Freightliners need no protection MRS. CASTLE has stated that even
Page 67
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
if the railways were made more efficient she doubts that they would get more traffic. Therefore her proposed quantity licensing system will give BR a sporting chance against road haulage.
Present evidence-and some theories based upon it-do not seem to me to support her theory.
The Freightliner system is as yet incomplete and while labour troubles continue not fully efficient. Despite this, however, we read in COMMERCIAL MOTOR of sonte hauliers transferring most or part of their trunk services to rail because they are satisfied with the service provided. It therefore seems likely that when the Freightliners are fully operational and efficient many more firms will follow their example.
I suggest that this argument in favour of' competition should be used by all who oppose quantidy licensing because if Mrs. Castle saw the logic behind it the following would be achieved: (1) Her desire for a "more rational division" of traffic between road and rail would result, not from the application of restrictive legislation, but from the working of two equally efficient transport systems.
(2) Railways would regain their self-respect by fully exploiting the Freightliner system.
(3) Road haulage would not be sacrificed to socialist dogma. It might lose much of its distance and bulk traffic but at least it would have a decent chance as against very little chance under a quantity licensing system.
(4) Industry would benefit from having the choice of efficient haulage by road or rail.
(5) Justice would be done to all concerned.
1 am not, as some may feel, on BR's side but I believe the hope is to convince Mrs. Castle that Freightliners constitute a seriousthreat to road haulage without legislative protection.
JOHN C. BARRETT, Nuneaton