AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Fight Railway Methods

5th June 1936, Page 25
5th June 1936
Page 25
Page 26
Page 25, 5th June 1936 — Fight Railway Methods
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?

RAILWAY objection procedure has degenerated into what the Americans would term a " racket." The applications of road hauliers are opposed on the flimsiest pretexts and the traffic courts are so congested with cases that full consideration to each cannot possibly be given. What is being done to combat this menace? Nothing! Attempts are made by individual groups of ,operators to counter these vindictive attacks. but nothing on a national scale has been essayed.

Short of the amendment of the Road and Rail Traffic Act to prevent this abuse of privilege by the railways, as suggested by The Commercial Motor, the only method of defence—and attack— is to reply to the railways in their own terms. This procedure involves the practising of all the wiles of the railway lawyers; it may be expensive in time and money, but in road transport to-day the splitter of hairs into the smallest dimensions is likely to be the most successful. The administration of the law has become a matter of forensic skill, and common sense is no longer an asset. It is , whispered abroad that the railways are already alarmed at the expense incurred in objecting to the licence applications of road hauliers. Now is the time for road-transport interests to strike. If the railways can be made to see that the industry will not suffer intimidation, they may think twice and decide to change their present tactics. Only by a fearless display of arms will the railways be dissuaded from their extermination campaign.

Beet-haulage Rates Must be Improved, Not Lowered I T is worthy of note, that the Sugar Beet Com mittee of the National Farmers' Union is again proposing to approach road-haulage associations with a view to discussing beet-haulage rates for next season, particularly the carriage of sugar beet over long distances. Such a consultation can have only one end in view—the reduction of rates. Having in mind the fact that this branch of the haulage business is not, at current prices, economically conducted, we suggest that the said road-hauliers' organizations should be prepared with unanswerable arguments demonstrating the impracticability of any reduction, and, rather, the justification for an all-round increase of rates. The plea which is being ,put forward by the N.F.U. is that of hardship on growers of beet. It appears that every branch of industry is to have sympathetic consideration, every branch, that is, but the road-haulage. In our view, it is well past the time when tne road-transport industry should be expected to subsidize others, and particularly those of agriculture and the railways. Here, in the presentation of a firm front and in agreement with a schedule of rates, may be an opportunity to show, in practical form, how great an asset unity can be.

The Control of Trolleybuses SUGGESTIONS have been made that the control of trolleybuses should be placed under the Traffic Commissioners so far as co-ordination and fares are concerned. The matter is one of considerable importance now that so many trolleybus systems are being put into operation, for this type of vehicle is more competitive and far more akin to the ordinary motorbus than is the tramcar, but it would be unwise to attempt such control piecemeal. The line taken by Parliament in the 1030 Act was expressly to exclnde the trolleybus from the control of the Commissioners, but circumstances have altered considerably since that time, and we are of the opinion that tlw situation should now be reviewed and an amending Bill introduced. We believe that such a Bill would be strongly favoured by the Traffic Commissioners, who are, at present, in something of a quandary. It seems radically unfair that there should be an invidious distinction between two classes of vehicle which so closely resemble each other, except that one uses the fuel which it carries and the other obtains its power from a central source.

Tags

Organisations: National Farmers' Union

comments powered by Disqus