Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-79)
MR ARCHIE
ROBERTSON OBE, HIGHWAYS
AGENCY
8 DECEMBER 2004
Q60 Mr Davidson: There is a fair amount
of criticism of your organisation in this report. Do you accept
the general thrust of what has been said?
Mr Robertson: Yes, I do. I have
accepted this report and there are things that we need to do to
be clear.
Q61 Mr Davidson: I am just wondering
to what extent you accept the issue about the agency being risk-averse
and clearly in need of cultural change. I wonder, if that was
accepted, what you have set in train to actually change the culture
of this organisation.
Mr Robertson: What we have been
discussing, without using the expression "risk-averse",
is exactly that, which is a different culture between, let us
say, the Dutch and the one that has been used here on ramp metering.
I think there is an element of unwillingness to try out the novel
thing in government, and I take the responsibility for pushing
that forward in the bit of the organisation that I am responsible
for.
Q62 Mr Davidson: What I actually asked
you was what you had done to change it. I understand you have
analysed the problem correctly. What I am asking is what have
you done since you arrived to change the culture?
Mr Robertson: What we have done
since I arrived is roll out the traffic officer service, which
is a completely new approach to traffic management.
Q63 Mr Davidson: That is an action, in
a sense. That does not necessarily change the culture. To some
extent it changes by example, but that in itself will not change
the culture. That could just simply be another arm of the organisation
with the same risk-averse, stuck-in-the-mud culture that you have
had up to now. What have you done to change the culture?
Mr Robertson: We have a new finance
director, who is a professional, to help us make our financial
decisions. I have appointed an information director . . .
Q64 Mr Davidson: He could be just as
bad as the previous one. I understand to some extent that changing
the personnel is helpful but it is not in itself changing the
culture.
Mr Robertson: If you let me finish,
there are a number of personnel changes. There is an organisational
change within the organisation in terms of focus. The people who
are currently described as the traffic operations people, who
manage the maintenance contracts, will in future have accountability
for the performance of the bits of road that they are responsible
for, which does not exist now. That is a corporate thing, and
so it is everybody's and nobody's at the same time. I want to
get down and will get down to people being accountable for the
congestion and for the safety performance of the particular bit
of road that they are earmarked to take care of. In addition to
that, we are about to launch a culture document by which I explain
the way in which I expect people to conduct themselves and to
innovate within the organisation. It happens to be called "Customers
First", but that is what it is about.
Q65 Mr Davidson: That is helpful. Do
we take it then that you would expect to have some sort of evidence
of the organisation being less cautious, less risk-averse, within
a certain period, and would there be ways in which that would
manifest itself?
Mr Robertson: What is really important
is that it manifests itself in tackling congestion and improving
safety, so it must manifest in the outcomes.
Q66 Mr Davidson: Not necessarily, because
anybody will argue that the organisation is continuing to have
the same aims, and in the sense of being more willing to take
risks, being more responsive than it has been up to now, being
more willing to look at examples of what has happened abroad,
how do we know within, say, a couple of years or so if the NAO
look at you that the culture of the organisation has changed?
We have all had a bit of fun and we could continue taking pot-shots
at you all afternoon, because it is so easy. That is unfortunate.
Mr Robertson: I do not think you
have a "before" and "after" perspective that
would make it easy. One of the things I notice the agency is criticised
for is not having a good enough "before" position, but
I would have thought that in two years' time, if you were talking
to our people, you would be clearer about what got them going,
and you would hear them getting going about the sorts of things
that we need to have, which is actively taking steps, innovative
or whatever, to provide a better service to people who use the
roads.
Mr Davidson: As long as I am convinced
that you have a perspective that is going to change the culture,
and I recognise the joys sometimes of personnel changes in new
circumstances. Can I ask you about one of the references in the
document about driver behaviour in England as being particularly
difficult in some way? I have always found some difficulty with
the English in general, and I am sure you have, but why are they
particularly bad drivers or difficult to manage?
Chairman: This may be in danger of being
a racist remark, and I have to rule it out of order.
Q67 Mr Davidson: There is reference in
here where you have referred to driver behaviour in England as
being particularly challenging. I am not quite sure why that is,
whether it is genetic, historical, or whether it is just an excuse.
Mr Robertson: I do not think I
find driver behaviour in England particularly challenging. What
we need to take account of is the fact that it is different everywhere,
and it reflects all sorts of historical factors, but not the one,
Chairman, that you might be worried about. It is in the way that
we pass on information to each other, and it is what my son picks
up about driving behaviour watching me doing my driving. All of
those things are very important in driver behaviour, because of
course, once you have passed your test, you are then a driver
and you do not need to be retested.
Q68 Mr Davidson: If you say driver behaviour
in England is different, but no more difficult than elsewhere,
then presumably there are a whole number of things that you could
have learned from overseas that for some reason you have not picked
up. Again, maybe if it is just a question of culture, you are
on the way to resolving that. Using a particular example, the
point that has been made before about the anti-social behaviour
of the freight transport industry in terms of the clear way in
which the structure that they have encourages the sort of behaviour
by their drivers that results in them running parallel up hills
and all the rest of it. You are considering experiments now to
deal with that, but why do you think it has taken so long for
something like that to be trialed? Is it because you are bullied
unduly by the Freight Transport Association?
Mr Robertson: It is because the
Highways Agency, whatever you may have perceived it to be before,
did not have a network management role until about 18 months ago.
So its job when it was created in 1994 was to build and maintain
highways. Its role has changed over its short 10-year history,
has expanded in fact; nothing has been given away. It has expanded
to include providing information and traffic management, and is
now, in the condition we will be as we move into the next Spending
Review period, beginning to think of itself as somebody who provides
journeys, not roads.
Q69 Mr Davidson: There is mention made
in the report of the difficulty of getting the public to accept
new ideas, and you have experienced that in governmental and public
service life. The suggestion is that you have been a bit slow
in picking up examples from overseas again about how to persuade
drivers to behave differently, how to persuade them to accept
new methods of running the roads. What confidence can we have
that you have learned that lesson and there will be some new pattern
of behaviour into operation within a reasonable period?
Mr Robertson: I do not actually
think the organisation has any shortcomings in terms of looking
at techniques that other people use in other countries. I think
where we need to improve is in the way we deploy those here, and
that is what counts. People are always anxious to see how others
do things, but if you look at it and you do not do something about
it, it is all rather wasted effort, and that is what I want to
harness.
Q70 Mr Davidson: Do you think the difficulties
are exacerbated by the extent to which organisations like the
AA and the RAC appear to be reactionary in lots of ways?
Mr Robertson: We have had our
moments, and I think in some areas they are right. For example,
we share the role of responsibility for people on the highway
and the hard shoulder, doing jobs to rescue and take care of people
and, as I have said already, you really cannot mess about when
it comes to that. The AA and the RAC have been concerned that
the development of our traffic officer role in particular is something
that will undermine the commercial service that they provide for
their customers. I do not believe that is the case. There has
been discussion in the House about this as well, because once
somebody is on the hard shoulder, then I am happy for the AA and
the RAC to take over, provided they do not hang about in getting
there, because the hard shoulder is a dangerous place.
Q71 Mr Davidson: We should not be taking
their commercial interest into account. That is a clear case of
a vested interest for their own revenue stream, is it not?
Mr Robertson: They do provide
a valuable contribution to what happens on the highway and I want
that contribution to continue and be enhanced, but we do have
changes to make.
Q72 Mr Davidson: Finally, in terms of
people hogging the middle lane, which is another road issue like
the question of the lorries running parallel, is that something
that you will have a degree of responsibility for as well?
Mr Robertson: One of our recent
initiatives has been to run a short trial on our variable message
signs on the period when they are not required to deal with accidents
or incidents. We ran a short "Don't hog the middle lane"
trial, largely in the north-west, because it was easier to evaluate
there. For those who were exposed to the trial, there was a fantastic
popular reaction to it, people saying "Why didn't you do
that before? We get so frustrated with these people that we can't
get past." In terms of the trial, we have yet to see the
properly evaluated before and after results. There was some short-term
benefit, but we have not yet got to the point of saying this is
the way to get people back into the inside lane. There was not
sufficient change on that trial, but it was very encouraging and
we will work further on it.
Q73 Mr Davidson: I have the impression
that those who drive in the middle of the road do not bother to
look at the signs either, and therefore it is not necessarily
appealing to those who ought to be influenced.
Mr Robertson: What is definitely
the case is that some people did see the sign and change their
behaviour—not as many as we might have liked.
Mr Davidson: This we can hope for, I
suppose.
Q74 Mr Bacon: I am sorely tempted not
to flog this horse any more, but my temptation is not as strong
as the temptation to continue asking questions about it. Apart
from the fact that when your agency failed to grit the M11 I was
in that 30-mile queue, I do not think there is any single issue
that most users of major highways and motorways find quite so
frustrating. I am sorry for being late. I had another Select Committee.
I understand members have already asked about this. I take it
you are talking about three-lane motorways, where the middle lane
is being hogged by a truck. Is that what you are talking about?
Mr Robertson: Yes.
Q75 Mr Bacon: There are also two-lane
motorways, and that is in my own personal experience much more
serious, two-lane motorways where trucks occupy the left-hand
lane and the right-hand lane, and if I am chugging along coming
into London on the M11, I frequently find suddenly, for no obvious
reason, I am doing 54 miles an hour or 56 miles an hour instead
of the speed I was previously going at, and I look ahead, and
sure enough, there is a truck. My first question is how long have
you been looking at this problem?
Mr Robertson: There are a number
of issues there. I think you did miss some of the conversation
earlier.
Q76 Mr Bacon: Yes, and I apologise for
that. I have been looking at it for three and a half years, every
week, on the M11. How long have you been looking at it as the
Highways Agency?
Mr Robertson: We have only been
looking at it in the last few months seriously, although we have
been aware that others overseas have been doing it, and we have
been watching how they have been getting on. There are two aspects
to this. One is any suggestion of lorries deliberately doing that
is a matter of enforcement for the police.
Q77 Mr Bacon: Sorry? Deliberately doing
what? Could you clarify?
Mr Robertson: Where two trucks
are riding parallel to each other.
Q78 Mr Bacon: Yes. When you say deliberately,
as if you could accidentally be in the right-hand lane, it suggests
the lorry driver is not in control of his vehicle. That is not
what you are suggesting, is it?
Mr Robertson: This is a point
that was raised by somebody else earlier, that sometimes it appeared
to be the case that two trucks were trying to travel . . .
Q79 Mr Bacon: I am not suggesting that
they are chatting, but that the lorry is not powerful enough to
get past. That is my sense.
Mr Robertson: The issue is particularly
acute on hills, which is where we now have a programme of introducing
crawler lanes, some of which you will see on the M25, and on other
parts of the network, some of which we are about to put in on
the M5 around the south of Bristol near the bridge.
| 
