AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Political Commentary By JAN US

25th August 1950, Page 37
25th August 1950
Page 37
Page 37, 25th August 1950 — Political Commentary By JAN US
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?

Doublethink

FAILURE by the Road Haulage Executive to fulfil its promises has led the chief executive officer of the Road Haulage Association to make some

pointed remarks in a .statement to members. Mr. Morton Mitchell reveals that besides undertaking to grant original permits generously and to deal fairly with hardship cases, the R.H.E. agreed to set up machinery for examining cases submitted by hauliers with a grievance. Unfortunately, the machinery has not worked well from the Association's point of view. Complaints have been fed into it, but the wheels have not revolved.

in a thoroughly denunciatory mood, Mr. Morton Mitchell has levelled a number of accusations at the ivory tower and its denizens. By squeezing the haulier, he states, the R.H.E. has accelerated the growth in the number of C-licence holders, to the ultimate disadvantage of all concerned. Hauliers whose original permits are whittled down run the risk of losing, part of their compensation if they do not choose to be acquired at once. Other hauliers, by harsh treatment of their permit applications, have been coerced into giving up the sponge.

Lack of Response Criticism is directed at the organization of the R.H.E. Lack of strong direction from the top means that there is no uniformity of action at divisional level. Local officers claim to have final authority in dealing with cases submitted for reconsideration, and the claim seems to be borne out by the lack of response from R.H.E. headquarters.

The advantages to the R.H.E. of parleying with the haulier are obvious. While his grievance is being examined, the operator can hardly feel justified in ventilating it in other quarters, and enlisting the powerful support of public opinion. If some concession be made, his hardship, to an outside observer, seems less acute. In the meantime, the British Transport Commission is able to compile a dossier of traffic carried under permits, and is then ready for the next round when the permits fall due for renewal.

Machiavellian Plan

To a mind such as Mr. Morton Mitchell's. trained in law and logic, these practices seem part of a deliberate and Machiavellian plan to ruin hauliers. In so thinking, he is possibly doing the Commission less than justice. A more likely explanation may be discovered in certain principles outlined in the last novel of the late George Orwell. The story is set in the year 1984, roughly at about the time when the Commission's charges scheme is likely to be ready for consideration by the Transport Tribunal. The population is completely under the control of the State, and the aim of the education system is to foster certain habits of mind. One such habit is known as " doublethink," defined as follows:—

" ' Doublethink ' means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously,. and accepting both of them. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt."

No more accurate description could be given of the processes of thought that _produced the Transport Act mid the transport situation as we know it to-day in 1950.

It is important, of course, not to put forward doublethink as an explanation of everything that is happening. It should not be confused with a mere difference of opinion, and one should not, therefore, use it to describe instances where the Appeal Tribunal and the Commission fail to see eye to eye.

Some months ago; the Tribunal, in the course of a decision, expressed the view that "Licensing Authorities should refrain from entertaining applications for the imposition of conditions on the grant of a B licence designed expressly to prohibit a haulier from carrying for a particular person." The R.H.E., in granting certain original permits, has taken exactly the opposite view, allowing hauliers to carry goods beyond 25 miles, except for one named customer.

Patent Explanation

To shrug one's shoulders and murmur " double think " would be a mistake in this instance. The explanation of the divergence of opinion is patent. The Appeal Tribunal wishes to bring all customers down to the same level, whereas the R.H:E. has taken commendable care to select certain companies worthy of having their traffic carried exclusively by nationalized transport.

This is simply a case where minds do not think alike. It is not doublethink; nor should the word be applied to the other decision in which the Appeal Tribunal allowed that a Road Transport Commissioner unwilling to grant fuel should be entitled, in his other role of Licensing Authority, to refuse a contract-A licence. This has been regarded in some quarters as double-dealing or doublecross. It is incorrect to call it doublethink.

Amazingly Generous

Undoubtedly, the best specimens are purveyed from the ivory tower or thereabouts. One had recently the statement by the Minister . of Transport that the disqualification of a haulier from original-permit rights on account of a change of name of the business was because of an error on the part of the draughtsman Of the Transport Act; and that the Government was being amazingly generous in allowing the haulier to escape the consequence of its own mistake.

More recently, the policy statement on integration issued by the B.T.C. describes the way in which traffic will be divided between road and rail. Simultaneously, it promises the trader freedom of choice. Nor should one forget how, after the Budget increases were made known, the R.H.E. said it would add no more than 73 per cent. to its rates, after it had first put them up.

So apt a pupil of the ivory tower has not found it difficult to cope with the permit situation. It was only necessary to say—as, in effect, the R.H.E. has done— that its attitude towards the haulier is entirely sympathetic, and is governed by the completely ruthless provisions of the Transport Act.

Before long, one may expect the R.H.E. to declare its policy on the renewal of original permits. These will be given practically without restriction, the statement will say, so long as the operators concerned do not wish to go beyond 25 miles. At least, something on these lines would cause po surprise to anyone who knows htf George Orwell.


comments powered by Disqus