Supplementary Written evidence submitted
from the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (UK) Cymru
Wales
Our answer to Question 17 given in oral evidence
on 17 October was:
Q17 Chair: That is one of the things that the
Committee is looking at. That is a very important question, but
you would accept that it is better to have a bridge with a toll
than no bridge and no toll, or even one bridge and no toll.
Chris Yewlett: There are questions of equity
floating around here. The tradition in Britain has been, and still
largely is, that motorways and major roads are free of charge-with
the exception of the midlands. So there is an argument to say
that building the first bridge would not have happened if we hadn't
had the toll-especially in the economic circumstances of the time-so
we wouldn't have actually had the bridge. We then had the bridge,
and it proved inadequate in terms of capacity. This is also true
of quite a lot of motorways that parallel the trunk roads around
England. Expansion of those motorways-additional lanes and so
on-is regarded as part of the day-to-day or year-to-year expenditure
of the Department for Transport. Putting a new bridge in Wales
could be argued to be an expansion to the existing one. We have
paid for the existing one, so why should we have to pay for the
expansion when other people do not have to pay for improvements
to their roads?
In order to clarify further point the contrast
with the situation pertaining in the English Midlands we would
add the following:
In the English Midlands, the Birmingham Northern
Relief Road, now known as the "M6 Toll" Road, was built
to alleviate severe congestion on the M6 link between the M6/M1
junction in the East and the M5/M6 North-South route in the West.
However, tolls were only imposed on the new construction.
Potential users thus retain the option of using
the old M6, and enduring any congestion delays arising. In practice,
large numbers of users, both light traffic and heavy goods vehicles,
elect to take the slower, cheaper option.
An equivalent arrangement for Wales would have
been to remove the tolls on the original bridge (now the M48)
once the original cost was repaid, whilst introducing a toll on
the new bridge. Customers would then be able choose between a
faster journey and a more costly one.
However, that option was not offered to Wales—indeed,
not even a reduction in tolls on the longer, older route. Instead,
operation of the two bridges was consolidated, and tolls have
been equalized ever since. Wales-England traffic is therefore
meeting the costs of capacity expansion on this key route directly,
in contrast to (say) Scotland-Wales traffic via M6/M1.
Indeed, there is even a disparity at the European
level, regarding through traffic to Ireland. Traffic using the
M4 and West Wales ports (Fishguard/Pembroke/Swansea) via key European
route E30 is charged a toll, whilst traffic choosing Holyhead
via M1/M6/A55 (Euro routes E24/ E22 and links) is not.
November 2010
|
