Peace and Prosperity• for Hauliers
Page 47
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TBELIEVE that if the opportunity is taken, there is today a better chance of a long period of stability than has existed at any time since 1920," Mr. T. G. Gibb, deputy chief traffic officer (general haulage operations) of British Road Services, told the Humberside section of the Institute of Transport last week.
. The railways have the blankest cheque both for development and competitive trading that they have seen for a 'century; the private hauliers have recovered anything lost under the Transport Act, 1947; the British Transport Commission, owners of the railways, have as a buffer between them and the hauliers a British Road Services likely to remain larger than they at one time had reason to expect, and the traders still hold complete liberty to develop their own transport organizations as they wish," he said.
Onus on Operators
The possibility of an escape from political interference depended, howes er, as much on those administering the industry as on the politicians. If transport operators were to continue to regard themselves, and be regarded, as belonging to a key industry, politicians should be entitled to satisfy themselves that it was running in the country's best interests. Its efficiency must not be allowed to deteriorate.
Although Mr. Gibb thought that the 1953 Act was too drastic, he said that some change in the 1947 Act was inevitable, because the radius restriction imposed on hauliers was extremely difficult to enforce. The complete reversal of policy by the 1953 Act was, ho s\ ever, a surprise, because it seemed to go right back on the general principles which had underlain the developments of the 'thirties, which the Conservatives had themselves sponsored.
Where the 1947 Act failed was in its arbitrary selection of those to be nationalized and in its imposition of almost impossible conditions on those left out. Consequently, there could be no . equity of competition between B.R.S. and hauliers, and this would have remained a grievance as long as the law compelled it. The grievance could, however, have been removed by far less drastic measures than the 1953 Act.
Tracing the progress of disposal, Mr. Gibb said it appeared to have been the failure to sell the large depots, \\Mich formed the backbone of the main trunk and regular services, that influenced the Minister of Transport in his decision to allow B.R.S. to keep them.
Although the fleet to be retained by B.R.S. would be small compared with that formerly owned, much of the original structure would be preserved. The basic organization would remain much the same and the aims and policies, particularly as regards the establishment of modern depots, would be continued.
Hauliers were providing keen competition not only with the State-owned service and the railways, but also with each other. "Let them beware of too desperate a competition by rate-war tactics," Mr. Gibb said; "go all out for trade by all means, but let common sense and judgment prevail in the matter of charges. . There is real danger to the operators if, by ignorance, rates are allowed to fall below a truly economic level."
He foresaw widespread amalgamation among hauliers during the next feW years. The result might well be the re-establishment of some operators of the calibre of those who disappeared after 1947.
He did not advocate restrictions on C-licensees and he saw no reason why their liberty should upset the promise of political stability in the industry. "But traders must," he warned, " take heed of their responsibilities in this matter and must make a proper appreciation of the full effect of any C-licence fleet development before they embark upon it."
Traders Take First Pick There was a natural .tendency for traders, particularly those producing heavy firms of traffic, to build up their fleets to the limit which could be operated on regular runs with capacity. loads, leasing a 'fluctuating balance to be carried by the professional haulier.
If hauliers were not allowed to take their proper share of the traffics on the routes where loads were good and plentiful, they would be unable to maintain services to the less favourable destinations; or at the same price. This consideration applied to both fullcapacity bulk loads and to distribution services. The professional haulier must remain the backbone of the road transport system.
Whilst everything seemed to be set fair for a period of peace and prosperity in the road haulage industry, there were at least three important problems to be faced. The first was the establishment of a proper staldard of operation.
The practices of overworking drivers,
• disregarding weight and speed limits, and failing to maintain vehicles properly, could be traced back to rates. If a universally high standard of operation were to be achieved for the general good, fair freight rates must be 4 maintained by operators and traders. Impossible achievements in service to customers must be neither expetted nor .demanded.
The second problem was to achieve greater efficiency. Traders and operators must work closely together to cut down loading and unloading times. Physical limitations imposed by premises could often be overcome by mechanical loading devices. By and large, terminal delays had been greatly reduced in inffiistrial premises, but not at the docks.
Greater efficiency would result from a reduction of aerall journey times, more intensive working of vehicles and better loadings. In considering overall journey times, speed limits played a part, but if by increased speed a vehicle merely arrived at its destination at a time at which it could not be unloaded. or if it then had to spend the greater part of the day at the depot, there would be no advantage. More vehicle journeys per week might be completed by abandoning the idea of one man, one vehicle.
Watch Weights
Anyone taking advantage of the new increased-weight limits was in duty bound to ensure that his vehicle was fit to carry the greater weight.
The third problem ...vas to ensure proper use of the railways. If it were accepted that the railways were an essential part of the transport system, there could be no stability if every development in the road haulage industry were aimed at making the railway bankrupt.
With the continuance of a large State road haulage undertaking as part of the B.T.C. there could be co-ordination between road and rail where appropriate. "Should not this be extended to the private haulier?" he asked.
Heavy expenditure on new roads was to go hand-in-hand with a railway modernization scheme estimated to cost at least £1,240m. The two could not be looked at apart.
"I feel that the goal must be a full use of rail between a greatly reduced' number of terminals, with road delivery over a very much wider arca from each," said Mr. Gibb. "I would recommend that, except where there are private sidings, all traffic should be carried throughout from consignor to consignee. Freedom would then be giyen to the transport undertakings to fix the best geographical position of major terminals between which all traffic could be concentrated for ultimate distribution by road."