THE TRANSPORT BILL: A CRITICISM
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—The Transport Bill is not in the public interest. The Minister in charge of the measure confesses he does not know whether it will send traffic back to the railways or not. It ought to have been designed to , send heavy and express traffic, not fit for our crowded public roads and streets— traffic .resulting in wholesale personal injuries, and deaths— back to the railways. We are as much in need of safety legis- lation for roads as for factories and coal pits, as for ships and railways. The Minister says the Government is only con- cerned with the provision of proper transport for the people. Road transport has gone too far, and causes fearful transport of bodies to hospitals and cemeteries.
The Minister says the Government desires individuals to be able to have a "fair choice." of the means of transport they employ. What is fair ? , If traders and travellers are to do as they like. abo.utrthe gleans they employ, why not let coal -
owners instal any sort:of-machinery, and use any methods they like, almost regardless of the lives of the miners ? The Salter Report was less than fair to the railways ; 'Much less than fair' to the public. It is whittled down in this Bill—made still le .zs fair ; and from Parliamentary speeches it seems likely to be made an almost worthless measure. Evidently, the man- slaughter on roads islo continue.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
