, a new conception of a Labour Minister of Transport
Page 68
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
LIKE explorers in space gingerly testing the atmosphere and environment of a new world, road transport operators have taken a little time to adjust themselves to the existence of a Labour Government Relations with a government bearing the same political label in the five' or six years following the last War had left an impression which was still plainly active even after a long period of Conservative rule in the course of which the policy and opinions of the Labour Party on such matters as nationalization and transport had obviously been undergoing a slow but progressive change.
Since the General Election operators have anxiously examined the signs. The absence of guidance in either the Labour Party's election manifesto or the Queen's Speech has in itself been reassuring. On the whole the less notice a government take of an industry the better pleased that industry is unless it has internal problems. Almost equally comforting has been the tone of those acknowledged Socialists who have been called upon to speak about transport. Whereas not so long ago, they would have talked of integration and implied compulsion—especially when it was a question of switching traffic from road to rail —they are now content to advocate persuasion and planning. This is a big step forward, even if it does not entirely dispel the suspicions of road users.
The new Minister of Transport, Mr. Tom Fraser, has set the tone. On more than one occasion, when dealing with what could be awkward subjects, he has paid a tribute to organizations representing road operators, more particularly the Road Haulage Association. He has said, for example, that members on the whole maintain a high standard of vehicle maintenance and he has appeared to welcome steps taken by the R.H.A. to improve the turnround situation at the docks.
He has indicated his approval of the action of British Road Services in joining the R.H.A. Objections on political grounds had been raised by the Scottish Commercial Motormen's Union. The Minister pointed out in his reply that there were safeguards in the form of membership against the political involvement of B.R.S. and added that there was a good deal to be said for encouraging co-operation among all sections of the road haulage industry so that it could speak with one voice when the necessity arose.
Perhaps the Minister could not sensibly have said anything else. It must still be a welcome novelty for hauliers to find a Labour Minister putting the case for them against a somewhat militant trade union. Commonsense may well prevail in another dispute affecting hauliers which has now dragged on for several months. Mr. A. R. Dunbar, a member of the Railways Board, has recently supplied the National Union of Railwaymen with a list of points on which the railways would like their co-operation. High on the list is a request that railwaymen should make the liner-train scheme a practicable proposition by allowing independent hauliers to use the terminals.
The railwaymen may respond to Mr. Dunbar's appeal al8 or to other arguments. If not, the Minister may find himself called upon to express an opinion. He could hardly fail once again to reveal a point of view opposite to that of a trade union.
The beginning of a new year is as good a time as any for the road transport associations to develop what may for them be a new conception of a Labour Minister of Transport. When all is said and done he is the member of the Government to whom they ought to look for support, whatever political party is in power. Throughout the long administration of Mr. Alfred Barnes that support was lacking—or at any rate it appeared to be lacking. Even when Mr. Barnes made the occasional concession, such as dropping from his Transport Bill the clause designed to restrict the C-licence holder, the impression at the time and subsequently is that he was influenced by considerations other than the desire to help the industry which he was supposed to represent.
In spite of the celebrated tor notorious) concession neither hauliers nor C-licence holders ever felt that Mr. Barnes regarded them as his " constituents ". Mr. Fraser may be learning from the mistakes of his predecessor. It is at least risking nothing for the road transport industry to approach him on this basis and invite him to look after their interests.
In some quarters there may be the confused idea that this is already happening. More than one newspaper, in explaining the decision not to appoint Dr. Beeching as transport overlord, has given the opposition of "road haulage interests" as one reason. The phrase is vague and may not mean exactly what it appears to mean. All the same it would have been impossible for any journalist 20 years ago to have supposed that the representations of road haulage interests would have played much part in making up the mind of a Labour Minister.
Press comment does not always move in one direction. When the Transport Holding Company issued its version of relative track costs, Sir Philip Warter, the chairman, made some reference to the greater freedom which the company now enjoyed when they had in mind buying other haulage businesses. The statement was interpreted, although not generally, as a declaration of war on independent hauliers who would either be taken over or run out of business. However the error arose it clearly shows the need for public education on the present relationship between state-owned and independent transport, and perhaps also between independent operators and the Government.
The familiar metaphor of the calm before the storm may turn out to be the true explanation. It is always possible that after dealing with more pressing problems the Government will turn its attention to transport with results just as catastrophical as in 1947. Road operators will continue to have some reservations on this score. Their feelings will (one imagines) be understood, but should not prevent them from going forward with plans which might after all find favour with the Government, whatever latent intentions the latter has.