The Government's White Paper on the Future of Transport
There is now a consensus for radical change in transport
policy. The previous Government's green paper paved the way
with recognition that we needed to improve public transport
and reduce dependence on the car. Businesses, unions,
environmental organisations and individuals throughout
Britain share that analysis.
This White Paper builds on that foundation.
For the last two decades, the ideology of privatisation, competition and deregulation has dominated transport policy. Bus and rail services have declined whilst traffic growth has resulted in more congestion and worsening pollution.
This White Paper fulfills our manifesto commitment to create a better, more integrated transport system to tackle the problems of congestion and pollution we have inherited. It is timely. In its Green Paper the previous Government recognised that we could not go on as before, building more and more new roads to accommodate the growth in car traffic. With our new obligations to meet targets on climate change, the need for a new approach is urgent.
As a car driver, I recognise that motorists will not readily switch to public transport unless it is significantly better and more reliable. The main aim of this White Paper is to increase personal choice by improving the alternatives and to secure mobility that is sustainable in the long term.
Better public transport will encourage more people to use it. But the car will remain important to the mobility of millions of people and the numbers of people owning cars will continue to grow. So we also want to make life better for the motorist. The priority will be maintaining existing roads rather than building new ones and better management of the road network to improve reliability.
More bus lanes, properly enforced, will make buses quicker and more reliable. Even a small increase in the numbers of bus passengers will transform the economics of the bus industry, allowing higher levels of investment in new buses and new and more frequent services.
This White Paper isn't just about national policy. Local transport plans will create a partnership between local councils, businesses, operators and users. Local initiatives such as safer routes to schools will give parents more confidence in letting their children make their own way. CCTV cameras in car parks and bus stations will make users, especially women, feel safer.
We have had to make hard choices on how to combat congestion and pollution while persuading people to use their cars a little less - and public transport a little more. And we have devised imaginative new ways of raising money from transport for better transport. That is the New Deal for transport which I believe the country wants.
The last transport White Paper was a generation ago. But the economy, technology and attitudes to transport and the environment are changing so rapidly that we should not wait another generation before a new White Paper. The new Commission for Integrated Transport will bring together transport users, the private sector, local authorities and others to make recommendations to Ministers.
This White Paper reflects the Government's commitment to giving transport the highest possible priority. We now look to others - companies, individuals, employees and local authorities - to join us in shaping a new future for sustainable transport in the UK.
John Prescott
Chapter 1:
Congestion- courtesy of Alan Laughlin, City of Edinburgh
Council
Chapter 2:
Cyclist - courtesy of the Highways Agency
Chapter 3:
Artist's impression of Trafalgar Square -courtesy of Foster
and Partners
Cycle lane, National Cycle Network map - SUSTRANS
Edinburgh Greenway bus lane - courtesy of Alan Laughlin, City
of Edinburgh Council
Birkenhead bus station - courtesy of Merseytravel
Wheelchair user -GMPTE1998
Freight on inland waterway - courtesy of British Waterways
Photolibrary
Luton Airport - courtesy of Luton Airport
Eurostar train - courtesy of Eurostar (IJK) Ltd.
Chapter 4:
'Piggyback' lorry- courtesy of Freight Transport
Association
Northern Line Train - courtesy of London Transport
City of Edinburgh Council Vehicle Inspectors - courtesy of
the Vehicle Inspectorate
Solar powered car - courtesy of Honda (UK)
Chapter 5:
Smiling children -SUSTRANS
Annex E:
Core trunk road network - map courtesy of the Highways Agency
Annex F:
Rail network pinch-points - courtesy of Railtrack
This is a United Kingdom White Paper. It sets out a new approach to transport policy which has relevance throughout the United Kingdom, and it embodies new, modern thinking on integrating transport with other aspects of Government policy. Some of the discussion in the text relates only to England. But the guiding principles apply throughout the UK.
Different parts of the UK have differing transport needs. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will be able to consider their own transport priorities under the new arrangements for a Scottish Parliament, a National Assembly for Wales and an Assembly for Northern Ireland. The Secretary of State for Scotland is publishing a White Paper on integrated transport policy in Scotland that sets out our transport policy for Scotland consistent with the principles in this paper. Separate documents will also be published for Wales and Northern Ireland.
In Northern Ireland, responsibilities that fall to local authorities in Great Britain for roads, transport, land use planning and the environment rest with the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland and references to local authorities in this document should be read accordingly.
This White Paper sets the framework within which our detailed policies will be taken forward. Some of the proposals will require legislation which will be brought forward as soon as Parliamentary time allows.
A number of supporting documents which set out fuller details of the proposals highlighted in this White Paper will be published and are listed at Annex A. A summary of the responses to our consultation on integrated transport policy is at Annex B and a fuller summary is being published to accompany this White Paper.
Our quality of life depends on transport. Most of us travel every day, even if only locally. And we need an efficient transport system to support a strong and prosperous economy. But in turn, the way we travel is damaging our towns and cities and harming our countryside. As demand for transport grows, we are even changing the very climate of our planet.
Cars in particular have revolutionised the way we live, bringing great flexibility and widening horizons. And we do not want to restrict car ownership-with our vision for a prosperous Britain where prosperity is shared by all we expect more people to be able to afford a car. But the way we are using our cars has a price - for our health, for the economy and for the environment1.
Transport policies dominated by the short-term have reduced choice, for the public transport passenger and for motorists. The mood is for change. Business is concerned about the costs of congestion. People want the existing transport system to work better. They want more choice and a new emphasis on protecting the environment and their health.
Simply building more and more roads is not the answer to traffic growth. 'Predict and provide' didn't work. Privatisation and deregulation of public transport were key features of the last decade. But they failed the passenger because they fragmented public transport networks and ignored the public interest. This is why we promised an integrated transport policy to fight congestion and pollution.
In this White Paper, we set out our integrated transport policy. We explain how we will extend choice in transport and secure mobility in a way that supports sustainable development. It is our New Deal for transport - a transport system that is safe, efficient, clean and fair.
1. Information on the major trends in domestic transport is provided in "Transport Trends", Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, TSO, 1998. ISBN 0-11-551987-4.
Over 35 years ago, the Government of the day commissioned a study into the problems posed by road traffic. The resulting 'Buchanan report'2 predicted that traffic would increase dramatically, with profound consequences for the environment and the way life was lived. It has. We cannot say that we weren't warned.
Congestion and unreliability of journeys add to the costs of business, undermining competitiveness particularly in our towns and cities where traffic is worst. The CBI has put the cost to the British economy at around £15 billion every year, some estimates are lower but agree that the cost to the nation runs into billions of pounds every year and is rising3. The convenience of the car is eroded by congestion and driving is increasingly stressful.
In the UK, emissions of CO2 from road transport are the fastest growing contributor to climate change - the greatest global environmental threat facing the international community. Climate change doesn't mean we will all enjoy pleasant Mediterranean summers: it threatens unpredictable extremes of weather with more frequent and intense storms, floods, droughts and rising sea levels.
Road traffic is also adding substantially to the local air pollution that is damaging our health and hastens the death of thousands each year. Contrary to popular opinion, drivers and their passengers are not protected from the pollution they create - the air inside a car can be more polluted than for the pedestrian on the pavement.
2. "Traffic in towns. A study of the long term problems of
traffic in urban areas", HMSO 1963.
3. £15 billion taken from "Moving forward - a business
strategy for transport", CBI 1995. Other estimates include £7
billion from National Economic Research Associates, July
1997.
Road Traffic Forecasts
....... which keeps going up
With increasing prosperity, more people with driving licences and several million new households likely over the next two decades, we are faced with dramatic increases in traffic. Over the next 20 years car traffic could grow by more than a third. Van and lorry traffic is forecast to grow even faster.
We all know that unless something is done this means more traffic jams, not just in the cities but in country towns too. The tranquility of the countryside will be further eroded. Rush 'hours' will become longer. Driving will become even less of a pleasure and the costs to business will soar. There will be more damage to the environment and our health will suffer.
Car ownership
Increasingly, people do not have real choices. For many people using a car is now no longer a choice but a necessity. Nowhere is this clearer than in the rural communities with no daily bus service. For those who rely on public transport it is all too often inadequate, suffering from declining standards and services. And as motoring costs fell in real terms, bus and rail fares have gone up.
Three in ten homes in Britain don't have a car - some thirteen million people. The advantages of owning a car aren't available to them. Even in homes with a car it is not always available to everyone. Increased traffic, and speed, have made our streets more threatening for pedestrians and cyclists. Children's freedom to play, or to walk or cycle to school unaccompanied has been severely curtailed. Twenty years ago, nearly one in three 5-10 year-olds made their own way to school. Now only one child in nine does. We walk less than we used to and cycling, other than for leisure, is mostly left to a few enthusiasts.
In Britain, we have fewer cars but our cars do more mileage and we use public transport less than in most other countries in the European Union. It is not surprising that our roads are among the most congested. But it doesn't have to be like this.
....... and people want change
People know we cannot build our way out of congestion with new roads. The previous Government, too, came to see the problems - the growth in road traffic was at the heart of its national debate on transport. Its subsequent Green Paper "Transport: the Way Forward"4 highlighted the dilemma of road transport - on the one hand the advantages it can bring but, on the other, the environmental damage it causes. Change was proposed - a new approach to transport policy that was not led by road building.
People feel the time for action is long overdue. The results of our consultation5 last year confirm the overwhelming desire for Government to show leadership. People said they want more choice on whether to use their cars and more reliable journeys when they do; they want a better public transport system and one that doesn't let them down; they want better protection for the environment and they want less pollution because they are worried about their health.
Early in this Parliament we received a comprehensive report on transport and the environment from the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution6. The Commission, too, raised concerns that "action has been too little and too slow" and warned that continuing as previously would have consequences that were environmentally, economically and socially unacceptable.
We agree. That is why we acted quickly and announced a fundamental review of transport policy. This White Paper is the culmination of that work and the widespread consultation that accompanied it.
4. and "Keeping Scotland Moving: A Scottish Transport Green
Paper", Cm 3565, 1997. A summary of the main proposals in
"Transport: the Way Forward" is provided in Annex D.
5. "Developing an Integrated Transport Policy. An invitation
to contribute", Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions, Department of the Environment for Northern
Ireland, The Scottish Office and The Welsh Office, 1997. A
summary of responses is provided in Annex B, with a fuller
breakdown in the report on the consultation that we are
publishing separately.
6. "Transport and the Environment - Developments since 1994",
Twentieth Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental
Pollution, 1997. Cm 3752. ISBN 0-10-137522-0. A summary of
the Report's main conclusions is provided in Annex C.
We face an enormous challenge to deliver our vision of a transport system that supports sustainable development. We need a new approach, bringing together the public and private sectors in a partnership which benefits everyone. We want to ensure that companies have incentives to provide new services and raise standards, that taxpayers' money is spent wisely to make public transport available for all and that services are properly regulated in the public interest.
We have not put everything on hold until this White Paper. We are already working to extend the range of transport choices across the country and are investing more in public transport to improve its quantity and quality. We have secured new and imaginative ways of funding to modernise our transport system. We are giving high priority to maintaining and managing the nation's transport infrastructure. Taken together, this public and private investment represents a substantial increase in resources for transport. More investment in public transport and more people using it will work together to create a virtuous circle, generating more revenues, further investment and even better services.
We want transport to contribute to our quality of life not detract from it. The way forward is through an integrated transport policy. By this we mean:
........ better places to live
We want a transport system that meets the needs of people and business at an affordable cost and produces better places in which to live and work. We want to cut congestion, improve our towns and cities and encourage vitality and diversity locally; helping to reduce the need to travel and avoid the urban sprawl that has lengthened journeys and consumed precious countryside. We will revise the planning guidance we issue to bring together thinking about better transport and a better environment at the planning stage.
The New Deal for transport means:
.......... local transport plans
We want to see integrated transport locally as well as nationally, which is why we are introducing local transport plans as a core part of our proposals. Local authorities will set out in these plans their strategies for transport. There will be new tools to tackle congestion and pollution which will provide local authorities with new and dedicated sources of funding for transport measures. But we are not relinquishing responsibility for what happens locally, we will need to be satisfied that these new powers will be used as part of clear transport strategies that have the backing of local communities.
We want more priority for public transport, improved facilities for people to interchange when travelling and better information for passengers. We want bus lanes that are properly enforced so that buses are more reliable as well as more frequent. We will improve choice and reliability of journeys in ways which safeguard the environment and the health of the nation. We will change the focus of road investment to reflect the needs of all road users, giving top priority to maintaining and managing our existing roads and getting them to work better.
We will put greater emphasis on listening to transport users - there will be a New Deal for the public transport passenger and a New Deal for the motorist. We will continue to work with motoring organisations to improve the service offered by trunk roads and, through investing in technology, we will improve the speed and efficiency of customer services provided by Government agencies.
The New Deal for transport means:
A New Deal for the motorist
Buses will be cleaner, more comfortable and more reliable, a real and attractive alternative to using cars. We are challenging the industry to produce a bus design fit for the next century. We will build on Quality Partnerships, local partnerships to deliver better bus services. We will ensure that the passenger gets a real say in influencing bus services in their local area. Quality Contracts, where there is local demand, will mark a real change from the present and provide the opportunity for the development of integrated networks.
The New Deal for transport means:
..... better trains
Through a new Strategic Rail Authority, we will bring vision to the privatised railway and we will ensure that it meets the needs of passengers and the freight customers it serves. Passengers rightly demand better services and more accountability. We are willing to re-negotiate existing rail franchises where this would secure benefits for passengers and value for money for the taxpayer.
The New Deal for transport means:
A New Deal for the public transport passenger
......... better protection for the environment
We want to preserve and enhance our environment: the places where we live and work, our built and natural heritage and our richly diverse countryside. We will be more effective in our stewardship of natural resources and are determined to build from the historic turning point of the special United Nations' conference at Kyoto, where the developed countries agreed to legally binding targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We have already made an important step forward under our Presidency of the European Union (EU), reaching agreement on how to share the EU's target between Member States.
We want to see greener, cleaner vehicles that have less impact on our environment. We want to see better public transport and we will make it easier to walk and cycle. But these alone will not be sufficient to tackle the congestion and pollution that is caused by road traffic: we need to reduce the rate of road traffic growth. We also want to see an absolute reduction in traffic in those places and streets where its environmental damage is worst.
The New Deal for transport means:
......... better safety and personal security
We want people to be able to travel safely and without fear for their personal security. Pedestrians and cyclists should not be intimidated by traffic; parents should not have to drive their children to school because they worry about their safety; women and older people should feel safe to use public transport after dusk.
The New Deal for transport means:
......... better safety and personal security
Because access to transport can be a matter of social justice we want to see high quality public transport designed for everyone to use easily. We want to tackle the downward spiral of disadvantage in the most deprived areas in the country, where difficulties in getting to jobs combine with other social and economic problems. Better transport is an essential building block of our New Deal for Communities which will extend economic opportunity, tackle social exclusion and improve neighbourhood management and quality of life in some of the most rundown neighbourhoods in the country.
As well as prosperous towns and cities we want a thriving countryside in which there are real jobs and opportunities for the people who live there. So where there is new development it should be planned in a way which supports existing communities. We know that transport needs vary widely within and between rural areas. The problems of remote island communities in Scotland are very different from rural villages in the South East of England. So will be the solutions.
The New Deal for transport means:
........ moving goods sustainably
We are building a new partnership with business to improve the competitiveness of industry for the 21st Century. We want a reliable and efficient transport system that supports prosperity, to provide the jobs and wealth we all want. But the growth in freight risks being met at the expense of our environment. This is why we want to reduce the extent to which a healthier economy results in high levels of road traffic growth. We want to see a real increase in the use of rail freight, inland waterways and coastal shipping.
The New Deal for transport means:
...... sharing decisions and modernising local democracy
We have made good progress in meeting the demand for decentralisation of power through our proposals for devolution. Different parts of the UK will be able to consider their own transport priorities reflecting their different transport needs. We also want to revitalise local democracy and strengthen the relationship between local and central Government. We will bring power closer to people and play our part in building effective partnerships.
We want local people and business to have a real say and real influence over transport. We will modernise the way in which transport is planned regionally and locally. We will expect local authorities when preparing their local transport plans to consult widely and involve their communities and transport operators in setting priorities for improving transport. In approving local transport plans, we will want to be sure that they fully reflect this consultation and that the views of local people have made a difference.
The New Deal for transport means:
....... everyone doing their bit
Our New Deal for transport sets the framework for change and we will provide the new powers and extra support needed to make it happen. But we cannot do it alone. We want to create partnerships at all levels, to help business, local authorities and local communities to come together and respond to the challenge.
Much will depend on each one of us as individuals. For example, a significant reduction in car commuting and the 'school run' would help to tackle peak-time congestion. We cannot leave it to others to bring about the changes that are needed. We have a shared responsibility. But great sacrifices aren't called for. It doesn't take much to make a difference - if we all left the car at home just once out of the ten or so shopping and leisure trips we make from home each month, we would deal with most of the projected increase in traffic this year7 .
The New Deal for transport means:
7. calculated from National Travel Survey 1994/96 data for home based journeys for the purpose of shopping, leisure, personal business (eg trips to the bank/hairdresser) and to see friends and relatives somewhere other than where they live
....... delivering the New Deal for transport
In this White Paper we set out the New Deal for transport. In Part II we look more closely at the problems that we have inherited and at why it is so important to set the right framework for change and have clear objectives. We describe the difference that our policies will make. We commit ourselves to challenging targets and rigorous monitoring and set out in detail the measures needed to secure changes on the ground.
In Part III we explain how the New Deal for transport will be supported by a new framework for action at national, regional and local levels and by getting the right balance between incentives, voluntary initiatives, best practice and economic instruments. We consider how we can all do our bit to produce a difference, explaining how the New Deal for transport supports and encourages local and individual action.
Sustainable development meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs.
From the Brundtland Report, 19871
A modern transport system is vital to our country's future. We need a transport system which supports our policies for more jobs and a strong economy, which helps increase prosperity and tackles social exclusion. We also need a transport system which doesn't damage our health and provides a better quality of life now - for everyone - without passing onto future generations a poorer world. This is what we mean by sustainable transport and why we need a New Deal.
We don't underestimate the difficulties. There is much that needs to be done to recover from the legacy we inherited. The lack of a strategic and integrated approach in recent years has made many of the problems worse. But our New Deal for transport sets out a framework for change.
It will be supported by clear and challenging targets, setting out what we want to achieve and by when. By publishing indicators we will be able to measure progress in a way that is clear and comprehensive. It will enable us all to see what is working and what more needs to be done.
It is a long term strategy to deliver sustainable transport. It is also a strategy for modernisation that harnesses the latest developments in technology. It begins in this Parliament, looks towards the next and sets out a programme for improving our quality of life for years to come. But to meet the country's needs, it must and will make a difference now as well as in the future. This Chapter sets out the framework for change and explains what that difference could be.
The way we travel is making us a less healthy nation.
Coronary heart disease is the biggest killer of adults in this country. Part of the blame is that we drive too much when we could walk or cycle. More exercise would help to reach the proposed target for reducing coronary heart disease and strokes in England, set out in "Our Healthier Nation"2.
Road traffic is a major contributor to air pollution. Up to 24,000 vulnerable people are estimated to die prematurely each year, and similar numbers are admitted to hospital, because of exposure to air pollution, much of which is due to road traffic3. Tighter standards and advances in vehicle design have helped to reduce those emissions which cause the greatest concern but in the longer term these gains could be at risk if traffic growth continues unchecked. Even this downward trend in emissions will not be sufficient in all places to reach our local air quality objectives set for 20054. We must do everything we can to cut this loss of life by improving air quality, including further controls on vehicle emissions which have brought about significant reductions in emissions without imposing unreasonable burdens on car users or on business.
Motorists themselves and their passengers are at most risk from exhaust fumes. Recent studies5 have shown that cars offer little or no protection against the pollutants generated by traffic. Car drivers face pollution levels inside a car two to three times higher than those experienced by pedestrians. Car commuters may receive more than a fifth of their total exposure to some pollutants from their daily journey to and from work, as well as adding to the pollution on our streets.
Although serious road casualties have declined, too many people are still killed or seriously injured on our roads (more than 120 people every day in 1997) and in other transport accidents. Some in society are more at risk. Children are particularly vulnerable and those from disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to die as a result of road accidents than children from more affluent homes6.
But the threat to children's health from the way we travel goes beyond accidents and pollution. Because of worries about safety, many parents now shuttle children to school by car when previously they would have made their own way on foot or by bike. The British Medical Association has warned7 that the effects on children's physical health and mental development could be serious.
Traffic contributes substantially to the noise that has become part of the everyday environment and can make many people's lives a misery. There is now some evidence8 that this noise disturbs sleep and affects performance in school children and that the stress this noise causes may increase the risk of developing chronic heart disease and psychiatric disorders. Noise is an important issue for those living close to airports and under flight paths and near to busy roads.
The New Deal for transport therefore sets the framework to:
1. the most commonly used working definition of sustainable
development - taken from "Our Common Future", (The Brundtland
Report) - Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development, Oxford University Press, 1987 ISBN
0-19-282080-x.
2. "Our Healthier Nation. A Contract for Health", Cm 3852.
"Working Together for a Healthier Scotland", Cm 3584. "Better
Health, Better Water", Cm 3922.
3. "Quantification of the Effects of Air Pollution on Health
in the UK", Committee on the Medical Effects of Air
Pollutants, Department of Health, 1998.
4. in the National Air Quality Strategy.
5. "Road user exposure to air pollution", a literature review
published on behalf of DETR by Environmental Transport
Association, 1997. ISBN 1-873906-14-5.
6. I Roberts and C Power, BMJ volume 313, 1996.
7. "Road transport and health", British Medical Association,
1997.
8. "The Non-Auditory Effects of Noise", Institute for
Environment and Health, 1998.
The transport system moves goods and people and helps to make the economy tick. Good transport is needed to get people to work and many jobs are based on extensive travel. Transport is also a major contributor to the economy in its own right, currently employing around 1.7 million people9.
We rely on efficient transport to ensure that goods and services are distributed throughout the UK and exported overseas. Yet in recent years investment in transport has failed to maintain the physical quality of the system, allowing valuable assets to deteriorate. There is a backlog of neglect of railway stations, track and bridges10; and roads in England and Wales are in their worst state for twenty years11.
More than four-fifths of domestic freight tonnage goes by road. But traffic congestion now costs the nation billions of pounds each year and with traffic forecasts pointing to more congestion these costs can only increase. Important parts of our motorways suffer daily from traffic jams but building more roads can just encourage more traffic.
Modern business practices put firms at even greater risk from delay and congestion. 'Just in time' production, for example, means that companies no longer hold large stocks of raw materials, components or finished products on site, depending instead on their suppliers meeting their needs at short notice. They rely heavily on an efficient road network.
On the busiest roads in our cities journey times in the rush hour could lengthen dramatically, by as much as 70% over the next 20 years. Already in outer London one-fifth of the time taken to make a journey during rush hours is spent stationary. In central London, at any time of the day, drivers face the prospect of spending a third of their journey at a standstill12. Even our country towns at the busiest times can grind to a halt through congestion.
Rail freight tonnage has dropped by more than a quarter over the last decade, although the tide has turned in recent years. The lack of investment in rail infrastructure has led to increased delays and unreliability.
Air transport has been growing dramatically. But we haven't made the best use of the airports in our regions and we need to improve public transport to all our airports. Shipping is one of the most environmentally sustainable means of transport, carrying 95% of our growing international trade by tonnage. The UK is a world centre of excellence for shipping and maritime-related activities. But recent decades have seen a massive decline in the size of our merchant fleet.
The New Deal for transport therefore sets the framework to:
9. Office for National Statistics Labour Market Statistical
Group.
10. see Railtrack's "Network Management Statement",
1998.
11. from the visual survey of the "National Road Maintenance
Condition Survey 1997": the condition of roads in England and
Wales was the worst recorded since the survey began in
1977.
12. time spent at 0 mph in a queue of traffic or spent
waiting at traffic lights or road junctions. Taken from
"Traffic Speeds in Central and Outer London: 1996-97", DETR,
Statistics Bulletin (98) 17.
The way we travel is changing our environment for the worse. The 'skyglow' from light pollution and noise from transport have changed much of our countryside. Road construction and car parking have made heavy demands on land, a finite resource. In England alone, in the second half of the 1980s an area equivalent to the size of Bristol was taken for road building and parking13.
Transport's contribution to global warming14
Climate change is one of the greatest environmental threats facing the world today. Globally, the balance of evidence now points to a discernible human influence on the earth's climate through the emission of greenhouse gases. In the UK, transport's share of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, the main greenhouse gas, has grown from around one tonne in eight in 1970 to more than one tonne in four in 1995, and is set to grow still further. Four-fifths are produced by road vehicles.
As we use cars more, we have made less use of public transport. Yet buses and trains can have distinct environmental advantages as highlighted by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. Buses require less road space per seat than cars and usually emit less CO2 per occupant. Emissions of CO2 and most other pollutants are lower per tonne-kilometre for rail freight than road freight. And emissions of CO2 and most other pollutants are generally lower per passenger-kilometre for rail than for road.
Travel Habits
We all know about noise pollution and road congestion around airports. But air traffic also has a global impact. CO2 emissions per passenger-kilometre are higher from air travel than from most other ways of travelling and fuel for air travel now accounts for one-sixth of transport fuel sold in the UK.
The New Deal for transport therefore sets the framework to:
13. some 10,500 hectares in England changed to highways and
road transport uses (public car parks and bus stations).
Taken from Department of the Environment, Transport and the
Regions' Land Use Change Statistics.
14. Transport CO2 emissions. Source DTI EP65 central
forecasts which are currently being revised for publication
later this year.
Nearly a third of households in Britain don't have a car - some 13 million people. The number who rely on public transport, walking or cycling is even higher because in those homes where there is a car not everyone has regular access to it. Those who can't drive have to rely on lifts (over 4 in 10 women don't have driving licences) and in many families there is a main driver who has 'first call' on the car. In some places, poor public transport and lack of a car combine to produce social exclusion. For example, some families in rural areas have had to make great financial sacrifices to keep a car to avoid relying totally on the little public transport that exists.
Most users of public transport rely on buses to get about. The less affluent - students, retired (there are five million elderly people without a car) and unemployed people - use buses more than others. It is these people who have had to face bus fares rising by almost a third in real terms since 1980. At the same time, the standard of living of bus and coach drivers has fallen - on average by 4% since 1985, compared with a 20% increase in real terms in the average wage.
Being unable to afford transport can limit everyday life. Job, training and education opportunities are more limited and there is less choice in shopping, adding to the family budgets of those least able to bear the cost. An expanded road network has helped people travel further and faster than before. But it has also led to jobs, shops and essential facilities moving out-of-town, reducing the vitality and diversity of local facilities and hitting the less mobile and those on low incomes.
Road traffic has affected some people more than others, the poorest and most vulnerable in society often suffer more than most. Busy roads in towns have cut communities in half and heavy traffic can be a barrier to community life. Road noise contributes to stress and disturbs sleep: those living closest to busy roads bear the brunt. Some of our town centres have been ruined by major roads, putting people in second place to the car. Increased traffic and speed have spoilt streets. Fear of traffic adds to the isolation sometimes faced by older people.
Public transport is not available to everyone, and where it exists is not always accessible to disabled people. Although recorded crime levels on public transport are low, concern for personal security is a significant deterrent to travel, particularly for older people, women and ethnic minorities.
The New Deal for transport therefore sets the framework to:
Privatisation, deregulation and competition were key features of the last decade but they have failed to deliver an integrated transport system. This needs to change. We want to work in partnership with industry but the shift of Government's strategic responsibility on to the private sector went too far.
Managing competition and regulating
monopolies
The legacy we inherited ranges from the competitive market of
the deregulated bus industry to inadequate regulation of
monopoly supply in the provision of railway infrastructure.
Whilst competition can bring benefits to some customers as suppliers compete for market share, the wider public interest must always be taken into account. In transport the problems of noise, congestion and pollution associated with individual travel decisions are often ignored and there is concentration on profitable routes at the expense of integrated transport networks which extend choice and accessibility.
We will therefore:
BUS DEREGULATION
How We Travel
Deregulation of the local bus market, outside London, caused substantial upheaval because of 'bus wars' and confusion over changing service patterns. There have been some good examples of innovation but frequent changes to bus services, poor connections and the reluctance of some bus operators to participate in information schemes or through-ticketing undermined bus services. In this climate, it was not easy for buses to match the levels of comfort, reliability and access offered by the private car.
Deregulation has not broken the spiral of decline in local bus use. Since 1986 bus use has fallen by about a quarter - by about one billion fewer journeys a year; in contrast with London, within a regulated market, where use has held up. More recently, there have been good examples of bus companies and local authorities working together in Quality Partnerships to change the image of bus services and stem, sometimes even reverse, the decline in patronage.
Rail privatisation
The previous administration supported the progressive
liberalisation of access to the rail network by passenger
train operators, who would compete with those already
providing services. The Rail Regulator is legally committed
to introduce greater competition from 1999. But open access
with inadequate safeguarding of the public interest could
lead to a loss of network benefits in areas like ticketing
and timetabling. 'Cherry picking' of profitable routes could
threaten local networks. This sort of behaviour has no place
in our transport policy. The Rail Regulator has therefore set
in hand arrangements to introduce limited competition subject
to strict safeguards. Competition will not be allowed if it
would undermine existing services supported by the taxpayer
or reduce network-wide passenger benefits. The Strategic
Rail Authority will be able to set the longer term
policy framework for competition, ensuring continuing
safeguards against erosion of a properly integrated network.
A healthy, growing economy has meant an increase in the number of rail passengers and this is welcome. But the privatised, fragmented railway that we have inherited is not making the most of this potential. And the privatised railway continues to receive vast amounts of public subsidy, with inadequate public accountability.
Some passenger train operators have gained new customers with better services and new products but the picture is patchy. For every train operator that has improved punctuality and reliability, there is another that has let standards slip: punctuality deteriorated in the year ending March 1998 in more than half the service groups operated and there were less reliable services in more than a third.
Passengers know that rail privatisation has not delivered the benefits claimed by its supporters. Figures compiled by the Central Rail Users' Consultative Committee indicate a substantial increase in the level of passenger dissatisfaction: in the first quarter of 1998 complaints almost doubled over the same period in 1997. The Committee had already expressed concern that there was "a gulf between what passengers can reasonably expect and what they receive and how it is delivered"15.
The Rail Regulator published on 1 July 1998 figures showing that there were nearly one million complaints direct to train operators in 1997/8. That is a huge number. What is even more disturbing is the Rail Regulator's view that these complaints do not fully reflect passenger dissatisfaction with the privatised railway.
In a recent report, the House of Commons' Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Select Committee highlighted the fundamental weaknesses in the organisation of the privatised railway16. These include the overlapping responsibilities of the Rail Regulator and the Franchising Director which leads to confusion about their respective roles; the inadequate sanctions when train operators and others perform badly; and the inconsistent regulation of key parts of the industry.
Critically, there is no good mechanism for long term strategic planning in the privatised rail industry. We will inject a strategic approach which will nurture the potential growth in rail patronage.
The New Deal for transport therefore sets the framework to:
15. The Central Rail Users' Consultative Committee (CRUCC) is
the statutory consumer organisation representing the
interests of rail users nationally. Figures on complaints
taken from CRUCC press release 9/98, dated 4 June 1998 and
commentary from CRUCC press release 3/98, dated 16 March
1998.
16. Third Report of the Environment, Transport and Regional
Affairs Committee, Session 1997-8, on the proposed Strategic
Rail Authority and Rail Regulation, House of Commons paper
286-I, March 1998.
Different ways of travelling
Using the car less is not as impossible as some think it is. Nearly three-quarters of all journeys are under five miles and 45% are less than two miles. Even though many of us could walk or cycle these short distances, or catch a bus, we have increasingly used our cars - a quarter of all car journeys are now under two miles.
A recent study for the RAC17 concluded that most car trips do not have to be made by car. Using a car currently seems the sensible choice because of factors such as physical and time constraints and the poor quality of alternatives. Some car trips (up to 30%) were judged to be hardly necessary at all or a perfectly good alternative was already available but ignored. This shows the potential for people to use their cars less without making great sacrifices - and often benefiting instead from the exercise, the stress avoided and the money saved.
We know that a very high proportion of people change their travel choices from day to day and year to year, showing a great adaptability in arranging their travel and their lives. The New Deal for transport will make it easier for people to choose different and more sustainable ways of making their journeys, helping them to make the changes in travel behaviour that are needed. 17. "Car dependence", a report for the RAC Foundation for Motoring and the Environment by ESRC Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford with RDC Inc, San Francisco, 1995. ISBN 0 86211355 5.
We can all do our bit to make a difference and this will be helped by advances in technology. We are committed to making the fullest possible use of new technologies to deliver the New Deal for transport. As technology works best when combined with other measures, for example, financial incentives to buy greener vehicles, we will bring forward packages of measures to get the most from technological progress.
Improvements in fuel and vehicle technology, for example, will make a significant contribution to achieving our targets for improving air quality and reducing greenhouse gases. And developments in information technology will produce more reliable and comprehensive information to help public transport users and motorists plan their journeys. Technology can also help to make transport safer through, for example, improvements in vehicle design and the use of CCTV.
We have embarked on a comprehensive agenda for change - a series of practical, carefully thought out reforms. Our new approach will work best when the measures are combined in packages, so that each reinforces the other. We set out the measures in the remainder of this White Paper. Together, these measures will deliver the change that is needed. This integrated approach is vital if we are to meet the objectives and targets in our New Deal for transport.
We have international and national targets for protecting the environment. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution has produced two comprehensive reports on reducing transport's impact on our environment and proposed targets to drive the process. These have been key influences on our New Deal for transport. Challenging targets are helping to focus attention on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving local air quality and road safety, boosting rail freight and encouraging more cycling.
International and National Targets and Standards
Following the Kyoto climate change conference in December 1997, the UK has a legally binding target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 12.5% below 1990 levels by the period 2008 to 2012. This means a reduction equivalent to 27 million tonnes of carbon. We also have a domestic aim to reduce CO2 emissions in the UK to 20% below 1990 levels by 2010. We do not underestimate either the scale of the challenge or the huge potential for industry in the UK to benefit from improved fuel efficiency and win exports through developments in environmental technology.
We shall be consulting soon on options to meet our legally binding target and help move towards our domestic aim. The consultation will present an opportunity to assess savings from the transport sector in relation to measures which could be taken in other sectors. We will consider the balance of our programme in the light of public debate and responses during the consultation period.
|
Kate's story 18 My first job in the morning is to get the kids to school. By car, of course. It's too dangerous to let my nine year old, Sam, walk by himself - there is no lollipop lady where he needs to cross a busy road. Rebecca, who's 13, wants to cycle but I'm frightened that she'll have an accident. We need two cars. David, my husband, drives to work as well. He really has no other option. There's plenty of buses but they're dirty and unreliable and take longer than the car. But he does find the drive stressful. The traffic gets worse. He arrives at the office wound-up. On the way home, I sometimes pop down to the supermarket in the car. That allows me to get some shopping done without having to go out at the weekends. If I've time, I do it before picking up the kids. Trying to go round a supermarket with them is a nightmare. We hardly ever use public transport. Or walk for that matter. David even drives the 500 yards to the paper shop on a Sunday morning. |
The New Deal for transport
We will work with local councils to make walking safer and to provide more cycle routes to schools. Schools will be encouraged to improve facilities for cyclists. We will improve bus services. There will be investment in better information. New rules will improve the quality of the buses. And, by giving them priority in the rush 'hour', they will become more reliable. Some supermarket chains are already introducing home shopping by phone, fax and the internet. This will be more convenient for many shoppers and reduce the number of car journeys. We should all try to walk more - for our own health. Together with local councils we will help by making walking more pleasant, by cutting traffic and car speeds. |
A range of measures will be needed from the transport sector. These will form an essential part of a balanced approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Of the initiatives in the New Deal for transport, those directed at improving the fuel efficiency of all vehicles on our roads, especially those which target the fuel consumption of the cars we drive, have the greatest potential to reduce transport CO2 emissions. Reducing the overall rate of road traffic growth and local action designed to achieve a switch to less fuel intensive forms of transport will also play an important part.
EU Member States have agreed a strategy for reducing CO2 emissions from new cars, with the aim of achieving a reduction of more than a third by no later than 2010. This strategy alone has the potential to reduce forecast road transport CO2 emissions in the UK by 8-14%19. But these improvements critically depend on the way we respond as car buyers. Motoring taxation also has an important role to play, by providing the right incentives for those decisions.
The main aim of our motoring tax strategy is to encourage people to buy more fuel efficient models and to invest in regular maintenance and fuel saving technologies. For example, recent analysis by the AA suggests that car owners can reduce fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from their cars by as much as 5% by fitting low rolling resistance tyres20.
Tackling congestion will also help improve the fuel efficiency of urban travel and reduce the impact of UK road transport on climate change. Even cautious estimates21 suggest that fuel consumption, and therefore CO2 emissions, are at least 10% higher on urban roads and 25% higher in the centres of our largest cities as a result of congestion.
The impact on emissions of the New Deal for transport depends on how quickly packages of measures to tackle congestion can be brought forward and implemented by local authorities. The potential gains are large. They can lead to absolute reductions in local traffic levels by promoting transfers to public transport and improvement in the fuel efficiency of the vehicles that remain. We estimate that getting the right transport packages in place locally, backed by road user charges, could deliver reductions of up to 20% in road traffic CO2 emissions in the centres of our busiest cities22.
The overall contribution of the measures set out in this White Paper towards reducing UK road traffic CO2 emissions will depend on a great many factors, in particular the way in which local authorities, businesses and all of us as individuals respond to the lead it provides. Against this background, estimating a range for the potential savings is difficult.
We have based our analysis on the 1997 National Road Traffic Forecasts. Our work to date therefore includes the reduction of 14% in CO2 emissions which is implicit in these forecasts, when compared with those published in 1995 for CO2 emissions and shown in the earlier chart, 'transport's contribution to global warming'. What our work shows is that, even without a major change in behaviour, with the key measures in the New Deal for transport, there is the potential to reduce forecast 2010 road traffic CO2 emissions by 22-27%23. Other measures in the New Deal which are less easily quantified will add to this. With a step change in attitudes even greater reductions are within our grasp.
|
Martin's story I drive to work. It's frustrating, though. The traffic is terrible and getting worse. I try to find new routes but there's no way to avoid it. I do a lot of car journeys with my work, seeing clients and so on. I'm often late because of roadworks. And the state of the roads after they've finished is a disgrace. You can suddenly hit really bad traffic with no chance to take a different route. |
The New Deal for transport Better traffic and road management will help to cut congestion. The Highways Agency is developing a 'Toolkit' of ways to keep the traffic moving. We want to ensure there are decent alternatives to the car. We will give priority to maintaining the roads we have before we build new ones. And we are looking at ways to improve co-ordination between utility companies for essential streetworks. We are working with the private sector to improve information systems on traffic problems, both before you set off and while you are driving. |
18. this and the other stories in this Chapter are composite
pictures drawn from the widespread public consultation
exercise and are designed to illustrate the concerns that
people have about transport."
19 compared to estimates based on the 1997 National Road
Traffic Forecasts with unchanged traffic assumptions. The
analysis assumes that the EU objective of reducing average
(sales weighted) new car CO2 emissions to 120
grammes per kilometre is achieved in the UK by 2005 or 2010
at the latest.
20 "Tracking CO2 emissions from UK Home and Cars",
Automobile Association, December 1997.
21 based on analysis using the framework developed for the
1997 National Road Traffic Forecasts and estimates produced
by the Highways Agency of the impact
22 from analysis based on the 1997 National Road Traffic
Forecasts and published studies of local packages based on
central area cordon charges and complementary public
transport improvements for locations such as Bristol,
Edinburgh and London.
23 compared to the 1995 CO2 emissions forecasts
referred to above, and including the impact of the 1997
National Road Traffic Forecasts.
Increased traffic and congestion is at the heart of many of the problems we face. Local traffic authorities are already required to consider setting targets for traffic reduction in accordance with local circumstances. The amount of traffic on our roads will be a powerful indicator of how things are going, at both national and local levels. We agree with the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution that national targets for the reduction of road traffic must have a clear and specific justification in terms of the environmental benefits they are expected to achieve, and must represent the preferred and most effective method of achieving those objectives.
We will therefore assess the broad impact on national road traffic levels of the measures we are proposing and, in the light of that assessment, consider how national targets can best help. The question of national targets for road traffic reduction has been debated by Parliament in the context of the Road Traffic Reduction (National Targets) Bill. In considering national targets, we will seek advice from the Commission for Integrated Transport, the new independent body that we will set up to review progress on implementing our integrated transport policy (see Chapter 4).
We know that the New Deal for transport will make a difference at the local level. Analysis based on studies in cities such as Edinburgh, Bristol and London points to a reduction in public and private transport peak journey times of as much as 20-25% in the centres of the largest urban areas by 2010. This reduction in congestion would bring benefits to business and the environment. This underlines the conclusion of the Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment (SACTRA) in its interim report24.
We estimate that European initiatives aimed at tightening vehicle and fuel standards have the potential to reduce busy central urban area road traffic nitrogen oxide emissions by up to 67% and particulate emissions by up to 70% below 1996 levels by 2010. Action at the local level, bringing together user charges and complementary public transport packages directed at tackling congestion and bus and freight Quality Partnerships directed at promoting cleaner buses and lorries25, have the potential to deliver further significant savings. Further reductions in particulate emissions of up to a half appear possible.
Reducing urban road traffic emissions will make our towns and cities healthier places in which to live and work, bringing benefits in particular for those suffering from respiratory disorders including the increasing number of children with asthma. Better air quality will also benefit drivers and passengers who are currently exposed to high levels of pollution in busy city centres.
The New Deal for transport will produce a step change in public transport bringing significant benefits to both town and country with better mobility for all in society. The measures we are introducing will tackle the transport needs of women, disabled and elderly people and people on low incomes. Reducing road traffic in city centres will make it easier for local authorities to reallocate road space to cyclists and pedestrians.
|
Joe's story I'm a pensioner and I've never had a car. I've always used the bus. The service isn't too bad but it's pricey. Our local council doesn't have a pensioners' pass scheme.Once you get into town, the traffic is terrible. You have to be fairly quick to get across the crossings. |
The New Deal for transport The New Deal will mean a half fare pensioner's bus pass. That will be the minimum guarantee. Councils can have more generous schemes if they wish. There will be more pedestrianised streets in town centres and more space for people who walk. We will encourage councils to design crossings so that people are not forced to deal with difficult subway crossings or bridges. |
We will help to draw up new targets - for example, for promoting public transport. In doing so, we will balance the costs and benefits of such targets and seek advice from the Commission for Integrated Transport on the form they might take.
At the same time, we will publish new indicators so as to allow progress to be measured. For example, in England a series of indicators is being developed by the Highways Agency to report on the performance of the trunk road network. We have already published our first report on "Transport Trends", containing key indicators covering a wide range of transport topics: for example, on the use of different forms of transport, on transport safety, changes in the level of air pollutants, greenhouse gas emissions and road traffic.
We will continue to publish these reports each year so that progress against key indicators can be monitored. The indicators will include breakdowns by income groups, rural and urban areas and by age and gender so that we can monitor the impacts of policies on different groups in society. We will carry out the further work that is needed in some areas to ensure that targets and indicators are appropriate and effective. One such area is noise.
But in most cases we expect targets to be developed as part of coherent regional and local strategies to support integrated transport, rather than being set at the national level. National targets can usefully act as benchmarks and encourage improvement but they do not recognise local variations or draw on local knowledge of what is achievable. We suggest in Chapter 4 what these local targets could include. Drawing up targets regionally and locally will help to sharpen the focus of local policy; complementing the approach we have set for reaching our target in England to build 60% of new homes on previously developed land26.
|
Sue's story I live in London and use public transport a lot. But I am worried about safety. You read about attacks and muggings on trains and stations. I don't like using them at night. I prefer to use the car because it's safer. |
The New Deal for transport We will improve safety at stations and on public transport. We will encourage better lighting in stations and at station car parks. We will extend the use of CCTV. We will review security on trains with the operators. |
24"Transport Investment, Transport Intensity and Economic
Growth: interim report", SACTRA, 1997.
25 for example by encouraging operators to fit particulate
traps.
26"Planning for the Communities of the Future", Cmd 3885,
1998. ISBN 0-10-138852-7.
'Developing an integrated transport policy represents a
major shift in direction. We don't just want to stop traffic
problems getting worse, we actually want to make things
better for people and goods on the move'
John Prescott 1997
Making it easier to walk
Making it easier to walk: an artist's impression of a pedestrianised Trafalgar Square.
We are all pedestrians, even if we own a car. Nearly all journeys involve a walk and walking is still the main way of getting about locally. But all too often the things that make walking a more pleasant experience have not been given proper attention, as can be seen in the way road space and priority is so often biased against pedestrians. Too often pedestrians are treated like trespassers in their own towns. We want streets that are decent and attractive to walk in.
Too many of us have given up walking short distances in favour of using the car. We need to reverse that trend for the sake of our own and others' health, and for good environmental reasons.
Our New Deal for transport will make walking a more viable, attractive and safe option. Strategies to make it easier to get around locally by walking will be included in the local transport plans that we will introduce (see Chapter 4).
Reflecting our proposals for 'streets for people' that we describe later in this Chapter, we will expect local authorities to give more priority to walking by:
Better for pedestrians
We are working closely with local government and a wide range of organisations to prepare a strategy1 that will provide a framework for action. In addition to supporting and developing this strategy, we will revise existing advice and work with local authorities and others in improving the environment for walking.
We will also encourage local authorities to introduce facilities which make it easier and safer for disabled and elderly people to move about. This will include pedestrian crossings that are fully accessible to all, including people in wheelchairs, and incorporate tactile features and audible signals to help blind and partially sighted people.
We have already made a start in promoting walking, and cycling, as healthy modes of transport through the 'Active for Life' physical activity campaign run by the Health Education Authority.
Safer routes to school
1. being prepared by a steering group which comprises representatives of local and central government and a wide range of organisations and individuals.
Making it easier to cycle
National Cycle Network
The National Cycling Strategy (NCS) published in 1996 highlighted the potential of cycling as a flexible, relatively cheap and environmentally friendly way to travel with important health benefits for people of all ages. We agree. Cycling, however, has been in decline nationally, even though more cycles are owned than ever (and annual sales of bicycles outstrip the number of new cars sold). But this doesn't have to be the case if we make it easier and safer to cycle:
The NCS encourages local authorities and others to establish local targets for increased cycle use. A number have already done so and we expect targets to become more widespread as local strategies for cycling evolve. The NCS has established a national target of doubling the amount of cycling within six years (against a base year of 1996) and of doubling it again by the year 2012. We endorse this target. A National Cycling Forum2 has been established to oversee its implementation.
Adapting existing road space for cyclists (Reading).
To support the NCS, we are continuing to research innovative measures to improve the safety and convenience of cycling and will publish advice on good practice. We want to see better provision for cyclists at their destinations, at interchanges, in the design of junctions and in the way road space is allocated. In particular, we are looking to local authorities to:
Concern about road safety is a major reason for people not using their bikes for everyday journeys. Parents in particular see the dangers for their children of cycling on roads. In many areas radical changes are needed to create safer cycling conditions. Cycling promotion policies therefore need to mesh with those on road safety. Safety should be an additional incentive for action, not a reason for delaying priority measures for cyclists.
We will continue to help with the development of the National Cycle Network being co-ordinated by the transport charity Sustrans. The network will be a linked series of traffic-free paths and traffic-calmed roads providing some 8,000 miles of safe and attractive routes by 2005. By opening up opportunities for people to cycle more, the network will help to create a culture that welcomes cycling as an activity. 2. the Forum comprises representatives from a range of organisations across the UK including central and local government, business and the voluntary sector.
More and better buses
Buses are already the workhorses of the public transport system and in many parts of the country they are the only form of public transport. Increasingly they will become the focus of an efficient transport system that gets people to where they want to be quickly and comfortably, without having to rely on cars.
But people will not switch from the comfort of their cars to buses that are old, dirty, unreliable and slow. Too often buses have been treated and seen as 'second class' transport. It doesn't have to be like this and is certainly not the case in many other European countries.
As part of the New Deal for transport we want better buses - clean, comfortable and convenient. Bus lanes and other priority measures will help to get buses running on time. A first-rate and modern bus industry will make an important and cost-effective contribution to tackling congestion and pollution at the local level. By giving buses greater priority and improving information and networks, we can encourage more people to use buses. Increasing passenger numbers could transform the economics of bus operations, opening new horizons in quality, reliability and network expansion.
Quality Partnerships
Quality Partnerships have been developed in a number of towns and cities, eg in Aberdeen, Birmingham, Brighton, Edinburgh, Ipswich, Leeds and Swansea. They:
Quality Partnerships can also be successful in rural areas, eg in Pwllheli, North Wales, where:
The most significant improvements in bus services recently have been achieved through co-operation between local authorities and operators under 'Quality Partnerships'. In these partnerships, the local authority provides traffic management schemes which assist bus services (bus lanes, priority at junctions, park and ride). The bus operator offers better quality (in terms of comfort, 'greenness,' accessibility and staff training), improved marketing, better integration and more reliable services.
Putting buses first: bus priority lane in Edinburgh.
Quality Partnerships work but they need to be more widespread and put on a firm footing. We will therefore introduce legislation to put these partnerships on a statutory basis. This will enable local authorities to require operators to meet certain standards of service quality in order to use the facilities provided by the local authority as part of the Quality Partnership. This will give local authorities greater influence over the provision of bus services and their marketing, and will enable them to encourage the provision of easy access buses.
Quality Partnerships should be for rural as well as urban areas, although a rural Quality Partnership might well look different. It might feature improved bus stops and information as well as higher quality vehicles, rather than traffic management. We have already made significant strides in improving bus services in the countryside and more Quality Partnerships will help. We set out our proposals for rural bus services in Chapter 4.
We will clarify local authorities' powers to buy in extra services to boost frequencies on a particular route or corridor. This will help to make bus use more attractive, particularly to those who would otherwise use cars.
In some circumstances, strengthened Quality Partnerships may not be sufficient to guarantee the necessary improvements. We will therefore introduce primary legislation to give powers to local authorities, where it is in the public interest, to enter into Quality Contracts for bus services. Quality Contracts would mark a real change from the present and would involve operators bidding for exclusive rights to run bus services on a route or group of routes, on the basis of a local authority service specification and performance targets. We will apply the experience from the best value approach to contracting which we are introducing to improve the quality and efficiency of services in local government. Quality Contracts will be subject to Ministerial consent for each local authority that wished to adopt such an approach (and following devolution, the consent of the National Assembly for Wales or the Scottish Executive).
The circumstances in which Quality Contracts might be considered will be the subject of national guidance, drawn up in consultation with local government. Initially, a small number of pilots could be used to demonstrate the contribution of Quality Contracts to developing bus networks and responding to what the passenger wants.
Putting buses first
The Leeds 'guided bus':
'Greenways' in Edinburgh:
Listening to the passenger is an important part of the New Deal for transport. We therefore welcome the recent initiative by the Confederation of Passenger Transport to establish an independent Bus Appeals Body to handle bus passenger complaints outside London not resolved direct with operators. In London, this task falls to the London Regional Passengers' Committee.
We want a wider role for the Traffic Commissioners in strengthening the passenger voice. The Traffic Commissioners have an important independent oversight of the bus registration system and in licensing operators as fit and proper persons to operate bus services. We are considering with the Traffic Commissioners how best their role might be enhanced in delivering integrated transport.
Innovation is an important part of providing better bus services. For example, the use of smaller buses has become increasingly common. They can get to places where the traditional double-deckers would be inappropriate; they can provide more frequent services; and they can exploit niche markets that only require small buses. Taxis can also act as small buses although the use of the powers in the 1985 Transport Act has been disappointingly low. Local authorities will need to assess the potential for smaller buses and taxi buses, particularly in rural areas, when preparing their local transport plans.
Making a difference for the public transport passenger
We have also seen innovation in the structure of bus fares. For example, Magicbuses in Manchester have cheaper fares but are less luxurious than other buses on the same routes. Magicbus fares are typically 20% cheaper than alternative services. Results show that some passengers wait for a Magicbus, letting the better quality bus go. Others let the Magicbus go and prefer a better quality bus. Our proposals on fares are explained in Chapter 4.
A better railway
With the New Deal for transport there is the potential for a railway renaissance. But this will not be possible with the weaknesses arising from the fragmentation of the rail industry. We will therefore establish a national Strategic Rail Authority for Great Britain, to provide a clear, coherent and strategic programme for the development of our railways. This proposal is explained in Chapter 4, together with our new approach to franchising and investment in rail.
Better for passengers
Passenger rail services in Great Britain are provided by 25
franchised train operating companies, owned by 12 different
franchisees, four of whom are also major operators of bus
services. Recent performance of the privatised railway has
not been good. But there is clearly scope for increased use
of the passenger railway. The franchise bids of the train
operating companies forecast demand growth of nearly 25% in
terms of passenger mileage by 2002/03 with the strongest
growth in the inter-city market.
In 1997 we revised the objectives of the Franchising Director to put the passenger first. We welcome the steps now being taken by some operators to put more emphasis on passengers' needs and increased service frequencies, especially where this reduces overcrowding and encourages new passengers. The benefits of our new approach are already beginning to show. For example, the 'passenger dividend' from Thames Trains includes station improvements, a new Oxford-Bristol service and new bus/rail and bike/rail integration.
Faster journey times can encourage greater use. That is why we welcome improvements such as the modernisation of the West Coast Main Line. Together with the up-grading there is the commitment to allow for faster, tilting trains, to which the Virgin Rail Group is guaranteeing substantial investment. Such improvement programmes can produce greater reliability and shorter journey times, thereby making rail a more attractive transport option.
Fare choice
The ability of the railway to cope with the increase in passenger demand that we wish to see will depend in part on the pace of infrastructure works and rolling stock improvements. Some inter-city routes can increase rail capacity substantially at relatively short notice and at moderate cost, using longer trains and platforms, more trains and improved signalling. Other operators are constrained by infrastructure pinch-points that are already operating at or close to capacity.
Railtrack has recently identified 15 key bottlenecks on the rail network, together with possible solutions, in its 1998 Network Management Statement (see map at Annex F). Railtrack is evaluating these pinch-points and estimates that its programme for solving these congestion problems could be complete by 2006. We welcome the Rail Regulator's examination of Railtrack's Statement against the obligations in its licence. In particular, he is investigating the sufficiency of:
More rail freight
We can move more freight by rail, relieving pressure on the
road network and bringing environmental benefits. The main
rail freight operator, English, Welsh and Scottish Railway
(EWS), has an aspirational target of doubling its traffic
measured by tonne-kilometres over five years and tripling it
over ten. Freightliner, which specialises in the haulage of
containers between deep sea ports and inland terminals, aims
to increase the volume of containers carried by 50% over five
years.
We endorse these targets. Overall, reaching them could mean that in 2010 the share of freight going by road3 was 10% lower than is currently forecast. For every percentage point reduction in road freight that is achieved some 1,000 to 2,000 heavy lorries could be taken off our roads. But we also wish to see improvements to the passenger railway, which must be balanced against the needs of freight customers. We will therefore ask the Strategic Rail Authority to develop targets for both the freight and passenger railway in order that we secure the maximum benefit overall from our rail network. In the meantime, we will continue to work towards our objective of moving more freight by rail and towards the targets set by the industry.
Rail freight starting to grow