AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Hauliers Take the

24th October 1952
Page 36
Page 36, 24th October 1952 — Hauliers Take the
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Middle Course on the Bill

By A. E. Sherlock-Mesher

R.H.A. Conference Delegates Call for Date of Lifting of .25-mile Limit to be Specified in New Legislation MODERATION characterized the views expressed on the Transport "'Bill by members of the Road Haulage Association at their annual conference at Blackpool, last week. The whole subject of denationalization was discussed in less than two hours. If time had allowed, more violent opinions might have come to light.

As it was, the conference agreed that if the 25-mile limit could not be abolished directly the Bill was passed, a date for its removal should be specified. Pressure should also be exerted to secure the more generops issue of permits in the interim period. The levy was condemned.

A wide agenda of 32 resolutions covered subjects ranging from golf to taxation. A proposal that the Road Haulage Wages Council should be disbanded was defeated.

Mr A. T. Lennox-Boyd, Minister of Transport, was the guest of honour at the conference dinner. He flew up to Blackpool by charter aircraft on Thursday afternoon.

Mr. Bernard Winterbottom, national chairman of the R.H.A., was acclaimed for his conduct of the conference preceedings.

"Specify Date for Freedom"

FOUR resolutions concerning the Transport Bill generated less heat than might be expected. Mr. W. Bridge urged members to welcome the Bill and praised the Minister for his efforts. The only way to get relief from the 25-mile limit, he said, was to pass the Bill quickly and then buy transport units. Unless the restriction remained for a time, he feared that some hauliers would exploit their freedom and leave the Government with the Road Haulage Executive's assets on its hands.

Mr. John Barber was surprised that Mr. Bridge should think more of presenting the Government's case than the haulier's. He foresaw disaster in the next three years unless the 25-mile limit were lifted quickly. Etc described the purchase of transport units as "wild speculation" and, said that private enterprise would never have a chance to prove its merits unless it were able to do so soon. If the Minister would not give way, the Association's negotiating committee should resign en bloc.

Mr. Winterbottom replied that the stage of breaking off negotiations had not yet been reached.

Mr. M. Ferry also counselled moderation. Nobody liked the Bill as it stood, he said, but everyone should support it publicly while trying privately to have it amended [cries of

n2

"hear, hear "J. The Bill was better than none at all. "Back up the Government and be prepared to wait a little longer for your freedom," he urged.

Mr. A. E. Adams thought that more consideration should be had for exhauliers, who would have little to come back to if the 25-mile limit were raised at once.

Mr. Winterbottom interjected to explain that a system of priority in the sale of transport units was impracticable.

Mr. E. H. Patterson represented those who demanded the immediate removal of the limit, but was opposed by Mr. R. Clifford, Mr. R. W. Amey and Mr. A. R. Butt. They held that the proposal was impracticable, but were adamant that a date for the abolition of the 15mile radius should be specified in the Bill. Mr. Arney pointed out that the purpose of the Bill was not to sl..rve hauliers, but to secure cheap transport for the nation.

The conference agreed that if immediate relief from the limit could not be granted, a date should be fixed.

A resolution " that this conference deplores the fact that no satisfaction has been obtained on the restoration of permit rights and that further strong representations be made to the Minister for the immediate restoration of suFh rights " was carried. Mr. Winterbottom thought that the Minister would take some action on these lines.

Mr. C. W. H. Sparrow, who supported a resolution condemning "a levy on one form of transport to subsidize another," said that it was inequitable that the short-distance haulier should be asked to subsidize the long-distance operator.


comments powered by Disqus