Better for the Change
Page 40
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
HAMLET.: Do you see ' yonder cloud that's almost in , shape of a camel?
POLONIUS : By the mass, and 'tis like a.camel, indeed.
HAMLET : Methinks it is like a weasel.'
POLONIUS : Jr is backed like a weasel.
HAMLET: Or like a whale?
POLONI0S : Very like a whale. POLONI0S : Very like a whale. EVERY time the political wind changes and makes the transport weathercock point in a different direction, somebody within the Ivory Tower is ready with a statement that at last road haulage is on the right course and the weather is set fair. Mr. T. G. Gibb, deputy chief officer (organization), British Road Services, in his interesting paper on "The Emerging Pattern of Road Transport in Britain," emphasizes that he is expressing his own views, and not those of the British Transport Commission. If he were acting as spokesman of the Commission, however, he would still be likely to say, as he does, that "there is today a better chance of a long period of stability than has existed at any time since 1920."
Mr. Gibb draws a number of lessons from what he regards as the errors of politicians in the past. He is particularly severe on the Transport Act, 1947. He cannot find a good word to say for the limitation of independent hauliers, with some exceptions, to. a radius of 25 miles from their base. It was a "rigidly fixed radii's of operation, a theoretical fence around every operating base." It was bound to create anomalies, and it put before the private operator -!= a real temptation to infringe a law which at best was extremely difficult to enforce." It imposed upon him "almost impossible conditions." There could be " no equity of competition between B.R.S. and hauliers, and this would have remained a grievance as long as it remained the law."
Another respect in which the 1947 Act failed, according to Mr. Gibb, was in the "arbitrary selection" of the operators to be nationalized. By no means all the 45,000 vehicle S taken over were fit for the road, and at their zenith B.R.S. had about 40,000 vehicles, which were soon reduced by "intensive operation "—an expression that Mr. Gibb does not elucidate. They handled every kind of traffic. Premises that were acquired were generally "quite inadequate for the proper housing of all the B.R.S. interests in the locality."
Haulier's Ally Unfair restrictions upon independent competitors, as well as indiscriminate acquisition, were condemned at the time in even more immoderate language than Mr. Gibb now uses. Perhaps he has always spoken in similar terms, and the clamour of the hauliers drowned his voice four or five years ago. If so, the fitting of an amplifier on the Ivory Tower might have had a remarkable effect when the Conservatives in opposition were trying to persuade the Socialists to raise the "almost impossible" 25-mile limit to a more moderate 60 miles.
His criticism of the 1947 Act does not mean that Mr. Gibb is in entire agreement with the Transport Act, 1953. Its complete change of direction was a surprise "to many who had studied transport development in earlier years." It seemed to go right back on the general policy behind the developments of the 1930s that the Conservatives themselves had sponsored. The hauliers' grievances could have been remedied by a "far less drastic measure" than the 1953 Act, which provided for the sale of practically the whole of B.R.S., "not necessarily to those ex-owners who wanted their property back but to anyone including dealers and others not interested in transport per se."
It would seem that the situation Mr. Gibb would like to see established is very much the situation as it is today. Which is perhaps what one would have expected from the Ivory Tower, whether or not the spokesman is official. A critic more suspicious than I might suggest that the Commission have been working towards the present position ever since the 1953 Act was passed. He would note Mr. Gibbs comment that the Act required a "tremendous administrative exercise " within the Commission. He would note the further comment that "probably few on the outside merely scanning the lists of sales as they have come out have realised what an exercise this has been."
Mr. Gibb complains of the "arbitrary selection " of vehicles to be acquired under the 1947 Act. It may be that the choice of vehicles to be offered fol. sale was more deliberate. The first three lists, with a total of approximately 10,000 vehicles, were, he says, " very much in the nature of sighting Shots."
Begging the Question
Few people wanted to buy " a complete haulage depot, offices, yard, workshops and vehicles which could be run as a business." Mr. Gibb begs the question whether this kind of unit was offered, except possibly in List S.4, bids for which had to be made shortly before the general election. "It would appear to be the failure to sell the large depots," he says, "that influenced the Minister in his decision that these should be retained by the Commission."
This is interesting to learn, for the Minister himself, has given no indication of such an "influence." In his statement last July, he attoibuted the Government's change of policy to the fact that the Commission's trunk services "have developed substantially in scope and efficiency during the last year or two."
Not everyone will share Mr. Gibb's optimism for the future. He says there is "every reason to hope" that the transport industry will soon "cease to be a political shuttlecock." No doubt, on the assumption that the present Government stay for their full term, there will be no political interference for another four years. It would be unrealistic to suppose that the Socialists will easily abandon their intention to rearrange road transport when they get the chance. Further nationalization may be quietly dropped from their programme, but they constantly make it clear that this will not affect their views towards transport.
What might help more than anything else would be a statement from the Commission giving official backing to what Mr. Gibb expresses as his personal view. If the Commission agree that the 25-mile limit was bad, and that it is proper that the licensing system should regulate all road hauliers, nationalized or otherwise, there Will be much more chance of keeping permanently at least some of the ground won by the 1953 Act.