AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

If the Bill be Passed

4th April 1947, Page 23
4th April 1947
Page 23
Page 24
Page 23, 4th April 1947 — If the Bill be Passed
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

MANY knowledgeable people in the road transport industry have little doubt that the Transport Bill will, if it be passed into law in its present form, even without the previous restrictions on C licensees, be much more farreaching in its results than may at first appear. They have come to the conclusion, and not without good reason, that the' Government, through the agency of the British Transport Commission, will do everything possible to quash competition, not only in the long-distance field, but, eventually, within the 25-mile radius permitted to " free " hauliers.

Mr Strauss has made statements to the effect that in the early days of the Commission, permits for hauliers to travel over this radius will be freely granted. This, obviously, would not be done to assist those licensees concerned, or to temper the wind to the shorn sheep, but to provide for reasonable transport facilities while the Commission is getting into its stride. The Government will merely use these hauliers until it suits its convenience to cancel the permits.

To be Used as a Convenience What would be the effect? For a time those with permits would enjoy the benefits of a reasonable amount of traffic, but as the permits lapsed they would be gradually forced back into the rigidly limited area and compelled to compete against others already established within it. This might well prove a hopeless position, causing intense competition for what loads were available. The consequence would be that many operators would be driven by the pressure of events to ask to be acquired by the Commission, and this with but poor assets, for their prospects would be stith that they would hardly be able to claim much in the way of loss of business.

There is also another side to this dangerous question. The Commission would undoubtedly be running a considerable number of vehicles on short-distance work—those, for example, taken over from the railways, and portions of acquired businesses which had hitherto been engaged in this field. The Commission would, therefore, be in actual competition with the so-called " free " hauliers, and could, if it liked, cut rates to such an extent as to render work ' by private enterprise unprofitable. Losses incurred by the Commission in this way could be concealed in the gross receipts. The effect on many sections of trade and industry would be most unhappy.

• The haulier is often part and parcel of many leading concerns, even of some which own their own transport. Few possess sufficient vehicles to cater for all their needs, and at rush times it is the practice to pass excess traffic to the hauliers. Others employ them constantly alongside their own fleets.

C-Licensees Must Fight for Hauliers Hauliers, of course, constitute the most efficient class of operator, for they are usually able to Toad both ways. It is for this very reason, apart from others, that traders should continue to fight with the utmost strength against the elimination of services afforded by these men. If they be killed off, then all classes of user of road transport will be faced with monopoly charges. Few students of economics can believe that services rendered by the proposed enormous national transport concern can be given at the average cost normal to the smaller and privately owned units. If this be' the case, either present rates will have to rise or the Commission will have to operate at a loss.

Transport enters seriously into the ultimate price of practically everything we employ in our normal life. Therefore, either general prices must rise or taxation must make up any deficit.

Yet the compensation to be paid to hauliers is likely to be so low as to cause grave hardships. At One of the sittings of the Standing Committee on the Bill, Mr. Peter Thorneycroft and Sir Harvie Watt gave two examples which showed that operators in this field would be deprived of sixsevenths of their income if their businesses were acquired. This was no exaggeration, and to check the figure the Road Haulage Association took at random no fewer than 263 examples of haulage concerns throughout the country and had the possible results on them of acquisition worked out by its accountant. The average loss proved to coincide with the fraction given above. The total number of hauliers will be great. Even at the 60-mile radius imposed when the Government haulage scheme was in operation, between 2,000 and 2.500 would have been covered. At the much smaller radius of 25 miles, the number would be correspondingly greater.

Even the method of testing whether a haulier concerned is predominantly engaged in longdistance work is grossly unfair and might almost be described as unscrupulous. One of the factors is whether the receipts of the undertaking from long-distance transport exceed half the total value of the services of the vehicles concerned. It is obvious that even if a fleet be equally divided between shortand long-distance work, the receipts on the former would automatically be less than on the latter. Thus a comparatively small amount of long-distance work would be quite likely to bring a concern within the class to be acquired.

Thus clause 42 is so much eyewash. Although appearing ingenuous at first examination, it is clearly conceived to cover a tremendous number of operators. It shows the intention of the Government to take over far more of road transport than might seem to be the case when other clauses are studied, and it is noteworthy that any amendments that were suggested in connection with it were hotly contested.


comments powered by Disqus