|
|
Cuttings from the Newsletter- July 2004 |
Time for a Transport Policy for Bristol.
In the last 18 months there have been some important changes in government transport policy as well as changes in local policies. The biggest change in Bristol has been in light rail. Two years ago; South Gloucester set up a Select Committee to examine the scheme from Junction 16 on the M5 to the Bristol Centre. It was critical of the costing and routing of the scheme which led to it being abandoned. The City then revived the original Avon plan for a line from Parkway to the Centre but which swung through University of the West of England. This scheme was turned down by the Government in December 2OO3. This means that the largest part of Bristol's Transport Plan has disappeared. It is worth remembering also that light rail had dominated transport thinking and the Five Year Bristol Transport Plan, because its cost affected what could be spent on improving the rest of the transport system. It also means that Bristol now needs a new transport policy.
The rejection of the Bristol scheme follows changes in government policies. The national Ten Year Transport Plan wanted 25 new light rail schemes by 2010. None have ever been approved because of stricter costing which adds about 3O% to costs. The government also wants better local bus services and effective cooperation between Bristol and its neighbouring authorities to obtain these improvement. As most transport routes operate across the borders of the four local authorities this is a sensible requirement.
The Government has laid down four inter-related priorities which must be met for receiving money for local transport: congestion, accessibility, safety and air quality. The government paper which lays down these priorities adds that there must be targets for the effects of proposals, estimates for their outcome and plans for delivery.
Congestion. The Department of Transport has invented a complicated mathematical formula for assessing congestion in a town or area of a town. It is doubtful if anyone understands what congestion of 1.5 % means. But it could lead to endless abstruse arguments instead of effective action. The public understand when they cannot travel on a road because there is more traffic than there is road space .They also know that they are the cause although rarely admit it. As 80% of traffic is cars it means that some effective action is needed to reduce it. Ken Livingstone has shown in London that one way of reducing car traffic is road charging. Schemes have been suggested by consultants for the Greater Bristol Area and the four councils could now put forward schemes for public consultation.
There are other methods of reducing car use, such as traffic management, parking restrictions, more, cheaper and better quality bus and local rail services which should be considered and discussed with the public.
Accessibility. Presumably this is providing the means for the residents of a town being able to move about to meet their needs; visit friends, travel to work, shopping, social activities. It is what method is used for these activities which matters. If the car is used more than other methods, as it is currently, at certain times and in certain places it prevents people choosing other means of travel, that is buses, bicycle or walking.
Safety. This the one type of action on the roads about which there is no argument although it often difficult to introduce, and there are often complaints that more is needed. Most accidents and deaths on roads are caused by car traffic.
Air Quality. Pollution is the cause of continuous public complaints, press publicity, scientific reports, international conferences and Government papers. But effective action treads on so many toes. No authority wants to appear opposed to effective action or to be the one to start action against cars. Once again the principle cause of pollution is the car. The European Union takes the most effective action by imposing stricter regulations for clean fuel and engines but this is counteracted by continuous increases in car ownership (about 2.5% annually) and therefore car traffic.
The Government's list of four interlinked priorities for public money for local transport have one common factor, the heavy use of the car, and the certainty that, if no action is taken it will increase and so will the problems.
These are some suggestions to assess the problems in the Greater Bristol Area and to find effective action to reduce them.
A. Agree with neighbouring authorities to request the Government to set up a Public Transport Authority with powers and money to specify the routes, services and fares which the private bus operators are required to provide in the Greater Bristol Area.
B. Because the light rail scheme has been abandoned set up a Select Committee to assess what are the requirements for a new transport policy for Bristol before new Local Plan and Bristol Transport Plans are decided upon.
Tony Howell
Convenor Transport Group
0117 942 3220
email: teresahowell@cromwellbs6.fsnet.co.uk
