Comment: Right of Reply

The director general of the Road Haulage Association replies to a leading article attacking the hauliers

WHEN I retired from the Commons to earn serious money, I anticipated the odd crack about fat cattery. What I had not foreseen was being dubbed a "Scargillite" by The Independent's leader writer.

There is a superficial comparison between the miners' strike and the recent actions of some hauliers. Both were prepared to use "direct action". Both were greatly disapproved of by ministers. But the public made one fundamental distinction. Scargill was wrong, and the truckers are right.

Scargill was arguing for a self-fulfilling prophesy of doom. His class- war politics were redundant.

Hauliers, on the other hand, are simply fighting to get their message heard. And why do so in convoy? Well, the House of Commons answer by the Treasury Minister Patricia Hewitt says it all. No, she confessed, the Treasury had made no prior assessment of the impact of the recent Budget rises in excise duty and fuel tax on the British haulage industry. Just like that. More than a year ago, the Road Haulage Association pointed out that if the Government took no action, 26,000 jobs would be at risk. When we showed that another 26,000 could go in the wider economy because of higher distribution costs, again we were met by a sublime combination of arrogance and indifference.

When we were not listened to, we stopped talking and started shouting. When even that was ignored we started banging the table.

I argued for two years that there would be a serious risk of alienating the public as a result of direct action. When too many truckers were facing bankruptcy, they took matters into their own hands. It is time for the Government to examine the problems. We want a level playing-field. There's nothing Scargillite in that.