"Not With a Bang, but a Whimper"
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By JANUS INSTITUTIONS have a way of outliving the ideals that first brought them into being. The ideal of a united road transport industry is for the present as unattainable as the "one world" of Wendell Wilkie; but the National Road Transport Federation, embodiment of that ideal remains regardless of the altered circumstances
The call for unity, leading to the merger in 1945, was based on 'sound reasoning. Order and progress were almost impossible when road transport was split into so many rival camps; some national, others local; some old, others new; some restricted to one type of carrier, others more catholic in the, range of 'their membership. The logical course was the one ultimately followed, to dissolve the existing organizations and crystallize out the Passenger Vehicle Operators' Association, the Road Haulage Association, and the •Traders' Road Transport Association.
Of the three, only the R.H.A. , --the ,association for Aand B-licence holders—can fairly claim to be the sole natiOnal body for the class of operator it represents. In addition to the P.V.O.A. and the T.R.T.A., important organizations remain on behalf of the passenger operator and the ancillary user. One or two visionaries hoped that in the end everybody would come under what they were fond of calling the umbrella. Their hopes gradually faded. The empire of the N.R.T.F. reached its limits at the time of the merger and seems unlikely ever to extend farther.
By the end of this year the N.R.T.F. will have completed its first lustrum. There has been speculation as to its future. It may happen that its functions will decrease in number and importance There are plenty of signs already that it is no longer playing the part originally envisaged for it.
Officials Not Replaced At first the services of several distinguished officials from the merging associations were made over to it. As these officials left they have not, with certain exceptions, been replaced. In the areas, an attempt was made to set up an organization parallel to that of the associations. At the beginning the majority of the areas had one secretary acting for all three bodies, and this had the natural effect of knitting them together. The tendency now is more and more-for each association to have its own area secretaries, and even separate accommodation. This must ultimately mean a weakening of the local_ ties between the associations.
The ideal behind the federation may have been genuine and far-sighted. The structure set up was to a large extent the result of a conflict of opinions. Paradoxically, the formation of a unifying body was largely inspired by a strong separatist tendency, particularly in associations catering for all licence holders. Although there might. be comparatively little conflict among ancilliary users, hauliers and p.s.v. operators, there was little .community of interest apart from the fact that they all used commercial road vehicles. For example, as providers of transport, hauliers and p.s.v, operators were in some respects nearer to the railways than to the,C-licence holders. Consequently, members
at general meetings found themselves for a great deal of the time listening, and even being asked to make a decision upon, matters of no direct concern to them.
This was unsatisfactory and tended to reduce the interest in such meetings When matters foreign to many members were under discussion.
The individual's reaction towards this confusion varied with his temperament. Some people preferred an association with as wide a scope as possible; others felt that the presence within the same organization of so many different interests was a constant brake upon progress, causing protracted discussions on matters where a more homogeneous body would have been immediately unanimous. The N.R.T.F. represented a compromise between these two extreme points of view.
Compromise is a satisfactory solution so long as circumstances remain the same. The unity that may have been the dream of the more extreme among the planners was never quite reached. Certain factors have put it more than ever beyond the reasonable bounds of probability or possibility.
Acquired undertakings are no longer allowed to remain members of the R.H.A., and through that Association of the N.R.T.F. One may assume that the Road Passenger Executive will impose a similar embargo upon nationalized passenger undertakings.
Before the Transport Act was passed, the ancillary user, the haulier and the p.s.v. operator were united by the threats made against them. One may suggest that even this unity was a little unreal, for each kind of operator wanted something different.
In the case of the ancillary user and the haulier there might even be certain advantages to one in restrictions placed upon the other. If the ancillary user were tied, he would be less eager to have his own • vehicles and there might be more traffic for the haulier (there would certainly be much More traffic for the R.H.E., but that is another story ?). On the other hand, suppression of the haulier might give the C-licence holder an advantage over his competitors without their own vehicles, who would have no option but to use the State monopoly, whatever the rates charged.
The threat of nationalization temporarily strengthened the bond between ancillary user and haulier. It was greatly weakened by the withdrawal of the proposed restriction on the radius of operation of the C-licence holder. He was put into a moral quandary. If he still actively opposed nationalization he might find the restriction put back again, whereas the haulier, with nothing to lose but his chains, was spurred to greater efforts by the good fortune of his neighbour.
Federation May Lose Power If the federation were to break up at some time in the future, the link between C licensee and haulier is the one most likely to snap. If no dramatic break takes place, the three associations will probably sever one by one the connections binding them, and the federation as a force in road transport politics will end, like Mr. Eliot's world, "not with a bang, but a whimper." There is no reason, however, why it should not continue in some capacity or another.