Although a great deal of attention is paid to rail in mainstream UK transport policy circles, it is the traders and manufacturers involved with the automotive world who take the lion’s share of the billions that are spent on transport each year globally. In the light of that knowledge it is easy to imagine that the movers and shakers of that world have correspondingly great influence on the form and thrust of transport policy development. In practice, especially in the UK that is not the case.
11th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
In theory, UK government at local and central level is ultimately responsible for the quality and performance of all transport services – and the extent to which the nation’s needs to move people and goods are met. In theory, there is a direct link of accountability between public opinion and the quality of transport services via government. In practice there is a big gap between what the UK public want and get. In practice, nearly every aspect of transport service is run by profit seeking corporate entities. So, it is almost always contractor who is really in charge of the services you may want improved – but you can only ask your local councillor or MP to deliver them…
All modes that are commonly known as ‘Public Transport’ in the UK are owned and run by private sector businesses. Most programming of traffic light sequences and parking regulation enforcement is by companies whose primary goal is profit not service. The enforcement of parking controls is in theory to improve traffic flow and road-safety. But for many and probably most road users it seems to have more to do with revenue generation – and that’s because in practice, it is – both for cash strapped local authorities and the flow of profits into enforcement company coffers. The commercial structure in which public rail services and private enterprise are mixed is extraordinary to say the least and abysmally daft at worst – as Christian Wolmar will explain in as much breadth and depth as you can stand. The options for changing transport amenity on roads are however far more commercially manageable for bus, coach and taxi companies. And this is dramatically enhanced by widespread measures to enhance and ‘encourage’ use of ‘public’ transport – which in practice allows commercial service operators to have prioritised and frequently exclusive access to swathes of public highway. A consequence of this UK trend is that demands from commercial operators to change the way highways can be used are more frequently and better met than demand for use by individual members of the public in vehicles they fund and pay tax on, and the commercial operators of freight services whose needs for infrastructure improvement are generally ignored.
11th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
Transport planners in Britain generally work for local government authorities or in transport consultancy and engineering firms that are contracted to develop local or centrally funded projects. In theory, transport planners are engaged to develop solutions to specific problems, or improve existing sections of infrastructure in the most cost effective ways. In theory, the changes these professionals make to the way transport works is for the greater good. In practice, many ‘improvements’ by planners do not make transport better for the majority. See ‘more’ below for an LTT ‘Viewpoint’ about this by LM. In practice, planners develop schemes in accord with prevailing orthodoxies on what is ‘sustainable’ etc. which significantly skews the assessment of costs and benefits. In reality, the costs in increased congestion for the most widely used road modes are often ignored or significantly under estimated when plans involve changes that, will (in theory) improve walking or use of bicycles and public transport or encourage modal shift away from use of private motor vehicles.
Presenters of the theories on which UK policy is based are mostly either transport policy academics or transport systems modellers. The most influential academics are based in government funded centres for transport in which the vogue for constraint, especially of private motorised modes, is a key element in the teaching and research that is granted funding. Some modellers are also in academia, but most work in the private sector. Read More »
10th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
In theory, policy is shaped in modern democracies by a combination of what government experts and the public think are the best ways to tackle problems. In Britain great emphasis is placed on consultation procedures as means of demonstrating that the public always has a fair say in what government or their sub-contracted consultants propose and decide to do. In practice things don’t really work like that.
UK consultation procedures are rarely more than a well managed way for politicians to justify implementation of measures regardless of what the majority of people who will be affected by them actually think.
A prime example of how this works in practice is the way ‘consultation’ over the introduction of bus lanes is conducted throughout the UK. Almost invariably a bus priority lane will only be proposed on a two carriageway section of public highway that carries a high volume of traffic – and such proposals are often part of a larger scheme that continues along a major route used for both localised and through trips. However, the majority of people using a section of highway that is due to have its capacity to accommodate general traffic halved will not be consulted at all. The only people consulted are the handful of residents who live by the road in question. The thousands who pass through going about their lawful business have no say whatsoever in the prospect of being prohibited to drive their personally funded vehicles on half of the public highway they have already paid for – and enforced with automated penalty charges and fines.
9th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
News and Internet Commentators…
The way problems are perceived by politicians and the public has a fundamental impact on the choices made between options to solve them. But a key influence on the way transport problems are seen is the way they are presented by the media and especially in ‘news’ stories which are generally expected to be a mixture of facts and peoples’ reactions to events. And, to a lesser but increasing extent, views of transport problems and solutions are developed by web based discussion and commentary.
In practice, each publisher of ‘news’ has a view of the world that will differ from others and those differences will lead to correspondingly diverse and biased reports.
For example: David Begg’s organ The Transport Times, invariably presents pollution problems associated with cars with an assumption that the core problem is that too many people use cars. On the other hand, Autocar magazine is far more likely to report on car manufactures successes in reducing vehicle emissions as the key to solving pollution problems…