Transport Fabian
Page 59
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Political Commentary By JANUS
FABIUS won his reputation by the use of waiting tactics, and his policy often gets the best results in certain circumstances. He is, or should be, the patron saint of the queue and of what are generally
described as consumers' councils. It is appropriate, therefore, that the Fabian Society should recently have published the results of an investigation into the work of these councils, choosing for this purpose the bodies set up to form a link between the public and the gas and electricity boards. .
The transport users' consultative committees differ in scope and constitution from their opposite numbers in the fuel industries, but to a large extent the conclusions reached in the Fabian pamphlet may be applied generally. Representatives of consumers often lack the technical knowledge to decide whether a criticism is justified. To meet this difficulty it is usual for at least one member of a consumers' council to be a representative of the nationalized industry concerned.
Through a Medium As a result, the public is suspicious of the councils and regards them either as stooges or as a subtle form of publicity. Where no publicity is given, there is public indifference or ignorance. People prefer to voice their opinions through a medium, such as the Press or Parliament, which has no connection with the subject of criticism.
Many Socialists now recognize that the private eye is not well adapted to keep watch on the public corporation. They are reluctant to abandon completely the idea of consumer councils, which have become, part of the accepted paraphernalia of State-ownership, but the Fabian pamphlet and other investigations show anxiety as to whether the councils are adequate for the job they are supposed to do.
No other nationalized industry bas to bear the weight of public assault that is directed against the British Transport Commission. The consultative committees, the transport equivalent of the consumer councils, are probably no great affliction. It is the Transport Tribunal's inquiries into rates and fares that bring down the full fury of the public.
Reduction Secured To meet the attack, the Commission has the courage of its own convictions, but it has no means of hitting back. It is not completely insensitive to the force of public opinion, which took it by surprise a year ago when increases were applied to London Transport fares. On that occasion the Government intervened to secure a postponement, and subsequently a reduction in the proposed scale of charges.
The London Transport Executive is taking steps to advertise its latest proposals so as to escape the accusation that it is keeping the Londoner in ignorance. Its submissions have been made in a suitably deprecatory manner. There was a time when the Commission said boldly what extra money it needed and how it ,proposed to get it. Now, with apologetic firmness, the L.T.E. declares that it really needs far more than it dares to ask, but will settle for an additional £6m. per annum. Lord Latham, the chairman, has said: "We are applying
for this increase only because it is forced on us by pressure of inexorable necessity. We have tried to make the changes as moderate as possible," he added, "and to spread them as thinly and as equitably as possible over the whole range of fares."
It is not difficult to detect a note of apprehension in this. However inevitable and thinly spread the increases may be, they have caused a barrage of protests from individuals and organizations prepared to sink political and other differences in the joint vilification of London Transport. If the increases are general, everybody Will complain. If they affect some passengers and leave others untouched, the protests will make up in vigour for what they may lose in numbers.
Meed of Gratitude The 2d. minimum fare and the 5d. fare are not to be raised. They cover between them over 50 per cent. of ordinary journeys on London Transport 'services, and the Executive may have expected some small meed of gratitude for leaving them unchanged. If so, it has been disappointed. A group of Conservative M.P.s, no doubt warmly supported by their constituents, has said that the retention of the 2d. and 5d. fares means that the whole increase must be borne by less than half the passengers.
As the halfpenny represents the smallest feasible step, there are bound to be inequalities. The 2d. fare, in conjunction with the shorter fare stages, is more than twice the pre-war price compared with an average increase of 84 per cent. in London Transport fares as a whole. The new proposals will mean an increase of 7 per cent., whereas the new 31d. and 7d. fares will be 161 per cent. greater than the contemporary 3d. and 6d. fares, which account for more than one-quarter of all ordinary journeys.
Lower Peaks?
London Transport appears to be justified in claiming that the increases have been evenly spread. On its own estimates there is no doubt of the reasonableness of the request for a further £6m. The only hope is for economies in operation or for passenger travel to be less concentrated during two peak periods during the day.
According to Lord Latham, London Transport is making economies at the present time which should save £750,000 in a year, and it must be up to the critics to find room for further retrenchment. The obvious method of attracting traffic from the peaks is to provide tempting fares reductions for the slack periods. We are told, again on the authority of Lord Latham, that such a move would not help London Transport to balance its books. "We would certainly introduce cheap fares if we thought they would pay. Our close and comprehensive survey of all the factors involved goes to show that they would not pay."
The irresistible force is up against the immovable object. As politely as possible, Lord Latham has to tell the public that it is ignorant. The public, will seize the opportunity of reciprocating Lord Latham's politeness in the presence of the Transport Tribunal. It will be one of the rare occasions when the consumer comes face to face with a nationalized undertaking. He would find the intervention of a council or consultative committee a very poor substitute.