"The First Steps in a Long Haul"
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Government received approval for their new transport policy in the Commons on Monday—but only at the expense of some criticism.
This came principally from Mr. Aubrey Jones, former Minister of Supply on the Tory benches, who declared that by the severance of road and rail "certain advantages which are now enjoyed are going to be forfeited." Opposition speakers, as expected, attacked hotly the dismemberment of the B.T.C.
When Mr. Ernest Marples, the Minister of Transport, opened the debate he referred to the Holding Company and the Commercial Board. The other activities of the Commission outside the railways—buses, road haulage, hotels, and so on—operated alongside similar private-enterprise undertakings and were generally in competition with them. They did not call for special statutory authorities. They should depend entirely on their own commercial strength and they represented considerable and valuable public assets which ought to be used effectively for the public good. To do that they must be able to conduct their day-to-day business in exactly the same way as those commercial undertakings with which they competed. The Holding Company. by its support, advice and encouragement. without intervening in management, Would be able to ensure that the right standards of operation and financial judgment were applying. In framing the White Paper, the Government had had regard to the views of the particular interests concerned and they were prepared to do the same in framing the legislation.
Full Opportunity for Management We aim to give management full opportunity to give of their best,he said. They would have the means and tools of good management and be able to feel and bear the weight of personal responsibility for their actions.' This was of particular importance in the railways. Nowhere was a single-minded direction needed more. The railways must be run as an effective national system. Speaking of investment, Mr. Marples said this was becoming a matter increasingly on which the Minister must form a judgment, because he had functions which went beyond the nationalized transport sector alone, an example being roads. His department was developing improved methods of investment allocation to meet this need. One example was the five-year rolling programme for classified roads instead of a yearly financial allocation. Another very interesting question was the relationship between the railways and B.R.S. They were living in a competitive world and would both have to consider the effects of competition from private-enterprise road hauliers and the C-licensed vehicles. Where co-ordination was sensible the White Paper provided for it. Fares: Only in the London passenger transport area, where London Transport and British Railways together held a virtual monopoly, would it be necessary to have a statutory control of fares. Elsewhere the Government proposed that the railways should be free to fix their own prices. Finally, he said the Government's proposals were no more than the essential first steps in a long haul. The necessary Bill would be introduced next session.
A Nod from Mr. John Hay Mr. George Strauss, for the Opposition, said he would have thought that no one nowadays would have questioned the desirability of road and rail services being closely integrated, but B.R.S. were not even to have the status of a separate board. Surely it was as important as the docks, which were to have such a board, but B.R.S. together with Thomas Cook, the hotels, and five other services, were to be lumped together into a separate holding company. Were these services to have the same powers as private companies? Would they be entitled to enter into their same businesses with the me unrestricted powers which a private company had today? Mr. John Hay, Parliamentary Secretary. nodded. Mr. Strauss said: "I am delighted to see you nod in agreement. We arc looking forward to reading the terms of the Bill that will permit that to happen." Mr. Aubrey Jones said that under the new arrangements it would be extremely difficult to bring about any cross-fertilization of experience between road and rail. It was most important that people with the flexibility of road experience should play a part in railway operations. This was made more difficult by the Government's proposals. The old road and rail problem had been superseded by a newer problem: the competition of both public road and public rail vehicles against the private vehicles. Public road and public rail vehicles were duplicating and ruining each other in competition with private vehicles. It might well be that we were entering a time when the future might belong to a vehicle adaptable to either road or rail and if that were so the development and introduction of such a vehicle would be made more difficult by these proposals.