Effective road and traffic management

Written evidence from the Motor Cycle Industry Association (MCI) (ETM 51)

Introduction

The MCI

The Motor Cycle Industry Association (MCI) is pleased to submit written evidence to the Transport Select Committee Inquiry on Effective Road & Traffic Management in light of the Governments decision not to introduce road pricing on existing roads.

The MCI is the UK trade association that represents the supply side of the motorcycle industry, including manufacturers and importers of mopeds, motorcycle and scooters; the suppliers and distributors of associated goods and services. With approximately 120 members, MCI represents approaching 90% of the UK industry.

The Motorcycle industry in the UK today employs around 62,000 people in 6,300 businesses. The UK industry has been valued at over £7billion per annum.

The MCI has played an active role in the development of sustainable policies for motorcycling over many years and has worked closely with the Government, police and other delivery bodies to implement strategies and to encourage a holistic approach towards motorcycling. A number of landmark initiatives have been taken to raise awareness of traffic integration, road safety issues and compliance with the law among riders, most particularly, the production, promotion and distribution of specialist literature, DVDs, temporary funding of the successful ‘Bikesafe’ initiative, actions to support the ‘Think!’ campaign and work with Government departments and agencies.

The MCI does not request a specific opportunity to present oral evidence, though if called by the Committee to give evidence, will be happy to do so.

Summary of Position

The Challenge

Creating a less congested , a safer and more sustainable environment in transport policy terms is as much about introducing choice as it is about encouraging alternatives . There has been an emphasis on reducing the amount of journe ys that are made by private car, B ut policies to reduce car use have been far from creative and have fail ed to recognise the need for ‘ on demand’ personal mobility in a modern and dynamic society.

As a result, the car driving public has been offered only the personally constraining choices of walking, cycling and public tr ansport offered as alternatives to their cars – 1950s solutions in a modern era where 1950s travel options for buses and trains, are no l onger available , aside from within major conurbations .

This has been coupled with ‘demand management’ policies which have been primarily aimed at making life difficult for car users, who for various and often good personal reasons, stick to their chosen mode of transport. The result has been more congestion, more transport inefficiency and more Co2 from road transport.

I s it any wonder that only limited successes have been achieved against a backdrop of the 21 st century need for individual and personal transport flexibility and choice.

Motorcycling offers exactly the kind of choice and flexibility that individuals require, but in ‘command’ policy terms, very little has been done or said to recognise this.

The MCI is concerned that the absence of a full consideration of the valuable role that motorcycling can play in achieving overall UK transport policy goals has been and is continuing to be, a major deficiency. Successive administrations have failed to fully integrate motorcycling into mainstream policies and MCI feels that Government and Local Authorities should recognise the mode and support commuter motorcycle use in particular, with policies similar to those developed for other vulnerable modes.

The industry looks to the Coalition Government to correct this fundamental oversight.

Motorcycling Offers:

Less Infrastructure Damage

· Motorcycles cause little damage to roads compared to other motorised transport modes and are responsible for only a very small percentage of maintenance costs. Motorcycles take up a fraction of the space that a car needs, so increased motorcycle use would have little impact on the current roads infrastructure.

Tackling Congestion.

· Motorcycles occupy far less space on the road and do not contribute to traffic congestion.

· Five motorcycles can be parked in a single car parking space, allowing for more efficient land use. A Vienna City Council investigation in 1985 found that cars were being driven 1.5 million km per day just to find parking places. In 1992, 180,000 litres of fuel per day were used in this way in Vienna. (FEMA – European motorcycle riders organisation)

· Motorcycles are not forced to remain stationary in traffic with an idling engine. A gridlocked car – even when carrying four passengers – returns zero miles to the gallon.

· Motorcycles play a role as practical and flexible personal transportation for those who cannot afford a car, allowing PTWs a role in reducing social exclusion. Motorcycles can also be used as low cost transport by young job seekers in remote areas which are not well served by public transport.

Time Saving

· A motorcycle can take approximately 16 - 46% less time to cover the same trip through congested traffic as a car. A motorcycle can also offer significant time savings for commuters on medium to long distance trips. (London journey times surveys)

· Key parts of many urban motorway networks and main routes are fast approaching (or have reached) gridlock during peak periods. Increased motorcycle use can help to slow traffic growth. A mid-range motorcycle is capable of maintaining normal traffic speeds on ‘A’ roads and motorways and is less affected by traffic congestion at peak times.

· Motorcycles can, in most cases, avoid or extricate themselves from congestion.

Reduced Co2

· The motorcycle fleet is emits on average 30% less Co2 than the current car fleet. Most machines used for commuter purposes emit less than 100g/km of Co2.

· Motorcycle use should therefore feature as a default component of any strategy to reduce transport Co2. The Select Committee is requested to carefully examine why this has not been the case – particularly as its is accepted that safety concerns can be significantly addressed by properly integrating motorcycling into transport policies. Motorcycle casualty rates have fallen by around 30% since the year 2000.

Sustainability

· In addition to being a low Co2 mode, Motorcycles require far fewer resources, fewer raw materials and less energy during manufacture. Once a motorcycle has reached the end of its useful life over 75% of components can be reused on other machines, the remaining 25% can be recycled. (ACEM).

Ignoring or rejecting motorcycles in transport policy has had the unfortunate effect of sustaining motorcycle safety problems and has also left a significant gap in strategies to reduce traffic congestion and Co2. The OECD has recognised this and has concluded that fully integrating motorcycling into mainstream transport policies should be a default policy for any Government wishing to address safety issues.

All transport modes, including motorcycles, should be regarded as tools within the transport policy toolbox. All modes offer key components to the structure of a properly managed and integrated transport policy, but if some are left out of the toolbox, key aims cannot be successfully realised.

The Government’s Motorcycle Strategy of 2005 was widely welcomed by the motorcycle community and road safety experts. The then Government announced that motorcycles would be ‘Mainstreamed’ in transport policy, u nfortunately, progress on implementation has been sporadic.

Ministers in the Coalition Government have committed to think more positively and have gone as far as to say that motorcycling should be a natural part of sustainable transport policies (meeting with motorcycle groups, June 2010). However, this welcome commitment has yet to be backed proper by engagement and action from officials. DfT documents still largely overlook the existence of motorcycles, let alone recognise their proper place in transport policy. In short, nothing which would offer positive effect with regard to motorcycling, has changed since the General Election.

A sensible, sober and ideology-free discussion offers the chance for a new and more rational approach to policy development. So far, all attempts to reduce car road traffi c have failed as evidenced by the statistical data available, forcing narrow concepts, such as "demand restraint" upon citizens should now be considered as policy choices that, in the narrow ideological fashion that have so far been applied, have been proven wrong and have actually led to a rise in Co2 outputs from urban road traffic in particular .

Therefore, MCI believes that the focus should be on policy measures fully compatible with the real demand-oriented needs of UK citizens and businesses. Action is needed to re-orient transport policy within the framework of a more systematic approach, without favouring arbitrarily one or the other transport mode, whilst at the same time applying realistic and economically viable principles, such as:

· Fair and equal competition between and within transport m odes ;

· Freedom of choice by users/business and accordingly the respect of rights and choice of users to select the most appropriate transport mode for their mobility needs;

· Transport efficiency encouraging the most suitable and effective mode of transport a ccording to the circumstances.

· Integration, in particular in urban areas, of motorcycles in transport po licy.

The Government’s Motorcycle Strategy

The industry was pleased to hear from Coalition Government Ministers, soon after the General Election, that they supported an updated motorcycle strategy for Government (meeting with motorcycle groups June 2010).

However, nothing has been done to realise this goal thus far and there has been almost no engagement within DfT on issues related to the motorcycle strategy. In fairness, DfT has been heavily engaged with the ongoing review of the motorcycle test, but this should not be an excuse for total stagnation after Ministers have expressed a wish for work to be done in this area.

Key to the success of any new strategy will be for the DfT to take proper ownership and provide real leadership in order for a strategy to realise its objectives.

It is fair to say that motorcycling organisations have become extremely tired of being constantly ‘stone-walled’ when sensible proposals are made to reduce rider vulnerability and allowing the realisation of the potential of this low cost, low Co2 form of transport in traffic management policy. The seemingly ‘ideological untouchability’ of PTWs in policy is an extremely unhelpful position to take by a Governmental ‘machine’ which often expresses concerns about motorcycle safety.

Real safety improvements for cycling have been achieved by integrating cycling into transport policy and traffic management as a ‘favoured’ mode and through the encouragement of local action to support the mode.

This has not been the case with motorcycling, which is currently boxed into a narrow ‘silo’ at the DfT, mostly regarded as a road safety problem and not an opportunity for overall transport policy. The result is no real leadership of overall policy direction, very limited coordination of policy actions away from the Road Safety Division and a limited mandate for the Road Safety Division. MCI feels that this approach has led directly to sustained vulnerability for PTW users and a lost opportunity for traffic management policy.

As mentioned at the start of this section, the industry requires clarity regarding the general direction of the Coalition Government on motorcycling. Currently, Ministers state that the Government wishes to encourage safe and sustainable motorcycle use through inclusion in transport policies. However, aside from positive remarks on ‘Wheels to Work’, policy actions do not seem to support these welcome words.

Specific Points Raised by the Committee.

The comments below, do not necessarily address the ‘big issues’ in relation to the points raised, but instead outline how motorcycling can help mitigate negative impacts of the issues under examination.

T he prevalence and impact of traffic congestion and likely future trends;

· In terms of mitigating some of the impacts of traffic congestion, a f ully integrated motorcycle policy could offer the travelling public an additional means of transport, thereby encouraging car users to switch to motorcycles for journeys where public transport, walking and cycling is impractical.

· In the case of transfers of users from public transport to motorcycles, the creation of much needed capacity on public transport in this case would create additional space for those car user s who wish to switch to buses and trains .

· Motorcycling should be included in green initiatives , which encourage a switch to lower Co2 forms of transport. Motorcycle Co2 is on average one third lower than the average for cars. Many commuter motorcycles produce under 100g/km of Co2

· Incentives for electric cars should also apply to electric motorcycle purchases (Plug in Car Grant)

· The Plugged in Places programme, should recognise the infrastructure needs of electric motorcycles .

the extent to which the Government and local authorities should intervene to alleviate congestion and the best means of doing so;

· Government and local authorities should take a management based approach to moving people and goods, not an ideological one. In other words, instead of talking in terms of what is ‘correct’ transport (walking, cycling and public transport), concepts which are either not practical for many and indeed are often resented, there needs to be an emphasis on utilising different modes according to the type of journey that is desired and managing road space accordingly. This would help tackle the real issue of traffic congestion in urban areas which have been created by badly thought-through ‘demand management’ policies (road space reallocation, lane narrowing, traffic light phasing etc). Demand Management has tended to create traffic congestion in urban areas and consequently, increased Co2.

· Local Authorities should have guidance on the implementation & management of motorcycling strategies & policies , in order to inform choices and policies, reduce vulnerability and realise the opportunities that motorcycling offers . The IHIE Motorcycle Guidelines are a good example of this .

the extent to which road user culture and behaviour undermines effective traffic management, including the relevance to today’s road users of the Highway Code;

· Interventions need to be aimed at riders and drivers, with these targeted at addressing Skills deficits, Attitudes, Defensive motoring/riding and Enforcement.

· Some issues are ‘generational’ where it takes some years to create effective change. Road user education in schools is a valuable tool though.

· Poor traffic management, or demand management measures which seem to be poorly justified, or not well understood by road users, or seem mainly aimed towards being ‘anti car’, help to sustain a negative culture towards traffic management.

· Breaking the ‘us and them’ mentality among roads users and their attitudes to traffic management intervention, is an important issue. Breaking the ideology of ‘some modes good, some modes bad’ in favour of a more practical approach to moving people and goods, using all modes according to there abilities and versatility, will be of great help.

  intelligent traffic management schemes, such as the scheme which has operated on the M42, and their impact on congestion and journey times;

· Motorcycles s hould be considered in such traffic management schemes at every stage in order to ensure the safety and inclusion of motorcycle users.

· However, the impact of the M42 scheme has generally been positive and industry support s the ‘roll out’ of the initiative to congestion hot spots such as sections of the M25

· Motorcycling needs to be more actively considered as part of research and developments in the area of ITS.

the effectiveness of legislative provisions for road management under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 and the Traffic Management Act 2004;

· Motorcycling is often overlooked by Highways Planners and Managers. Engineering standards should take account of PTWs and standards should be set according to those laid down in the IHIE Motorcycle Guidelines.

the impact of bus lanes and other aspects of road layout.

· B us lanes, advanced stop lines and other priority measures should be engineered to take account of motorcyclists as well as other vulnerable road users, thereby improving their visibility and reducing vulnerability.

· A broader issue, where the public question seemingly empty bus lanes in certain places, while the general traffic lane is blocked solid at peak times, needs to be addressed. This brings traffic management into disrepute and bus lanes should be restricted to areas of high bus flows, rather than placed ‘wily-nilly’ as a way of constraining road space – a technique that creates additional traffic congestion and Co2. Bus lanes are a valuable tool, the placing of which should not be abused.

March 2011