'olitical Commentary
Page 57
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
All or Nothing
By JANUS
okT a time when a by no means negligible minority of hauliers is beginning to talk openly ' of calling a halt to disposal, the publication of le British Transport Commission's draft charges theme is a powerful reminder to them and to trade nd industry that they cannot pick and choose among -ie provisions of the Transport Act, 1953, but must ccept it as a whole. Section 20 comes after Section 1 )gically as well as in the arrangement of the Act. 'hat is to say, the freedom of the railways from their ntiquated rates structure presupposes the prior return f road haulage to free enterprise.
The proposed rates now in the hands of the Transport -ribunal are described as maxima, and the actual harps may be much less, in accordance with the disretion of the Commission, which they have promised will be exercised commercially."
There is a special provision in the Act to meet ireumstances where traders cannot reasonably send heir goods by any other means than by railway. Cornilaints can be lodged with the Transport Tribunal, who nay in certain cases direct what the charge should be, his safeguard is valid'against'only a railway monopoly. he Act envisaged the complete disposal of nine-tenths P f the Commission's road haulage undertaking, and gave io guidance on what should be done if a substantial iroportion of the vehicles remained unsold. There is io provision to help the trader in any district where tc. would have British Road Services as well as the ailways—but possibly no other professional carrier— rum which to choose.
Frenzied Rates War
For different reasons, even the hauliers who have ome out in favour of stopping denationalization may teed to think again. They maintain, with some truth, hat at least B.R.S. have continued to keep rates up to reasonable level, whereas newcomers, and even estabished operators, who have bought transport units, have ally too often embarked on a frenzied rates war that nust sooner or later lead to disaster.
Once let the railways have their freedom and the iew may change. Where B.R.S. keep up rates, they lo so for their own benefit, and would promptly depress hem if it suited their purpose or that of the Commision. The life of the unwise rate-cutter with a comparaively small business is short unless he learns wisdom luiekly. If the railways and a powerful B.R.S. combine 0 under-cut other providers of transport in a locality, he struggle may be prolonged for a time, but can have only one end.
Those people for whom complete disposal is a ardinal point of policy have been given a new argunent. Their aim should now be to speed tio the process, or at present they seem to have little hope of delaying atification by the Transport Tribunal of the Cornnission's proposals.
Some time must elapse before the rai1way,1 arc free o go ahead. A public inquiry must be held, after vhich the Tribunal may refuse to confirm the scheme ir may confirm it with such alterations, if any, as they hink fit. The preparation of a charges scheme was irst ordered under the Transport Act, 1947. Orga,niza tions representing providers of traTport for hire reward were given the right to submit evidence to support a contention that the charges in the draft scheme were unduly low.
This right would be of little use now. The charges in the scheme are purposely fixed at a high level, although some argument is possible about the exact effect. For general traffic tarried by goods train, the rates are calculated by reference to a combination of the weight and what is called the loadability of each consignment. Loadability is defined as "the greatest weight of goods identical in every way (save as to total weight) with the goods comprised in the consignment as tendered for carriage, which is reasonably capable of being loaded and safely carried in an open railway wagon with two axles capable of carrying a maximum load of l0 tons and with a cubic capacity of 450 cu. ft."
Proposed Maximum
The lowest rate is for a consignrnent weighing 10 tom and having a loaclability also of 10 tons. The proposed maximum is 41s. 7d. per ton for 50 Miles, 55s. 1d. per ton for 100 miles, and 68s. 8d. per ton for 150 miles.
Hauliers may still claim to be represented at the inquiry as users of the railways. Many smalls carriers, in particular, make a habit of consigning traffic torail for the trunk part of a journey, reserving only the collection and delivery for their own vehicles. They may be vitally interested in a scheme that would allow the Commission to discriminate against theni.
The speculation is not an idle one. The draft charges scheme has been popularly described as a challenge to the habliers, and the Commission themselves support this interpretation. They stress that the railways "are, already faced with intensified competition from road haulage " following the removal of the 25-mile limit on January 1. The theme of competition runs all through the explanatory memorandum distributed with the scheme, and the Commission leave no doubt about whom they regard as their competitors.
Thus the wheel has turned full circle. When road transport first became a serious rival, the railways used every possible means in an attempt to crush it. After the "square deal" campaign just before the war, an attempt was made at collaboration. There was much talk of correlated rates. The link remained even after nationalization. Although the so-called liaison machinery was a sickly growth, a good deal of work was done, and has continued, by the joint negotiating committees in the field of licensing.
Denationalization has sounded the death knell of liaison. Even if co-operation continues on the subject of licensing, it seems unlikely to go any further. " fn transport, as in any other commercial business," say the Commission. "the most effective price protection for the consumer is competition." Most hauliers have realized from the beginning that the proposed new freedom for rail would create a serious problem for them. To their ears, the latest statement by the Commission must sound like a declaration of war, This is all the more reason why they should' do what they can to speed up disposal, so that they can the sooner give their undivided attention to meeting the new threat.