Truck and Bus to get £346m of Govt's Leyland support
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ly CM reporter /JOBE AUTONOMY and a izeable slice of the Governnent's Elm a day, eight-year nvestment programme seem to ie the main benefits which 3ritish Leyland's Truck and 3us Division will reap from hr Don Ryder's controversial :eport.
With the acceptance of the :eport in the Commons last veek by the Prime Minister, he Government is committed o Europe's biggest ever ndus trial expansion pro;ramme planned for one :ompany, likely to cost :2,800m before 1982.
Inevitably, much of the xpenditure will be on the roublesome mass-produced :ar ranges, but the Ryder eport concedes the importance if the Truck and Bus Division. 'hough possible changes in livisional management were till not confirmed as we went o press, it is clear that riportant new policies are ikely. This is a summary of tyder's main recommendations or the Truck and Bus set-up : / BL must continue as a roducer of trucks and buses, nd one of the Corporation's Dur new streamlined divisions ; to be responsible for them. I Total demand for heavy rucks in the UK is likely to e about 30 per cent higher 1 1980 than in 1974 and todest growth should continue ntil at least 1985. BL should e able to retain its existing tarket share of this enlarged tarket.
I The truck market will con:nue to grow in Europe and L should aim to increase its hare from an existing 1 per ent to 5 per cent. Much reater potential exists in the eveloping countries, with .uck demand likely to double y 1985 in the oil-rich ountries of Turkey, Iran and ligeria, for instance.
BL is already the major supher of buses on the UK larket, but the DoE is to be ncouraged "as a matter of urgency" to hold discussions with the company and bus operators to work out better methods of phasing orders and deliveries. (This implied criticism of the bus industry is refuted by operators, see p.6.) • There must be greater rationalisation of the Corporation's product range, including engines, transmissions and axles.
• Engineering facilities for truck and bus work should be extended as a matter of urgency at Leyland and a central control established.
• As one of four divisions in the Corporation, Truck and Bus, will have its own managing director and be its own profit centre. Its potential will be enhanced if it is given maximum autonomy within the Corporation's framework.
• A total of E346m is to be spent on the division before 1982, £239m of which will be used for modernising production facilities.
Details of the Ryder plan— like how model ranges are to be rationalised, where expenditure is to be made and so on—were excluded from the published version of the report, for reasons of commercial security. Leyland directors have not be shown an unexpurgated version either.
It is clear that the changes at Truck and Bus will be less devastating than in other, less successful, areas of the Corporation. However, there is obviously plenty of scope for product rationalisation in a group which produces so many competitive vehicles (Marathon-Crusader in heavy trucks, and Atlantean-Fleetline-VRT in double-deckers are just two examples). Whether such reorganisation can be effectively undertaken without redundancies is not certain. This option has been effectively ruled out by both Ryder and the Government. Jobs come first, they have • said.