Examination of Witnesses (Questions 460
- 479)
WEDNESDAY 22 MARCH 2000
MS DIANA
LINNETT, MS
TARA GARNETT,
MR ALLEN
MARSDEN AND
MR GEORGE
BOYLE
Chairman
460. I want to ask you whether there is any
evidence that even larger lorries than 44 tonnes might be introduced
in the future?
(Mr Boyle) May I just say that Scania have already
demonstrated a 60 tonner to the European Commission, 28 metres
long, which they are pushing very hard to make the new European
standard. DAF-Volvo, as it is now, have pushed hard even seven
years ago for a 48 tonner. We know already that European countries
have different weight limits; 50 tonnes in Holland and up to 75
tonnes in Finland and Sweden. With the 60 tonner coming up from
Scania, unless the pressure is brought to bear this 44 tonner
is not the end of it by any means.
Dr Ladyman
461. Has the axle weight changed?
(Mr Boyle) Not the 60 tonnes. They are guaranteeing
it will be no heavier than the present axle load, but to me 10
axles at 10.5 tonnes each do four-tenths more damage than six
axles at 10.5 tonnes each.
Chairman
462. May I ask you about the damage. What higher
costs will be incurred by local authorities and the Highways Agency
if we get the heavier lorries?
(Mr Boyle) At the moment they are spending a lot of
money rebuilding bridges. Essex County Council are spending 40
percent of their local transport plan budgets purely on rebuilding
bridges. Lancashire County Council have a backlog of 460 bridges
which they reckon will take them 16 years to rebuild. Massive
amounts of money are going into rebuilding bridges for 44 tonners.
With a time span of 16 years, they will not finish them before
the 60 tonner comes along.
Chairman: I must say it is such a cheerful thought.
Mr Bennett: Madam Chairman, may I just ask?
Chairman: Yes, Mr Bennett.
Mr Bennett
463. Why would a 60 tonner be worse than two
30 tonnes?
(Mr Boyle) It would not be. Except it would be more
efficient because there would only be one driver, but you can
say goodbye to most of rail freight which transfers all of that
onto road.
464. But that is a different argument?
(Mr Boyle) Is it?
465. I mean if you are talking about the damage
to the roads, then convince me that big ones would be worse than
two or three smaller ones?
(Mr Boyle) If you keep to the same axle load there
is no more damage for any given tonnage, but as soon as you go
up to the 11.5 tonne axle, which the 40 tonner on five axles is
an 11.5 tonne drive axle, the damage goes up geometrically, which
is why I am so disappointed that yesterday's announcement did
take £1800 off the cost of a licence for that.
Chairman
466. Well let us ask you about the vehicle excise
duty. To what extent does it cover the costs that arise because
the road haulage industry does not pay for the damage done
(Mr Boyle) Estimates have put it at about 70 percent
of the costs they cover.
467. Whose estimate, Mr Boyle?
(Mr Boyle) It is, I believe, an estimate from OXERA
and Freight on Rail.
468. Ms Garnett?
(Ms Garnett) The OXERA Report is an amalgamation of
different literature. It is a literature review—different
areas of research—and it puts together—
469. I am sorry. I did not catch the name of
it?
(Ms Garnett) OXERA.
470. Oh, OXERA, yes?
(Ms Garnett) It brings together a number of different
factors, including things like CO2 emissions, noise, damage to
the road network, accidents.
471. That is the one on which you are relying?
(Ms Garnett) Yes.
472. Mr Boyle?
(Mr Boyle) The RDS did some research in 1996 on the
same topic and came out with broadly similar figures, except that
we also included the capital value of the road network and if
you try to earn a 5 percent return on £400 billion of roads
in this country, you have to put £20 billion into the system
to give you your 5 percent return. The roads of this country are
financed on the basis that they are free. You build them and give
them free to the people who use them and do not expect to get
a return. Try that with the railways. Even with the nationalised
railway they wanted a return. With a privatised railway you certainly
have to have a return so there is no level playing field there
and there is £20 billion involved per year on that one item
alone.
473. Supposing we carried all our freight between
cities by rail and all the internal traffic by small van, what
would the Government have to do to bring about such change?
(Mr Boyle) Level playing field, in a few words. If
your opposition is consistently not paying its way then you cannot
compete and make a profit and that is the whole problem for EWS
and everybody else. The opposition is not paying its way. We are
not asking for anything more than the opposition paying its way.
If the Government will not let the opposition pay its way, then
the Government has to subsidise—sorry, a grant, an environmental
grant; it is not a subsidy, horrible word—an environmental
grant to recognise the benefits of rail freight. There is no other
way out of that equation.
(Ms Linnett) I think there are two key issues on this.
474. Is there?
(Ms Linnett) One is affordable track access and the
other is investment in the infrastructure and there are two aspects
to investment in the infrastructure. One is the capability that
we were talking about to accommodate larger equipment, but the
other is the capacity and it is the same issue for freight as
it is for passenger. Freight capacity should not be treated separately.
It is a mixed railway and the capability should be there to move
the required cargos, the passenger and the freight.
475. Okay. So are you attracted for example
by drive on, drive off forms of transport? Supposing we said to
you that in future we have a road train for freight traffic. Would
that be an attractive idea?
(Ms Linnett) I think from the Rail Freight Group's
point of view and our members we would encourage anything that
encouraged the shift from road to rail. I think there are reasons
and particular types of cargo that that would be attractive to
and others where perhaps it would be less cost effective.
476. Do you have respective costs on those?
(Ms Linnett) I have not actually studied them in any
detail, but I think the economics of rail freight are very much
driven by the ability to make the trunking cost as efficient as
you can and clearly the more payload you can get behind the same
locomotive the better these costs stack up. If you are actually
carrying a lot of rubber tyres and chassis of trailers and so
on, you may well alter that payload to tare ratio and make it
less competitive. I have not actually studied them in detail,
but I do know that the payload to tare ratio on trunk route on
rail is very, very key and therefore that could make a difference.
477. One of the ways in which you could level
up your playing field, Mr Boyle, to create a phrase, would be
to enforce road traffic laws or restraints upon road traffic much
more efficiently. Why do you think it would be a good idea to
take people's goods as well as their vehicles if, for any reason,
they have been found to be flouting the law?
(Mr Boyle) On the concept of joint liability. It is
all so easy for a company now to turn a blind eye to what their
haulier is doing. I can quote examples where well known major
companies have used road hauliers that everybody in the industry
knew were bent in what they were doing. But they had the cheapest
price and they turned a blind eye to it and used them. "If
anything goes wrong, it is the haulier's fault, not mine".
Now that to me is wilful blindness. If that was in the Theft Act
for handling stolen goods they could not get away with it, the
knowing and belief the goods were stolen.
478. So what you are really saying is you thump
one or two companies very publicly and the people that are given
the work and they might get the general idea this is not to be
allowed to continue?
(Mr Boyle) If the legislation was available to do
it, you would not need to use it very often, no. You would not
need to thump the big people that often. But the lorries we are
talking about, the ones that should be impounded are often at
the end of their lives, anyway. You impound the lorry and one
comes alongside it and tranships the load off it and away it goes.
He will leave you with that load of scrap; he is not right fussed
about it. He will go and get another load of scrap and carry on.
479. How much is enforcement undermined by lack
of resources for things like police force, like not having a traffic
enforcement group?
(Mr Boyle) As a retired policeman, I know what the
situation is. You are always going to be diverted from traffic
to burglary, assault and any other offence that might in the nearby
town. Motorway patrols are often pulled off to deal with burglary
in the town.
| 
