The Lorry - Ally or Adversary - TrustNews Summer 1993
Frank Cook - Regional Director of the Freight Transport Association Western Region, outlines the present situation regarding lorries in cities and the need for better use of transport resources to satisfy our everyday needs.
"Demanded by all, wanted by none" adequately defines the lorry. Few objects in daily use create greater heartache, few more emotional reaction.
It is surprising, although perhaps not so surprising, that the presence of lorries is generally speaking, regarded as the result of actions taken by "they" and rarely by "we".
The truth is probably the reverse of that situation. A society, particularly one that operates on a free market, tends to get the transport regime it deserves not the one that it desires. We must be clear, the reason we have lorries is because we as a nation, we as a society demand that we should. Not a day goes by when each of us does not use or consume some article or commodity that has been transported and at least 89% of those will have been transported in whole or in part by lorry. The result of the purchasing decisions that we make are those with which we must live.
As we approach the end of the millennium we live in an increasingly competitive world. The political flavour in the United Kingdom is for increased competition, the same applies in countries of the former Eastern Block and nearer home, within the EEC itself there is a 'Competition' directorate to ensure that no country or sector gains undue advantage. The phrase may be much overworked, but if we as a nation are to maintain our position within that system we do need a level playing field. Those companies that this Association exists to look after must transport goods. Goods that they manufacture, goods that they retail, goods that they wholesale, goods that they import or export. Those companies ship their goods by road, by rail, by air, by sea, by canal or even by pipe line. The decision as to which is both operational and commercial, a situation which we have created. The movement of freight is therefore vital to our economy and to our way of life. Without transport nothing would move, we would have no food, no medicines, no income and no cash. Transport is not an optional activity.
That said, let us look for one moment at the situation we have created for ourselves on this small and crowded island on which we fight to protect our heritage. Thirty years ago there was an adage in the public transport industry to the tune "if you don't use it, you'll lose it". How true that has proved.
Travel by car is much the norm. We have developed out of town shopping which relies on car transport. There is not a day that passes when we do not use or consume some article or substance that has been delivered through a distribution chain. We buy with impunity our mangetout from Zimbabwe, our fennel from Italy, our tomatoes from Spain and our rice from the other side of the world without thought of how the goods arrive on the shelves. It is "we" who demand that lorries be present.
Not only do we make these demands for transport of goods, we require increasingly the facility to travel by car at will. If the forecasts of the growth of car traffic in the medium and long term prove only half true, we need to do some fairly fundamental thinking. We need to establish what kind of society we wish to live in and then decide how to make the best use of the resources that are available to us. You may well claim that is not the newest thinking you have heard, but I would suggest it is none the worst for that. Basic decisions are needed if we are to continue to believe in the right of people to make journeys at their convenience or produce goods that must be transported to sell.
What then can we do? We can certainly encourage better productivity from the modes of transport we use at the moment. We must encourage the use of alternative modes.
I referred earlier to our crowded island. If we take a smaller unit. that of the City of Winchester, we can pose ourselves some questions. For example, how many of us normally travel to work between eight and nine in the morning? How many of us do so by car? How many of us in cars of single occupancy? That is a graphic illustration of a national problem. Between the hours of 8am and 9am we make the maximum demand on our transport resources for the purpose of commuting to and from work. Not only that, we compound the action by deciding that be the time we should take the children to school and in all probability then have the effrontery to complain about this "infernal congestion". We must spread the load and make better use of transport resources. We should encourage by a sensible investment policy and adequate incentives the use of rail and waterway for the transport of goods, but we do need to hear mind the question of competition I referred to earlier and the fact, that a new railway line is as welcome in the average back yard as is a new road. The supply of transport resources must be increased. This can be achieved in some part by improved planning and accounting procedures.
Another way to improve our efficiency is to increase the maximum permitted weight of lorries from 38 to 44 tonne. This can be done without any increase in the physical size of vehicles. Indeed the 44 tonne lorry will be distinguished from its 38 tonne cousin by means of one extra axle. It will be no larger, but the load will be spread and the number of lorries on the road would be reduced by 9000. The Government has now accepted the validity of the case and is proposing to allow 44 tonne vehicles to carry traffic to and from rail heads. It would also make sense in carrying traffic to Sainsburys, to Tescos, to a car manufacturer or anywhere else. We need 44 tonne vehicles on our roads. We would save some £3m in expenditure and we would use less fuel, create less pollution and reduce congestion. We would cause less wear-and tear to our bridges. It is to be hoped that the engineering, environmental and economic arguments do not lose out to the more shallow, ill informed and emotive views that are from time of time expressed.
A service of transport is an essential element of life, a statement that is as true now as it was before the invention the wheel, never mind the compression ignition engine. But, as in all things, we must as a society achieve a balance. We have to recognise that ther are competing demands for the use of our limited road space. We have to accept that transport is a subject which demands a coherent and long term strategy. It should not be allowed to become a political football, subject to undue influence from considerations of the ballot box. We have to bear in mind the solution to one man's problem, may be another's sleepless night. Small shops have been an integral part of the heritage of this nation of shop keepers, for some considerable time if we are to believe the good French Emperor. But if we insist, for example, on out of hours delivery thereby increasing the costs of the already threatened small shop keeper, we may reduce his ability to compete to an unsustainable level.
We are custodians of the fabric of cities like Winchester, but we are also in doing that, obliged to recognise the key role played by commerce in history. Commerce must be recognised as an integral part of the future of the city and attempts to preserve a bygone era in aspic must be resisted.
"Demanded by all and wanted by none" may be true. What is true is that we all have a duty to maintain that quality of life that a thriving city can and does offer. To that end, we must make sure that the lorry is our ally.