Why has transport slipped down the list of electoral priorities?
European examples confirm research findings that local government manages transport better than the centre
Author: Steven Howell, in the Guardian |
Transport is hardly the sexiest policy area in local government. Roads, buses, bridges and trains are not the sort of things that excite people, despite the ever-present angst over timetables and potholes.
It was not always this way. Britain has a world-leading transport tradition, from building the first railway network in the world, to the great engineering masterpieces of Isambard Kingdom Brunel ? and the world famous London underground. Transport in Britain was once something to be proud of, but it’s since slipped way down the list of electoral priorities.
But in an age where growth is the number one priority, and “all departments will be departments of growth”, transport should be rising up the agenda. Countless reports have suggested that transport infrastructure is one of the single biggest determinants of both local economic growth and why prospective workers choose to locate themselves in a given area.
Given the vital importance to growth of getting transport infrastructure right, the independent thinktank Localis undertook research into different ways of managing and investing in transport, both here and in Europe.
A number of European cities, such as Barcelona and Munich, have well regarded, integrated public transport systems that are managed at a much more local level than transport networks in Britain. Combining both state and local funding into a local management organisation, influenced by local investment priorities, these cities have been able to integrate networks far more effectively than national operators ever could. On the continent, transport devolution is seen as a given.
Here in Britain, we’re operating under a different structure. But local areas have been able to demonstrate that they can develop schemes that give real bang for the buck. The National Audit Office found that more than a quarter of the local schemes they looked at delivered a return on investment at a ratio of five to one ? not a bad rate of return in infrastructure that is so desperately needed to support growth.
One of our key recommendations was to reconsider the future of the strategic roads network and in particular its steward, the Highways Agency. With the government due to consider a major review of the Highways Agency, why not devolve some of these responsibilities to local authorities or combined authority groups? Local authorities have proved their ability to deliver better value; Cornwall council, for example, was able to reduce costs by 25% and deliver the scheme on behalf of the Highways Agency.
Why not take this as a devolutionary precedent and expand it across the country? With a government committed to localism, and with better transport essential to the future prosperity of the nation, surely looking to local bodies to join up the transport network is not beyond the realms of possibility.
Even if this is too bold a step, why not allow authorities to bid for these responsibilities? The opportunity for better transport is there for the taking.
While more people-focused issues will inevitably dominate most of the headlines, perhaps a return to the more entrepreneurial days of transport systems under local leadership, might just be the ticket to getting back some of that pride in our transport network while boosting the economy to boot.
Steven Howell is senior policy and communications officer at localism thinktank Localis.