Letter: How to put loads on the right track

Mr G. Turvey
Friday 06 August 1993 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Nobody questions the desirability of moving freight from road to rail. The plain fact is that there are much better ways of achieving this than allowing limited use of 44-ton lorries. For a start, the Government's plan does not apply to bulk road/rail movements of commodities such as gases and cement or to 'piggy-back' trailers. And the Government has yet to identify one commodity that will move to rail as a result of its proposals.

You argue that Freight Transport Association figures on the benefits of 44 tons across the board should be regarded with suspicion. They are based on specific examples from companies such as ICI, Esso, Scottish and Newcastle, and British Sugar, and take account of empty running. Petrol tankers have little option but to return empty, for example. Separate research by the Transport Research Laboratory has produced similar figures.

The Government's decision is likely to prove costly. Multi-million pound investment plans for new vehicles have been put back on the shelf and industry is to be denied the right to operate to maximum efficiency. Where is the sense in that?

Yours faithfully,

G. TURVEY

Freight Transport Association

Tunbridge Wells, Kent

5 August

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in