Examination of Witnesses (Questions 172
- 179)
WEDNESDAY 19 APRIL 2006
DR KEVIN
AUSTIN, MS
ISABEL DEDRING
AND MR
MARK EVERS
Q172 Chairman: Good afternoon. Welcome
to the Committee. I am afraid in this room we are all rather separated
from each other but we are delighted that you are here to give
us evidence. We have seen the memorandum from the Mayor's office.
Perhaps, just to kick things off, you would like to give your
overall assessment of the Government's Climate Change Programme
Review and in particular how it addresses cutting carbon emissions
from transport.
Dr Austin: Perhaps I will start.
The document does show that achieving reductions in emissions
from transport in the short to medium term is going to be extremely
difficult. I think it highlights that even with all the proposed
measures in place CO2 emissions will still stay about
the same in 2010 as they were in 1990. We are pleased that there
is a clear commitment to reducing CO2 and it identifies
clear areas for attention but I think we would want to see a more
aggressive approach to encourage modal shift and to reduce the
carbon content of road transport fuels. In terms of the key areas
that they put forward, in terms of modal shift we are pleased
that the Government highlights investment in public transport
as a critical element in strategy. In London bus use has seen
a 40% increase in ridership and a 4% modal shift from cars to
buses as a result of that investment. Investment really does need
to continue, in particular in national rail which will see a significant
increase in passengers over the next 20 years and does need a
lot of investment. Mention is also made of the 20 million a year
rail freight grants. We are pleased that is in but, again, more
funding could be made available to encourage the further shift
of lorries off the roads. Mention is also made of investment in
travel demand management. Again, it is absolutely crucial in the
short-term to encourage a shift towards sustainable transport.
We are pleased that DfT have put forward 10 million over five
years but they certainly need to be ready to commit significant
amounts of funding once the demonstration towns have been completed
and go out and implement on a much larger scale. The Renewable
Transport Fuels Obligation is a positive step forward. Biofuels
account for 0.3% today and the target of 5% in 2010-11 is a step
forward but we would like to see longer term targets to encourage
a longer term commitment and potentially more challenging targets
over the longer term to ensure that the proportion of biofuels
increases steadily into the future. There is also the issue about
the use of biofuels for public transport and the potential to
have separate targets and we would like to see that because that
is an area where Government has a much greater amount of influence
compared with the private vehicles. Finally on that, developing
technology required to support alternatively fuelled vehicles
and the infrastructure required. On the issue of fuel efficiency
of vehicles, again it is a step forward that the Government have
reformed the company car tax, fuel benefit charge and the vehicle
excise duty related to CO2 emissions and also the recent
announcement to zero rate the A band cars is positive. However,
there is concern that the vehicle excise duty differential is
insufficient. For example, £215 for a diesel car at the highest
level is not so much different from some of the most fuel efficient
cars. We would like to see consideration of additional bands with
significantly higher rates of duty and potentially wider differentials
in the existing bands. We are also pleased that they are looking
at sustainable distribution because the area of freight driving
has the potential to reduce the amount of fuel used with better
training. Certainly the Government needs to help promote the schemes
and educate drivers to drive more efficiently. Transport for London
is currently developing a freight operator recognition system
which will do this and we are happy to share that information
with Government.
Q173 Chairman: That is helpful. Do
you want to put that in a specifically London context and say
how the GLA is tackling the question of cutting carbon emissions?
Dr Austin: Certainly. In terms
of the modal shift, I have mentioned the increased investment
in buses which has led to a 4% modal shift from cars to buses.
The additional investment and capacity increases in the Underground
will also see the same sort of growth. On the travel demand management
scheme that TfL has put forward, originally in 2005-06 they put
about £13.9 million towards this and this is going to be
doubled this year to £24.5 million and next year to £30
million. That will ramp up school travel plans, workplace travel
plans and personalised travel plans where you target individuals
to change their travel habits. We have also invested significant
amounts of additional money in cycling, both in terms of marketing,
advertising and training but also in terms of providing better
facilities, such as cycle lanes. We did a study about three or
four months ago and found that cycle lanes were the critical thing
to encourage non-cyclists to become cyclists. Once they start
to become cyclists they will continue and other issues will become
more important.
Ms Dedring: London as a purchaser
has a significant role to play. Certainly we are thinking about
how we can catalyse the development of markets by promising to
buy X volume of buses as hybrid buses. One of the points you have
made is how do we get to the 600 bus target. Just making an announcement
to the market that our intention is for the fleet to be hybrid
by a certain date, which is not something that we have done but
is something that we are considering, would have a significant
impact on giving a certain level of assurance to the market. That
is the kind of place where I think London can play a significant
role simply because of the volume of purchasing that it does.
In addition, it can do that in conjunction with other European
cities. There you start to get into the potential of getting some
of the prices down for something like hydrogen fuel cell technology.
One of the counter-arguments that I have heard is that London
is different because it is more CO2 efficient, because
of the nature of the density of the population and the nature
of the activity. I guess one of the things that is worth mentioning
is that outer London is very much like a lot of suburban areas
in the UK so London's experience in the suburban areas is highly
relevant to other parts of the UK, so we do not want to throw
the baby out with the bathwater when we say "London is not
relevant for a Leeds or a Bristol".
The Committee suspended from 2.59pm to
3.12pm for a division in the House.
Chairman: We will move on to buses, I
think.
Q174 Colin Challen: Bus use in London
has increased greatly in recent years, whilst in the rest of the
country it has diminished greatly it is true to say. What do you
think are the most important features of London's success in promoting
bus use?
Dr Austin: I think there are a
number. Firstly, there is the investment. Significant investment
has gone in to increase the bus services in London. There has
been a 26% increase in services so people know that buses will
come along very soon, they will not have to wait so long. Allied
to that there have also been significant improvements in bus reliability,
partly as a result of things like the Congestion Charge, which
has freed up traffic on central London's roads to enable buses
to be more reliable, and partly to do with operating practices,
recruitment of drivers, et cetera. There has also been a significant
improvement in the quality of buses over the last five years.
I think the average age of buses is about half what it was in
2000 and all the buses have CCTV and are wheelchair accessible.
The other issue is fares. At the moment average fares on buses
is the same as it was five years ago. Allied to that there have
been policies to encourage specific groups to travel free, for
example free travel for under-16s on buses came into force from
last September. A recent survey showed that about 56% of those
11-15 year olds questioned were travelling less by car as a result
of that policy. There has also been advertising, "You are
better off by bus", so that has put the message that travel
by bus is far better than it was and it is an acceptable way to
travel around London. I know many people who five years ago would
never use a bus who are now using it regularly and finding it
a fantastic way to get around.
Q175 Colin Challen: Can I just follow
up on the issue of free travel. This April we have seen the introduction
of free travel for pensioners and I assume that operates in London
in a similar way as it would in the rest of the country. Does
offering these free travel policies increase capacity or does
it simply mean that bus companies reap a greater reward in filling
up existing capacity?
Dr Austin: It will do two things.
One, bus companies will reap greater rewards as more people travel
on buses and they are able to obtain income from that. Secondly,
it is a question of whether it will encourage some people who
previously would use their car for certain trips who now find
it just as easy and cheaper to use the bus. Londoners have had
free fares for disabled and elderly people for a number of years,
so the recent trend is difficult to establish in London.
Q176 Colin Challen: How do the bus
providers measure the benefits of this? Do you have to register
each journey or is it simply a subsidy to the providers?
Dr Austin: In London it is based
on the journeys. For example, all will have Oyster Cards so every
time they go on and click their Oyster Card you know that a trip
has been made so you are able to identify the number of trips.
Outside London I assume the bus driver will press a button to
say that is a concessionary fare and at the end of the month or
whatever they will be able to total up the number of concessionary
fares and presumably that will be checked by surveys to ensure
that the drivers are not pressing the button hundreds of times
more than they should.
Q177 Emily Thornberry: Can I ask
a question about the younger generation. Another thing that London
does which is really innovatory is that we have got free bus travel
for youngsters, so the idea is children get used to always travelling
on the buses and it is cheaper for the parents to go out on a
day trip on the bus because they do not have to pay anything for
the children. You still have to pay for the Tube but kids can
travel free on the bus. That is right, is it not?
Dr Austin: Under-11s can travel
free now on the Tube.
Ms Dedring: The argument is the
incremental cost effectively is zero because these are groups
that tend to travel in the off-peak and because of that we would
not be carrying very many people at that time anyway so there
is a lot of spare capacity on the bus network, just as with the
electricity industry, so you may as well get people on the bus
and there is a perceived benefit to them but not a great cost
to us since the load factors on the buses at that time are quite
low.
Q178 Emily Thornberry: Except you
can travel free to school and that is obviously at peak times
but that is clearly an advantage in itself to stop people travelling
in cars.
Ms Dedring: Exactly. It is the
lesser of two evils.
Q179 Colin Challen: In the design
of routes, are you able to use the free travel issue as a lever
with bus providers to get routes laid on where previously they
would not have looked at them as a commercial prospect?
Dr Austin: In London we regularly
monitor the routes anyway and if there are requirements to increase
capacity as a result of additional children going on the buses,
for example, then additional buses are laid on. The types of trips
for children and others will also be considered as part of the
overall planning process. For example, if it is shown that a large
number of people want to travel from A to C and they have got
to go via B or whatever then that can be considered and adjusted
accordingly if there is a case for it.
| 
