THE WRONG LINES SIR,—I read your leading article on the
Railway Settlement with interest : 1 also read Mr. Jim Campbell's reported denial of any redundancy or inefficiency on the part of the railwaymen.
As I see it, the real danger with which we are faced is the growing tendency towards syndicalism on the part of organised labour in the great nationalised industries. In face of this, I venture to advance three propositions, arising directly from the position which has now been reached in the case of the railways: (i) i/it is true that the railway system is so vital that even its temporary interruption would imperil the nation, then its employees should be brought within the legislation which pro- hibits strikes by workers in public utilities.
(ii) To the extent that railway services can only operate at a permanent loss, it is in the public interest to replace them by road services as quickly as this can be accomplished. There is no 'strategic' virtue in rail as against road, but rather the reverse. On a long view, railways must stand or fall by their efficiency and economy under peace-time conditions.
(iii) Once it is accepted that a publicly owned industry is to be indefinitely operated at a loss, it should be placed under the control of a Minister responsible directly to Parlia- ment. Delegation of powers, as provided for originally, is only appropriate for industries which pay their way.
It is the third of these propositions to which I attach chief importance, as I doubt whether poor management, or inefficient labour, could long survive day-to-day questioning and debate in Parliament.
Finally it is well to bear in mind that the truth of this proposition is in no way affected by the scheme for railway mechanisation, necessary and overdue though this may be. Let us not be dazzled by its magnitude into thinking that it will of itself make the railways pay, any more than the money sunk in mining mechanisation schemes has yielded the results which had been expected. Before further capital is sunk in the railways it would be well to negotiate precise agreements with the unions to ensure that the new equipment will be operated to the best advantage of the railway users : otherwise we may be throwing good money after bad.—Yours faithfully,
JOHN HUGHES HALLETT
House of Commons, London, S.W..1
Previous page
