Political Commentary By JANUS
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Inside Information
WHAT does it feel like to be nationalized? So far the answers to this question have come mainly from people who have left the British Transport Commission because they could not tolerate the environment. Their opinion is bound to be hostile, but when the Road Haulage Executive is returned to free enterprise it may be possible to get more favourable views from some of the staff who have remained with it presumably because they like it.
I had hoped that a recent article by the public relations officer of the B.T.C. would have opened a window into the Ivory Tower, especially as it is the function of public relations to explain and justify the purpose and value of the organization it serves. Mr. J. L. Henderson was discussing "Popular Misconceptions about Nationalized Transport." The title led one to expect the real inside story of the B.T.C. and an explanation of why it was so greatly superior to free enterprise. In fact, Mr. Henderson seemed at great pains to prove that there was no difference. This is naturally disappointing to you and me, as it appears to make the political cycle of nationalization, denationalization and renationalization more futile than ever.
Mr. Henderson claims there are certain calumnies permeating most of the criticism of nationalized transport. It is said that the losses have to be met by the taxpayer; that the B.T.C. is a monopoly; and that it has put up its charges beyond what the public regards as reasonable.
In refuting the first point, Mr. Henderson is on firm ground. He quotes several examples of otherwise reliable authorities who categorically assert that the deficit on the railways is made up out of taxation. He is able to show that the deficit has in effect been met out of reserves, and to insinuate the suggestion, or perhaps the threat, that once the B.T.C. is free to charge what it likes the deficit will soon be extinguished.
Moral Ascendancy
He is wise to begin with the misconception about taxation. This enables him to establish a moral ascendancy, which he consolidates with some examples from what must be a remarkable collection of epithets applied to the B.T.C. by " present Ministers of the Crown and other leading politicians and publicists." Having softened up the enemy, Mr. Henderson proceeds to develop some more doubtful propositions.
How stupid, he says, to accuse the B.T.C. of being a monopoly! The Transport Act intended it to have a "qualified monopoly" in long-distance road haulage, but there are over 7,000 private cdmpanies with threeyear permits to carry "established traffic." The B.T.C. has 55,700 goods vehicles as against the 120,000 of freeenterprise hauliers and the 781,800 under C licences. Only 24,000 buses and coaches are controlled by the B.T.C. out of a total of 77,700, "while unremitting competition comes from some Um. cars, 750,000 motorcycles and 59,000 taxis, all operated privately."
Mr. Henderson then puts forward the ingenious argument that much of the transport system of the country is parcelled out into monopolies, some under State ownership and some under free enterprise. Bus and coach services are licensed and completely protected. Free enterprise hauliers are "the first" to object to licence applications.
"The facts speak for themselves," he comments. Let us see, therefore, what the facts have to tell us. In the first place, the 400,000 C-licence holders are only a fraction of the traders of the country and most of their vehicles are small delivery vans performing a service the B.T.C. would not want to offer. The majority of traders must rely on nationalized transport for the carriage of most of their long-distance traffic. The original permits held by 7,000 hauliers are in most cases severely limited, and are often for work the B.T.C. does not particularly wish to handle. From this point of view they are designed to shore up the State monopoly rather than to break it down.
It is not for want of trying that only one-third of the buses and coaches are in the hat;ds, of the B.T.C.
• The suggestion that the man who cannot afford nationalized transport should go by car or take a taxi is not perhaps to be regarded too seriously. "If they have no bread, let them eat cake! " said Marie • Antoinette—and we all know what happened to her!
Value of Monopoly • One can understand how Mr. Henderson feels. As soon as the B.T.C. has taken a parcel of traffic into
a corner to make the most of it, along comes the freeenterprise jackal and snatches it away, or the owner who decides he will keep it after all. Then they egg their friends on to call the B.T.C. the most comprehensive monopoly this side of the Iron Curtain." This sort of thing may sometimes happen. But if Mr. Henderson genuinely believes that the B.T.C. is no more a monopoly than the independent providers of transport, he should consult those of his colleagues who told Lord Leathers that to uplift the 25-mile limit to 35 or 40 miles would have ruined the R.H.E. Somebody in the Ivory Tower realizes the value of a monopoly.
Mr. Henderson's conclusions on the subject of rates are also open to doubt. He spares us, for which we should be grateful, the customary catalogue of price increases for such things as linseed oil and brass buttons. He does point out, reasonably enough, that costs have risen and that we cannot expect rates to remain constant. Rates charged by the R.H.E., he concludes, had in fact increased 21 per cent. by last May, more or less to the same extent as the recommendations put forward by the Road Haulage Association.
A comparison of this sort is practically useless. lt takes no account of the basic rate to which the percentage is added; nor does it cover certain important traffics where completely new scales of charges have been drawn up by the R.H.E. The trader is more concerned with rates actually in force than with percentages. What relevance have Mr. Henderson's calculations to the wholesale grocers in Scotland who say that a 25-mile haul of cased goods cost 8d. in 1939, and to-day costs is. 3d. under free enterprise and 3s. 4d. by British Road Services?
There is, of course, a good deal of truth in Mr. Henderson's article. In accordance with his intentions he has been able to prove the existence of popular misconceptions about nationalized transport. He has also demonstrated, possibly not in accordance with his intentions, that a further article could be written on the subject of nationalized misconceptions about popular transport.