§ 48. Mr. Ernest Daviesasked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation why he refused the request of the British Transport Commission to retain 200 service vans as C licence vehicles; and why 140 of these vehicles are to be sold as chattels under Section 6 (1) of Transport Act, 1953.
§ Mr. WatkinsonThe request was refused because the Commission wished to keep these vehicles in addition to the number the Transport (Disposal of Road Haulage Property) Bill permits it to keep. The 140 are being sold as chattels under Section 6 (1) because service vehicles have not generally been used to carry traffic and it would, therefore, be undesirable to grant special A licences to the purchasers of these vehicles.
§ Mr. DaviesIs this not the craziest of all actions in conjunction with disposal? Does the Minister realise that these vehicles would not compete with commercial road hauliers—they would have C licences—and that his action means that the Commission, having to dispose of these vehicles, must now buy new vehicles to carry its own goods? What is the point of compelling the Commission to sell vehicles at a loss and to purchase new vehicles at a higher price in these days of capital restriction?
§ Mr. WatkinsonThe fact is, as the hon. Member quite definitely knows, that, taking the whole operation generally, the Commission has had a very fair and generous deal. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]Oh, yes; it certainly has. There are bound to be these small anomalies before we can finally clear up the process of disposal, which I wish to do as quickly as possible for the sake of the Commission.
§ Mr. DaviesHow can the Minister say that the Commission has had a fair deal when he whittled down by 7½ per cent. the number of vehicles which the Commission was allowed to keep? When he is deliberately making the Commission dispose of vehicles, which it could use for its own use and which would not enter into competition, with the result that the Commission has to buy new vehicles, how can the right hon. Gentleman justify this crazy bit of business?
§ Mr. WatkinsonThe hon. Gentleman, I think, forgets the purpose of the Act, which concerned 7,500 lorries, which is a rather more important matter.