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 
Hauliers Must Stand Together in Licensing
Page 104
Page 105
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IN this article I am striking a new note. I am going to make some suggestions to hauliers which, I hope, will be of assistance to them, not, as usual, in the matter of costs and rates, but in respect of applications for licences, or for renewals, extensions or variations. I must begin by making some general observation as to the broad policy which seems to be governing the actions of the. parties concerned—the Licensing Authorities, the railways, and road hauliers.
The Licensing Authorities in general are doing their best to hold the scales evenly. Even when, for example, they have, in my opinion, exceeded their powers, in granting only, B licences to• bona-fide hauliers who, on the face of it, and according to my reading of the 1933 Act, are entitled to A licences, it is clear that the underlying intention is to give a helping hand to the small c62 .
haulier and to grant him a B licence, because, otherwise, in so many cases, he _might receive no licence. I have no direct authority for this statement. My justification for making it is my own observation and regard for the facts of so many of these cases.
The other two parties are not being quite so helpful, having in mind the fact that the Act was designed to bring about a rapproachement between them to promote' the co-ordination of road and rail, and not to serve as a casus belli between them. The two parties are certainly not making any visible attempt at co-ordination. There is proceeding a certain amount of absorption of one by the other, but that is not quite the same thing.
The Railways are the Aggressors.
The railway companies are definitely the aggressors. However much they may appear outwardly to accept the principle that proper co-ordination of road and rail transport is desirable, they have no doubt that any tendency towards that ideal conflicts acutely with their own interests. The railway companies have one objective, and that is to put as much traffic on the rail as is practicable.
They are, therefore, entering objections wholesale to licence applications and, just now, are concentrating on applications for the renewal or extension of B licences, large numbers of which are coming before the Licensing Authorities. With these objections they are choking the courts with work and are not always having the courtesy even to acquaint the Authority, in advance, when objections are withdrawn. Time and time again is a case called, the applicant making an appearance only to hear the railway companies' counsel stand up and say "objection withdrawn."
That means that the applicant has had to attend court, the Licensing Authority has had to collect essential papers, evidence in support has been amassed and, in many cases, Counsel instructed, all to no purpose. Many railway objections are the eSsence of futility and are obviously the outcome of a determination to object in any event. One such case sticks in my mind and, although it would not be fair to call it typical, it does show to what lengths the railways are going in their deterreination to stone-wall all attempts of road transport to expand.
The case I have in mind was that of a woman, obviously of very limited means, who had for some time, been carrying on a business as firewood merchant and eked out the obviously meagre returns from such a business by using the old Ford-tonner which she employed for delivering the firewood, for any odd job of haulage which came her way. Little thought is necessary to appreciate that those jobs must have been comparatively few and quite insignificant in their effect on any other transport operator.
Road hauliers are being unhelpful in a different way. They are passively acquiescent in the misfortunes of those amongst them who fail in their applications for renewals, extensions or variations of their licences. There is no* evidence of any inclination to hold out a helping hand to a brother in trade.
Apathy Towards Injustice.
No better example of the attitude of the road-haulage industry can be cited than that with regard to the granting of a B licence when, strictly, an A licence is due. Had hauliers in general been of a mind to pull together in the face of the difficulties confronting them (and which they will discover to be still more serious next year), they would, quite early in the development of this phase of the regulations, have taken an example to appeal as a test case. If that course had been adopted it is quite possible that they would have achieved success and established what I believe to be a sound principle, namely, that bona-fide hauliers, who operate their vehicles entirely for hire and reward, are entitled to A licences.
Why was no fuss made about this type of case? I should like to believe that it was because hauliers appreciated that the Licensing Authorities, in taking this line, were really trying to help what I might term border-line cases. Unfortunately, I do not think that was the reason why nothing was done. Judging by the general attitude of established hauliers who have sufficient licences for the moment, the reason was, and is, that carriers look with a more jealous eye upon the success of a haulier in obtaining a licence than they do upon the railways, which are being granted licences by the hundred.
I have heard the opinion expressed quite openly by some that the Authorities are granting licences too freely to banners. That is a very short-sighted attitude, in view of the actual circumstances, and is likely to create the impression that operators themselves are not opposed to restriction.
The railways are showing no quarter. They have expert counsel at their command and they are united in their efforts. A proper attitude for hauliers, in so far as icensing is concerned, is to pull together and help each other in every case, irrespective of individual jealousies. That is the first piece of advice that I have to give. .1 can now turn to problems of more direct interest, to suggestions which will help the individual.
, To those problems I propose to devote one or more subsequent articles and, in the meantime, I shall be interested to hear from readers who have problems of this description with which they would like me to deal, in conjunction with the others relating to costSand
charges. S.T.R.