Flies in Amber
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Political Commentary By JAWS pROTESTS continue to be made against the slowness 'with which compensation is being paid
by the British Transport Commission. There is good ground for complaint, as many hauliers who have had their undertakings acquired months ago, and had received notices of acquisition some time previously, still have nothing to show for their painful loss. Their past is written off and their future cannot yet begin.
. As is natural in controversies of this sort; each side blames the other. When recently tackled on the subject in the House of Commons, the Minister. of Transport presented a neat facade of statistics that had been carefolly prefabricated for him, and--like most statistics— could be analysed in a number of different ways, but in nO way so as to prove that hauliers had yet been paid
anything substantial. Later in the discussion the Minister accused hauliers in plain terms of not being forthcoming with the .information upon which the assessment of compensation would have to be based.
The haulier, with his traditional dislike of statistics, takes
up an attitude of suspicion: He is sometimes inclined• to regard the delay as part of the policy of . the B T.C. to-. retain his services and goodoffices until needed. Another :explanation occasionally. heard is that the .13.T.C.,' anxious to make its balance sheet rook. as healthy as possible, and wishing the profit on road haulage to offset to some 'extent the certain loss on the railways, is reluctant to pay out more than it need at the present time.
There may be an clement of truth in some of these accusations and counter-accusations. . Hauliers have • been known to resent the loss of businesses built up over a lifetime, and such men are not likely to enter with any enthusiasm into the compulsory winding-up of their undertakings. They have made no secret of their determination not to stay in the nationalized organization, and have agreed to remain at their posts for the time being more out of consideration for their customers than for any other reason. they are no longer Tools of the RILE.?
Their services, often given at a comparatively low figure, are of great value to the Road Haulage Executive during the transition period, and it may be that the withholding of compensation would in some cases be an extra inducement to them to remain. . At least, this way of looking at the matter must sometimes occur to hauliers, and must add to their irritation at taking orders from some higher authority in the place where they were once the masters.
Whatever value may be attached to these various explanations for the delay, the main reason is likely to be simple. Valuation of a -road haulage business calls for a good deal Of experience and knowledge. On numerous items there are differences of opinion, each of which may well develop into a large-scale legal battle. The R.H.E. must have great difficulty in finding enough suitably qualified people, particularly as the tempo of
a.32 ' acquisition increases. The valuers who have been appointed have no easy task. They may go to considerable trouble to agree figures with a haulier on the spot, only to find the agreement repudiated by their own superiors. The inevitable delays and, difficulties resulting from the setting up of a great national transport organization begin to show themselves.
Information Not Readily Available In theory, the haulier should be in a position to meet the R.H.E. halfway. It would be helpful if he could supply information and figures in exactly the form required. Unfortunately, he has seldom made a practice of producing inventories and statistics other than are required for the operation of his business. They involve extra work for which often neither he nor his accountants have time and staff available, particularly when he is in the throes of changing over from his own system to the, generally speaking, more complicated one devised by the R.H.E.
It is absurd to say that the lack of the precise information • required is the haulier's own • fault. If he needs the money, he is riot going to put more obstacles hi the way of the R.H.E. than he can avoid. There are many instances in which operators have done everything they have been asked, but after long periods of waiting are still without their compensation.
Difficulties that may lie in the way of computing the exact value of an undertaking for compensation purposes are largely beside the point. They should not present an insuperable obstacle to payment on account. According to Section 48 (1) of the Transport Act, the B.T.C. is in duty bound to make a "provisional ascertainment . , as soon as may be after the date of transfer," and to make payment of at least 90 per cent. of that ascertainment.
It has been argued that 90 per cent. is near enough to 100 to justify the B.T.C. in exercising care to see that the provisional figure is not likely to be appreciably higher than the compensation finally agreed. This is not so much a " holier-than-thou " attitude on the.part a the B.T.C. as it may sound. It is a reasonable precaution against an operator's investing the whole of his 90 per cent. in a new business, and then finding himself faced with the disagreeable obligation of repaying part of it.
Nevertheless, there is no reason why in almost every case. the B.T.C. should not be able to calculate fairly rapidly the lowest figure that it is likely to be called .upon to pay. Its experience to date is surely sufficient for that purpose. No payment on this basis could be , regarded as influencing the compensation finally agreed. No dangerous precedents would be created. The terms of the payment expressly preclude this. By a simple process,_ the B.T.C. could at once benefit hundreds of hauliers imprisoned like .flies in amber, deprived of one living; arid -unable to set about making .another until their capital is released.