Conclusions and recommendations
Maximising the capacity of existing road space
1. Our
recent inquiry, Bus Services after the Spending Review,
concluded that bus services are an important and valued form of
transport for many people, enabling them to participate in employment,
education and voluntary services, and to access health services
and shops. Bus lanes are an important means of supporting local
transport, and if well designed, bus priority measures can also
make a substantial difference to our congested roads. (Paragraph
10)
2. We recommend that
the Government publish early next year a detailed assessment of
traffic flow on the M4 in the year since the bus lane was scrapped.
If the evidence shows that the bus lane contributed to faster
movement—taking account of all travellers—it should
be reinstated. (Paragraph 13)
3. We can see no reason
why Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 should not be fully
commenced to enable local authorities to deal more effectively
with moving traffic contraventions and we recommend that the Government
bring this part of the Act into force, by 2013. (Paragraph 16)
4. We agree with the
Government that the 'managed motorways' approach should be implemented
on other parts of the strategic road network, but are realistic
in recognising that the approach may not alleviate the whole problem
of congestion. Also, we share concerns with the police about
safety on stretches of motorway where junctions are widely spaced
and where the use of the hard shoulder by motorists could prevent
emergency vehicles from reaching accidents. The Government needs
to address how to manage congestion on stretches of motorway where
the 'managed motorway' approach might not be appropriate. In addition,
we expect the Government to monitor the effectiveness of the managed
motorway approach as it is extended more widely, with particular
reference to cost and safety issues. (Paragraph 21)
Information
5. The
Government clearly has a role to play in working with highway
authorities to identify the latest forms of intelligent traffic
management systems and how such systems can be used effectively
and promoting joint procurement projects, principally through
bodies such as the UTMC Development Group. We are disappointed,
therefore, that the main means by which local authorities could
identify suitable intelligence traffic management options, the
ITS Toolkit, is now unfunded. In the absence of an up-to-date
ITS Toolkit best practice is likely to be lost, and local authorities
will be less likely to benefit from Intelligent Traffic Management
schemes in helping to tackle congestion. The very nature of ITS,
the need to maximise value for money and the need to make the
most of limited, skilled resources make coordination between local
authorities especially important. We recommend that the Government
should renew its funding of the ITS Toolkit, or a successor project
aimed at assisting highway authorities in identifying and procuring
the most up-to-date and appropriate intelligent traffic management
systems and in accessing available technology. The Government
should work more closely with those involved in Intelligent Traffic
Management systems, including the Highways Agency and local authorities,
to ensure that there is greater collaboration and sharing of best
practice. (Paragraph 25)
6. Highway authorities
are legally obliged to monitor how they perform their traffic
management functions: however, most fail to do so. This is an
unacceptable situation which the DfT must address. The DfT should
be more proactive in calling on local authorities to publish their
traffic management performance measurements. We recommend that
the Government require all highway authorities to publish traffic
management performance measurements, by the beginning of 2013
at the latest. (Paragraph 29)
7. We recommend that
a leaflet should be sent to drivers, when they apply for their
tax disc or driving licence, to highlight existing sources of
detailed travel information—including information provided
by the Highways Agency—and to remind drivers to use the
'traffic programme' (TP) button, which cuts into the radio to
give accurate, up-to-date travel information. (Paragraph 31)
8. The DfT should:
decide what real-time travel information should be made available
from local authorities and the Highways Agency to motorists and
what should be provided by the private sector; identify barriers
to collating and disseminating information; and develop a strategy
for delivering that information, including the route for overcoming
those barriers and the scope for public/private collaboration
on deployment, giving examples of best practice. (Paragraph 34)
Minimising the number and impact of events on
our roads
9. Useful
work is being undertaken to develop and promote good practice
in minimising the number and impact of road and street works.
We recommend that the DfT, working with the Highway Authorities
and Utilities Committee (HAUC), should ensure that examples of
best practice are disseminated to highway authorities and utility
companies. (Paragraph 37)
10. The Government
should commission an independent assessment of the London and
Kent permit schemes, as was agreed by the previous Government.
This assessment should assess whether the initial permit schemes
are following the right approach and make recommendations about
improvements, in order to inform other local authorities considering
implementing their own permit schemes. The Government should also
put in place arrangements to monitor the uptake of permit schemes
and the variations between local authorities' approaches. (Paragraph
43)
11. Our predecessors
were not convinced about the merits of lane rentals, and we are
yet to be convinced that the scheme is the best way of tackling
congestion from street works. We recognise the potential of lane
rental to target more directly changes in the behaviour of utility
companies, which will potentially reduce disruption. However,
we also recognise the fact that there will be costs attached,
which will be passed on to customers. We want reassurance that
the scheme achieves the right balance. The Government should monitor
the London lane rental scheme, in order to assess its wider application.
(Paragraph 49)
12. The Government
should study ways of ensuring that local authorities' own works
on roads are subject to the same rules and penalties as the utility
companies' works, so as to produce the same improvements in reducing
disruption. In such circumstances, the Government should explore
the possibility of ways of ensuring that resulting fines are not
simply a transfer of resources from local authority department
to another, rather than being a real incentive to change. (Paragraph
48)
13. We support the
Highways Agency in its joint initiative with the police and the
Home Office, to speed up the time taken to clear major roads,
following an incident. We particularly support the Highways Agency's
work in analysing the regional variations of motorway closures.
The review was published in May 2011, but some of the recommendations
will not be taken forward until December 2012. There needs to
be continued commitment from all parties, with maintained urgency
in addressing all of the outcomes of the review. (Paragraph 50)
The relevance of the Highway Code
and road user behaviour
14. Welcome
though the Road Safety Partnership Scheme undoubtedly is, we question
whether there are sufficient funds for highway authorities to
take up successful schemes more widely, especially when road safety
funds are no longer ring-fenced and local authorities are under
financial pressure. Furthermore, we again urge the Government
to prioritise work on making the driving test more rigorous, in
order to ensure that young drivers are better trained and safer.
We made recommendations on this in March of this year and our
predecessors also made recommendations in 2007. We are not persuaded
that the Government is prioritising this issue and we will return
to it in our forthcoming inquiry into the new strategic framework
for road safety. (Paragraph 53)
15. The Department
for Transport should take steps to make the Highway Code
more readily available to all road users, in particular more experienced
drivers and cyclists. The Government should work with the various
road user groups to promote better adherence to the Highway
Code. The DVLA website should clearly link to the Highway
Code, for all those applying for or renewing a driving licence.
A leaflet drawing attention to the Code, highlighting any recent
changes, should be posted to drivers with tax disk or licence
renewal letters and other correspondence. The Department should
consider options for a free Highway Code 'App', which gives
useful and new information about The Highway Code, and other ways
in which new communication media could be utilised for this purpose.
These cost-effective recommendations would go a long way to disseminate
information included in the Highway Code and help improve driver
behaviour. (Paragraph 56)
Responsibility for managing the road network
16. 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. (Paragraph 64)
17. 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. (Paragraph 67)
18. 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. (Paragraph 69)
19. 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.
(Paragraph 72)
| 
