Observation on the Road-Rail Plan
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE plan concerning the co-ordination of road and rail which was submitted to the Minister of Transport by the railway companies and the R.H.A. creates, upon examination, an impression of constructive thought and purpose. rn general terms, the proposals are sound and link past experience with a full appreciation of the needs of the future; and it is essential that an inland transport service shall keep pace with the changes which are taking place in the economic policy of the present time.
The plan has been well received by the Press, as also by almost all interested parties. This unanimity which characterized the presentation of the plan should not, however, give rise to undue optimism and lead the members of the roadhaulage industry to believe that nationalization is a thing of the past. A step by the Government towards nationalization of the industry still remains more than a possibility. Much will depend upon the reception accorded to the plan by the Minister, as also by the extent to which election pledges will be considered honoured by its acceptance. It may be that thc greater task of the Minister lies not so much in acceptance as in pacifying that section of is Party—the whole-hoggers—who continue to wear the blinkers of Party prejudice and refuse to see good in any plan alternative fo nationalization.
Desire to Prove that Nationalization is Unnecessary and Cumbersome The complete accord in which the plan has been produced is a striking testimony to the earcest desire of all concerned to prove to the Government and the Nation that natidnalization is unnecessary. Not only is it unnecessary, but the imposition of so.cumbersome a machine could not fail to prove a millstone around the neck of British industry and would seriously impede our economic recovery.
The plan, in fact, puts the Government in the dock where honesty of purpose and sincerity of intention are on trial. If the chief aim be a desire to provide an efficient and economical inland transport system in adequate strength, then the general principles of the plan must be accepted. Rejection can provide only convincing proof that power politics and
ideologies ignore all other considerations. The weighty opinion of industrialists—used in the widest sense to include traders, railway companies, road transport, coastwise shipping, canals, and, indeed, all users of transport—will be of no avail. The voices of counsel and advice, enriched by wide experience, will have spoken in vain. Time alone can reveal the wisdom or folly of the Government.
Detailed Criticism Should Await the Publication of Full Particulars
Notwithstanding the fact that the plan has been warmly received, it would be wrong to suggest that it is above criticism and contains no weaknesses. Until, however, the operational details become available, all detailed criticism should he withheld. The proposals mark a new departure for both road and rail. For the first time in history the members of the road-haulage industry have-agreed to accept the obligations of a "common carrier," also the principle of nondiscrimination in charges as between users of transport They agree, also, to relaxation in the statutory restrictions as envisaged in the 1939 T.A.C. Report. These agreed principles indicate the degree of advance made by hauliers along the road of progressive thought and realistic ideas.
The proposals may not give equal satisfaction and, in the case of some, it may be decided that they are contentious in character Where the terms are fully understood. Particular reference is made to the proposed amendments to the licensing system. Readers who have perused the Memorandum may recall the following proposals, which, on account of their deep significance, are worth repeating:— " (i) That the licensing system should be amended so as to make it a statutory obligation for a carrier to carry goods of the class and description in the districts and between the places specified as normal in the licence granted."
"(ii) That all holders of A and B licences (including the railways) be required as a condition of their licences to register with the appropriate area organization and to accept an' obligation to carry traffic if required on behalf of that organization."
Further, it is proposed that, when applying for a licence, an applicant shall accept these and other obligations referred to in the Memorandum. This becomes one of the conditions under which the licence is granted.
Plan Seems to Demand Compulsory Membership and Vehicle Routeing
In framing the proposals the authors, apparently, have had in mind compulsory membership and the routeing of vehicles. which intention, clearly, is foreshadowed. Regarding the first, always there have been two schools of thought—the one which opposes compulsory membership on the ground that any such measure must take away the freedom of individual thought and action; whilst the other maintains that any advantages enjoyed by non-members, who make no contribution towards and do not assist in any way to produce the benefits, displays a selfish and insupportable attitude. In the event of the plan being accepted by the Government, this ancient argument will disappear, for thus compulsory membership will become automatic and statutory.
The possibility of routeing presents an entirely new departure so far as A-licence vehicles are concerned. Whilst the applicant always has had to provide details as to the type or description of goods carried and the districts or places between which the vehicles normally would be used, he did enjoy, nevertheless, a certain measure ofoperational freedom. He was not tied down in the tame way as a B licensee. If • the motive underlying the proposals does, in effect, mean the routeing of vehicles, this will introduce a system of control and regulation which is neither welcome nor desirable. It will mean, simply, that operators will become controlled by an organization set up within their own industry instead of by Whitehall.
A National Rates Structure Would
Result in Less Competition The proposal foe a national rates-structure brings to a head a time-honoured controversy. Without going into the pros and cons of this subject, which, already, are well known, the wisdom of adopting correlation remains doubtful. It will add no lustre to the claim that competition between hauliers will continue as before. Correlation will, in fact, eliminate most of the competition, not only between haulier; but between rodd and rail in general. Service will remain the only competitive factor, and, having regard to the high state of efficiency in evidence before the war, this is but a slender thread by which to hold a connection together. On balance, the industry's plan would appear to be in favour of less, rather than more, competition. There is no evidence to suggest that enthusiasm for free enterprise is Woven into the fabric of the proposals.
Should the Government decide to discard nationalization in favour of the industiy's plan, hauliers will find themselves compelled to accept some ingredients which, hitherto, have iendered the dish unpalatable. Whichever way the decision may go, there can be no illusions about their being subjected to an enduring system of control.