GAP IN RESEARCH COUNCIL
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
NEWS of the formation by the Government of an advisory council on road research was likely to leave the commercial vehicle operator unmoved. Research, he may have felt, was best left to the experts and he need not concern himself with their investigations. Any slight interest would in any event have evaporated half-way through a reading of the council's terms of reference, which were to advise the Minister of Transport upon the "orientation and scope of research on roads and road traffic".
The operator should perhaps have pursued the matter a little further. He would have found that examples of the kind of subject to receive the council's attention include the design of the road system, traffic engineering, road safety and "the interaction of the technical problems with economics". Whatever the precise meaning of the last item the operator would certainly agree that his views on all of them should not be ignored.
He will not be entirely reassured when he sees the composition of the council announced by the last Minister of Transport, Mr. Fraser, in answer to a question in Parliament. There are 20 members, with one appointment still to be made. They include two professors, one of civil engineering and the other of psychology; civil servants and Government advisers; a county surveyor; and representatives of the police, civil engineering contractors, the Confederation of British Industries, and the cement and concrete and coated macadam industries.
DISQUIET FOR OPERATORS?
Excellent appointments all of them. But the transport operator may at last feel disquieted when he realizes that he is altogether unrepresented on an influential body which could put forward proposals on many matters of vital importance to his livelihood.
Road users are not left completely out of account, One of the council's members is Mr. A. C. Dune in his capacity of director-general of the Automobile Association. Mr. Durk is also a vice-chairman of the British Road Federation which is guided by a policy calculated to meet with the approval of commercial operators.
To this extent any fears they may have about the new council should be allayed. The BRF performs an invaluable function for road users as a whole. The theme which it propagates is almost entirely harmonious. When the chairman of the Road Haulage Association was pleading the. other day for an accelerated road programme, for a separate Road Board free from the "stranglehold" of the Treasury, and even for fairer financial competition between road and rail, he could almost have been acting as a spokesman for the Federation.
Nevertheless, perhaps more opportunities should be taken by operators to express opinions which are particularly their own. Because of the wide range of interests which it represents, the BRF is bound sometimes to make general statements and avoid being too specific. The issues which it brings out may not always be those which the commercial operator would accentuate.
It is interesting, for example, to examine the recent BRF statement following threats by the Government to initiate measures designed to dissuade users from bringing their vehicles into city centres. Three conditions are laid down. by the BRF before it would accept "such regrettable and temporary measures in whole or in part ". The road user should be offered an acceptable alternative at a reasonable price; the maximum use should be made of existing road space; and the Government should undertake the urgently needed increases in road facilities as rapidly as possible.
To a similar statement road operators would give a significantly different emphasis. The first condition would be made much tougher. Where goods have to be collected or delivered there is no "acceptable alternative" even as a temporary measure to allowing the vehicles free access to the premises where they have business. The ulti mate aim must be to get the vehicles off the streets when they are not moving but the accommodation must be within the city itself since it is there that they must load or unload.
On the other hand many operators might be inclined to agree that in some cases the Government's powers of dissuasion should be permanent once the acceptable alternative is provided. In the larger towns the commuter, one suspects, will not go back to public transtort, however much the services are improved and increased, while he is able to leave his car near to his place of work. There may have to be compulsion.
REASON FOR RESTRIMONS
The need for restrictions arises, says the BRF with every justification, "because of the failure of successive Governments to take a realistic view of investment required in urban,' areas ". This neglect has intensified the antagonism between motorists and commercial operators. It is still true that in the best of circumstances that antagonism is latent and will show itself inevitably as the number of vehicles using the road increases.
The proposal that lorries should not be allowed to use the fast third lane on motorways seems to be borne out of this situation. These great highways were envisaged as a means of linking urban centres. It was thought they would provide ample space for all the traffic wishing to use them in the foreseeable future. The construction programme has hardly got under way before cars and lorries are jostling each other for space and new restrictions have to be imposed. But in this instance at least Governments could not be accused of failing to take the "realistic view of investment required ".