|
Memorandum from Sustrans
1. Introduction. 1.1. This consultation response from Sustrans, the
1.2. In summary Sustrans' key messages are; · That active modes of travel, walking and cycling, alongside public transport, need to be prioritised over use of private motor vehicles as the key mode of transport. · Increased levels of walking and cycling combined with an equivalent reduction in car usage will provide significant, proven environmental, economic, social and health related benefits. · These benefits need to be prioritised within the policies of the Regional Transport Strategy, as well as its delivery. · That regional bodies such as SW Councils, GOSW and the SW Regional Development Agency need to be strong advocates for ensuring a sustainable Regional Transport Strategy is delivered and implemented, with a clear focus on active travel and public transport. This is a role that these bodies have to date been ineffective in delivering.
2. Whether transport provision in the south west is adequate to meet the demands placed upon the region. 2.1. The key transport demands faced by the south west relate to economic prosperity of the region, climate change and carbon emissions, health and wellbeing, and congestion in urban centres throughout the region.
2.2. We know that according to 'The Foresight Tackling Obesities: Future Choices Project' the obesity epidemic will cost the UK over £50 billion per annum as of 2050; that according to the Eddington Transport Study, "by 2025, without action, there will be a 31 per cent increase in road traffic, 30 per cent increase in congestion on the roads and [only] a 4 per cent decrease in carbon dioxide emissions"
2.3. At present the transport provision in the south west does not effectively meet the necessity to increase use of the active travel modes of walking and cycling, in combination with public transport and this lack of provision, notably within the region's urban centres needs to be addressed within the Regional Transport Strategy. This can be achieved through a wide ranging programme including walking and cycling infrastructure and network development, behavioural change programmes, and marketing activities.
3. What the priorities should be for improvement. 3.1. The Regional Transport Strategy must create the conditions that allow people to make choices to travel that have health, social, environmental and economic benefits, in line with cross departmental priorities.
3.2. Sustrans is a co-signatory with 93 other organisations that calls on all decision makers from a national down to local level to act now to bring about a population-wide shift from sedentary travel to walking and cycling by: · set ambitious targets for a growth in walking and cycling - and ensure they are met: publish a coherent strategy for growth in walking and cycling, based on experience of what works; monitor and performance-manage progress; give transport departments a clear public health objective, and make clear the roles of other government departments and other partners · invest at a realistic level: commit 10% of transport budgets to walking and cycling immediately, and in future ensure that transport funds are allocated proportionate to the new, ambitious target levels · create safe, attractive walking and cycling conditions, with coherent high quality networks linking all everyday destinations, so that walking and cycling are faster and more convenient than motor travel, backed up by individualised travel marketing, school and workplace travel plans, practical walking promotion programmes and high quality cycle training · make 20mph or lower speed limits the norm for residential streets and those used by shoppers, tourists and others, close to schools or public buildings, or important for walking and cycling or children's play. In urban areas only the busiest strategic traffic routes should now qualify for higher speed limits · tackle bad driving, through improved driver training and awareness campaigns, backed by stronger and better enforced traffic laws · 'health check' every transport and land use decision, focusing on the potential impact on levels of walking and cycling and other aspects of health; invest public money to the benefit of public health, and reject proposals whose impact on walking and cycling will not be positive.
3.3. These are the priorities that the Regional Transport Strategy should focus on, with a particular emphasis on the urban centres and growth points in the region, where such active travel modes and public transport are prioritised over private car use.
3.4. This urban focus should however not be to the cost of the large rural population in the south west who should be able to access such provision wherever possible.
4. How these priorities should be reflected in the upcoming Regional Transport Strategy. 4.1. The above priorities should clearly be reflected in the Regional Transport Strategy through a clear prioritisation process whereby walking, cycling and public transport are prioritised over use of the private car given the benefits that such modes of transport provide meet the key demands the region faces, and which were outlined above. These priorities should also contain clear targets for increase in walking and cycling trips and reduction in car journeys and congestion.
4.2. To date there also appears to have been a lack of reflection of cross departmental policy, and the Government's own Local Carbon Transport Strategy in the allocation of Regional Funding Allocation for transport with over 60% of RFA funds allocated to road schemes despite the implications for carbon emissions, health benefits and severance of communities. It is therefore essential that the agreed priorities within the Regional Transport Strategy are accurately reflected within funding programmes such as the RFA and local transport plans.
5. What the costs of these improvements would be and whether the region can afford them. 5.1. Making improvements to walking and cycling networks and of behavioural programmes to encourage increased uptake of walking, cycling and public transport are highly cost efficient, providing significantly better cost benefit ratios than road building schemes.
5.2. For instance the implementation of Sustrans' individualised travel
marketing programme, TravelSmart, in a town of 60,000 people (the equivalent of
5.3. Furthermore Sustrans has carried out research with the Universities of Bolton and Leeds which shows a typical benefit to cost ratio of 20:1 compared to a typical ration of 3:1 for other transport schemes such as road or rail (see http://www.sustrans.org.uk/resources/research-and-monitoring/economic-appraisal-of-cycling-and-walking-schemes for details).
5.4. The above demonstrates the value of investment in walking and cycling schemes and behavioural programmes in comparison to other forms of transport investment.
6. Whether the current arrangements for prioritising, approving and funding infrastructure projects are effective and appropriate. 6.1. Sustrans is concerned that the current regional structures and processes are insufficiently transparent and accountable, and are not well suited to delivering active sustainable travel infrastructure in the South West. The second round of the Regional Funding Advice process - which encourages local authorities to compete to secure funds for local schemes rather than consider strategic priorities on a regional basis - has dominated by road building accounting for over 60% of funding bids. There is some support for public transport, but cycling and walking are not considered part of strategic regional transport infrastructure as has happened elsewhere, despite their importance in enabling door-to-door journeys and work travel.
6.2. There is a significant mismatch between regional transport plans and policies and wider policy goals relating to health, physical activity and climate change, in particular the government's carbon reduction strategy yesterday. Improving conditions for cycling and walking contributes to many objectives which extend beyond transport issues, and we would like to see this recognised clearly in the Regional Transport Strategy, and this in turn should be reflected in regional priorities within RFA, DaSTS implementation, local transport plans, community strategies, LAAs and other delivery programmes. As an outcome of this, the test of whether the arrangements are delivering active, low carbon travel choices at the regional level.
7. Whether the region is doing enough to promote environmentally friendly transport. 7.1. It is clear from the
7.2. Regional strategies also focus the inter and intra regional connectivity, focussing on longer journeys and largely on the perceived need to improve road links within the region and also out to the West Midlands, south east and London. This focus and lack of prioritisation of changing local journeys in urban centres has led to the region doing very little to promote environmentally friendly transport.
7.3. However, the select committee should in Sustrans' view, not only consider the environmental credentials of the transport system in the SW but should also consider the health impacts of transport, issues of noise, severance and lack of social cohesion that traffic flows have on communities, and issues of social justice caused by a focus on car based transport where many poorer individuals and families rely on public transport, walking and cycling as their modes of transport.
8. The role and effectiveness of regional bodies, such as the Regional Development Agency and South West Councils, in identifying and addressing transport issues. 8.1. As commented previously regional strategies to date have a significant emphasis on inter and intra regional transport links focussing on long distance travel and to date this appears to have directed the role and effectiveness of regional bodies. There has to date been very limited interest in active travel from South West Councils (as the Regional Assembly) and limited support from the Regional Development Agency at a level whereby walking and cycling are considered as an integral part of an integrated transport system. To date cycling appears to have been regarded by SWRDA as a tourist activity and its role beside walking and public transport within an integrated transport system has been underestimated, perhaps due to a lack of assessment of the costs, benefits and scale of modal shift that can be achieved and the impact this can have from economic, congestion, health, social and environmental perspectives.
8.2. We believe these regional bodies need to be much greater advocates of active travel and public transport, showing greater commitment to delivery of improvements in these modes of transport and working strongly with stakeholders and partners to effect delivery throughout the region.
9. The role and effectiveness of the Government Office for the South West in delivering national transport policy within the region. 9.1. The GOSW transport team need to play a key role in transforming transport policy and delivery of that policy in the south west. This policy transformation needs to take full account of the key demands facing the south west which we have outlined above and which are cross departmental in their nature.
9.2. At present the GOSW transport team appear unwilling to engage with other Government departments namely Department for Health and regard transport as a means of achieving economic gain with no cross reference across departmental agendas (which is on of their key roles). In assessing RFA proposals there appears to be a direct conflict between RFA schemes and Government climate change targets and policies. Much clearer, stronger leadership from GOSW is required with a cross departmental approach being taken. Decisions taken need to be informed by facts which does not appear to be the case at present as road building schemes, with their poor value for money return and negative health and environmental impacts have been preferentially treated despite clear Government policy.
10. The ability of the Government to influence private sector transport providers. 10.1. As experts in the active travel modes of walking and cycling this question falls outside of Sustrans' core remit and expertise.
|