AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

On the track of a combined rail/highway authority

28th May 1971, Page 44
28th May 1971
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 44, 28th May 1971 — On the track of a combined rail/highway authority
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?

by Derek Moses

THE ESTABLISHMENT of a statutory Public Track Corporation to effectively control the establishment and maintenance of public transport routes ("track") was suggested at the annual conference of the Public Road Transport Association at Eastbourne on Wednesday. The suggestion came from Mr G. M. Newberry, chairman, north-east region, National Bus Company, in a paper entitled "Sink or swim?—public transport and the British environment".

The Corporation would be sponsored by the Secretary of State for the Environment but free from direct political control. It would operate through subsidiaries, covering each Metropolitan and County Area to be designated in the 1974 local government reorganization, if Mr Newberry's suggestion were adopted. The Public Track Corporation would take over the responsibility for the provision, development and maintenance of track from central and local government authorities.

Rational system Part of a prescription put forward by Mr Newberry to introduce a rational system for relating traffic to track capacity, the Corporation would be linked with two other proposals:—

(1) To adopt a system of differential economic prices for the use of specific track and terminals, related to the cost of maintaining and developing the highway system in each location, taking into account the commercial value of land required in excess of that needed for simple vehicular right of way and access to premises.

(2) To abolish the existing discriminatory tax on petrol and Dery fuel used in road vehicles, or failing that, if there is no acceptable alternative source of revenue and some indirect taxes are unavoidable, to charge a standard rate of tax on oil consumption for all purposes, static or transport.

Mr Newberry explained that he had deliberately used the term "track" because it seemed logical to make publicly owned roads and railway tracks the combined responsibility of a single agency, adopting for each the same criteria in fixing charges and with authority to change the use of under-used tracks, after public inquiry, either from road to rail (or vice versa), or by disposal to other authorities for alternative uses.

Owners of common and private user vehicles would all be charged at the appropriate rate, according to location, by using electronic devices in the highway system which could identify individual vehicles as they passed selected points. Vehicle owners would receive and settle invoices like telephone bills—in fact the whole system might be technically comparable to subscriber trunk dialing (STD).

Survival?

Introducing his paper, Mr Newberry said that the subject he had chosen was suggested by the potent question put to the Association's chairman by the Minister of Transport (as he was then), soon after his appointment. It was simply: "Can your industry survive?"

He was reminded of the address by Mr J. D. Jones to the Institute of Transport on Jrban transport problems" early in 1969 ten Mr Jones said: "There is, of course, elaborate democratic process that vents decision-taking . . . but are these ocesses and the way they work in practice St suited to the sort of issues that will ye to be decided in the transport field over e next few decades? Because the issues e, basically, about what we value in urban e---either as it is, or could be—the cision-making process must come back to ople."

larket forces Theoretically, if natural market forces ere left to operate freely, the production of sods and services should automatically ljust to the levels people were prepared to ty for, of their own choice, Mr Newberry rationed. That seemed consistent with the D. Jones objective.

In the real world, of course, the situation as very different and infinitely more implex. Governments, community groups id individuals tried to interfere with or introl market forces to gain commercial

• political power or to protect the weaker embers of society from going to the wall. Because real consumption and demand timately depended on the consumers' :.rsonal choice, there was always some risk any trading activity due to unexpected ianges in social habit, fashion or ;chnological advance. Since public irporations were at least as subject to risk s any other, it was not clear why they ere commonly financed on fixed interest :rms. The device of equity capital seemed at as appropriate for them as for "private" nerprise; indeed, public dividend capital,

recognizing risk, was already provided for by statute in one large State enterprise.

If the premium bond, earning no interest unless one won a prize, was an acceptable tool of public finance, asked Mr Newberry, why should public corporations not secure funds for capital investment in trading enterprises by issuing participating equity bonds (with entitlement to dividends, when justified by profit) directly or through, a public agency. There might even be a Public Corporation Investment Trust set up for the purpose, he suggested.

Reasonable balance In Mr Newberry's opinion, the "reasonable balance between public and private transport", which everyone was seeking so eagerly because of the inexorable pressure of traffic demand on highway capacity, would never be secured until:— EITHER market forces were harnessed effectively to secure equilibrium between traffic demand and track and terminal supply; OR the liberty of the subject to choose responsibly for himself in this field was eroded or destroyed by an elaborate and expensive system of prohibition and enforcement.

The policy set out in the White Paper Public Transport and Traffic, effected in the 1968 Transport Act, prescribed various measures of "conditional assistance" for public transport by road. To the extent that they went a modest way in reducing the burden of taxation on the bus industry, some of the measures were undoubtedly welcome, but he thought it unfortunate if Ministers and the general public were thereby given the impression that the only solution to the industry's problems was to support it by State subsidies.

In fact, Mr Newberry believed that a large part of the bus industry was a net contributor to public revenues. For example, the published accounts of the National Bus Company and its subsidiaries showed that 9 per cent of working expenses, or over £12 millions, were paid in fuel and vehicle licences in 1969.

The speaker then referred to two major aspects of policy in relation to public transport which might eventually cause it to sink. First were the very serious difficulties in public transport direction and management, arising from confusing financial objectives and inconsistent criteria as between different operators of public transport and different publicly or privately owned trading organizations. Some must balance their books and provide for asset replacement each year; some had restricted powers of rate precept. Others had unrestricted powers of precept and no specific financial duty.

Such inconsistencies and difficulties diverted responsible attention, from fundamental operational problems and promoted feelings of frustration and injustice in the minds of those concerned which were detrimental to efficiency, enthusiasm and leadership, he claimed.

Land use.

The second, and more impOrtant aspect of public policy was the failure of modern societies. ti conie to terms with their transport problems due to their failure to apply sound economic principles to the use of land for transport purposes.

The growing difficulties of rising costs and declining paSsenger traffic suffered by the industry in recent years; in Spite of increasing population and spreading urban' areas, might be accepted by some as inevitable because of advancing technology and material liviiig standards in modern industrial societies. If that were so, said Mr Newberry, the answer to the Minister's question about survival was: "No, the bus industry is doomed to extinction and cannot survive."

Nowadays, nobody disputed that city life dependent entirely on private transport would be intolerable even if enough land were available, and impossible where, as in Britain, it was not. So the realistic answer to the Minister's question was: "Yes: because it is essential that it should."

That was not to deny the need for change in the scale of operating according to

changing circumstances. in location and demand, but substantial provision of public road transport would always be necessary.

It followed that public policy should ensure that adequate financial resources were available for that provision with acceptable standards of reliability of service.

In conclusion, Mr Newberry said: "Here then is a system to make technology the

servant rather than the master of men, to bring order out of growing chaos in the British transport system. . .. Certainly, with Mr J. D. Jones, I say 'the decision making process must come back to people'."

Discussion

Mr Tebay said that the pOssibility of road pricing had not been ruled out by the DoE, but there were very considerable problems involved in its introduction—both technical and financial. It was a measure that was more likely to be introduced in the 80s rather than the 70s.

Addressing the Association's agm, the chairman, Mr F. K. Pointon, referred to the psv drivers' hours regulations, important modifications to which are to be introduced tomorrow (Saturday). Mr Pointon said: "I don't want to rake over old ground now but this is an issue which should never have

developed in the way it did. Without the modifications ultimately introduced last year, the industry would have faced complete chaos. But the damage done during 1970 is certainly going to take some time and some considerable effort, to repair.

"We are pleased to have ultimate recognition of the special difficulties of our industry in staff utilization, the need for flexibility and that, as employers, we seek to use the regulations in a responsible way."

Mr Pointon reported that following representations made by the Joint Committee of Bus Operators and Manufacturers, the Department had recently agreed to relax the double-deck standards in so far as exits and staircases were concerned, and these relaxations should do much to assist design progress. He added that the council of the PRTA had decided to press that the bus grant scheme should be continued beyond August 31, 1975; and to qualify for grant in future, buses should only he required to be used wholly or mainly as stage-carriages suitable for one-man-operation, and to meet certain standards, with regard to minimum power/ weight ratios, heating and ventilation, and internal noise when a requirement of this was agreed and established.

Mr Pointon said that he was pleased to report that the Joint Committee had reached agreement on this matter and a letter would shortly be sent to the Department of Environment.

A forecast that the introduction of road-pricing was a long way off was made by Mr C. N. Tebay, assistant secretary, public transport division, Department of the Environment, during Wednesday's discussion on the paper by Mr Newberry.


comments powered by Disqus