T.G.W.U. View on White Paper
Page 57
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE reason why the men in the employ of the Road Haulage Executive are opposed to the Government's proposals, as contained in the White Paper, is that the indictment against the British Transport Commission that (a) it is inefficient; (b) it cannot give trade and industry as efficient a service as that offered by private hauliers; (c) the R.H.E. cannot stand up to competition from private hauliers; and (d) the B.T.C. is an all-powerful monopoly, is not justified.
The sensible thing for the Government to do would be to submit these charges to be examined by an impartial body, and we, the people employed in the industry, feel confident that the facts that would emerge would substantiate a very strong case for the continuance of the R.H.E. as it would be proved that it is a sound financial asset to the nation.
The truth is that the R.H.E. took over some 3,000 Separate undertakings operating over 40,000 vehicles and organized those into 225 groups, offering a nation-wide service which no privately owned concern could hope to emulate. Moreover, it is making its services pay, not by putting up charges but by efficient administration and competitive prices, so that some privately owned concerns have lost their contracts to the Executive.
It is true that the greater part of freight transport is operated by private enterprise with a fleet of 120,000 vehicles, as compared with the Executive's fleet of 40,000. Compare this again with the fleet of 781,800 vehicles in the C category. In the long-distance field, the Transport Act of 1947 intended the Commission to have a qualified monopoly, but the Executive successfully competes with 7,100 concerns the vehicles of which have three-year permits to carry established traffic.
On the passenger side, out of 77,700 buses, coaches and trolleybuses, the Commission controls only 24,000.
With regard to the Commission being a monopoly, free-enterprise hauliers holding A or B licences have monopolies in their own hands. They are the first to object to the granting of additional licences by the Licensing Authorities.
Travel by train or B.T.C. buses and on examination of other services you will find that the cost represents one of the cheapest of all services or commodities which enter into the cost-of-living indices, after allowing for the effect of subsidies on items such as food.
The increases in rates or fares that have been necessary have been due to advancing costs. As a result of the past three Budgets the London Transport Executive paid an extra £3,200,000 per annum in the duty on fuel, bringing the amount paid to £4,600,000. Again, this Executive pays in road taxation no less than £700,000 per annum. The operating cost per car-mile for fuel alone has risen to 4A11., in fact fuel costs have risen by 265 per cent. over pre-war. The cost of the lateat increase of fuel tax over the whole of the B.T.C. activities amounts to £5,500,000 per annum, whilst that resulting from the last three increases inclusive is between £15m. and £16m.
The agreements reached with the R.H.E. by the trade unions on behalf of their members provide for local joint committees. These secure that the staff have a greater share in the responsibility for the settlement and observance of the conditions under which they work, also a greater measure ofagreement between the Executive and the grades representatives. We also have a Disciplinary Policy and Procedure Agreement which
secures to any member of the staff the right of appeal right up to divisional level. Much better staff relations and morale arise out of the improved negotiating machinery agreed between the unions and the Road Haulage Executive.
Birmingham, 15. I. LETT
(For Transport and General Workers' Union, Birmingham and Coventry).
IS DIPPING ESSENTIAL?
fOUR correspondent A. J. Parris, whose letter appeared in your issue dated May 30, seems to have fallen into the same error as that of the Royal Automobile Club, the Automobile Association and the Royal Scottish Automobile Association, in that they all seem to be advocating that everything possible should be done to make it unnecessary for the motor driver to use his head lamps.
There are many things, including pedestrians, entitled to be on the roads without any illumination, and there are others, such as fallen trees, which are on the roads quite inadvertently and not illuminated.
Surely what we need are head terms which we can use and with which we can see.
For many years now the tendency has been for drivers, when meeting other vehicles after dark, to shut one eye and look away with the other (dip and switch). More recently the idea is just' to cast your eyes on the ground (double-dip). In both cases the "seeing distance" may be considerably less than the "stopping distance" at 30 m.p.h.
Headlamps are meant to see with, and when necessary to be used at all should be left on and up. It is false courtesy to dip and kill or injure someone in the process.
Daz7le? When will someone tackle seriously. the application of polarized light to this problem?
There have been several half-hearted attempts, all of which seem to have been extinguished because of lack of enthusiasm or some more heinous reason.
Is there not someone who manufactures or will produce a suitable plastic polarizing medium, as did the concern 'which originally developed laminated glass, and so confer much benefit on all road users, contribute substantially to a reduction in road accidents, and make a large profit?
Gerrards Cross. A. RALPH WILSON'.
A PROBLEM FOR JANUS BEFORE he places to much credence in Mr. Churchill's conjecture that dissatisfaction with nationalized transport is responsible for the increased use of C-licensed vehicles, Janus may well check some authoritative estimate of the increases due to—
(a) Expanding post-war-boom economy; (b) use and number of electric vehicles, including pedestrian-controlled types; (c) cattle-moving vehicles; (d) travelling shops and demonstration vans. The figures would be interesting and might even show that transport is worth some deeper thought by both politicians and leader writers.
Guildford. E. 0. SCOTT.