Political Commentary By JANUS
Page 55
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Debate Continues
THE London fares dispute is a fascinating spectacle. It provides an outstanding example of Transport Man in the toils of fate: Like the -hero in a Greek 0*Sr, he is the helpless subject of -a struggle between the gods Explanation and expostulation alternate regularly above his head as opinions are expressed by such organizations as the British Transport Commission, the Transport Tribunal, the Central Transport ConsultatiVe
Committee and the London County Council. ."
How is he to find his way about in a, dispute where every point opens up new lines of argument? A week or Iwo ago the B.T.C, possibly stung to action by the widespread insinuation that . its public relations were faulty, issued a statement reducing its case to four points " of paramount importance." The Londoner who read the statement in the expectation that it would reassure him must have been greatly disappointed.
In its first point, the B.T.C. denied that the Londoner
NV
In its first point, the B.T.C. denied that the Londoner
NV NV
as being asked to pay more than the cost of the services he used. During 1951, he paid £1.6m. less, even -before contributions to interest, amortization of capital and other " necessary " Central charges, "Even after the increased fares the figure of net traffic receipts in a full year Will be far below what can reasonably be required to finance the capital invested in the under taking." So far from paying too much, was the implication, the Londoner is still not paying enough.
• L.C.C. as Champion
• Not having easy access to all the relevant statistics, he was bound to accept the statement at its face value. 'and -and to wonder how much extra the B.T.C. would require before it was really satisfied. However, help was at hand from another member of the pantheon. The leader of the L.C.C. drew attention to the B.T.C.'s own estimate that two increases granted'by the Transport . Tribunal since October, 1950, would bring London Transport additional revenue amounting to £13.8m. a year. This he compared with the figure of £10m. put forward by the B.T.C. as the rise in London Transport costs since the same date.
Scarcely had the Londoner had an opportunity of thanking his champion when the B.T.C. came back with the statement that the first of the two fares increases was intended to cover costs accruing well before October, 1950. The amount of these costs was not stated, but the addition to them of the £1,0m., said the B.T.C., • made a total larger than the produce of the two fare increases. "London Transport will not be paying its way at the new level of fares, leaving aside altogether the question of reserves."
To which argument the L.C.C. . but the Londoner has long ago lost heart and lost the thread. The one clear point is the ominous repetition of the statement that, however many and great the increases in London fares since any date he may care to name, the revenue is still not enough from the point of view of the B.T.C. Perhaps resenting the taunt that in the past it has not kept the public completely in the picture, it is making sure this time that there will be no misunderstanding. ' Having given up the first point in despair, what is the Londoner to make of the next point? According to the B.T.C., many considerations must be taken into account when London Transport fares are compared with those elsewhere. For one thing the congestion in London . streets slows down traffic and puts up the cost per bus
mile. Not the most tactful line of approach, perhaps, to stress that the man condemned to crawl in London buses has to pay extra for the delay. The congestion that slows the bus may also -fill it, and the traffic problem provides no excuse so .far as London Transport railways are concerned.
The purpose of the second point may be to exasperate the Londoner into saying that he is not interested in what other people pay but is sufficiently appalled by the comparison between his present fares and what he used to pay. This brings him at once to the third point, which states that London Transport fares are only 74 per cent above pre-war whilst costs have more than doubled.
ImprovedOperation • Relenting a little, the B.T.C. explains how the trick is . done: There are More passengers than before the war, financial charges have not changed and there has been . a general improvement in operation.-Whereupon the Londoner says: "So what?" If his own .-fares have. gone up by a good deal more than 74 per cent. he is , -likely to be correspondingly more eloquent The final point is a grumble at the time taken to' reach agreement upon putting up the fares. " If it takes over a year to obtain an increase, then obviously, in times • of rapidly rising costs, the fares must move up in fairly large jumps." Without necessarily accepting the argument, the Londoner would agree with this as a statement of fact. His fares have undoubtedly moved up in a fairly large. jump. The statement does not help him with his personal problem. Whichever direction he takes, his inquiries Iead hint into .a -forest of statistics.
He is at a disadvantage in that the organization best equipped to provide informa,tion is. the London Transport Executive, which naturally, tends to . concentrate -upon" the figures that suit its own convenience. Lord Latham, chairman of the-. Executive, has described impressively the detailed budgets prepared by each -of his departments, carefully checked when the expenses are incurred and subsequently collated into a red series and a blue series.
The Bemused Dormouse The experts are impressed by this evidence of super-planning, much as the same colour-scheme bemused the dormouse in the poem by A. A. Milne. Their instinct is 7-to come down on the side of, the big battalions,, and certainly the B.T.C. can marshal bigger and possibly
better figures than its opponents. , The Londoner cannot deny to the B.T.C., or to any other provider of transport, the right to charge enough
• to-cover costs. He is chiefly concerned to know whether there is any way by which those' costsmay be -reduced
• Little information is to be obtained from the Ivory Tower on this point. It is the nature of the B.T.C. to assume that its own structure, sanctified by the taw, is the only one now possible,: The public is less inclined to' accept this than it was a few years ago. There is a growing feeling that no organization, however structurally and statistically perfect it may seem,, can remain efficient without competition. The problem is to find some method of re-introducing competition into London's transport without destroying whatever -advantages have been obtained from integration.