Political Commentary
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Fanfare for Toy Trumpet
FOR a measure that nearly everybody was supposed to want, the Transport (Disposal of Road Haulage Property) Act, as it approaches the statute book, is receiving a somewhat apathetic welcome, in the same way as a wedding after too long an engagement lacks interest except perhaps for the bride's mother. The martial atmosphere of Parliamentary discussions is not ideal when so little divides the two parties. The big guns concentrate on small or irrelevant points, while the central questions remain without an answer.
It is still not clear why the Bill was thought necessary or who persuaded the Government to introduce it. Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter, Minister of Transport at the time, told the House of Commons just over a year ago that the main objects of the Transport Act, 1953, as regards road haulage, had been achieved. During the previous year or two the trunk services of the British Transport Commission had "developed substantially in scope and efficiency," and were "rendering a good service to industry and commerce."
This was not an original idea. Other people were saying the same thing, although the opinion was by no means universally held. An increase in the efficiency of British Road Services should not have been sufficient in itself to justify a change in Government policy. EVen before the passing of the 1953 Act, the Conservatives were concerned more with relative than with absolute efficiency. They maintained in their White Paper of 1952 that an elaborate system of depots could not give trade and industry "the speedy, individual and specialized services afforded by free hauliers before nationalization."
The Conservatives may still have believed this in 1955. At least they have never contradicted it. Possibly a more exact interpretation of their attitude is that in 1955 they no longer regarded as inevitable the earlier conchision—also to be found in the White Paper--that B.R.S. "should revert to private enterprise." The reasons for the shift of policy may be cogent, and would have made an interesting subject for discussion either in Parliament or within the Conservative party.
Poor Response
In fact, throughout the discussions on the various stages of the Act, and in answers to organizations outside Parliament that have sought for enlightenment on the point, neither Mr. Boyd-Carpenter nor Mr. Harold Watkirison has in effect gone beyond the original statement of a year ago. Another question they have not bcithered to answer is why the Government changed their mind so rapidly and so radically after last year's General Election. Almost all the vehicles that the new Act will save for the nation were offered for sale just before the election; so close to that event, in fact, that there was every excuse for the comparatively poor response. No sooner had Conservative policy been vindicated by the electorate than it was changed.
Debarred, as it would seem, from discussions on political principles and expediency, the Lords and Commons have nevertheless had to find something with which to keep the debates going. The reports make tedious reading. There can seldom have been a measure about which so many people have said the same thing, and kept on saying it.
Throughout the discussions, the Government and their c20 supporters have found it desirable to reiterate how well they are behaving towards the Commission and towards the Opposition. This is probably true enough, but it is a poor substitute for an analysis of the reasons for such behaviour. The Opposition have had to acknowlege that, so far as it goes, the Act meets with their favour. Their criticism has been reduced to the almost automatic allegation that any amendment introduced by the Government must be inspired by the independent hauliers.
Amendments from either side have been comparatively slight Some have been introduced with the intention of modifying the total number of vehicles to be left with B.R.S. Others have been designed to improve the procedure for forming and operating companies that will ultimately, it is assumed, be offered for sale. The end-product of the amendments and discussions looks somewhat different on paper from the Bill as it was first introduced, but the underlying structure has changed hardly at all.
Sufficient Noise
If as a matter of form the new Act has to be greeted with a flourish, a single toy trumpet will make sufficient noise. The general public have long since ceased to show interest, and some time ago even the hauliers virtually abandoned the attempt to influence the new direction of Government policy. They could not be expected indefinitely to sustain a cause that would probably benefit newcomers to the industry rather than themselves. Realizing towards the end that the passage of the Act was inevitable, independent hauliers and B.R.S. have acted on that assumption.
For a while hauliers may feel out of place without legislation or prospective legislation. For a decade or more they have been either fighting the Government or pressing for action in their favour. The continual necessity of putting their case to one side or the other has imposed upon hauliers a unity that may be artificial. However deep their desire to keep out of politics, they have felt the attraction and the compulsion of the political magnet. Allowing for differences of opinion on detail, they have known, broadly speaking, where they wanted to go, even if for much of the time there has seemed little prospect of getting there.
Now that the political pull no longer exists, many hauliers seem to have lost the sense of direction that has kept them together. They are no longer sure of themselves, and their opinions often contradict each other. An interesting confirmation of this fact is provided by the articles The Commercial Motor is publishing on the state of the road haulage industry in various parts of Great Britain. Hauliers are found to contradict each other diametrically, even on so vital a question as whether or not a rates war is raging.
It would be an over-statement to say that such differences of opinion have not existed previously, but they are certainly pronounced at the present time. If the political situation were anything to go by, road haulage should be entering a period of stability that should, in turn, lead to as great a measure of prosperity as the country's economic circumstances will allow. The present turbulence makes nonsense of the expectation. There are, however, encouraging signs that this state of affairs will not continue.