=OBJECTIONS TO THE SCHEME.=
=1.--State Ownership.= Page 33.
Writers for and against--All assume that on Nationalisation, system
followed of charging according to distance, and to “what traffic will
bear”--Fundamental differences between State Monopoly and Private
Monopoly--Evils of applying profits of State monopolies in reductions
of taxation--Strikes.
Four rules to be observed on Nationalisation:--
1. Natural monopolies only to be taken over.
2. When taken over, only to be worked for benefit of community
and not for profit.
3. Competition of private enterprises not to be prohibited.
4. Monopoly to be worked by Department of State responsible to
Parliament.
=Chief grounds of objection to State ownership=--
(1) Difficulty of Government in dealing with conflicting interests of
traders and general public. (2) Difficulty of Railway servants (being
also voters) using political pressure to obtain better wages, against
interests of traders and general public. Both of these objections
removed if scheme (which avoids all preferential or differential rates
or treatment) adopted with above four rules.
Other grounds of objection, _e.g._, want of competition, officialism,
&c., apply equally to present Company system, but may be remedied if
owned by State. Suggested remedies:--Railway Council to deal with
all matters of administration; Railway Courts to deal with questions
of compensation, labour disputes, &c. Railways and Post Office being
Department of State with Cabinet Minister at head subject to vote of
censure in Parliament, provides better security for public than private
Companies or Railway Trust.
=2.--General Objections.= Page 43.
=Fear of Losses=--
All existing staffs required for increased traffic--therefore no loss
to them.
Traders, like newspapers more than make up for any losses by economy in
rates and fares and increased circulation.
Mr. Acworth’s objections to “average” rates considered.