the railways have tricked the public
Page 70
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ALREADV the latest argument on track costs. which began when the railways submitted their Qvidence to the Geddes Committee only two months ago, is developing complications. We have just had the railways' further comments on the contribution by the Ministry of Transport to the discussion. We may shortly expect counterblasts from the various organizations representing road users. The next step will probably be the considered decision of the hapless Geddes Committee, whose members know in advance that they will not be able to please everyone, and that their report will merely start another wrangle.
The current controversy cannot be considered in isolation. The Ministry points out that its own study has taken account of the extensive studies on infrastructure costs undertaken by the Economic Commission for Europe and of the tests carried out by the Association of American State Highway Officials. The Ministry might well have added that since the first motor vehicle came on the road there have been innumerable investigations into the subject. The only common feature is that none of them has provided a solution which has the remotest chance of being generally acceptable.
An obvious comparison is with the interminable discussions on some artistic or literary point. Here again commentary is heaped on commentary until it is difficult to understand what the quarrel is about. Where taste and literary judgment are involved, disagreement is expected and has a useful part to play in sharpening the perception of the critics and of the readers. But the argument on track costs becomes more confused the longer it is protracted. The railways' original contribution appeared to make sense in a limited and partial fashion. The welcome they give to the Ministry's polite demolition squad makes no sense at all.
In a similar situation it took a child to see clearly that the Emperor had no clothes on. The suspicion grows that the railways have tricked the public into giving solemn consideration to a pseudo-problem. When an issue is presented in terms of pounds, shillings and pence, the years we have spent struggling to master the principles of arithmetic and mathematics condition us to assume that there must be an answer and that somewhere there is an Einstein or a Newton capable of providing it. Many of the riddles and catch-questions involving numbers thrive on this belief.
Signs of Strain The railways, to whom full credit must be given for starting a non-existent hare, may themselves be finding some difficulty in keeping up the chase. Their latest statement shows some signs of strain. If, as they claim, their "broad conclusions remain unchanged" even after accepting the figures given by the Ministry, the natural inference is that the conclusions must be very broad indeed, so much so as to be virtually useless. Another slightly suspicious circumstance is the hearty acceptance by the railways of the Ministry's study as a " further valuable contribution to B36 knowledge of road costs ". Ths cOuld be translated as meaning that the more the controversy is stoked up the better will the railways be pleased.
The search for a solution becomes more and more like the chase of a will-o'-the-wisp, or like the making of a precision instrument to determine the exact difference between chalk and cheese. To some extent there must be sympathy for the railways. They are stuck with their early Victorian track, which they paid for themselves at early Victorian prices, and they see thousands of millions of pounds spent by the Government on providing up-to-date track which will help their competitors to take away their traffic. It is only just that the people who use a stretch of road should pay the proper price for it.
Not a Proper Analogy The analogy is not a proper one, although it may have seemed more plausible a few years ago when the railways were still severely restricted on rates and were classified as common carriers. They have the permanent way for their exclusive use. They can decide exactly what to do with it and have the right to open new sections or close sections down. If ordered to continue to provide a certain service in the national interest, they are entitled to ask for compensation and even most road operators would be prepared to agree that they ought to have it.
In return for the payment of his vehicle tax the road user is given the right to use all the roads provided by the Government and by local authoritie-s. The extent to which he uses them is entirely his own affair. As the number and operation of vehicles increase the Government finds it necessary to build more roads. Where these are across open country the objections from interests other than road users have not so far been sufficient to outweigh the obvious commercial and social needs.
Within towns the problem is greater. The capacity of many streetsis already below the maximum demand. Drastic widening or the building of new streets would often be impracticable or intolerable, or both. The. authorities have no alternative except either to keep certain traffic out of certain districts, as suggested in the Buchanan Report, or to charge extra for the use of scarce road space, possibly on the lines indicated in the Smeed Report on congestion.
Where congestion is not an issue it is inconceivable that roads should be built which only certain kinds of traffic could use. No doubt it would be possible to build motorways exclusively for cars, or if it came to that, exclusively for two-wheeled vehicles; and the cost would be less than that of the all-purpose motorway such as the Ml. There would be no justification for such an exercise and in that case no useful purpose is served by attempting to estimate the difference in cost between a cars-only and an all-purpose highway. The railways are basing their whole argument upon an impossibility. The real consideration might be to ensure that road users as a whole pay more into the Exchequer than the benefits they receive. The Ministry's own figures confirm that this is the present situation.