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 
; one of the ordinary, though ightly misled human beings
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
lion H. T. Harvey refers to in' s letter (CM August 4), I feel I ust point out certain.facts to Ir Harvey.
Firstly, he accuses ''a gnilcant membership of the rad haulage fraternity" of owboy antics". It is obvious cm this statement that Mr arvey does not know the first ring about road transport. It is is ''significant membership of re road haulage fraternity" that e doing their best to rid the dustry of a very small minority cowboys.
Secondly Mr Harvey says rat most industrialists would refer to have their suppliers -id markets readily accessible. I 1-1 sure they would, and I am Jre a lot of people would prefer re world we live in to be perJct, but it is not and I am certain at f industrialists found a way i do without transport, then ley would.
Thirdly, he claims that road ansport is a prime reason for rflation and unemployment. ow Mr Harvey arrives at this )ndusion one can only guess, w road transport is the cheapst and most competitive form of transport today. If it were not, then surely more goods would go by rail.
Also, I wonder if it would be possible for Mr Harvey to explain to us misled human beings, why prices haverisen 104 per cent in four years when road transport rates have only risen 30 to 40 per cent (and in some cases, even less)? Surely Mr Harvey cannot expect us to be ignorant as well as misled, He says unemployment is transported from low-cost areas to high-cost areas. If it were not for transport, then the employment would be high in the low cost areas and consequently the goods manufactured in the high-cost area would quite obviously cost more — now tell us what is causing (or would cause) even more inflation, Mr Harvey?
While stilron the subject of inflation, Mr Harvey tells us that T2000 is anti-juggernaut and seeks a reduction in gross vehicle weights and is going to fight for a reduction in pollution and waste of natural resources. He also tells us that we (the misled human beings) would be better off driving smaller lorries over smaller distances.
To my (uneducated?) mind, this obviously would mean more vehicles, so in consequence would mean greater cost, higher inflation, more, not less of our natural resources being used and would also constitute a greater pollution hazard. Might I also point out that it is a proven fact that a diesel engine causes less pollution than a petrol engine, so remember that, Mr Harvey, next time you drive around the country in your car telling other people that it is our vehicles which cause pollution.
Finally, it is said that 12000 is supported by the rail unions, of whose membership includes drivers, merchant seamen and dockers, although I fail to see the significance of seamen and dockers. I can assure Mr Harvey that no driver in this country would support an organisation so obviously run by a minority of completely selfish and uninformed people, who by writing biased and sometimes untrue letters to newspapers and magazines, hope to turn the ordinary man in the street against road transport. It is this majority who would suffer should the aims of T2000 ever be taken seriously.
G. S. R. GOWLAND, Haltrohistle, Northumbria.