An objectionable Act
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE OPERATORS' licensing system is to be fundamentally changed as soon as the provision of the Transport Act 1983 are brought into effect.
This is the price the industry will have to pay for getting the 38-tonner permitted. The Minister wanted to get that issue resolved and to get his Bill through Parliament-Tp placate the opponents, he said-he would place further restrictions on the operations of those wicked juggernauts. That is just what he has done, and the severity of his new rules has hardly yet been realised.
The new proposals are contained in a Schedule to the Act and in small print and this was another reason why they were hardly debated in Parliament and so received virtually no publicity. There has been so much clamour in recent years to the effect that lorries ruin the environment, and the Minister promised to put severe checks on that spoliation. So in future all the environmentalists are to be given every opportunity.
We know that hitherto all app I ic a t i o ns have had to go through the publication process in the Applications & Decisions. That will continue, but not be sufficient. Additional publication and publicity is to be stipulated in future, every application for a licence, including renewals and extensions (and probably other alterations) will have to be published in one or more local newspapers. So that will involve time, bother and expense.
Obviously the Licensing Authority is going to require proof that this has been done. The form of wording which is to be used in-the newspapers is now set out in the draft Regulations. There may well arise arguments as to which is the appropriate newspaper, unless the applicant goes to the expenses of publishing in lots of newspapers.
This amounts to an open invitation for the creation of opposition. Any person who is the owner or occupier of land in the vicinity of the operator's proposed operating centre may lodge representations.
The words "in the vicinity" are extremely vague; it is not impossible to anticipate that persons three miles or more away will be arguing that they are still in the vicinity. In some cases there may well be many local residents who intend to pursue their representations.
So the application must be dealt with by the Licensing Authority at a Public Inquiry. Some of these may well take on the atmosphere of some planning inquiries on highway proposals. How can the simple haulier applicant hope for success?
It must follow that many applicants are likely to take fright at the mass of opposition and so abandon their applications.
Of course, that is just what the environmentalists want. It will be a major tragedy, not only for the haulage industry, but for the whole of British industry and commerce, to lose the services of the existing wide variety of hauliers.
What is the RHA doing? It was very successful in securing a very important amendment, which is most valuable as far as it went. It is to be found in subsection (5), where the essential words state that the licensing authority may not refuse an application if the applicant satisfies him that the grant of the application will not result in any material change in the use of the operating centre.
This goes some way to meet the needs of the larger and wellestablished operator. If the RHA wants to retain its membership, it must strive to protect the large number of smaller operators. These are the ones who will be embroiled in the major battles before the Licensing Authority. The Public Inquiries which we knew in the days when British Railways were the main objectors will be as nothing, compared with what is coming in the future.
The first step for the RHA is to try to persuade the new Minister of Transport that perhaps the pendulum went too far in favour of the environmentalists in view of the former Minister's determination to get approval for the 38tonner. The Minister does not have to bring into operation all the clauses contained in the schedule to the Act. The first essential one to be omitted is the new Section 69E, which provides for the publication of applications in the local newspapers. Is this really so necessary?
As I read the statute and the draft Regulations, it only needs one individual to make a representation and that will gum up the whole works. This is ridiculous. There are so many antilorry enthusiasts that they are bound to be able to find one individual in the vicinity of every application for an operator's licence.
I am, of course, concerned for the transport operators, whether hauliers or own-account, and whether established or newcomers; they are going to have the aggravation of all the consequences of trying to get that licence.
But the effect on the machinery of the licensing authorities is likely to create enormous problems and could require an explosion in the numbers of staff required to handle the administration of the licensing system.
The representation might well rest on some quite flimsy point such as that a few drops of diesel either have in the past, or might in the future, drop on to the highway or the footway; I think one cannot deny that that does cause damage to the environment. The Licensing Authority may indeed not give much weight to this at the eventual Public Inquiry but that does not prevent the representation being made and causing unreasonable disturbance.
How can one start to limit this odd quirk? Should one say there should be five individuals, or ten? Or the vicinity should be within 100 yards of the operating centre? At the moment it
appears that a mere written n, from such a quirk is a suffici, form of representation.
Would it assist if there wer set form of wording duly down in the Regulation Should the representator be quired to set out in full de exactly what his representat is all about? Would it be mi correct for this odd quirk o representator to be required attend some preliminary pui enquiry so that the Licens Authority can examine whet there is any merit in this rep sentation?
The costs of getting a licen for the transport operator, going to be so great and prospects of having to face P lic Inquiries so dishearten that many hauliers, particule. the small ones, will just have give up. They will just disappe and the industry must dwin enormously.
Frankly, the whole syst looks like becoming a terni monster.
In my view, the only pract way of preventing this aim complete jam-up is to wipe away completely. It seems t the former Minister of Transr was giving away far far much to the environmental in his keenness to buy off tf objections to the 38-tonners, without thinking of the impli tions. Can the FTA and the R and others persuade the n Minister to look at the probl afresh and then delete the rer sentation idea?
There might be a sort of h way position but I hardly I mentioning it because I do like to think of allowing rep sentations at all. It might be pulated that the Licensi Authority shall be debarred fr admitting any representati unless it is linked with and companied by an objection one of the bodies allowed to , ject:
In my view, even this goes far and gives too much sta and opportunity to those A abhor the lorry.
In the past many Ministers Transport have seen the neec support the operational requ ments of the lorry in the face popular opinion. Let us hc that the new Minister will do again.
• Ralph Cropper