1 Introduction
1. In May 2000 the Environment, Transport, and the
Regional Affairs Committee, on which many of us served, reported
on Light Rapid Transit Systems.[1]
While the report concluded that "The Government should adopt
a "horses for courses" approach to ensure that investment
is directed to the modes of transport which is best suited to
local conditions and passenger flows",[2]
it was also clear that Light Rapid Transit (LRT) was likely to
tempt motorists out of their cars. The Committee noted:
If the Government is serious about enabling LRT
to play its full role in tackling traffic congestion, it must
go beyond statements of support and be prepared to contribute
public funds to projects which are unable to cover all of their
costs through fare revenues, but which reduce congestion, bring
environmental improvements and can stimulate economic development.
In that respect its recent announcements about the Sunderland
Metro Extension, Manchester Metrolink, Nottingham Express Transit
and Docklands Light Railway have been most welcome, and we look
forward to similarly positive decisions in future.[3]
2. We identified "Integrated Transport"
as a subject for inquiry last summer, but have only been able
to turn to it recently. We decided to open this inquiry with an
investigation into Light Rail and Modern Trams[4]
because it is clear that the optimism of 2000 is no longer appropriate.
Funding for the Manchester Metrolink, Leeds Supertram and the
South Hampshire Rapid Transit has been withdrawn by the Department
for Transport, which appears to have developed a preference for
bus over rail-based schemes. A National Audit Office Report on
Improving Public Transport in England through Light Rail
found that light rail had improved the quality and choice of
public transport, and departmental expenditure had been kept within
budget, but it also considered:
- Passenger numbers, and therefore
passenger benefits, had been lower than expected;
- Light rail systems were not fully integrated
with other forms of public transport;
- Light rail had had a limited impact on road congestion,
pollution and road accidents;
- It was not clear what impact light rail has had
on regeneration and social exclusion.[5]
We felt we needed to find out whether the problems
were intrinsic to light rail as a mode of transport, or had been
caused by past mistakes on the part of government, promoters and
operators. Essentially, does light rail have a future in the United
Kingdom?
3. Accordingly we called for evidence on the following
points:
- The costs and benefits of light
rail;
- What light rail systems need to be successful;
- How effectively is light rail used as part of
an integrated transport system;
- Barriers to the development of light rail;
- The effect of different financing arrangements
(public/private) on the overall cost of light rail systems;
- The practicality of alternatives to light rail,
such as increased investment in buses.
Since it was possible that there would be a May election,
we gave respondents only four weeks to reply. Even so we received
nearly 100 memoranda: light rail is clearly considered important.
4. Many of the memoranda related to personal experience
of two schemes: the Manchester Metrolink and the Nottingham Express
Transit (NET). We have read these submissions, and have drawn
upon them in our report, but to save space and money we have not
printed them unless they explicitly addressed the questions in
our call for evidence. Some raised particular questions about
the proposed route extensions to the NET. We are not qualified
to comment on such local matters, but appreciate these insights
into the views of those affected. We note that the representations
from Nottingham, where the tram system is relatively new, tended
to raise concerns about noise, safety and the routes of possible
extensions, whereas those from Manchester, where the Metrolink
has been open since 1992, were strongly in support of light rail.
5. The limited time available to us meant we had
to limit our oral evidence; we heard from the National Audit Office;
AEA Technology (Rail), a participant in the Light Rail Thematic
Network, Tramtrack Croydon, Transport for London, Nottingham City
and County Councils, Mr Tony McNulty MP, the Minister of State
at the Department for Transport, Merseytravel, Manchester City
Council, the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities and
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority and Executive,
and JM Parry and Associates and Holdfast Carpet Track. We are
grateful to all those who gave evidence, both written and oral.
1 Eighth Report of Session 1999-2000, HC 153 Back
2
HC (1999-2000) 153, para 56 Back
3
HC (1999-2000) 153, para 57 Back
4
"light rail" covers all light rail systems, including
metro like systems with no on street running; trams typically
have on street running, although they may use segregated track
for part of their route. Back
5
Improving Public Transport in England through Light Rail,
Report By The Comptroller And Auditor General, HC 518 Session
2003-2004: 23 April 2004 Back
|
