'Integrated transport policy is a joke'
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
long distances.
Mr Peter Fry (Tory, Wellingborough) accused the Government of proceeding in transport "by a series of nudges, winks and half-veiled threats, combined with a masterly display of inactivity over the most important problems."
He refuted the idea of an "integrated system." To be mere political jargon it had to imply a degree of direction and a loss of freedom of choice—economically damaging, costly and personally unacceptable to many people.
Such a policy would imply that someone other than the customer would decide the mode of transport for his goods.
Mr Bob Cryer (Labour, Keighley) noted that many railway depots and warehouses which had been closed down had been bought by road operators, which demonstrated that the route centres chosen by the railways were often extremely sensible.
The National Freight Corporation, then set up, was to collaborate at national level with the British Rail Board, and its subsidiaries would collaborate at local level with British Rail to obtain a more balanced structure of traffic by our inland transport system.
Unhappily, National Carriers had added to its role of customer and supplier to British Rail another role, that of competitor. This role, said Mr Bradley, had gradually become paramount.
Mr Bradley suggested that Freightliners should be returned to British Rail — he thought both managements would welcome such a change.
Mr Roger Moate (Tory, Faversham) said transport was disintegrating, and added: "I suspect that the White Paper is likely to be the joke of the decade."