Memorandum by Bristol City Council (TYP
32)
INTRODUCTION
Bristol is well placed to provide the Select
Committee with a large urban area perspective. It is a freestanding
city, and the largest non-metropolitan city in England. We feel
that Bristol has much to offer the inquiry through our approach
to transport planning, which in many respects pre-dates the Transport
The city has also developed its role over a
number of years through the European Commission, as nominated
co-ordinator of a number of networks and initiatives, where both
policy development and funding have been influenced by work undertaken
in Bristol. We have recently won a major new Commission-funded
bid of £3.24 million, (now also backed by a successful supplementary
bid allocation of £700,000 from DTLR and £250,000 from
the New Opportunities Fund) for a wide-ranging demonstration project,
"VIVALDI", which includes elements of clean fuel and
alternative energy vehicles, sustainable distribution, promoting
of public transport, access control and charging, home zones etc.
Bristol was also invited, largely because of
developing road user charging policy and pilot demonstrators,
to contribute to work leading to the publication of the European
Transport White Paper, and the city has been cited within that
paper, and others, as an example of good practice. We would welcome
the opportunity of bringing this experience to the Select Committee.
Cities are the economic drivers of their sub-regions,
and Bristol's integrated strategy is one that reinforces the role
and importance of land use policy to build a sustainable and inclusive
economy for all our citizens, as well as for residents, businesses
and tourists in both Bristol and the former Avon area. We have
also worked with partners in the city, the sub region and the
region to show that investment in city transport solutions could
help to engender much wider prosperity.
Particular elements of the 10 Year Plan we would
like to give a view on are:
CONGESTION CHARGING
AND HYPOTHECATION
Bristol has been an active and enthusiastic
member of the Government's Charging Development Partnership. The
CDP was set up to support policy development within Local Authorities
interested in examining the use of either Road User Charging or
Workplace Parking Levy as both policy instruments to reduce traffic
growth and congestion (and to meet local and national targets)
and to raise additional funding for transport programmes and major
projects. We believe that to achieve the targets set in the 10
Year Plan, and to raise the revenue for the infrastructure needed
to achieve these targets, Government should not lose its resolve
to continue to support those Local Authorities likely to be amongst
the first to use the powers given to them by the Transport Act
2000. Local Authorities have a pivotal role in implementing national
policies at local level, but need continuing government backing
to do so.
SKILLS AND
CAPACITY TO
DELIVER GOVERNMENT
POLICY AT
THE LOCAL
LEVEL
There is an acknowledgment in both professional
and academic institutions, Local Authorities and the private sector,
that there is an acute skills shortage which potentially severely
limits the capacity to deliver projects on the ground. ITS UK,
for example, has recently circulated a questionnaire to members
conducting research on this, on the effects on delivery and on
possible solutions. Bristol, like many other Local Authorities,
does not want to see this as a barrier to achieving the programme
in our LTP. We are working with the University of the West of
England to develop a Centre of Transport Excellence where both
undergraduate studies, modules for transport professionals and
refresher courses would be available. The City Council is actively
seeking sponsorship for this work with interested private sector
firms. The Select Committee might wish to consider encouraging
Government to fund Local Authorities to enable further development
of such partnerships.
Skills and capacity issues are not the only
barriers to delivery experienced by local authorities. There is
a plethora of organisations, some new and some which have been
given new powers, (eg RDAs, Regional Assemblies, Sub Regional
Partnerships, SRA/Railtrack, train operating companies and bus
companies, Government Offices in the Regions, Highways Agency,
Local Strategic Partnerships etc) who all have a role in implementing
and co-ordinating transport policies and programmes, especially
in the case of large infrastructure projects. The forthcoming
Green Paper on Regional Issues is widely expected to promote elected
regional government in England with additional powers. Meanwhile,
Transport remains at or near the top of the public agenda for
action by local and national government. Local Authorities have
democratic accountability. Many, like Bristol, have developed
their Local Transport Plans with a great deal of public consultation.
LTPs are statutory documents, Bristol would contend that Local
Authorities are best placed to take responsibility for co-ordinating
work between both statutory agencies and other bodies to deliver
transport solutions.
FLEXIBLE FINANCIAL
ARRANGEMENTS INCLUDING
DELIVERY OF
MAJOR SCHEMES
FINANCIAL PROCUREMENT
AND PARTNERSHIP
MODELS
Bristol has put into place a variety of financial
packages to deliver projects. We have been successful over a number
of years at winning European funds to deliver, or accelerate delivery
of, LTP projects. These bids require additional funding which
we have matched with the city's own resources and by successfully
securing private sector contributions. Increasingly, and in order
to promote "joined up" projects, we have also used a
variety of regeneration funds, (eg Single Regeneration Budget,
Objective 2) lottery, and DTLR challenge funds (Urban Bus Challenge
etc). More flexible financial arrangements, including capital
and revenue split to fund the LTP programme, are needed to maximise
resources to deliver the Plan. The lack of revenue resources to
support, for example, public and community transport services,
concessionary fares, certain aspects of highway maintenance and
Council staff costs is a very real barrier that has yet to be
addressed, despite the Government asking for this information
to be identified in LTPs submitted in July 2000.
The introduction of the Single Capital Pot,
whilst again welcome in giving Local Authorities more flexibility
over spending against local need, could mean that Transport might
lose funding previously ring-fenced, when Local Authorities allocate
funding against competing priorities. Although this is likely
to be monitored by DTLR, the Select Committee may wish to examine
whether a more formalised system may be appropriate.
Development funds for major projects are an
area of difficulty that Bristol has encountered in work on the
Bristol/South Gloucestershire Light Rapid Transit project. The
Government has reaffirmed that it is unwilling to allow LTP monies
to be used for these development costs and this presents a difficulty
for local authorities in progressing schemes.
EFFECTS OF
THE MULTI-MODAL
STUDIES ON
URBAN AREAS
See comments above (under skills and capacity
issues) re co-ordination of policy work at the regional level.
REALISM OF
ROAD TRAFFIC
REDUCTION TARGETS
See comments above (under Congestion Charging
and Hypothecation) re Bristol's twin track approach to achieving
local targets and contributing to national ones. We believe that
these targets cannot be achieved by additional supply of public
transport and better provision for benign modes alone. Progressive
restraint measures restricting growth are essential, these include
(from the "soft end") development of Home Zones, traffic
calming, parking, apportioning road space for use by public transport,
through to Road User Charging and Workplace Parking Levy. These
latter measures give Local Authorities access to additional funds
to speed up delivery of massively improved public transport alternatives—the
"carrot and stick" approach. However, most research
and modelling by the City Council shows that, even with these
measures, national targets will still be difficult to reach.
CONDITIONS FOR
LIGHT RAPID
TRANSIT PROJECT
DELIVERY
See comments above re financial packages and
delivery of major schemes. In addition, Bristol would wish to
comment on the difficulties which appear to be caused by procurement
rules, specifically the inclusion of potential operators and construction
companies as partners at development stage may preclude them from
bidding for contracts later.
BARRIERS IN
THE REGULATORY
REGIME FOR
BUS SERVICE
PROCUREMENT
Bristol could bring a very particular perspective
to the Select Committee's investigation into this issue. In Bristol
the "freedoms" of the 1985 Act have resulted in a situation
where there is a virtual private sector monopoly by the major
bus operator. Low levels of driver recruitment leading to withdrawal
of commercial services, problems with reliability exacerbated
by congestion in the city, patchy implementation of bus priority
measures and a desire to maintain profitability, have all resulted
in some poor performance by the bus company. Local and vociferous
press campaigns have added to citizens' very low perception of
the bus company's efficiency.
We have a Bus Quality Partnership which both
the City Council and the bus company take seriously, but there
are continuing difficulties. Recent examples of this are in the
City Council being expected to pick up "commercial services"
withdrawn by the bus company, the increasing costs of supported
services, and constant expectations of these services by the public.
There are particular issues also about the contractual penalties
levied by the Council on the bus company where service levels
have not been met. Recently this has led to the bus company threatening
to terminate contracts rather than bear these penalties.
We have also expressed concern previously (letters
to Lord Whitty available) about the role and remit of the Traffic
Commissioners. FirstGroup have had to appear before the Commissioner
and been penalised—although this was later overturned on
a technicality. The "punishments" open to the Commissioner
are the ability to fine bus companies but also include being able
to withdraw licences to operate services. In Bristol, with one
of the lowest percentages of bus users among the larger cities,
the City Council found it hard to reconcile this with improving
services—especially where there was no other operator willing
or able to take up those operations.
Bristol has limited ability to influence the
retention and development of the network and this is a major barrier
to implementing its LTP, particularly in developing what is the
main transport alternative to the car, and in helping employers
to develop effective travel plans.
THE REQUIREMENTS
ARISING FROM
AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT AREAS
As part of the dissemination work required through
Centre of Excellence status, DTLR has asked the City Council to
concentrate on issues of Air Quality. Having declared our Air
Quality Management Area, run an extensive consultation exercise
and now working on the AQ Action Plan (AQMA), we welcome any additional
powers. 82 per cent of respondents to the consultation said that
they would be prepared to accept limitations on their ability
to drive in the city centre if air quality and environment were
improved. We regard any additional statutory obligations here
as helpful and as further tools for Local Authorities to achieve
their LTP targets. The Select Committee may wish to consider encouraging
Government to give to those Local Authorities who have declared
their AQMAs additional funding for innovative transport measures
linked to those designated areas as indicated in the 2001 APR
guidance.
A number of innovative solutions will be required
if Air Quality Action Plans are to be effective, such as Low Emission
Zones and associated certification schemes, encouragement to vehicle
owners to retrofit emission controls, old vehicle scrappage schemes
and awareness campaigns. There will be significant economies of
scale if the Government is active in setting the national framework
for this work rather than allowing local authorities to "go
it alone". The current consultation by the DTLR on the case
for a national standard on LEZs is welcome and Bristol hopes to
assist this debate through its Centre of Excellence role. Bristol
is holding a seminar in March where these issues will be discussed
as part of our dissemination on Air Quality and reported back
to DTLR. Any further evidence collected by the Select Committee
on these national standards would be most welcome as input to
this seminar.
THE ROLE
OF CLEAR
ZONES
Bristol has already been designated a Clear
Zones Trailblazer and we welcome these initiatives. Similarly
with Low Emission Zones, we feel that they should be helpful in
achieving realistic local and national air quality targets.
SPEED REDUCTION
POLICIES
There is a growing recognition that emphasis
on engineering solutions will limit the pace of improvement and
therefore the ability to meet road casualty reduction targets.
Bristol welcomes the role of enforcement and education in achieving
a change in public attitudes towards speed and has joined the
Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership. Bristol would like
to see greater emphasis given to these aspects of implementation
during the course of the 10-Year plan.
| 
