LORDS AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 23 October 1968)

§ LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist upon its Amendments Nos. 3 to 29 to which the Commons have disagreed. The Government felt unable to accept the Amendments introduced into the Bill in your Lordships' House, which would have had the effect of preventing the transfer to the National Freight Corporation of the freightliner activities. My right honourable friend the Minister of Transport made it clear in another place that he still regards it as an absolutely fundamental part of his transport policy that the Freight Corporation should take over from the railways the two parts of their activities which are essentially a combination of road and rail; that is to say, the sundries activities and the freightliner activities.

I do not propose to spend long on the arguments that have been deployed about the damage which might be done to British Rail by this transfer of the freightliner activities. The Government remain convinced that it is better for the railways to concentrate upon the problems of railway operation and upon the task of "wholesaling" full train-load services to industrialists. The Railways Board will be able to play a full part in the future of freightliner activities, and will secure a proper share in the profits, through the 49 per cent. holding which the Bill provides for the railways in the freightliner company. But the marketing of freightliner services can best be done, in the Government's view, by those already used to retailing road transport. If we allow the boundaries between road and rail to remain fixed in a way made quite out-of-date by the development of through trans- 1488 port in containers, we shall be failing to seize the opportunity of integrating road and rail in the interests not of railwaymen or road hauliers, but of the industrial customer and the nation. For that reason, I beg to move.

§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD

My Lords, may I intervene with a brief word on this set of rejections and on the Government's decision that they wish to stick to the transfer of the freightliner services from the railways to the new Freight Corporation? I do not propose to repeat at length the earlier debate that we had during the Committee stage, but just as a parting comment I should like to say this. I am not convinced by the noble Lord's argument about the advantages which will be obtained—and there certainly are advantages—by transferring the freightliner services to the new Freight Corporation. But I am convinced that it will be most disheartening if British Rail have this most important part of their services taken away from them. The previous Chairman described it as the jewel in the crown of British Rail, and, in fact, it is really the one winner that they have had this century.

Apart from any human feelings one may have in the matter, it seems to me that we are still basically concerned with the railways as a whole. There is this vast organisation turning over £400 million or £500 million a year and losing £150 million, and still its major problem is management. Yet here we are about to take away from it the most interesting, exciting and best growth point in the whole business and, inevitably, there will go with it the most enterprising, able younger men—men who are in the market. Generally speaking, it does not provide a sound structure in any industry to separate off the marketing function from the production function. So I feel the cost is much too high. But I certainly wish it well. I am sure the freightliner service is going to be a success, and I hope it goes ahead at a great rate. But I feel it is being done at the expense of a most regrettable weakening of the management of British Railways itself, 1489 and that is something for which noble Lords and their right honourable friends in another place have to take responsibility.