 |
|
|
| Kate Gibbs at the the RHA looks at how taxation
and tolling is affecting the industry |
The RHA is confronting a range
of issues that are affecting the haulage industry |
 |
| "Today’s road hauliers have
to be virtual lawyers and politicians" |
Running a haulage business is not just about selecting the vehicles
most suitable for your purpose – although this is a pretty important
issue. Today’s road hauliers have to be virtual lawyers and
politicians as they battle with national and local government forces
seemingly intent upon driving them off the road. Fortunately, the
role of the Road Haulage Association (RHA) ensures that we can tackle
the growing myriad of issues confronting the industry, for never in
our 60-year history have we had to deal with so many challenges. Core
to these is the never-ending desire by government and local government
to demand greater revenues from operators. Despite the record levels
of taxation extracted from road users, now well over £40bn per
year, the Chancellor is still on the look out for additional ways
to maximise his income. The Lorry Road User Charge (LRUC), congestion
charging and expansion of the concept of road tolling are some examples
of this.
And I have left out his continuing ravenous attitude toward fuel duty
increases!At least the LRUC is supposed to be tax neutral. Hauliers
pay for road use and claw back a fuel rebate to compensate. And, just
as importantly, foreign truckers will pay the same as UK ones, thus
removing the anomaly of cheaper EU fuel prices. When the Chancellor
gave the assurance of tax neutrality, he was talking in terms of perpetuity,
wasn’t he?No prizes for the correct answer. However, the LRUC
does offer one distinct benefit – a unique system of taxation.
Do not get me wrong, no one likes paying taxes, but the way things
are at the moment hauliers pay the same fuel duty as the motorist.
And the Chancellor needs the revenue from 27 million of these, but
unfortunately the haulier has to pay as well. The LRUC will divorce
us from motorist taxation so we will be better able to fight our own
good fight aided and abetted by the CBI, Chamber of Commerce, Scottish
Parliament, Welsh Assembly and everyone else interested in ensuring
that UK plc does not disadvantage itself by excessive road transport
costs.
This will not be easy, but we stand little chance of success with
the present tax regime, so we will be up for the challenge the new
one offers. The London Congestion Charge is another case altogether.
Opinions are hotly divided about the merits of the present scheme,
depending upon whether you are a Regent Street retailer or an out-and-out
environmentalist. Suffice to say, given the relatively small size
of the area geographically, transport services have had to adapt to
the system. For the general haulier, not too many customers exist
within the cordon, and those that do – the construction industry
for example – will just add a surcharge to their invoice. With
pre-planning, one can avoid unnecessary intrusions. It will be a different
situation if the zone is expanded in the way the London Mayor desires.
The new area, stretching towards Earl’s Court, will include
main trunk roads, roads that are the arteries of the economy. The
complexity of whether during a day’s work in London a driver
might or might not enter the expanded charging zone will be at some
expense and counter productive. Commercial vehicles guarantee the
survival of our society – none more so than those that service
our great cities. What is the purpose of levying an additional charge
for essential traffic? Will this reduce it, which after all is the
aim of the charge? To lump goods vehicles in with cars is absurd.
If ever authority is given to expand the London Congestion Zone, then
commercial vehicles must be exempt.
Road tolling is an issue of
debate that directly affect hauliers |
|
| "Commercial vehicles guarantee the
survival of our society" |
And one other thing – London now, everywhere else tomorrow.
That concentrates the mind. Road tolling is another issue of some
debate. The M6 Toll around Birmingham got it all wrong when it opened
in January of this year. The £12 charge for large HGV’s
was twice what was expected and, not surprisingly, attracted few takers.
After intense lobbying, wiser comments prevailed and the rate has
all but halved, albeit temporarily. Result? Goods traffic has increased
because operators can more readily see a cost benefit to them based
on the new rates than on the previous. The challenge is to make this
a permanent feature, not a trial one. But news that the government
is proposing an extension of the M6 Toll northwards towards Manchester
fills hauliers with very mixed views given existing experience. Is
this a substitute for a fourth lane on the existing M6? Of course
it will be, but at what price in terms of finance and planning delays?
Maybe if the new road was limited specifically for cars and to a lower
specification and thus quicker, and resulting in more space on the
existing M6 for other traffic, it might afford a solution. In any
case, if trucks are already paying a LRUC by then, surely they would
not be expected to pay double to use a toll road, so why build it
for their use?There are many other issues that the industry must address.
The forthcoming introduction of the Road Transport Directive in March
of next year will herald a significant new change in operating systems
with the need to incorporate the 48-hour average working week. Regrettably,
there is no opt-out. We might not like the consequences of this –
although thanks to RHA lobbying it is not as bad as it once was –
but it will be the law.
The key will be to work within the regulations and we will be giving
the best advice available. It is probably highly fortunate that, given
these radical changes, the one the hauliers can depend upon is the
excellence of today’s truck. Without that as a given, few could
remain in the business.
www.rha.net |
|
|
