1K thattoakt oficg he CCC
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
3nus does not help his case pima the EEC transport 3licy, by propping it up ith hypothetical cost gures (Commercial Motor, Line 6). Nor is he likely to in the support of the sneral public by presuming at the policy on vehicle reights and size could and lould be settled in elation. There are other ansiderations, just as aportant, which affect the ilationship between the ammercial vehicle and the eneral public.
For example, the harder a ahicle is driven, the more Tioke, noise, road damage ad vibration will it cause. he vehicle will also cost lore to run and will be ivolved in more accidents. .pparently, the other 'ember countries of the EC accept the logic of this rgument: hence the acision to control the onditions affecting the way which a vehicle is
perated and driven as well s its size and weight. Viewed in this light, there ; every reason to hope that le current breach between lose expressing sincere oncern on behalf of the eneral public and those rishing to run a viable 'ansport industry can be ridged.
All that is needed is for le industry to accept that le general public have a ght to be reassured that 3sponsible drivers backed y qualified managers are roperly supervising a arefully designed vehicle. Were the industry to ccept this broad view of le EEC transport ari:konisation programme, -ten n.ciny of the petty isagreLments might be lore easy overcome.
A R BITER
Vairre and address suppled)