Memorandum by The Ramblers' Association
(TYP 8)
INTRODUCTION
1. The Ramblers' Association (RA) warmly
welcomes this inquiry into the 10 Year Plan. As an organisation
primarily concerned with walking, both in rural and urban areas,
we believe that there is an urgent need to give greater priority
to walking as a form of transport, and we are particularly disappointed
that the 10 Year Plan gives so little emphasis to it. We hope
that this inquiry will highlight the importance of walking as
a key means of integrating other transport modes, as well as a
way of improving both urban and rural areas through encouraging
people to walk by providing better conditions for pedestrians.
2. The RA is a voluntary organisation founded
in 1935 whose aims are to promote walking, to protect public rights
of way, to campaign for access to open country and to defend the
beauty of the countryside. It has over 130,000 individual members
and 77,000 members of affiliated clubs and societies. The Association
believes that it is the largest single organisation representing
a group of vulnerable road users and we are pleased to have the
opportunity to submit evidence to the Committee.
3. We were pleased with the outcome of the
recent inquiry into Walking in Towns and Cities which produced
some important results and highlighted some important issues.
We urge the Government to act on these in order to improve the
quality of life in towns and cities. We currently remain concerned
that the Government is not taking walking seriously as a solution
to many transport problems, and we hope that this inquiry will
help to highlight this point. We urge the committee not to forget
the outcomes of the Walking in Towns and Cities inquiry as it
progresses with this one on the 10 Year Plan.
4. The RA sees that one of the roots of
the transport problem is the unwillingness to tackle the legacy
of under investment in more sustainable forms of transport including
public transport, walking and cycling. This is an important issue
which must not be overlooked in the rush to tackle congestion
by building more roads. We believe that the Government must seriously
act to make up for the years of under funding that has occurred
for improving and encouraging alternatives to the car which has
had the damaging consequence of massive increased dependency on
the car.
ASSUMPTIONS
5. We would like to challenge the assumption
of the importance of mobility above and beyond that of accessibility
and quality of life resulting from streets that are for people
rather than cars. The 10 Year Plan focuses on the need to travel
as far as possible as fast as possible and provides little promotion
of the benefits of reducing the amount of travel that we do. It
fails to recognise the impact that traffic has on places (both
urban and rural), and consequently on the lives of those people
that are not in cars. Furthermore, it fails to recognise the potential
cost benefits of any measures to reduce traffic by closing roads
to traffic and opening them to people, so making places less polluted,
safer, more sociable and more economically viable at a local level.
6. In addition to these criticisms, we wish
to highlight the issue of skills which we are concerned do not
match the task in hand. Although the 10 Year Plan commences with
a Foreword which commits to the provision of an integrated transport
policy to tackle congestion and pollution, we do not agree that
the guidance or the skills that exist within local government
are adequate to do this effectively. As already said, we believe
that greater emphasis needs to be put on accessibility by modes
other than the car, but importantly, those that are responsible
for producing transport plans need to be trained in how to do
this. Given the high priority that is given to road building as
a solution to transport problems, planners seem to us to be resigned
to this rather than to seeking imaginative and innovative transport
solutions which reduce car use.
7. The RA would also like to query the assumption
that road building is seen as an investment while services which
can generate revenue (such as efficient, clean, safe, regular
public transport services) are seen as spending. We would like
to see a much more positive light shed on spending on public transport
and improvements to facilities for cyclists and pedestrians so
that their value in economic revenue generation terms is recognised
against the costs (financial, environmental and social) that road
building causes.
TARGETS
8. Much Government policy is now focussed
on reducing congestion, with little regard for reducing traffic
generally. We strongly recommend that the millions currently spent
on road building (including road widening, building bypasses and
schemes to "improve traffic flow") are redirected into
reducing the need to travel, improving public transport and making
it safer and more pleasant to walk or cycle. This is a fundamental
need if we are to increase transport choice rather than simply
decreasing the time that it takes to reach destinations by car.
Such improvements to encourage more sustainable transport are
generally not only cheaper, but improve the environment, the health
of the public (by encouraging exercise) and reduce the adverse
associated impacts that road building has (including quarrying
and loss of countryside).
9. The RA would like to see much more challenging
targets set for the use of sustainable transport modes, particularly
for walking which is the most sustainable of all.
INTEGRATED TRANSPORT
POLICY
10. There are some welcome references in
the 10 Year Plan to providing better public transport services
for rural areas. However, we are concerned that these references
are made only in relation to availability of service, rather than
cost or quality. Furthermore, we are not convinced that the Plan
makes an adequate effort to recognise the differing needs of different
communities, particularly in rural areas, and consequently encourage
more intelligent solutions to transport problems (rather than
simply providing a bypass or a bus service).
11. Again, we would like to highlight the
lack of walking as a feature of transport solutions in this plan.
We believe that walking has been severely ignored by transport
policy in the past, despite recognition that it is an integral
part of most journeys. By doing this, we believe that the Plan
excludes a whole dimension of transport policy which can improve
the quality of life for everyone, and is consequently socially
exclusive. While we are dubious about the idea of a "balanced
approach" to all modes of transport, since each area needs
to be looked at in its own right and assessed on the basis of
the needs of the community which it serves, we strongly recommend
that greater acknowledgement is given to the role that walking
plays and to the benefits that it can bring.
CONCLUSION
12. Despite the growing public recognition
of the importance of sustainable transport, it is disappointing
that policy continues to restrict transport choice by doggedly
ploughing money into schemes which are designed to make it easier,
faster and cheaper to travel by car. There is an urgent need to
tackle this issue, and we believe that the 10 Year Plan does more
to exacerbate it than to tackle it.
13. The RA urges the Transport sub-committee
to move Government thinking forward so that the 10 Year Plan is
amended to reduce dependency on the car rather than encourage
it, and to put far greater attention and resources towards improving
sustainable transport, and consequently improving the quality
of life for all.
| 
