;crimination against nsport, MPs allege
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
)TEST at the treatment given to road lage under the Industrial Development made by Tory front bench spokesman, hony Barber, when the Commons disle measure this week.
)ted that when he introduced the Bill glas Jay, the President of the Board of ad not even referred to. the transport Road haulage was responsible for ent of the freight tonnage which moved le country, yet Mr. Jay had not troubled hat the effect of the Bill would be.
consequences of withdrawing the invest)wances from road haulage will be either :e efficiency or to increase prices or I pretend otherwise is to fly in the face ng up for the opposition, Mr. Michael )oke of the importance to firms of the speed of transport. Both factors were considerable importance if one wanted lopment of industry to be accelerated. In the past few months, neither in this Bill nor in any other Government measure had any appropriate action been taken to help the transport industries, said Mr. Noble. They were discriminated against in this Bill; they were very heavily hit by the selective importance tax; they had been hit by the petrol tax and the road and rail policy.
It was very difficult for MPs to believe that the Government was seriously interested in regional development when it was asked to provide a sum of about £10m. to give cheaper transport to people living in the London Passenger Transport Board area. This was not for any new capital development but was just a subsidy so that these people could get from one part of London to another more cheaply.
Essentially the problem was that the London Board was overmanned and everyone knew it, said Mr. Noble. If it put its own house in order this subsidy would not be needed and the money could be used much better in Wales or Scotland.