§ 2.38 p.m.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government if they will state the unladen weight categories of the 7,750 vehicles and the number of vehicles in each such category which it is proposed to allow to be made over to a company under the proposals of the Transport (Disposal of Road Haulage Property) Bill.]
540§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (THE EARL OF SELKIRK)My Lords, if the proposals under the Transport (Disposal of Road Haulage Property) Bill become law in their present form, under Clause 1 (b) (iii) (which deals with "Other motor vehicles"—that is, vehicles for general haulage) I understand that the British Transport Commission propose to retain the following vehicles:—
§ 7,649 vehicles totalling 35,991 tons. These vehicles are made up in the following categories by weight:
§ 2,336 are eight-wheelers, with an average unladen weight of approximately 7 tons.
§ 493 are six-wheelers, with an average unladen weight of 6 tons.
§ 989 are four-wheelers, with an average unladen weight of 4½ tons.
§ 1,899 are articulated tractors with an average weight of 3½ tons.
§ 518 are over 3 tons but not more than 4 tons.
§ 1.388 are over 2 tons but not more than 3 tons.
§ 26 are 2 tons or less.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, I regret that I did not catch the first figure which the noble Earl read out. Would he mind reading it out again?
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKCertainly; 7,649.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHI have not had time to add up all the figures. Has the noble Earl the aggregate tonnage?
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKI very much hope so.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHWould the noble Earl give me the figure?
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKI am not clear which figure the noble Lord wants.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHThe aggregate unladen tonnage of all the vehicles the noble Earl has read out.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThe aggregate unladen weight is 35,991 tons.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHWould the noble Earl tell me what was the basis upon which the figure of 36,000 tons mentioned in the Bill was arrived 541 at? Would the noble Earl also tell me whether it was the subject of consultation with the chairman of the Disposals Board and the British Transport Commission, and whether it received approval? Lastly, would he tell me what was the aggregate unladen weight of the 7,750 vehicles which were the subject of the report by the chairman of the Disposals Board, Sir Malcohn Trustram Eve, dated July 29, 1955?
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKThis point deals closely with the Bill now under discussion, but I will try to answer the noble Lord, even if his supplementaries are a little outside his original Question. The basis taken is, I think, a fair one, because it represents a higher average weight, 4.64 tons, than that of the original fleet. It is higher than the average of the two sales, S.3 and S.C.4, and is substantially higher than the final sale which will take place. In these circumstances, I think it is a fair figure. I do not say that the figure was agreed: none of this was agreed. This was, broadly, what was considered right and proper to enable two things to happen: first, for the British Transport Commission to retain trunk services, and, secondly, to provide reason able competition for public service. The noble Lord asked if there was a tonnage figure for the 7,750 vehicles. I think he will recall that that figure was an approximate one. It was not one that was mathematically obtainable, but represented, I was given to understand, roughly what was considered necessary. I would point out that the Transport Commission are quite free to choose what they want, whether they want heavy vehicles or light vehicles. This is A selection which they, in their wisdom, make.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHtake it from the noble Earl's answer that there was no consultation between the chairman of the Disposals Board or the Commission as regards this figure of 36,000 tons unladen weight. As Sir Malcolm Trustram Eve stated categorically his reasons for arriving at the figure of 7,750 vehicles, I should have thought there would have been immediately a computation of what was the correct unladen weight of the 7,750 vehicles which Sir Malcolm Trustram Eve specifically said he considered necessary for the carrying on of the services in the same efficient manner heretofore. Could the 542 noble Earl give me that figure? I admit that I have rather sprung this on him. If he cannot give it to me, he will, of course, have no objection to my approaching either the chairman of the Disposals Board or the Chairman of the Commission to find out.
§ THE EARL OF SELKIRKI think the noble Lord had better ask another Question on that point, if he so wishes. I am not pretending for one moment that the British Transport Commission agree with all the proposals in the Bill. The British Transport Commission, I have no doubt, would like to retain the 35,000 vehicles. The major complaint of the private road hauliers is that they have had an inadequate opportunity of buying in small numbers the large vehicles, and it is intended that they should have at least some opportunity of doing so.