Labour's transport plan
Page 52
Page 56
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Robert Hughes MP
TRANSPORT is not a frill to the economy or to people's daily lives. The Government needs to plan in order to improve services and to eliminate wasteful use of scarce resources. Only the Government, nationally and locally, can take responsibility for ensuring that all members of the community have adequate opportunities for mobility. If this means paying more for a better service, the whole community must underwrite the costs.
Social objectives Modern society recognises that the population has rights to education and health care; to a large extent, housing as well. These essentials are predominantly provided through collective action and payment.
A similar standard must be set for transport and the TUC and the Labour Party place emphasis on the social objectives of transport. The rising majority of household car-owners does not alter the fact that at any time the majority of individuals do not possess or have immediate access to personal transport. Even among households, one third will not own a car for decades to come and nearly half the population will not have a driving licence.
Yet the need for personal mobility is growing as more comm unity services become increasingly centralised without adequate consideration of the consequent increases in transport costs.
Thus, a public transport network needs to be provided for those who do not have access to a car or who would prefer to use public transport if they had the option. This network must exist in all parts of the country providing at least a minimum level of service for all who want to use it.
Environmental objectives The task of reconciling the benefits of the motor vehicle with its environmental costs is exceptionally difficult because of the popularity and unperceived costs of motor transport.
Yet the noise, fumes and phy ▪ sical damage associated with lorries and the unrelenting use of land for roads is deeply unacceptable to the community, especially to those directly and adversely affected.
An aim of the transport policy, therefore, must be to limit costs to the environment by: rigorously considering environmental factors as well as traffic factors in road building; securing lasting improvements to public transport facilities; suring that passenger railiy and freight alternatives road transport continue to ist; roducing local traffic meares to separate heavy lor:s from people.
must recognise that road port for the future will be Densable to the movement :ople and goods. A simple ail, anti-road position is ter-productive to construclolicy formulation but transneeds and environmental ideration have to come into balance.
believe that measures encourage the greater use rblic transport and protect mvironment will be more Live than simply pricing up 3Ist of motoring in achieving lbjective.
Resources
are are two main issues reto resources — the overall of financial resources availto public transport and the ent use of all resources. c transport expenditure and ;tment as a proportion of public expenditure has falparticularly during the last le. This indicates a lower ity attached to public transby Government. The ob,es of an integrated transpolicy will only be achieved is trend is reversed. Algh the possibilities of using te loan finance (not private y holdings) in certain transinvestment projects cannot .uled out, an increase in 'dal resources for public 'sport will need to be red.
ere must be regulation of 3les offering transport to the lc (for personal mobility and ht movement) in order to wasteful duplication and -ovide a more comprehenservice where this is led.
e efficient use of resources t be sought also by influencdemand for transport. For iple, some view must be -; on the use of cars, which, iugh convenient, lose their ency if the roads are so conad that all journeys, includourneys by bus, are badly yed, In large towns and citotal demand for the use of s must be held within the )nable capacity of the road )m.
Energy cause transport consumes ly a third of the country's oil supplies, and because oil fuel is a non-renewable resource, it must be an aim of transport policy to minimise oil fuel consumption within the social and other objectives of transport provision. By the early 1970s world fuel consumption had risen to the equivalent of 8,000 million tonnes of coal a year. Although the supply of oil must diminish, world energy demands continue to increase. While oil is the only fuel that can be used by the majority of air, land and water-borne vehicles, it has a number of other uses of major importance including lubrication and petro-chemicals.
Transport policy can help energy policy in two significant ways. It can influence a choice of more fuel-efficient types of vehicle and it can promote a move toward less use of oil. Investment in railway electrification could assist in both of these aims. Private cars consume 30 per cent of the energy of aeroplanes as a means of passenger transport but, per passenger mile, they consume two-and-ahalf times as much as buses and four times as much as trains. Energy considerations, therefore, tend to give added justification for Labour's policies of investing in rail electrification and improving other public transport services.
Choice and local democracy The Labour Party and the TUC remain committed to freedom of consumer choice in transport consistent with the overall interests of the community and to solving detailed planning issues at local level by democratic decision. But little freedom of choice exists if, as a result of Government policies, public transport has inadequate investment or protection from unfair competition and is consequently allowed to decline. Local democracy becomes meaningless if central cash limits dictate the real level of service and if legislation prevents effective co-ordination.
In passenger transport, consumer choice will be expanded by greater provision of public services and by pricing policies which seek to encourage a high level of patronage. In freight transport, the needs of industry will primarily determine the Labour Party's approach.
But industry's needs, in the long term, are not compatible with the objectives of careful preservation of the environment and energy supplies — these objectives serve the community as a whole.
Two further points will determine our approach to choice in freight transport: first, it will be a specific aim to secure the existence of rail freight facilities, despite commercial problems, because an alternative to road transport would wherever possible be available to industry.
The Government promised in its election manifesto to bring forward proposals for the creation of a London Regional Transport Authority to run bus, underground and rail services in London and surrounding areas. It therefore proposes to remove London Transport from the Greater London Council. The Labour Party is opposed to the establishment of a non-elected body to run public transport on two major grounds: it would destroy an important responsibility of democratically elected local authorities and secondly it would diminish the responsiveness of transport services to local needs. This would turn the clock back almost to the years before 1969.
The Government proposes to abolish the GLC and the six Metropolitan Counties. This would fatally undermine local democracy and thus the choice of local voters as to the kind of transport system they want. It would turn the clock back to the years before 1972 when transport was administered either on a borough basis or by joint boards of borough representatives. Neither the creation of the L.R.T.A. nor the abolition of the Metropolitan Counties can be regarded with any favour by those who care about meeting the country's transport needs.
Summary of transport policy objectives The main objectives may be summarised as follows: Social — to expand the transport network so as to provide a minimum level of service for use by the population as a whole at prices which do not unreasonably constrain demand.
Efficiency — to maintain a safe and efficient transport system which provides good, comprehensive transport facilities at the lowest cost for any level of resources used. Environmental — to protect and relieve the community from the impact of transport on the environment.
Resources — to increase the overall amount of financial resources available to public transport and to secure the most efficient use of these and other resources, notably energy.
Choice and local democracy — to increase the consumer's freedom of choice by expanding passenger services and securing alternatives in freight movement and to strengthen local democracy by creating a new framework of planning, co-ordination and financing of local transport.
Interests of transports workers — to ensure that the changes ahead are accomplished in the context of full and continuing trade union involvement.
Consultation with transport users — effective bodies representing users' interests are needed in all transport sectors to monitor performance, investigate complaints and advise on present and future policy options.