Truck or Lorry is the colloquial name for Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) which are used to convey freight by road. Vogue theory has it that decreasing the volume of goods moved by HGVs would bring a range of benefits. These large vehicles have a correspondingly highly damaging impact on the fabric of the highway network. They also have a significant negative effect on inter-urban highways and motorways where the efficiency of roads designed for fast moving traffic is impeded by the top speed of HGVs which is set at 60 mph throughout much of the developed world. Freight logistics is however a more complex business than it may appear to those who would simply prefer to cut the scale of HGV use. In practice, the economic and thereby social health of developed nations depends on movement of most goods by road and to be cost effective this is mostly done by hauliers using trucks. When the movement of freight is measured by weight it transpires that in Britain for example, 82 % of it is moved by private road modes – in contrast to 5% by rail, 6% by water and 7% by pipeline.
In practice, the global acceptance of standardised containers has cut the cost of transporting most of the goods on which national economies depend. But, by and large, such containers and their contents have to be moved between production centres and ports and onto retail outlets by road and are hauled by HGVs… To discover more about UK HGV issues go to the Freight Transport Association or the Road Hauliers Association.
18th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
In vogue theory, especially among UK policy shapers these ‘private’ motorised modes are the bad guys of transport. In accord with such vogue theory great emphasis is put on ‘discouraging’ use of cars & vans – and with correspondingly great expectations that getting people out of their cars and vans will solve widespread problems. In practice this is unfortunate for many reasons not least of which is the fact that these modes facilitate most movement of most people. In Britain, 85% of all passenger kilometres travelled are by car & van according to the DfT statistics on Modal Comparisons.
So, the vast majority of transport needs are met by private motor vehicles. Promoters of vogue theory about the need to constrain such behaviour say this is because most people are too selfish and lazy to use the alternatives that they believe are better for us and the planet. This theory is espoused by well meaning folk in SUSTRANS and CBT. But it is also extremely convenient for cash strapped administrations as it ring-fences a moral high ground from which demand for improving road use for the majority of people and journeys can be ignored or dismissed – and plans to expand transport tax can be pushed instead. In practice, most people work to sustain themselves and their dependants and are simply but powerfully driven to use the cheapest most efficient and convenient transport modes available. In practice, privately owned cars meet most transport needs and are made cleaner and safer each year – with the likelihood of and zero emission vehicles being a commercially viable reality in the lifetime of most who read this. These views are explore by the ABD and Drivers Alliance. Nevertheless, political support for constraining car use has gathered pace in a few developed nations and was enshrined in a much acclaimed Ten Year Plan for UK transport that was going to make it “Better for Everyone”. In practice, the proportion of UK miles by car has only reduced by 1% and hard evidence that transport is better for everyone is yet to materialise…
18th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
These modes form the core elements of what is known as ‘public transport’. Vogue UK theory has it that these are the good guys of motorised transport – and that seems to be for jolly good reasons. In theory any member of the public can go where and when they want by simply paying a fare and travel without the expense of owning and running ‘private’ modes. In theory, provision and use of buses, trams and trains offers many social, economic and environmental benefits by facilitating cheap and efficient transport – especially for the urban and inter-urban masses. 
In practice, the total cost of providing that glittering array of expected benefits is never fully calculated. In practice, a bus company or a local administration will not accurately asses the full impact and real Cost:Benefit ratio of a bus lane that halves the highway space available to the majority road users –because they are commercially and ideologically driven to avoid doing so. And as one senior transport planner explained in an LM research interview, we don’t do a proper assessment of the impact on traffic and congestion of a bus lane or new junction scheme in case we get “the wrong answers”.
In practice, commercial gain is the most powerful driver of extending provision of bus, tram and train services in the UK and indeed extracting ever greater state support in fuel subsidies and exclusive access to public highways. Here, despite fuel price hikes and the credit crunch, profits for bus companies are booming. As The Times reports, Arriva had a massive pre-tax rise of £47.3 million in bus profits and a jump of £14.8 million from £1.1 from rail services.
18th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
TC.com is a platform for well informed news, debate – and blogs about the often scandalous state of UK transport and what will really make it better for most in practice. As from October 2009, I have decided to change the format for TC.com for a while in recognition of the impact that the Climate Change agenda is having on transport policy thinking and plans for action. The influence of prevailing beliefs about climate change has now reached new peaks. This is colourfully highlighted by a stream of pronouncements about plans to save the world from climate change – which are up for discussion and at a forthcoming UN summit in Copenhagen. Opinions about such plans vary but there is at least one thing we can all agree is true. Climates do change and we have an expanding array of mechanisms to try and measure changes in atmospheric and geological conditions, and the geography of our planet. But it seems to me that the key to current problems is a potentially critical gap between our desire to predict what will happen next – and the capacity of policy shapers to do so on the basis of sound evidence instead of sound bite summaries of complex phenomena.
As TC.com was from the start, it is also about probing well-spun vogue theories to reveal why, especially in Britain, relentless emphasis on constraining use of ‘private’ motorised road modes continues to cripple the movement of most people and goods in practice – and never does deliver most of us from the evils of congestion-induced wastes of time and money, frustration, anger and misery. TC.com looks beyond politically convenient theory and helps show why civilised efficient transport is achievable in the 21st century – and not the selfish dream we are told it is to justify spiralling transport taxes or constraining individual mobility. The primary aim here is positive. It is to air and develop practical alternatives to reliance on constraining and taxing transport more. This is for several reasons – not least of which is that despite this emphasis dominating the output of an entire generation of UK transport policy planners, it has consistently failed to reduce the vast array of problems arising from congestion, especially on roads where most movement of people and goods occurs. The prevailing view among UK policy-shapers is that the best way to cut traffic congestion is by developing ever more effective barriers to movement by motor vehicle. These barriers come in two types. The first are physical and involve reducing the road space available to move freely or park ‘legally’. The second are financial and involve increasing road use taxes through the spread of such measures as ‘Decriminalised’ parking enforcement – or developing new taxes in the form of Road Pricing or Congestion Charges and Low Emission Zones. But, hello, this emphasis hasn’t worked – and shows no signs of doing so soon. Congestion is as bad in London as it was before Congestion Charging. So, an underlying question to be repeatedly asked here is whether such measures find political favour because they are likely to solve transport problems in practice – or because they glitter like buckets of gold at the end of rainbows over cash strapped administrations. Attempts to impose these taxes in Britain are watched with great interest throughout the developed world but reliable and valid evidence that they do cut congestion problems is virtually non-existent. Instead there is a mounting pile of evidence showing that the spread of measures to constrain use of the most widely used modes and ‘encourage’ uptake of walking, cycling and public transport patronage has not only failed to achieve those goals –but actually makes congestion problems worse as well.
15th September 2008
by Leon Mannings
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
Truck or Lorry is the colloquial name for Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) which are used to convey freight by road. Vogue theory has it that decreasing the volume of goods moved by HGVs would bring a range of benefits. These large vehicles have a correspondingly highly damaging impact on the fabric of the highway network. They also have a significant negative effect on inter-urban highways and motorways where the efficiency of roads designed for fast moving traffic is impeded by the top speed of HGVs which is set at 60 mph throughout much of the developed world. Freight logistics is however a more complex business than it may appear to those who would simply prefer to cut the scale of HGV use. In practice, the economic and thereby social health of developed nations depends on movement of most goods by road and to be cost effective this is mostly done by hauliers using trucks. When the movement of freight is measured by weight it transpires that in Britain for example, 82 % of it is moved by private road modes – in contrast to 5% by rail, 6% by water and 7% by pipeline.
