Let Farmers Keep Their Low Tax
Page 60
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I TRUST that Janus will forgive me if I am telling him something he already knows; but his .comments on the farmer C-licence position in The Commercial Motor on June 24 suggest that he is not absolutely au fait with it and they are likely to lead the casual reader or the town dweller into believing that the legal provisions governing the matter are more than usually illogical.
In this connection, farmers-, as usual, have the best of two worlds. If one intends to run his vehicle solely in connection with his own farming activities and it is to be "used on roads solely by that person for conveying the produce of or articles--required for the purpose of the agricultural land he occupies, and for no other purpose," he need pay only a low rate of Excise duty. For a vehicle with an unladen weight not exceeding 3 tons, the duty is only £16 a year. If he takes advantage of this concession . he does not need a C licence to authorize him to carry his own goods and, in fact, he cannot have one. Moreover, he cannot legally carry the goods of neighbouring farmers, even if he makes no charge,
If he decided to pay the full amount of Excise duty, it would be £35 a year and he would require a C licence to carry his own goods. In this event, says the law, he has the privilege (or right) of carrying goods for other agriculturists in his locality and notwithstanding that payment may be made for the service, the law, as Janus reminds us, says that this is not deemed to be carriage for hire or reward. In other words, "for the purposes of this part of this Act, black shall be deemed to be white."
With regard t o the descriptions, "farmers " or "persons engaged in agriculture," there is difficulty in definition. In the haulage industry we have fallen into the loose habit of referring to a "neighbouring farmer," whereas the 1933 Act makes no reference to either " neighbouring " or "farmer." It has, however, meant that on many occasions people who have been misled by the loose terms have asked for it to be defined and have asked whether the biblical definition of a neighbour can be held to apply. They have also asked whether a smallholder or market gardener can be called a farmer. Whatever the answer, if he is tilling the soil, he is a "person engaged in agriculture" and can take advantage of the provision.
It would not help at all if all such persons had to have C licences. In the present state of the law, this would give them all the right to carry for other agriculturists in their localities and that is something we certainly do not want. Let them enjoytheir lower rate of tax while it is available. Do not, in addition, give them the right to carry for others. In fact, the more farmers take advantage of the substantial concession in duty, the better.
It is sometimes said that certain farmers in some localities have difficulties at times in getting their goods carted. In my experience it is only the farmer who will not pay a fair rate, or never pays his accounts, or wants a year's credit, who cannot readily find a haulier.
However, in the unlikely event of some real seasonal . difficulty in any locality, Section 2(4) of the 1933 Act gives Licensing Authorities power to authorize the use of C vehicles for hire or reward where they are satisfied that the need cannot be met from other sources.
One must agree with Janus that there can be no possible justification for the continuation of this most unfair concession to farmers.
Referring to his article published on June 10, many readers will have sympathy with him in his problem of keeping up with everything that is happening in transport legislation. But with regard to the Road Traffic Act, 1960, this is no more than an Act of Parliament which consolidates existing road transport law. In these circumstances it cannot embody any new, hidden whips and scorpions.
Such legislation can embody only such corrections and minor improvements as fall within the limits allowed by the Consolidation of Enactments (Procedure) Act, 1949. A Consolidating Bill is closely scrutinized by a Parliamentary committee to ensure that it does no more than it sets out to. do and that it does in fact reflect existing law. There appears to be no debate on it in Parliament at any stage of its progress through the House and, in fact, in the case of the present Act, its third reading occupied some three lines in Hansard.
One consequential matter which will arise out of the 1960 Act is, of course, a completely new set of statutory instruments and regulations because, presumably, those issued under repealed laws will cease to be effective. Under the new regulations, new forms will have to be drafted. May one hope that the opportunity will be taken to draft them in accordance with the requirements of the Act, and not merely on what has gone before?
Linton, Cambridge. G. W. IRWIN.
A Briton Looks at American Transport
14AvING just returned from five weeks -in America, 1 " think readers may be interested in one or two of my observations. I was particularly pleased to note that Leyland Motors, Ltd., had obtained a fairly large order in America for general delivery vehicles.
Most of the modern 5-7-ton vehicles there have independent front suspension, air brakes and two-speed axles, one of the ratios being exceptionally high for use on motorways. Because of the wide differences in the standard of American roads—ranging from dirt tracks to broad motorways— tough suspension and two axle ratios are necessary. The large articulated long-distance vehicles, with four or sixwheeled tractors and 35-40-ft. semi-trailers carrying 30-35 tons at a regular 60 m.p.h., are an impressive spectacle.
I saw many Mercedes 0321H rear-engined buses. Apart from the Leyland Atlantean, Britain does not seem to have tried to compete in this market. Most of the buses are rear-engined, and two-pedal control is general. Many of the larger buses have torque converters, and most have air suspension. A necessary feature is air conditioning, the unit for which may take up to 20 h.p. and is usually mounted at the rear, above the engine. The most popular modern bus in America appears to be the new G.M.C. with V6 engine and torque converter. It is air conditioned.
American bus bodies are mainly made of steel and lightalloy pressings welded together. The windows are much smaller than those in British buses, and are usually closed, otherwise the effect of air conditioning is lost. One-man operation is common.
I questioned many Managers of transport undertakings, some of whom had used British oil engines and spoke highly of them on account of their economy. Many of the American oil engines appeared to be smoky, and I gathered that their fuel-consumption rate was in the region of 6-7 m.p.g.
Biggleswade. W. A. JORDAN.