Explanatory Memorandum from the Department
of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (EST 98A)
PART II—COMMENTARY ON THE SUPPLY ESTIMATES
CLASS VI, VOTE
2: PLANNING, ROADS,
LOCAL TRANSPORT
AND VEHICLE
SAFETY
More details can be found in the Annual Report
1998: chapters 7, 8, 9 and 16 and Tables A2, A10, A11, A14 and
A15.
| Total vote
|
|
| £000 |
|
| Final net provision 1996-97 | 371,384
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 364,579
|
| Change | -6,805 |
| Change (Per cent) | -2 Per cent
|
| |
| Final net provision 1997-98 | 316,388
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 364,579
|
| Change | +48,191 |
| Change (Per cent) | +15 Per cent
|
|
This Vote replaces the former Class V, Vote 2 (Department
of Transport: administration and transport services) and Vote
5 (Roads and local transport).
Most of the provision is allocated for grants and support
to local authorities in respect of expenditure on local roads
and transport programmes, funding of the Traffic Director for
London (Red Routes), payments in respect of vehicle and traffic
enforcement activities and land transport research, and grants
to the Humber Bridge Board. In total these programmes make-up
some 90 per cent of the cash limit and total provision. Other
services funded from the Vote include road safety publicity campaigns
along with road safety and mobility grants, traffic control systems
expenditure, the maintenance and operating costs of the Woolwich
Ferry, transport statistical support to Ministers and senior officials,
consultancies for roads and local transport services, planning
and minerals research, and licence fee refunds to goods vehicle
and public service vehicle operators and drivers.
There has been five main changes to the Vote structure since
1996-97. Land transport research and development and planning
and minerals research have transferred to the Vote from Class
V, Vote 2 and Class VI, Vote 4 respectively. The Vote contains
provision for a new Government initiative on rural transport funding
announced in the March 1998 budget—support for rural bus
services. (Provision for the other element of the new rural transport
funding, the rural transport Challenge Fund, is made from Class
VI, Vote 1). Finally, provision for both the Rural Transport Development
Fund and local roads and transport European Regional Development
Fund projects formerly held on this Vote, has transferred to Class
VI, Vote 1.
Individual Sections where the level of provision has changed
significantly are:
The reduction from both the 1996-97 and 1997-98 level of
provision is attributable to the transfer of the budget for the
Rural Transport Development Fund to Class VI, Vote 1 with effect
from 1998-99.
Annual Report 1998—Chapter 8, paragraphs 8.22; table
8a
Capital expenditure on red routes is, for the most part,
concentrated on the implementation of the red route measures.
Because the aim is to have the network operational in 2000 to
hand over to the GLA, this expenditure increases over the three
years beforehand.
| Section E—Vehicle and traffic enforcement
|
|
| £000 |
|
| Final net provision 1996-97 | 16,329
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 13,730
|
| Change | -2,599 |
| Change (Per cent) | -16 Per cent
|
| |
| Final net provision 1997-98 | 16,329
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 13,730
|
| Change | -2,599 |
| Change (Per cent) | -16 Per cent
|
|
Annual Report 1998—Chapter 8, paragraphs 8.34-8.43; figure
8a
The reduction from both the 1996-97 and 1997-98 provision
is mainly attributable to the accounting treatment advised by
Treasury for the re-classification of certain licence receipts
under the new European System of Accounts. Gross provision of
some £16.3 million per annum has remained almost constant
for all three years, but the re-classified licence receipts of
some £2.5 million per annum were only netted off in Estimates
as appropriations-in-aid from 1998-99. Prior to 1998-99, the re-classified
receipts are scored as negative public expenditure Consolidated
Fund Extra Receipts.
Annual Report 1998—Chapter 7
The increase over the level of the 1996-97 provision is attributable
to the inclusion of a new programme to provide funding in respect
of the EC Community (Interreg) Spatial Planning Initiative.
| Section K—Transport supplementary grant
|
|
| £000 |
|
| Final net provision 1996-97 | 235,934
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 155,478
|
| Change | -80,456 |
| Change (Per cent) | -34 Per cent
|
| |
| Final net provision 1997-98 | 194,876
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 155,478
|
| Change | -39,398 |
| Change (Per cent) | -20 Per cent
|
|
Annual Report 1998—Chapter 9, paragraph 9.19; figure
9a-9b
The reduction in provision across the three years is attributable
to fewer major schemes being accepted for grant and the effect
of the exclusion from grant eligibility of general minor works
and local safety schemes, as from 1995.
Annual Report 1998—Chapter 9, paragraph 9.20; figure
9a
The increased level of provision for 1998-99 includes cover
for the Croydon Tramlink project, formerly funded from the Transport
industries Vote.
| Section M—IDA grants
|
|
| £000 |
|
| Final net provision 1996-97 | 3,500
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 2,000
|
| Change | -1,500 |
| Change (Per cent) | -43 Per cent
|
| |
| Final net provision 1997-98 | 1,648
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 2,000
|
| Change | +352 |
| Change (Per cent) | +21 Per cent
|
|
The reduction in provision since 1996-97 reflects tauter
estimating of the likely grant take-up, coupled with the decision
to adopt a more stringent line on the eligibility of applications
over the last year or so.
The lower provision for 1998-99 reflects revised and tauter
estimating of the likely demand for licence fee refunds, following
an underspend of £0.6 million on the higher level of 1996-97
provision.
| Section P—Grants to Humber Bridge Board
|
|
| £000 |
|
| . | |
| Final net provision 1996-97 | 49,400
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 44,000
|
| Change | -5,400 |
| Change (Per cent) | -11 Per cent
|
| |
| Final net provision 1997-98 | 40,000
|
| Provision sought 1998-99 | 44,000
|
| Change | +4,000 |
| Change (Per cent) | +10 Per cent
|
|
Annual Report 1998—Chapter 9, paragraph 9.14 indent (iv)
The provision is required to cover the repayment of loan
interest and any capital repayment due to the Public Works Loan
Board. The higher level of provision for 1996-97 and 1998-99 reflects
the fact that capital repayments of £8 million and £4
million respectively were due in those years, whilst for 1997-98
only repayments of interest were due.
|
