Double Talk
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IF the discussion before the Transport Tribunal on the railways' freight charges scheme continues sidehy-side with the .clebate. in 'Parliament on the Government's new Bill to put an end to disposal, some interesting and contradictory arguments might be heard by anybody who is energetic enough to -shuttle backwards and forwards between the two inquiries. The discord may . eVen becorrie so . deafening that the Government will have to take notice. .
The British Transport Commission see M the charges scheme a move towards the freedom'. that they have consistently sought. They are justified in taking this view. A year before the passing of the Transport Act, 1953, the Government promised the Commission "greater latitude to vary their charges schemes so as to improve the ability of the railways to compete with other forms of transport." The promise was fulfilled in the Act, and the scheme now before the Tribunal is calculated to give the railways practically all the freedom they want.
Transport Paradise
The Government's Ultimate intention was to release the flow of traffic so that it would go naturally towards the means most suited for it. " The distribution between road and rail," it was said in 1952, "will be determined by the advantage which each has to offer to the trader." This prophecy of a transport paradise has lately been relayed, with appropriate modulations, on more than one occasion from the Ivory Tower.
Last week.! drew attention to a statement by Sir Reginald Wilson, a member of the Commission, putting the proposition in the plainest possible terms.. He said that the railways had a mandate to run them selves on a business basis. It was elementary good .business to look after the best traffics and the best and steadiest customerS. The railways would go out for some traffic and let the rest disappear. They would be hound to discriminate far more than in the past when they were a public monopoly.
Several times already the same point has been stressed before the Tribunal, although, on the whole, in more guarded terms than those used by Sir Reginald. The railways will make things easy for the trader with the traffic they want, and will not attract the traffic they think should be carried by road.
It is to some extent the business of the Tribunal, but perhaps not of the railways, to inquire who will carry the unwanted traffic, which will still need transport, although, so far as the railways are concerned, it has " disappeared." The Commission cannot particularly wish the trader to put it on his own vehicles, for they might prove to have an appetite less discriminating than that of the railways. They might catch not only the disappearing traffic, but attract a good deal more. The last thing the Commission want to do is to encourage the growth in the number of C-licence holders. The Government also would not relish such a development and the Socialists would find it a powerful weapon.
The haulier is the obvious beneficiary of any redistribution of traffic resulting from the railways' new policy. At any rate, the Government, and perhaps also the Commission, have cast him for that role. The 1953 Act was designed to groom him for the, part. He was released from the 25-mile limit, the bonds of the licensing system were eased, and he was given the chance to get back what he' had lost during the lean years of nationalization.
Disposal has virtually come to a halt while_ the railways' charges scheme proceeds ori its way. When the time comes for them to shed traffic, it may be that much of it cannot conveniently be carried by an independent operator, but will pass instead to British Road Services. The form of transport will.change, but the carrier remains the same.
The argument over the new Bill may well find its focus in this point. The opinion of the Government is that disposal has reached the stage where independent long-distance hauliers and B.R.S. can compete on equal terms. On the other hand, the Road Haulage:Association say that the 5,000 trunk vehicles that B.R.S. probably have in operation far outnumber those in private hands. Most of the 20,000 vehicles sold are not suitable for long-distance trunk services.
There may be some hope that the balance will be redressed by the operation a the licensing system. The danger is that the balance will tilt still farther. As pointed out last week, the expansion of the-licensed road haulage fleet, by whatever method it is achieved, may be a good thing. The end justifies the means. If B.R.S. have 10,000 vehiclesor mere, however, the problem may be to stop them attracting extra vehicles until they regain a virtual monopoly.
Danger For Traders The trader will not relish a situation where the Commission have a large Measure of, control over longdistance transport, and are able to vary. their charges largely to please themselves. The 1953 Act appears to give him little protection. He can Claim justice' from the Tribunal if he thinks the railways are asking -an unreasonable or unfair rate for merchandise. that he wishes to send by rail and that " cannot reasonably. be carried by any other means of transport."
This provision Was framed in the expectation that, the principal 'other means for transport would.ber mainly in independent hands.... The 'trader. now has little defence if the railways can show that B.R.S. are able to carry the goods. He has every reason to attack the scheme while it is still in enthry0. Many traders, through their representatives, have combined in a commendably vigorous onslaught before the Tribunal...
Some of them have seen the danger from the beginning and it . is surprising that a numberhas supported the Government's latest move. Perhaps they hoped that by stopping disposal they would also stop the charges scheme. If this was the ease, they have so far been disappointed, but their attack may be renewed as it becomes more and more plain what drastic use the railways intend to make of their freedom.
The Government seem not to have given sufficient thought to all the consequences of their decision. Some of the components of the 1953 Act may have been a little odd, but it was -designed to work as a whole. Tinkering with one part may have unexpected and unpleasant effects upon others.