AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

The Common Market from the Other Side

25th August 1961, Page 63
25th August 1961
Page 63
Page 63, 25th August 1961 — The Common Market from the Other Side
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?

THAVE been following with great interest the series of articles you have been publishing on the many aspects affecting road transport consequent upon Britain joining

the Common Market. Personally, I feel that the battle as to whether the U.K. joins or not is all over bar the shouting and, being closely connected with road transport on the Continent, I can perhaps view the matter "from the other side of the fence," so to speak.

International transport co-ordination has always been considered an essential part of the development of a united Europe by Common Market signatories, and it is hardly likely that Britain will be excused from the large-scale levelling process applied, or to be applied, to transport in the group. It is certain that at least an attempt would be made to force publication of rates and conditions of carriage. It is true that there has, as yet, not even been any success in introducing this to the original Market set-up, both Holland and Italy having opposed all attempts —the former country as being contrary to its national laws.

However, a compromise might be worked out on the basis of fixed rates with plus-minus margins of 10 per cent., and this or some similar recommendation will probably be accepted in time, simply because no real transport co-ordination of the comprehensive type planned by Treaty of Rome countries would be possible without it. Some European countries—the main one among them Federal Germany— already have "open rates as the result of national legislation and refuse to countenance competition within their own borders. The supra-national Common Market Commission has frequently made it clear that publication is a sine qua non in its eyes. The entry into the Market of the U.K., Eire, Denmark, Norway (and anyone else who might apply) would hardly alter these standpoints.

Continental Operators Here

Further, we should have to be prepared for a future in which German and French operators, for example, undertake not only international but even purely national operations within the United Kingdom. A similar state of affairs is already planned for the Little Six" area by 1967. The date of the U.K. being brought into this scheme may be later than that, owing to organizational difficulties, but the starting of it at some time or another seems only logical if it is to become a full member of the bloc.

This would mean a drastic review of British licensing law, " transport discrimination being forbidden by the Common Market agreement. Quite apart from this, it is very likely that both the lower wage rates in other European countries and the extra-heavy vehicles used there could put the British operator at a disadvantage.

The question of vehicle weights and dimensions would also figure large in any prognosis of British transport's future. Though the matter is still being discussed and argued over, some sort of international maxima ruling may be expected soon. Will the home manufacturer be able to provide the British operator with heavies more cheaply than some specialist foreign makers to whom the British market is no longer blocked by a tariff wail? An ancillary question of a more general nature concerns the U.K. vehicle manufacturing industry's future ability to export to nonCommon Market countries when the new tariff walls are built; will the traditional customer still want to buy British if Britain no longer wants to buy other products from him?

The loss of sovereignty of the British transport administration, so far as international matters were concerned, would be certain. Quite apart from the necessary changes in the licensing and Construction and Use regulations, it has been made plain by the latest communique of the Common Market Commission from its Brussels headquarters that no national legislation harmful to intermember transport co-ordination can be countenanced. The future is likely to see pronouncements from the supra-national body on proposed national transport policy.

This means that the Ministry of Transport, if Britain joined the bloc, would in future be limited by the direction not to cause international discrimination or lack of uniformity. Even taxes could take on new forms and levels—Belgium has already amended its tax laws "in the light of the Common Market."

Hamburg. CONTINENTAL HAULIER.

What Was

Janus' Purpose ?

IF the purpose of Janus in his commentary "Trouble I Shared" in your August 4 issue was to convince the private motorist that he is wrong in considering more could be done to divert certain commercial traffic from the roads, I suggest that he has failed lamentably.

Remarks such as "the transport operator sharing his fuel and his road space with other people" lead one to ask when the road transport industry obtained exclusive ownership of these national facilities. The picture of a 52-ft. 9-in. by 15-ft. 9-in, load being transported from Clacton to Southampton did not help his cause.

No doubt there are very convincing reasons why a seagoing vessel has to be transported from one seaside front to another by road. It would, however, be more convincing to the held-up motorist if these reasons were placarded on the back of a load.

Kenilworth, Warwicks. H. W. MANDER.


comments powered by Disqus