Examination of Witness (Questions 120-124)
Wednesday 10 November 2004
Mr David Rowlands
Q120 Mr Bacon: I was listening with interest
to your answer to Mr Williams' question about what would happen
if things failed, and the rapid fluency of your last answer was
in marked contrast to your answer to him when I counted seven
"um's" and "er's" before you got to your first
comma. It sounded to me like you were saying that the public sector
might get something back on the basis of little more than a meander
down Speculation Boulevard.
Mr Rowlands: Oh no. It is my fault
then if I did not express myself properly.
Q121 Mr Bacon: At least you did not "um"
and "er" between the "oh" and the "no",
but you did say that you did not even know what was in the contract
between the promoters and the banks. If that is the case how can
you possibly know whether or not the public sector is going to
get something back from them?
Mr Rowlands: What I think I said
was that we did not know what was in the contracting arrangements
between the concessionaire and their banks, and there is no reason
why we should. I hope I said, and if I did not perhaps I should
try and say it more explicitly, that in the case of all of these
privately financed light rail schemes there are sufficient arrangements
in place to ensure that in the event that the concessionaire exits
the contract the assets return to the promoter so that the light
rail scheme goes on.
Q122 Mr Bacon: That sounds a lot more
definitive.
Mr Rowlands: And with no "um's"
and "er's" either.
Q123 Mr Jenkins: Can you explain this
to me please? If you have a dense population in the city centre
or the town centre, you could probably have about 40,000 people
in a square mile of the town centre. These people tend to live
there, work there, shop there, eat there, go to the cinema there,
and that would be 10% of the population of a town like Grenoble.
Why would they want a tram ride? A high population in the centre
would not create extra passengers surely? It is the ones on the
periphery that are going to come in to work on a park-and-ride
system from where they live. Can you explain why I am wrong on
those figures?
Mr Rowlands: No, I do not think
you are. There is a danger in trying to lay down a general, "This
is the answer in terms of all light rail schemes". The successful
scheme I think will vary. The original Manchester Phase 1, which
beat its traffic forecasts, did not have any park-and-ride sites
because it did not need them because it was running from the suburbs
into the centre of town. I have not managed to do a trailer which
I thought someone might ask a question on. Can I do it anyway
because in part it is an answer to your question? What about small
areas which cannot sustain a quite expensive but conventional
light rail system? What about something that is smaller and costs
less? The Report touches on one or two so-called ultra light rail
schemes which are much less expensive, smaller cars dealing with
smaller numbers of people, and one of the complaints has been
that they are too cheap to get through the gateway, through our
local transport capital schemes because there is a floor. It has
to cost more than five million at the moment to get funded by
the department. What we will be doing, in the jargon, for the
next generation of local transport plans which will run from April
2006 is lowering the barrier and we are going to specifically
say that we are prepared to talk to a local authority about a
pilot or a demonstration scheme and we will appraise it on that
basis so that we will look at it as a pilot or demonstration and
that can be used to show that these ultra light tram schemes work
and for other promoters to go and look at.
Mr Jenkins: I would be very interested
in that[2].
You can contact me on that I would be very grateful.
Q124 Chairman: Mr Rowlands, you have
been with the Department for Transport for a long time, have you
not, since 1980? Mr Steinberg was in short trousers then. Let
your hair down a bit. Do you ever meet your opposite number in
France? We have heard the familiar excuse that of course France
is a much less highly populated country with broad avenues and
all the rest of it. You must talk to your French colleagues. Why
have they been so spectacularly more successful in their transport
infrastructure there than we are here?
Mr Rowlands: I was in Paris two
or three Fridays ago for a day-long meeting of secretaries-general,
as we get called, so it was me and my opposite numbers in France,
the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany as an opportunity to compare
notes. This arrangement has only been in place for 12 months.
We have not yet talked light rail schemes but we have begun to
talk heavy rail, which is a problem everywhere, I tell you. You
are quite right and it is one I can certainly pursue. Why are
they more successful? I will not revisit the earlier conversation
and I will stop talking about density patterns. It really is important;
we have got to integrate this problem with the local bus service,
see Nottingham, and it really is important that you get proper
through-ticketing arrangements. There is actually a power in the
2000 Transport Act for local authorities to put in place a ticketing
scheme with their local bus companies. It is not yet used as far
as I know and, again, in looking at fresh proposals they are going
to have to show us how they integrate it, how they through-ticket
it, how, if they need to, they are putting in place the park-and-ride
system and, if they need to as well, a demand restraint for motor
cars. I do genuinely believe that Nottingham shows us a successful
way forward. Even the dummies in the Department for Transport
cannot but notice the success and try and build on it.
Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr Rowlands,
for dealing in a very relaxed and charming style with what is
a very difficult Report for you because clearly in the brave new
world of the 10-Year Plan for Transport 2000 there were promises
of 25 new lines built by 2010 and it is nowhere near realisation.
There has obviously been the lack of a spirit of evaluation, so
we shall return to this in our report. In the meantime we are
very grateful to you.
2 Note by witness: Our guidance for local authorities
on developing their next round of Local Transport Plans was published
today (8 December 2004) on the department's website at www.dft.gov.uk
and this provides advice at paragraph 4.46 about arrangements
for funding pilot and demonstration schemes of innovative modes.
Copies of the guidance are now available in the House. Back
| 
