1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 
Training levy approved by Minister
Page 47
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Mrs. Barbara Castle, Minister for Employment and Productivity, has approved the Road Transport Industry Training Board's proposals for a levy equivalent to 0.9 per cent of employers' payroll in the year ended April 5, 1968. This approval is given effect by an Order laid before Parliament on Friday and coming into effect on December 11; it is Order SI 1968 No. 1835, obtainable from HMSO, or through any bookseller, priced I s.
But in making this Order, Mrs. Castle has made it clear that her approval is given On the understanding that the RTITB intends "to examine and determine the desirability of differential rates of levy for different sectors of the industry as soon as fuller information is available". This proviso reflects representations made by the Road Haulage Association and the Passenger Vehicle Operators Association when the proposed levy was announced fCM August 91.
The RHA protested that, despite an undertaking by the previous Minister of Labour that the case for a differential levy would be considered before a second training levy was formulated, the Board had postponed con sideration of this point. Road haulage, said the RHA, clearly paid much more in levy than it could claim in grants, while .shortening the interval between levy periods could mean that the industry would have to pay three levies in a period of two or two and a half years. Similar points were raised by the PV0A.
In its statement this week announcing the new levy's approval, the Department of Employment and Productivity said that the 0.9 per cent levy compared with a rate of 1.6 per cent for the previous levy period and was raised to cover the Board's operations until mid-1969 and to make grants to employers for the period from August 1 to December 31 1968.
The DEP says that, in deciding to approve the levy subject to an examination of differentials when more information is available, the Minister took into account the Board's continuing commitment to pay grants to employers until this information has been received.
The RHA comments: "We welcome with satisfaction the intention to examine the possibility of differential rates in the future."