Supplementary memorandum by the Passenger
Transport Executive Group (RI 16B)
1. DETR 10 YEAR
1.1 In October 2000 the West Yorkshire Passenger
Transport Executive commissioned Steer Davies Gleave to undertake
a brief analysis of the expenditure profiles set out in the 10
Year Transport PlanTransport 2010. This work updates a
previous analysis by the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive
which demonstrated that during the period 1985-95 the UK had spent
significantly less (both per capita and as a proportion of GDP)
on transport investment than other EU member states.
1.2 This note summarises out findings in
respect of rail investment.
10 YEAR PLAN
2.1 The Plan is relatively explicit over
its assumptions which is important in allowing identification
of proposed infrastructure investment. Table 2.1 summarises the
assumed capital spend over the 10 year period.
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL SPEND
|Total||At 2000 Prices Private
1 The figures assume that 60 per cent of this investment
is funded through the fareboxtherefore a proportion of
this capital expenditure is actually public support.
2 Of the £49 billion, some £38 billion is for network
replacement and enhancement, £7 billion for replacement vehicles
and fleet expansion, and the final £4 billion for network
enhancements to accommodate freight services.
3 The £9 billion of private investment on local transport
includes some £5 billion on new vehicles (essentially buses)
that are funded through increased demand for services.
3. RAIL INVESTMENT
3.1 The 10 Year Plan expenditure on rail investment has
been analysed as a proportion of GDP, reflecting an "ability
to pay". This analysis assumes future inflation at 2.5 per
cent per annum and growth in GDP of 2.25 per cent per annum, in
line with Government guidance.
3.2 Figure 3.1 below shows the 10 Year Plan proposals
superimposed on a graph of UK and EU member state rail investment
over the period 1987-96. Figure 3.1 demonstrates that in the early
years expenditure exceeds average EU member state levels of the
past decade. However, the profile fails to keep pace with expectations
of economic growth and reduces to past levels of investment towards
the end of the Plan period. The significant peak in the graph
in the early years of the Plan is most likely reflecting the significant
backlog in infrastructure investment caused by under-investment
over the past decade.
3.3 It should also be noted that throughout the 1990s
a similar amount was spent on rail and local transport. Rail is
forecast to take a much greater share of funding than local transport
throughout the 10 year Plan period. The implication of this is
that the legacy of under-investment in rail may be addressed at
the expense of local transport investment.
Director General, West Yorkshire PTE