The Shapes of Proteus
Page 54
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
MUCH of the more obscure wording of the Government's new measure represents an attempt to stop the return to free enterprise from straying in the wrong direction. The precautions arc praiseworthy, but no provisions, however ingenious, could do much to cut down such risks as there are, or to prevent denationalization from being a leap in the dark.
Where the Government's preference lies has been made plain all the way along. The White Paper which preceded both Transport Bills spoke of dividing the Road Haulage Executive into "operable units (including a suitable proportion of small units)", and the original proposal was for the sale of the whole organization in transport units none of which should have more than 50 vehicles unless the Minister of Transport agreed. The original ideal of an industry composed entirely of small operators was modified under criticism. The British Transport Commission are now permitted to keep something like 5,000 vehicles, and perhaps another 10,000 will be formed into companies.
On the other hand, at each stage in its task of disencumbrance the Commission are instracted to look with a kindly eye on the man whose requirements are modest. In deciding whit transport units or companies are to be formed the Commission must "have regard to the desirability of securing that persons desirous of entering or re-entering the road haulage industry have a reasonable opportunity of doing so notwithstanding that their resources permit them to do so only if their operations are on a small scale." Subsequently, when the tenders are being screened, the Commission must also " have regard to the desirability of avoiding any step which is likely to lead to the elimination or undue restriction of competition."
Privileges and Powers
To this extent the Government have tried to steer their scheme on to the desired lines. There shall be units for which the small man can bid. The Commission and the Disposals Board must be on their guard against the monopolist, who like Proteus can at will transform himself into many deceiving shapes. Thereafter, the purchasers will have substantial privileges and powers, without responsibilities, not even those that have been laid upon the Commission. Neither Parliament, nor the Minister, nor the public (through such agencies as the transport users' consultative committees) will be able to call the holders of special A licences to account.
Once the sales of transport units have finished, the long-distance road haulage industry will become a sealed system, and will remain so until the abolition of the 25-mile limit at the beginning of 1955. The Commission will have the vehicles they areallowed to retain. The rest will he in the hands of the buyers. The 60-70 operators whose request for acquisition has been held in abeyance will carry on, subject only to the terms of their licences, but will not be allowed to enlarge their fleets. .
The Commission's application to licence their vehicles must be made within six months of the passing of the Act. Assuming that the sale of the remainder has finished at the end of this year, there will follow a period of at least 12 months during the whole of which time exactly the same number of vehicles, neither more nor less, will be entitled to carry long-distance traffic Only the number of vehicles will remain static. Their ownership may pass to any number of different people. As the Government have found it desirable or necessary to issue special A licences with as few strings attached as possible, the buyers must logically be entitled to assign the same rights to somebody else. The licence-holder may transfer any of his vehicles, or the whole business, and the assignee can get his special A licence with the same ease and on the same terms.
It is possible to imagine the long-distance road haulage industry in 1954 behaving like a kaleidoscope in which the basic items remain the same but re-group themselves in an almost endless number of variations. Such a state of affairs would to a large extent defeat the Government's aim. The pattern that the Commission and the Disposals Board are to hammer out between them, with the Minister in the background as arbiter should the worst come to the worst, is expected to last at least until the abolition of the 25-mile limit.
Subsequent Division
Some of the changes in the pattern may be beneficial, or at any rate do no harm. A group of hauliers may arrange for one of their number to buy a transport unit, which they subsequently divide among themselves, obtaining separate licences. Other buyers may sell to one person, who can by this means build up a very large business. Transactions of either kind need not mean any loss in efficiency or scope.
Less desirable would be any transfer that might divert the undertaking from what should be its main purpose, the carriage of other people's traffic for hire or reward. There are some manufacturers who pass a good deal of their traffic to the R.H.E. Such a concern might think it worthwhile arranging for a transport unit to he its subsidiary in all but name. The primary function of the vehicles would be to carry the company's own goods, but they would incidentally be able to pick up return loads and do other work where convenient.
Such a scheme may conform with the letter of the law. It would help to defeat' the purpose of the new legislation, particularly during the first and crucial year. when everybody who has any interest at all in transport, whether as user, provider or politician, will be watching to see how this unprecedented experiment in denationalization is shaping.
Trade and industry appear now to be reasonably satisfied that it will be successful, provided the Government's plan is worked out satisfactorily by the Commission and the Board and there is no drastic subsequent change of direction. It might be worthwhile for the interests represented on the Board to set up a vigilance committee to watch over the spirit as well as the letter of the law. The committee would have no legal powers, but the force of its sanction or of its disapproyal might have a decisive influence on any person or organization whose action is likely to interfere with the .smooth working out of the process laid down in the new measure.