Supplementary memorandum by SOLACE (UWP
58A)
When I presented evidence on behalf of SOLACE
to your Committee on 29 March, I undertook to provide you with
some further information in relation to a question proposed by
Mr Hilary Benn, MP.
Mr Benn spoke about the importance of transportation
investment for Urban Regeneration and I offered to summarise Birmingham's
experience over recent months in relation to Road Charging.
The City Council along with the Country Boroughs
of Sandwell, Dudley, Walsall and Wolverhampton and West Midlands
Passenger Transport Authority are working together in partnership
to investigate the feasibility of introducing a charging regime
to a substantial part of the West Midlands conurbation with the
sole objective of escalating the levels of investment in transportation
infrastructure.
The partnership has been developed in response
to the Government's invitation and has been formally recognised
by inclusion within the DETRs Charging Development Partnership.
The interest of the authorities was prompted
by the prospect of higher levels of investment to respond to growing
concern about the quality of existing infrastructure and the economic
and social consequences of growing congestion. You will I'm sure
know that CBI last year estimated that the costs of this congestion
in the West Midlands alone imposes a bill of more than £2
billion a year on British Industry. From the very beginning the
partner authorities have sought to engage the local business community
in this debate, recognising that any charging regime would have
an impact on business costs and that this would particularly be
the case for the preferred model of work place parking charges.
Throughout those discussions the authorities have emphasised that
they are not yet committed to the introduction of charging, but
do wish to explore whether it could be the means to secure higher
levels of investment.
There is no doubt that this debate has been
controversial. Although there are voices of support in the business
community the much more normal response is hostile and it is a
difficult debate to take forward in the West Midlands with its
well established, although perhaps declining links with the major
car industry. That controversy has also been marked between the
authorities of the conurbation and the current partnership does
not include either Solihull or Coventry Councils.
My reason for believing the West Midlands experience
might be interesting to you relates to the principles which have
evolved out of our discussions with the business community. Those
discussions reveal:-
1. The business community as a whole agree
on the need for higher levels of investment in transportation
infrastructure.
2. Many parts of that community will accept
that this will inevitably need to be funded through taxation of
some form and urgent action will require a creative solution on
this front.
3. There is much greater support for the
prospect of a step change in investment which would begin to transform
transportation arrangements in the area rather than marginal improvements.
This has in turn led the partnership to evolve an initial programme
of expenditure of £400 million whilst recognising that a
sum of £2 billion would be required to affect a substantial
transformation.
4. There is a strong view that a stream of
investment which can be identified as having a close relationship
with the totals outlined above must precede the imposition of
any new tax designed to meet the costs involved. This in turn
has led the partnership to speak in terms of investment of the
order of £100 to £150 million a year for a period of
perhaps three years prior to the introduction of the appropriate
charging regime.
5. There is a prospect of greater enthusiasm
from the business community if they can be confident of a clearly
identifiable link between charges and investment flows and if
they have a strong voice in the determination of priorities for
expenditure. There is strong antipathy to any suggestion that
income from such a charging regime might go into general coffers
either at local or national level, or could be so diverted after
an initial period of hypothecation.
All of these views have been shared with DETR
and Ministers responsible for transport, but I think they offer
quite a compelling picture of how it might be possible to move
forward on an agreed basis if our ambition is sufficiently robust.
Mr Benn asked if we were satisfied with the
level of Government support. It would be fair to report that there
are some anxieties. An initial capital allocation of £5 million
to the West Midlands partnership was welcome but seemed decidedly
meagre compared with the £400 million programme presented
to Ministers. The partner authorities have energetically engaged
with the Charging Development Partnership, but we are concerned
at the pace of progress and an emerging priority for traffic constraint
rather than the improvement of public transport services.
Finally, I would like to restate my own strong
view that urgent and creative attention to outstanding transportation
needs has to be one of the most pressing priorities for our urban
areas, if we are to effect the transformation we aspire to.
Sir Michael Lyons
Chief Executive
Birmingham City Council
April 2000
| 
