6 Responsibility for managing the
road network
Current situation
57. The responsibilities and powers of various
highways authorities are set out in the Highways Act 1980 (broadly
covering the maintenance and improvement of the roads), the Road
Traffic Regulation Act and Road Traffic Acts (managing the use
of roads), and the New Roads and Street Works Act (managing works
taking place in roads, in particular those by utility companies).
The Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA) provided the legal basis
for traffic officers who have powers relating to the management
of traffic on the Highways Agency's roads, and, as we have seen,
gave additional powers and duties to local traffic authorities
to increase their role in the practical management of their highways.
58. The divisions of responsibility outlined
above do not reflect the way that roads are used and problems
exist when a major road is managed by several authorities. Major
roads provide an end-to-end service, and a highway authority will
usually have a consistent approach in managing and improving such
a road, both along its length and at its junctions with the more
local roads, to ensure that it can be used safely and to avoid
congestion wherever possible. However, where a road is split between
different authorities, there will not necessarily be a consistent
strategy for the whole route. Each authority can set its own priorities
that could put their local interests above the wider national
or regional good. Such a piecemeal approach, both to managing
and improving the network, could have adverse safety and efficiency
consequences. Ian Reeve told us of such difficulties in managing
the road network in Surrey:
Surrey is in a unique position. We have a very large
portion of the motorway network. A third of the M25 runs through
Surrey. Nearly half of our traffic is on motorways and trunk roads,
which is much higher than the average. The motorway and trunk
road network is very important to us and we know it causes problems
on the local road network.[104]
59. Congestion does not respect administrative
boundaries. Robin Shaw, of the Chartered Institution of Highways
and Transportation (CIHT), described the incongruity between the
Highway Agency's mandate to maintain only the strategic road network
and most people's daily journey requirements, which cover more
than the strategic road network.[105]
Professor Blythe, from the Institute of Engineering and Technology
(IET) said there needed to be
a more strategic view of connecting the whole road
network together, ensuring that we have more seamless travel and
use the best possible technologies and other techniques to manage
congestion and the discontinuities in our road networks.[106]
60. The A46 is an example of a main road with
different managing authorities: it runs between Bath, Somerset,
and Cleethorpes, North East Lincolnshire, although parts of the
old road have been bypassed or replaced by motorway development.
Three sections of the road are classified as trunk roads and are
managed by the Highways Agency but the other sections are the
responsibility of several local authorities.[107]
Many local authorities do not have the finances or expertise on
their own to carry out sophisticated transport planning and the
implementation of significant traffic management schemes. James
Coates, from the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport
UK (CILT UK) told us:
[A] lot of local authority areas are far too small
for sensible transport planning, which is what congestion relief
is partly depending on. You need sensible arrangements at sub-regional
level, and we have to hope that the Local Enterprise Partnerships
(LEPs) and the local authorities will work together and that in
some of the big cities they will use the powers to create integrated
transport authorities and so on, but we wait to see.[108]
61. This concern about how the management of
major routes covering several authorities would be dealt with
in the absence of regional planning mechanisms, was also raised
by Stephen Glaister of the RAC Foundation:
There are a very large number of very large roads
which, for funding purposes, do not come under the direct control
of the Highways Agency. If I give you an example, the A12 is a
major road going from the boundary of London all the way up to
the ports at Felixstowe and Harwich. That road was, for funding
purposes, the responsibility of the East of England Regional Development
Agency (RDA). I am entirely unclear about what is going to happen
about the accountability on that road, we surely can't expect
the local communities through which it goes to deal with the proper
stewardship of that major highway. I think that kind of thing
is repeated all over the country.[109]
62. The Government appears not to have an answer
to this problem in its evidence, but wrote in general terms that
"the Government is placing localism at the heart of the transport
agenda, and taking measures to empower local authorities when
it comes to tackling these issues in their areas".[110]
There are certainly benefits in local authorities working together
and there are processes in place that facilitate the uptake of
good practice, such as the national and regional traffic manager
forums. However, as Phil Blythe, from the Institute of Engineering
and Technology, told us, the Government needs to take a more proactive
approach for localism to work:
Localism is fine. It allows the local authorities
that are proactive and have expertise in-house to go away and
do some great things, but it leaves a large proportion of the
local authorities as also-rans who really do not have the capacity,
capability or knowledge to take up those benefits. They are the
ones that will suffer.[111]
The Local Transport White Paper, published in January
2011, refers to the role of Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs)
identifying strategic transport priorities across their areas,
engaging with, among others, the Highways Agency and the DfT:
We are inviting LEPs immediately to demonstrate their
potential to play a positive strategic role by engaging with local
transport authorities and partnering bids to the Local Sustainable
Transport Fund [...] The Department of Transport will seek to
work directly with a small number of Local Enterprise Partnerships
towards agreeing a joint approach to the worst congestion hotspots
in the major urban areas affecting both the local and national
strategic networks within the Local Enterprise Partnership area.[112]
63. Tension can exist because,
in making their own transport decisions, highway authorities can
have adverse consequences on congestion experienced by other highway
authorities. This is most likely in conurbations where the local
roads can run across several authorities and the Highways Agency
network can itself run through the area, creating a closely interlinked
network. Congestion is a strategic problem that can only be tackled
effectively if roads management authorities work together. In
our report on the winter weather in 2010 we recommended that local
authorities should share their transport winter resilience plans
in draft to ensure that resilience issues are managed strategically.[113]
We have seen in this inquiry that this principle of collaboration
should extend to other aspects of road and traffic management.
The written evidence from Urban Traffic Management and Control
noted that there are some successful partnerships between authorities,
in particular "authorities with a historical connection (Kent/Medway,
Hampshire/Southampton/Portsmouth, Dorset/Poole, etc), and authorities
in a metropolitan area, for public transport (where the Passenger
Transport Executive can lead/coordinate)".[114]
However, these successful partnerships are few and far between
and the DfT still needs to clarify how regional transport priorities
will be resolved. Our previous Report, Transport and the Economy,
highlighted the Prime Minister's response to questioning about
regional planning arrangements by our Chair, Louise Ellman MP,
during a meeting of the Liaison Committee:
He agreed to take a personal interest
in ensuring that regional perspectives and regional prioritisation
regarding transport were not lost as a result of the changes.[115]
64. We recommend that the DfT
should be more proactive in ensuring that highway authorities
work together to manage the road network. Indeed, the Prime Minister
agreed to take a personal interest in ensuring that regional perspectives
are maintained. Working with the Local Government Association
and other relevant institutions—such as the Chartered Institution
of Highways and Transportation (CIHT), the Chartered Institute
of Logistics and Transport (CILT) and the Institute of Highway
Engineers (IHE)—it should ensure that best practice, in
the way local authorities manage the impact of their road management
decisions on surrounding areas, is collated. Such information
could be published online, to inform local authorities and to
facilitate the exchange of best practice between them. The DfT
cannot wash its hands of the strategic management of the road
network by simply devolving that responsibility to new and untested
Local Enterprise Partnerships.
Alternative approaches
65. Capita Symonds proposed that there should
be a "Managed Route Network", formed from the strategic
road network operated by the Highways Agency and a significant
number of the more important all-purpose roads managed by local
authorities. The approach would include two strands of congestion
relief measures—road and traffic management, and influencing
behaviour—which are described in the firm's written evidence.
Capita Symonds stated that this new approach "means abandoning
many historically based policies and the thinking behind them,
but there is strong evidence to show this will save money and
deliver wide ranging benefits".[116]
66. Part 2 of the Local Transport Act 2008 already
enables Integrated Transport Authorities (these are the former
Passenger Transport Executive in the six metropolitan areas, but
ITAs can also be created by groups of other authorities) to modify
governance arrangements within their areas. For example, the constituent
authorities could effectively pool some of their road and traffic
management powers and delegate them to the Integrated Transport
Authority, although this would still not bring the Highways Agency's
network under the same umbrella.
67. We can see some benefits
in Capita Symonds' "Managed Route Network" proposal,
but we envisage there being significant governance issues in separating
the ownership and management of a local road and in agreeing who
would manage (and provide finance for) such a network. We recommend
that a working party should be formed, composed of the Government,
the Highways Agency, representatives from local authorities, including
ITAs and the private sector, to make recommendations to Ministers
about how to establish a broader managed network, in order to
tackle road congestion more efficiently than is possible today.
68. One attempt to bring about a more unified
traffic management system within the current framework is demonstrated
by an innovative project set up by the DfT, the Highways Agency
and Surrey County Council. The Integrated Demand Management project
is designed to co-ordinate the traffic management of the national
road network, principally the M25, and the corresponding local
road network. Surrey's written evidence describes the potential
impact of the project:
If successful, this demonstration project would deliver
a low-cost toolkit of traffic management measures which could
be applied more widely across the country.[117]
As a consequence of the Spending Review 2010, the
Integrated Demand Management project has not yet secured ongoing
funding and is on hold, pending further discussions. Iain Reeve,
from Surrey County Council, told us of the current position of
the scheme:
We are in dialogue with the Department for Transport
at the moment to see if we can resurrect it, particularly if we
can make it a cheaper project because we recognise there are funding
difficulties, but we believe this area is absolutely crucial.
[...] The project as it was before was £25 million to £40
million, which I do not think is affordable. What we are looking
for is something rather cheaper.[118]
69. We urge the Government to
take up this opportunity to fund Surrey County Council and the
Highways Agency's joint working partnership, with their revised
Integrated Demand Management scheme. There is a good case to be
made for such funding—provided that the promoters can show
that the scheme is delivering a measurable and cost-effective
impact on congestion—not least in encouraging other local
authorities to work in a collaborative way with the Highways Agency
and the DfT. The DfT must prove that it is fulfilling its leadership
and co-ordinating role, and financial support for this initiative
would be a positive application of that role.
The Highways Agency
70. As part of the spending review settlement,
the Secretary of State has commissioned an independent review
of the Highways Agency, which will study its effectiveness, efficiency
and performance measurement. Of particular relevance to this inquiry
is the fact that it will look specifically at the better management
of traffic congestion and traffic incidents by the Agency. The
review is to be led by Alan Cook, the non-executive Chairman of
the Highways Agency Board, and his findings will be presented
to the Secretary of State in October.
71. The question of better collaboration between
the Highways Agency and local highway authorities has already
been mentioned and was one that recurred during our inquiry. Graham
Dalton, Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, told us about
the work the Highways Agency does with local authorities, not
just on immediate transport issues, but in long-term planning,
which has consequences for traffic flow:
[I]t is around the planning regime and meeting long-term
planning and the role that the Agency has in consultation with
local authorities, previously with regional assemblies, and hopefully
with LEPs once they are established, on guiding and shaping development,
because motorway junctions especially and trunk road junctions
are very attractive places for developers to put in either commercial
or retail development.[119]
He also talked about discussions that the Highways
Agency and local authorities have on agreeing planning consents
to encourage alternative transport, such as bus services to serve
out-of-town business parks.[120]
72. The DfT must ensure that
it maintains its role as the strategic overseer of the road network.
The Government review of the Highways Agency should consider the
Agency's role in assisting and supporting local highway authorities,
making the most of the Agency's knowledge and experience. This
could include sharing best practice on the management of major
roads, including access to available technology, the impact on
roads of planning decisions, and collaborating in research and
supporting the development of common technical standards. The
review should also look at how the Highways Agency's collaboration
with local authorities can be improved, in order to integrate
more comprehensively the management of the road network as a whole.
104 Ev 44 Back
105
Ev 44 Back
106
Ev 44 Back
107
HC Deb, 5 July 2011, col1163w Back
108
Ev 12 Back
109
Ev 12 Back
110
Ev 121 Back
111
Ev 45 Back
112
Department for Transport, Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon:
making sustainable local transport happen, Cm 7996, January
2011, p 27 Back
113
Transport Committee, Fifth Report of Session 2010-11, Keeping
the UK moving: The impact on transport of the winter weather in
December 2010 Transport Select Committee, HC 794, para 41 Back
114
Ev 75 Back
115
Transport Committee, Third Report of Session 2010-11, Transport
and the Economy, HC 473, para 110 Back
116
Ev 151 Back
117
Ev 97 Back
118
Ev 37 Back
119
Ev 48 Back
120
Ev 48 Back
| 
