AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

We do not support the use of substantially larger trucks

29th April 2010, Page 9
29th April 2010
Page 9
Page 9, 29th April 2010 — We do not support the use of substantially larger trucks
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

on UK roads. However, the DfT is currently undertaking research on the costs, benefits and implicaticins of increasing HGV trailer lerhgth by up to 2m. This could have the potential to reduce the number of vehicle kilometres travelled with consequent benefits for CO., emissions, air quality, safety and congestion. We will consider the outcomes of this study carefully.

Local authorities must make their own judgements about how they best meet local priorities. Labour will support councils that seek to improve transport in their area, but whether local councils choose to pursue LEZs or charging schemes in their area remains a matter for them. We will work with the private sector and local councils to enable sufficient and secure truck parking facilities to be developed in the UK.

The existing 25 sector councils (SSCs) have dc great deal of work on bet employers and we have no tion of embarking on a who restructuring of the networ we have asked the UK Coi sion for Employment and S identify any potential for cc ration or consolidation acro network of SSCs, wherE would help simplify the ski vironment and make it clea employers.

We are keen to have a proper look at environmental and economic implications of longersemi trailers and wit look at experience in Germany, where they have been introduced. But this would not be accompanied by higher gross vehicle weights. We have ruled out longer, heavier vehicles; i.e the 25.25m, 60-tonne gross LHV

Labour earmarked funding for local authorities that would introduce congestion charging — blackmailing them into local road pricing. We would end this ringfencing and remove the requirement for local authorities to introduce congestion charging if they bid for funds. The introduction of local schemes would be a matter for local authorities and should only be done where there is local support not when it is imposed from above. We are keen to engage with motorway services stations to utilise some of the overnight parking that is not currently used. If we are going to attract new people into industry, particularly women, we need better overnight facilities the UK compares badly with the Continent in this regard. Yes. We support SSCs anc to enhance their role, not them. We would transfer sk sponsibilities from Region; velopment Agencies to and give SSCs a greater 1 accrediting and designin ther education college coo

Tags


comments powered by Disqus