THE MEDIUM IS THE MESSAGE
Page 74
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AT A LOSS to find major issues on which there is a dramatic split between the two main political parties the commentators have been driven to pointing out the contrast between the public image of the two party leaders. The encouragement which the Conservatives can draw from the results of recent by-elections is tempered by the suspicion that the floating voter can see little difference in the policies put forward from the Right and from the Left.
There should be no such doubts when transport is under consideration. At the Conservative party conference in Brighton last week Mr. Peter Walker, the chief spokesman on transport, promised that the new Transport Bill would be fought "clause by clause, line by line".
The Opposition would provide an example of a party "united to expose a thoroughly bad taste of Socialist legislation". He asked supporters to organize the strongest possible protests throughout the constituencies.
Mr. Walker's views
Oratory of this sort is perhaps not meant to be taken literally. Mr. Walker strongly dislikes the proposals to bring all passenger transport under the control of authorities who would in turn be under the control of the Minister of Transport.
He is just as fiercely opposed to the plan which would give the railways a freight transport monopoly over the long-distance routes.
With some other sections of the coming Bill he will be in reasonably close agreement.
Abolition of licensing and its replacement by a system based on merit are suggestions which many Conservatives including Mr. Walker have supported in the past. Somebody with a liking for burrowing into the archives would be certain to emerge with a few quotations for use against almost any member of the Opposition who promoted a long-drawn-out debate or filibuster on this subject.
Given the chance at the next election Mr. Walker promised the party conference a modern, competitive and efficient transport system. He may have to agree that this is just as likely to follow from those parts of the Government's proposals which are not concerned with safeguarding the special interests of the railways.
In the end it is with these special interests that both parties will be chiefly concerned in Parliament. The likely strategy on the political front is beginning to emerge.
Mrs. Castle has begun well enough by taking what appears to be a pragmatic point of view. There is a railway system, some
what diminished in scope by closures and the indifference of the people who should be using it. The system is still substantial and it has a good deal of unused capacity which is one of the reasons why it is losing money.
It seems only sensible, Mrs. Castle might say, that where the traffic is such that the railways could not possibly mishandle it, they should expect to have it passed to them on a plate.
In this way the available facilities will be put to the best use, there will be at least some decrease in the volume of traffic on the roads and to that extent there should also be some improvement in road safety. All this can only add up to a more rational distribution of traffic between the two forms of transport.
Mrs. Castle might not use this precise form of words but the paraphrase is near enough. The public might regard it as a poor compliment to the railways, in spite of which the plan as presented may not arouse much spontaneous opposition.
Mr. Walker's task is to demonstrate that it matters very much how the comparatively small amount of traffic involved is handled. "We have to see," he told the party conference, "that electors recognize how dangerous are the policies of Mrs. Castle".
One example of the danger is given by the latest dispute with the National Union of Railwaymen. Road transport has been called upon to handle traffic which the railways for the time being could no longer accept. The difficulties would be much greater after Mrs. Castle's proposals have been implemented.
Bigger problem
Some idea of the increase in the size of the problem was given by Mr. Stephen Swingler, Minister of State for Transport, to the Traders Road Transport Association in Blackpool.
If the Government's plan worked as it was hoped. said Mr. Swingler, it would add 30 per cent to the ton-mileage of the railways. This could also mean that if the unions chose to call a strike there would be 30 per cent more traffic for which an alternative means of transport would have to be found. At the same time the longdistance road transport fleet of vehicles suitable for the task would have been diminished to much the same extent. The Conservatives have gone beyond the periodical problem caused by industrial disputes. The resolution to which Mr. Walker was speaking, and which was carried, called for the total rejection of the Government's programme for "progressive nationalization of all transport undertakings". Before a programme can be effectively rejected there must be proof that it amounts to what the resolution asserts.
From the Government Front Bench at any rate the response is likely to be a flat denial. There is no intention to renationalizc road haulage, Mrs. Castle has said. Very few operators, if any, would go out of business, Mr. Swingler told the TRTA.
Dangerous policies?
In what way it will be asked, are Mrs. Castle's policies "dangerous" in any meaningful sense of the word?
Her opponents will not find the answer in Mrs. Castle's proposals as they have so far been explained. It is necessary to step back and examine them from a more extended point of view. Nationalization or State ownership has been discredited. The concept which has replaced it is one of State control over key sectors of the economy.
Long-distance transport and the carriage of certain commodities in bulk obviously qualify as key sectors. They have the additional qualification of being suitable—or more suitable than other traffic—for carriage by rail.
The railways might be embarrassed if they were offered the whole of this traffic . even if they could pass some of it on to the up-and-coming National Freight Organization.
On the other hand effective control of the whole sector can be obtained if every operator wishing to carry the traffic had to say what it was and if necessary explain why it could not go by rail. One cardinal point of the economy would have been captured before many of the traders even were aware of what had happened.
This would make it easy to understand why Mrs. Castle believes it so important to include within the net the trader wishing to carry his goods in his own vehicles. It also explains her preference for what many people consider an outmoded form of transport.
Whatever their shortcomings in some respects the railways are an ideal medium for State supervision and control. As Marshall McLuham might say, the medium is the message.
Janus