Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport Eighth Report



Transport

55. In our previous inquiries on the Dome, we highlighted the importance of transport infrastructure and policy to the project's success.[142] We emphasised that visitors to the Dome should not place more pressure on the already overloaded road networks of Greenwich and south-east London and that manageable and deliverable transport options were imperative if the Dome was to succeed with the forecast number of visitors.[143]

56. The transport policy was designed to reduce or eliminate use by the Dome's visitors of private cars. Ms Page explained how the Government, local authority and community groups had been involved in transport decisions.[144] The transport strategy that emerged from those decisions reflected the project's objectives of regeneration and environmental sustainability.

57. The Jubilee Line Extension [JLE] was central to that transport policy and a focus of much of this Committee's previous scrutiny. After more delays and uncertainties than we care to remember, the JLE was finally fully opened days before the Millennium Dome opened to the public, and is currently used by almost 60 per cent of the Dome's visitors.[145] However, the JLE has experienced technical problems, which have occasionally required the contingency bus fleet to be used.[146]

58. Ninety-seven per cent of the Dome's visitors arrive by public transport and that has been seen as an endorsement of the Dome's transport strategy.[147] River services have not been used as extensively as forecast,[148] carrying only 6 per cent of visitors to the Dome.[149] However, it was anticipated that river services would prove particularly sensitive to weather conditions.[150] Coaches are the principal mode of transport for school parties and groups, and affordable travel packages have been developed by coach companies.[151] Four per cent of visitors have used the bus to reach the Dome.[152] The Millennium Transit system has been used in line with forecasts, but has also suffered technical problems.[153] Twenty-five per cent of visitors have used rail for the first part of their journey to the Dome[154] and that popularity is due in part to the travel packages developed by rail operators.[155] The car-free policy has been successful, with only an estimated 15 per cent of visitors using the car for any part of their journey.[156] Few people arrive at the Dome in cars and those who do are directed to the park-and-ride sites,[157] which have not been used as much as anticipated.[158]

59. Greenwich Council was pleased with the success of the transport strategy. We asked the Council whether that success was simply a result of the fact that visitor numbers have been below those forecast. The Council did not think that that was the case, arguing that the transport infrastructure was "working well within capacity".[159] Some of the other problems that have emerged in the Dome's operation might suggest that too much effort was devoted by this Committee and others to transport. We do not believe such a conclusion is justified. The fact that the Jubilee Line Extension opened only just in time is a demonstration of the validity of our concerns about transport. Furthermore, the obduracy of London Transport until very late in the day in rejecting our proposals for a scheduled bus route was unjustified. We are concerned that even now visitor numbers may be affected adversely by London Transport's failure to direct visitors adequately to the Dome from its stations.


142  HC (1997-98) 340-I, paras 34-47; HC (1997-98) 818-I, paras 22-31; HC (1998-99) 21-I, paras 3-31; HC (1999-2000) 24-I, paras 5-20. Back

143  HC (1997-98) 340-II, p 130; HC (1997-98) 818-II, p 122. Back

144  Q 45 Back

145  Evidence, pp 53-54, 211. Back

146  Ibid. Back

147  Evidence, pp 69, 211. Back

148  Evidence, p 211. Back

149  Evidence, p 54. Back

150  Evidence, p 211. Back

151  Evidence, pp 55-56. Back

152  Evidence, p 53. Back

153  Evidence, p 211. Back

154  Evidence, p 54. Back

155  Evidence, pp 55-57. Back

156  Evidence, p 211. Back

157  Evidence, p 54. Back

158  Ibid. Back

159  Q 251; Evidence, pp 69, 53-54. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2000
Prepared 1 August 2000