Written evidence from the Transport Research
Laboratory (TRL) (TE 09)
Have the UK's economic conditions materially changed
since the Eddington Transport Study and, if so, does this affect
the relationship between transport spending and UK economic growth?
1. While the economic climate has changed,
there is no evidence to suggest that the underlying relationships
are any different. Transport investment needs to continue to support
economic development, and it can be argued that for the required
economic growth and development to be sustained to the necessary
level transport investment needs to keep pace. There is a strong
case for no diminution of investment, although there should be
some reassessment of investment priorities; the current priorities
may be correct, but that position should be tested.
What type of transport spending should be prioritised,
in the context of an overall spending reduction, in order best
to support regional and national economic growth?
2. For roads, the biggest transport issue,
related directly to the performance of the network and its ability
to support economic growth, is the lack of predictability of travel
times and the reliability of the road network. Intelligent Transport
can substantially improve the efficiency of all parts of our transport
system, while at the same time saving money, improving safety
and contributing to carbon reductions. Intelligent Transport Systems
(ITS) are already delivering significant benefits but they become
even more attractive in times of budget restriction, offering
"more for less" when compared with conventional transport
solutions. Information and communication technologies can be applied
to various modes of transport, in order to make them more efficient
while minimising the negative effects on health, nature, the economy
and quality of life. There are a number of technologies that are
proven to address one or more transport challenges without the
need for expensive new-built infrastructure. By employing information
and telecommunication technologies, congestion can be eased, road
safety improved and the environmental impact of transport can
be reduced in times of financial constraint.
3. ITS is therefore a priority for investment:
at a time when money is limited, technology can deliver consistent
journey times, information services and informed demand management.
Key application areas include urban traffic management and control,
real-time travel information, managed motorways, adaptive traffic
signal control, traffic management at roadworks, fleet management,
travel planning, speed adaptation, in-vehicle safety devices,
average speed cameras and congestion charging
How should the balance between revenue and capital
expenditure be altered?
4. One of the key barriers to the effective
delivery of transport schemes is the mismatched availability of
capital and revenue funding at all levels of government, but particularly
at the local authority level. Increases in capital funding have
outstripped increases in revenue funding, which raises issues
over how the operation, servicing and maintenance of new capital
assets will be funded.
5. This issue has been widely discussed
and documented. The availability of capital can be sufficient
to fund transport projects, but there can be issues over how the
operation, servicing and maintenance of these capital assets will
be funded. Poor availability of revenue support can diminish the
benefits associated with capital schemes, it can result in available
funds being stretched thereby decreasing the quality of the scheme
and increasing future revenue implications and ultimately revenue
intensive schemes may be delayed or cancelled and/or easily funded
capital schemes may replace more suitable revenue-based schemes.
The viability of schemes such as Prudential Borrowing may be compromised
by a lack of revenue to repay the debt and effective forward planning
can be jeopardised by varying year-on-year revenue allocations
from central government. Moreover, revenue payments from developer
contributions for example tend to be of a short term nature, and
the future of such schemes can be jeopardised when the funding
stops. Sustainable transport schemes are particularly at risk
because of their heavy reliance on revenue funding. Smaller or
"soft" schemes often require a high level of revenue
funding, and are therefore notoriously difficult to finance (with
both capital and revenue funding).
6. Recent reviews of transport and finance
have focused upon addressing this problem by proposing ways in
which local government can be strengthened to give local authorities
more control over the way in which revenue and capital are spent.
In the short term, as mentioned in DfT's Second Local Transport
Plan guidance, authorities should consider how revenue based transport
spending which supports capital investment could be funded, with
district auditor support, from the capital programme — one
example might be to classify resources that are typically considered
to be revenue resources, such as staff time, as capital through
referring to staff time as an intellectual resource. In the longer
term Local Government needs to make it easier for capital and
revenue expenditure to be integrated, and to consider funding
revenue-requiring activities from non-ring-fenced revenue support,
or from funds raised locally. CfIT has proposed that the importance
of transport revenue spending could perhaps be detailed in relation
to the delivery of government objectives.
7. Innovative forms of funding transport
projects have evolved as a way in which the gap between capital
and revenue expenditure can be bridged. There is also the potential
to increase levels of private investment, for example through
planning gain and the formation of partnerships. Revenue raising
approaches will be particularly effective if they take the form
of hypothecated revenue — this is likely to increase the
acceptability of the tax by directly linking it to the benefits
of improved transport infrastructure.
8. The revenue problem can be viewed constructively
through the development of local solutions, such as creating partnerships
with revenue-rich, capital poor partners (eg bus operators), and
strengthening the case internally for transport, for example by
stressing its contribution to wider corporate and community objectives.
The poor availability of revenue funding for highway maintenance
is an issue which has gained particular prominence since the Comprehensive
Spending Review 2007. Local authorities are tackling this problem
in a number of ways, such as by investing in high quality materials
to reduce revenue implications, undertaking joint procurement
of services, and linking improvements to other agendas, such as
the role that well maintained roads have in enhancing the local
economy or improving quality of life or the efficiency of public
services. Government needs to facilitate these kinds of initiatives
to ensure a better balance between capital and revenue funding.
How will schemes be planned in the absence of
regional bodies and following the revocation and abolition of
regional spatial strategies?
9. A key issue that will need to be addressed
is achieving integration between land use planning and transport
planning. Transport and land use are closely inter-related. Although
their planning, implementation and impact tend to operate at different
temporal scales, it is crucially important that the transport
impacts on land-use, as well as the land-use impacts on transport,
are taken into account in the planning processes in order to ensure
that the investments are sustainable in the longer term. This
integration cannot be achieved at purely a local level since many
of the influences will arise from outside local authority boundaries,
and similar local initiatives may well have impact outside their
boundaries.
10. Regional planning provides an important axis
for co-ordinating and integrating transport and land use planning
in a horizontal direction (between planning departments and organisations
at a local level) and in a vertical direction (between planning
guidance and policy at the national, regional and local levels).
The removal of the regional "tier" of governance will
not significantly impact the vertical coordination, provide central
government is able to deal satisfactorily directly with local
government, but a mechanism must be found to replace the horizontal
coordination function. Local authorities must therefore find ways
to work together, and develop planning structures, that provide
a context for investment in both land use and transport that are
mutually supportive, and do not place one LA's policies in unnecessary
conflict with another. These arrangements could take the form
of the proposed Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in the field
of enterprise and economic development. There is a danger that
these more "voluntary" arrangements could put more rural
communities, especially those in the hinterland of large conurbations,
at a disadvantage and thus it will probably be necessary for Government
to provide some guidance and recommended strategy for LA partnerships.
This guidance should include the provision that transport and
land use planning should take wider (sub)regional issues into
account.
September 2010
|
