APPENDIX 26
Memorandum submitted by the Local Government
Technical Advisers Group
TAG is a professional body representing over
300 senior technical officers of Local Authorities in Districts,
London Boroughs, Metropolitan Authorities and Unitary Councils
in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Responsibilities of our
representative Councils include highways, traffic, transportation
and parking and often town planning and economic development,
land drainage, coastal protection and environmental services often
including waste. They also often include buildings (on behalf
of other front line service departments) building design/architecture,
building control, cleansing, leisure and property assets.
TAG fully agrees and appreciates that good transport
and safe roads are essential for a healthy economy and society
for all the reasons set out in statements and policies from the
Department of Transport. However, within densely developed areas
of Britain, there is a real danger that the public's appetite
for evermore accessible transport is leading to hypermobility.
One of our overarching concerns raised by our technical officers
is the potential to inadvertently stimulate longer and longer
car journeys by members of the public and also work against other
government policies of improving the environment, reducing pollution
and helping the most disadvantaged sectors of the population.
It is quite evident from transport statistics
that lengths of our journey and our commuting times are increasing
year by year. This in part could be ascribed to the policies being
rolled out by authorities responsible for national highways and
indeed railways. Furthermore such authorities inevitably play
a more significant role in the strategic nature of these networks
and rather than looking after the local communities which live
adjacent to or sometimes on such networks.
TAG welcomes this opportunity to put evidence
in front of the House of Commons Select Committee. We would wish
to provide comment on two of the Agencies with which we have some
interactions.
DVLA
As the Committee will be aware, from our evidence
presented late last year, TAG represents the vast majority of
Parking Authorities throughout the UK. One of the largest issues
that we have currently is the implementation of the Cleaner Neighbourhoods
and Environment Act and the role that we can play in enforcement
in the street. One of the issues that we have most concern about
is the numbers of untaxed vehicles that are left "abandoned"
within our streets. Working with the DVLA, many of us have made
significant inroads into reducing this problem, but it is still
one that needs significant attention. We welcome the introduction
of automatic number plate recognition systems (ANPR) and how this
initiative is being used to reduce the numbers of untaxed and
uninsured vehicles. We also recognise the role that ANPR has played
in identifying potential criminals within our communities and
helping our role in terms of community safety and reducing car
crime.
The one area of concern that the Local Government
Community has in working with the DVLA is how much priority it
gives to removal of untaxed vehicles from our streets and about
the accuracy of records that are being maintained by the DVLA.
In our minds there should be greater emphasis put on ensuring
that records are up-to- date and accurate including the last recorded
keeper. We welcome the initiatives to put records online and this
has been extremely helpful within the Local Government Community.
In summary, our interface with the DVLA is relatively
limited, but is a positive relationship and we are pleased to
say that we believe they are accountable to the DfT and to the
public, our reservation however is that we together are not yet
able to meet public expectations in dealing with things like abandoned
cars and we welcome more priority being given to this particular
facet.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
From the public or indeed Local Authority or
TAG's viewpoint it is a little difficult to draw a clear boundary
where the Department of Transport's responsibilities end and where
the Highways Agency's responsibilities start. Furthermore it is
difficult to consider many of the questions asked by the House
of Commons Transport Committee without some consideration of policies
for Trunk roads and indeed transport in general.
TAG recognise the part that the Highways Agency
plays in managing the strategic network, but have concerns that
although this network carries a significant number of trips within
the UK, the vast majority of these start and finish on the network
managed by Local Highway Authorities, many of whom are represented
by TAG.
A fundamental issue that TAG has with the work
of the Highways Agency is whether the Agency understands the role
that it plays in the management of the wider network and its need
to interface with a wide stakeholder group particular of Local
Authorities managing Local Authority roads themselves or the functions
around such local authority's roads. The emphasis seems to be
very much on a highway engineering technical experts' hierarchy
where the Highways Agency's view is to consult with the County
Councils as the other primary authority with highway responsibilities.
They tend to relate less well with the Local Authorities in Metropolitan
areas and Unitaries with highway responsibilities and less well
still with the Shire Districts. The view seen by our authorities
sometimes appears that once the Highways Agency can gain support
from the County Councils then that is sufficient.
A question often posed amongst the membership
of TAG is "does the Highways Agency really understand its
purpose as the premier league Highway Authority?" Does it
really engage peers and others in the management of the wider
network? To us it appears that the focus is in the aims that have
been written by its experts and not what the public expectation
is for the management of highways and streets even if they are
at a strategic level. We would also ask that the Highways Agency
recognise responsibilities of other Authorities with which it
has to interface and how that interface can be managed in more
than just a pure technical management of the strategic road network.
Much of the network that is managed and operated
by the Highways Agency originates from the policies and implementation
of particular routes, by-passes and the like promoted by County
and Borough Councils. To this end much of the network stemmed
from a series of by-passes and short inter-urban links. The Highway
Agency's view now is to try and promote the strategic nature of
these routes, forgetting that many of them stem from needs demonstrated
for local by-passes and local routes. The question therefore has
to be asked as to whether or not the Highways Agency recognises
how these were built up and how this change in emphasis to longer
and more strategic journeys is actually having a part to play
in the overall lengthening of journeys both for commuting and
leisure trips within the UK.
Management of trunk roads is developed along
the lines of the experts' hierarchy where they can appear almost
to be aloof and possibly arrogant to many in the wider community.
The Highways Agency has significant resources not enjoyed elsewhere
and is happy to set standards rather than promote best practice.
This then influences the actions of Local Authorities and in many
case stems the use of initiative because the standard has been
set by a premier league authority. In terms of standard setting,
many of these seem to represent low value for money and the question
is: do the Highways Agency understand the real concept of value
for money in the same way as Local Government are required to
do?
The Highways Agency has a good understanding
of management of strategic traffic flows and in trying to reduce
congestion on a particular section of road, but tends to move
the problem on elsewhere. They still do not appear to have grasped
the fact that high capacity high speed roads "generate"
substantial extra traffic which cannot be accommodated on the
rest of the trunk road network let alone local authority roads.
Many of the trunk routes end on the periphery of urban areas or
in some cases trunk roads still pass through urban areas.
Many of my colleagues ask the question: does
the Highways Agency understand anything about the street management
or in general the relative responsibilities of how management
of the street, including functions like litter and parking, should
be properly managed? The interactions we have are not frequent
but appear to us to be an elitist organisation which is very research
focused and could be classed as lumbering and risk averse. There
are many more minor measures that local authorities would have
introduced long ago where the DfT/Highways Agency appear particularly
reticent. With an (unavoidably) overloaded network, effective
flow management should by now have included variable speed limits
on many critical motorways not just a section of the M25 near
Heathrow and the more recent M42 trial. The strategic approach
has also encouraged the Highways Agency to introduce ramp metering
on some junctions in busy urban areas as discussed below.
One of the questions posed in the paper put
out by the Select Committee is "how the Agencies contribute
to departmental objectives and policies?" It is quite clear
that the Highways Agency is very focused on the departmental objectives
set by its manager the DfT for its strategic road network. One
has to question how or whether this is very focused on motor vehicles
using a strategic network rather than sustainable transport. The
focus seems to be very much about keeping cars and lorries moving,
and questions have to be asked as to whether or not pedestrians
and cycles are given due consideration in terms of the overall
management of the network and the movement of people.
Issues around the questions of noise mitigation,
air quality and environmental objectives are those of the DfT
or the wider Government agenda. Given that the Government has
priority for all of these areas, it is a question of whether or
not the Highways Agency reflects the views of the Department for
Transport and not the Government as a whole. Responding to this
question, it is also a concern that it is departmental objectives
that the Highways Agency is accountable for and that there appears
to be little stakeholder engagement and local accountability.
It is accepted that the Highways Agency is ultimately
accountable to Ministers and not to the public at a local level.
Standards have to be set and this is accepted with the reservations
we have set out. However other standards appropriate to the local
communities or even to the local countryside through which these
roads are set are also appropriate. In terms of meeting Departmental
objectives and true transparency of the way trunk roads are managed
and delivered, the question has to be asked as to whether the
"targeted programme of improvements" would be funded
if these schemes had to be bid through the Local Transport Plan
process. It is noted that many of these will now fall within the
remit of the Regional Transport Boards and this is very welcome.
The Highways Agency deals very well with motorways
and high speed dual carriageway type roads and targets its maintenance
resources appropriately. The issue for Members of TAG is where
various trunk roads are at a lower standard and the Highways Agency
is less familiar with the maintenance requirements of single carriageway
and urban roads. We would question whether it therefore offers
value for money in anything other than the real strategic network
within the UK. Much of this comes back to the risk of averse nature
of the Highways Agency and that it can deal with strategic routes,
but is less familiar with the risks that management processes
within an urban area which is dealt with more often than not by
colleagues within TAG.
TAG welcomes the initiative set out in the Traffic
Management Act of 2004 and particularly of the Highways Agency
Traffic Officers. This initiative has been good and enabled Police
resources to be freed to deal with more important road traffic
policing matters. However TAG would like to make it known that
the travel information that is still provided by the Highways
Agency is still poor. Whilst Highway Agency traffic officers attend
incidents, this information does not appear to be ultimately transmitted
by the Highways Agency's own information systems, local radio
stations seem to pick up the information from the Police. Given
that incidents create most of the congestion we see on the strategic
road network, it is important that the Highways Agency focuses
on how it provides and disseminates traffic information to the
travelling public.
We note the Highways Agency is introducing ramp
metering on sections of its roads in urban areas in order to enable
traffic flows on the strategic network to be maintained. Whilst
we appreciate the technical reasoning behind this initiative,
we question whether or not it is not just placing undue stress
and congestion on the local road network. In reversing this thinking,
it may be possible for the Highways Agency to introduce ramp metering
to stop traffic entering local communities in causing congestion
in urban areas where people live, with consequent effects on health,
on holding the traffic in a congested flow on the strategic network
where it causes less of a problem to the health of the communities.
30 January 2006
| 
