Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Labour blamed for transport failure

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 26 October 2008
RISING traffic congestion, poor railways and environmental damage inflicted by air travel are getting worse because of a continued lack of government action, research has found.

A book by two leading transport experts claims Labour policy has failed completely in the 10 years since the UK Government launched its landmark White Paper 'A New Deal for Transport'.

Traffic congestion has increased dramatically since John Pre
scott declared in 1997 that he would have "failed in five years time if there are not more journeys made by public transport and fewer by car".

Dr Iain Docherty of Glasgow University and Professor Jon Shaw of Plymouth University have found traffic has grown by 15% overall in Britain between 1996 and 2006 and by 27% on the motorways.

Their book Traffic Jam: 10 Years Of "Sustainable" Transport In The UK noted that 200 kilometres of new roads are still being built per year despite Labour's pledge to make new road building "a measure of the last resort".

New starts on road building projects are now outstripping those being completed, while the total number of kilometres driven by all vehicles registered in Britain has increased from 441 billion to 506 billion in the past 10 years.

Shaw said: "Ten years on the problems are still there and they have got worse, because Labour has dodged making major decisions to address the key issues. They have failed to achieve their own objective, which was to move the us away from dependence on the car and use more sustainable public transport."

They criticised the Government's aviation policy claiming an increasing number of international and domestic flights had resulted in carbon emissions rising from 43 million tonnes in 1998 to 46 million today.

"The Government is not willing to curb the increase in flights," said Shaw pointing to hints that ministers intend to go-ahead with a third runway at Heathrow and plans to extend London Stansted and Birmingham airport.

He added that building an extra runway at Glasgow or Edinburgh would exacerbate the problem by increasing the number of flights.

The Government's attempt to promote healthier lifestyles by encouraging walking and cycling has also failed. In 1997 the number of deliberate trips made by an individual on foot stood at an average of 292. That figure has fallen to 249.

The use of cycles has been in decline since the 1970s with only 2% of trips now taken by bicycle.

The authors said there was a huge potential to ease the pressure on roads and public transport by walking or cycling given that 70% of journeys in Britain were under five miles and 41% were under two miles.

Although the amount of Government subsidy in railways had risen from 34% of rail receipts in 1998 to 51% now, Shaw said that there was still under-investment in carriage capacity.

The Hatfield crash of 2000 that resulted in the deaths of four passengers and injured a further 70 had exposed serious underlying flaws with the rail system that had eaten into Government money,Shaw said. In the aftermath of the crash, Railtrack embarked on a programme of rail checks.

Shaw said: "There has not been enough investment into capacity. The investment has been into broken systems instead."

The bus system in most of Britain was still "poor" in comparison with the rest of Europe. The exception was in London where investment in bendy buses and the introduction of congestion charges had succeeded in increasing bus use.

Bus journeys in London had risen by 62% in London compared with just 1% in Scotland.

Promises to build 25 new tram systems in Britain's cities had not been fulfilled. By 2004 only two new schemes had opened in Nottingham and Newcastle.

The authors pointed out that Alistair Darling had vetoed schemes in England when he was transport secretary yet there was a new tram system being built in his constituency in Edinburgh.

Docherty said: "It is 10 years since the landmark White Paper 'A New Deal For Transport' which said that, for a long time we have been pursuing the wrong kinds of transport policies and that we should start to make them more sustainable – to use cars less, to walk more and to use the train more.

"Our detailed analysis of Labour's transport policies shows that they have been a big disappointment, at best a missed opportunity. It's a shame because the Government came in with the right intentions but have done very little to promote meaningful change.

"Westminster's policy has failed with politicians there unwilling to take the bold decisions that are needed in order to tackle things like climate change and congestion."

Dead ends

Labour's broken transport promises include:

1. UK traffic is up 15% despite Labour pledge to cut road use.

2. Promises to encourage walking and cycling have not been fulfilled.

3. Pledge to increase public transport use hit by lack of investment in carriage capacity.

4. Promise for 25 new tram systems not met. Only two new schemes opened.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 25 October 2008 7:13 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
 
1

truthsleuth,

26/10/2008 00:56:48
rail travel has invcreased by 50% in the same time period despite fare increases.
Over the same period motoring costs have REDUCED by 18% in real terms.
Absolutely agreed about aviation but then you have only to examine the number of labour MPs who have 'links' to the aviation industry (this should be investigated).

Most of the 'failures' occured under Alistair Darling - OH Dear Douglas Alexander and other illegal immigrant Scots.
2

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 26/10/2008 01:10:04
Not wasting money on more tram systems is to the credit of Labour who worked out every single new build systerm thus far had been an economic failure, so they should not be criticised for that.

However supporting the ridiculous vanity tram in Edinburgh simply to spite the SNP is to their shame. Hundreds of millions wasted that could have made a real difference to transport across Scotland and if invested in the A9 and A82 have saved lives.
3

livilion,

livingston 26/10/2008 03:01:24
Well that's rich, Labour have only had since the 60's to produce a transport infrastructure to be proud of.

Give it a bit more time, aren't they getting there, a tram in Edinburgh surely that's the sign of what's to come?
4

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 26/10/2008 03:52:11
I think the report is being very unfair to New Labour in Scotland. They've hardly repaired the roads never mind upgrade them since before Willie Ross was Secretatary of State for Scotland.

He was a classic London Labour snout in the tough boy. You couldnt build a sandcastle in Scotland unless Willie and those further down got their big kickback. He was one of the many SNOUTERS who perfected the process. Blood out of a Stone?. Aye and the rest. Many of the younger ones on this forum would have a clue on how much Labours cash mountain grew in those days. They probably had as much as the London Treasury. Union organisers would pull out big wads of Notes and buy the odd drink for a union member. They had to have all the safety gear on even back then. It was dangerous getting out of bed with the extra height caused by mountains of money under the mattress.

Aye boys, the SNP put an end to your good thing eh.
5

Wisnaeme,

26/10/2008 04:00:55
Well apart from New Labour's proposed experiment in road pricing (Manchester) and the less than fiscally successful, M6 Toll road (Birmingham) there is nought much to encouraged fiscal entrepreneurs to partake of blackmail and extortion.

That was the big picture according to New Labour.

Road pricing in partnership with their beezness pals to make a killing.

Apparently there is a shortage of liquid capital to invest in such scams. Then there's the small problem of motorist's perceptions that they are paying for something which they have already paid for.

Aye, being ripped once is bad enough but twice.
.

But then, that's New Labour for you.
6

Hmm ...,

26/10/2008 05:45:38
... "truthsleuth" (was anyone ever so misnamed?) said "Over the same period motoring costs have REDUCED by 18% in real terms."

Oh yes, so how is that calculated then? Road users pay £53 BILLION in taxes and get investment of £8 billion in return. How can that be value for money?

Or is truthsl (sorry I can't repeat that lie) really saying simply that even with that poor return on its tax "investment" it is more efficient to travel and carry goods by road?
7

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/10/2008 06:23:26
Thats not fair to say the government has done nothing.
The fact is the government has done everything it possibly can in order to make as much revenue as possible out of the transport system.
And they havent finished yet I cant wait for the road tolls that should clear our roads for all but the well off.

1

Full of sh*t as usual.

"Over the same period motoring costs have REDUCED by 18% in real terms."

I cant believe anybody would have the gall to post that in public I bet even you dont believe it.
Truthsleuth indeed no wonder your always looking for it.
8

steve 1511,

aberdeen 26/10/2008 06:45:25
nothing works in britian with broon,were doomed with broon and the labour sleaze and corruption party
9

Sebastian the Hairdresser,

26/10/2008 07:29:59
http://files.the-group.net/library/rac/files/pdf_1797.pdf - Page 10.
10

noswod,

Honestas 26/10/2008 09:37:19
Although Labours progress has been slow in developing public transport what does the long term strategic thinking SNP do when it gets into power cancell the building of a new Waverley at Edinburgh airport that would have made Edinburgh Airport accessable by half of the Scottish population within 2 hours. To pour scourn on the isssue oor dear borders folk their new railway is emasculated and will never be built by the Nats. Two long term infrastructual projects unheard of in Scottish and UK terms cancelled because of political spite not long term economic /transport rationale. This shows the SNP's polical immaturity and failure to do something really Scottish and invest for the long term. They can be hardly surprized by Alistar Darlings response on the Scottish banks when Scottish jobs are at stake, short term economic and political expediancy rules. If the Nats were in total power we would be heading for the IMF or trading at 250 basis points above benckmark Euro lending rates,otherwise know as meltdown. Get real nationalism is a dead end and no solution to Scotlands problems.
11

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 26/10/2008 09:49:36
#10

You can "force" people to take buses and trams (how very much a New Labour/lentilmuncher approach) but we already massively overpay for petrol and diesel in the UK due to the malign influence of Gordon Brown, compared to other European countries and most of it is tax. If you continue to tax people off the road you won't have the revenue to replace cars with public transport.

In any event it would take a really massive investment and effort to introduce a comprehensive public transport system which would not be economically feasible and would stil leave enormous gaps in coverage. When I calculate how long it will take me to go from one part of this city to another by public transport it's usually something between 5 - 10 times the amount of time compared to a journey by car. I can't afford to lose that time! OK if you live in Edinburgh or Glasgow, are on a decent bus route and work in the centre, but introduce any complexity into that like having to go from one side of the city to the other or to a rural location and the timescales move to geological.

Public transport has to compete and show that it can provide the majority of people with comfortable, safe and economical transport, which then tempts people out of their cars if they can do it and is the correct approach rather than bludgeon people and take away their ability to choose. Something the Lieborites and thos of the Greenie persuasion would love to do.
12

SouthernSkye,

26/10/2008 10:14:26
Give TreuthSleuth a break eh?
Might well be correct !
If the cost of motoring is only increased vastly but the cost of everything else increased phenomenoly then, in real terms, motoring could be cheaper:-)!

10 Rulesbutnotrulers. Nice idea, never work, current Govt cannot be trusted to "ring-fence" tax take to use in one particular area. The green-takes relating to air travel....where are they being spent?
13

The_Reiver,

26/10/2008 10:33:40
Force all bankers to literally get on their bikes. Perhaps Salmond could set an example here too?
14

Americanbob,

26/10/2008 11:09:43
#'s 11 & 13,
The only shame about the cancellation of the ludicrously overpriced EARL was that the SNP did not hold to their election pledge and cancel the tram project as well. There is a perfectly good rail link for Edinburgh Airport all that is required is a station on the site of the old Turnhouse base and a link between there and the terminal such as the Newark Airtrain (look it up)
If necessary there could have been shunting sidings built which could have allowed for a shuttle service to run between Waverley/Haymarket and the Airport 24/7.
But that would have been too simple for the politcians!
15

Americanbob,

26/10/2008 11:10:35
Excuse typo "politicians"
16

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 26/10/2008 11:12:27
2 of 25 tram schemes approved.

Main reason - they were proven not to work in congested city centres where the old lines had been converted to use by cars.

Very few towns or cities where they will work, Salford for example, however Edinburgh is not one of them.
17

Hamish Scott,

26/10/2008 11:18:46
#11
EARL - £650 million for a train station at Edinburgh airport (that was the cost before construction even started) including tunnelling under a live runway (the only one) with open-ended public liability. And largely predicated on airport usage expanding massively (unlikely with a global recession and fuel prices rising).
M74 and GARL were schemes initiated by the previous Lab/Lib administration.
18

eric,

26/10/2008 11:59:19
Glasgow has made the right move ,train link to airport ,subway system,the Glasgow crossrail makes sense.the city is sitting on a goldmine of disused rail lines and tunnels,we have sot ourselves in foot with tram line,
19

beckypumps1,

Fife 26/10/2008 14:23:36
Bit of topic but the sooner we get the A9 dueled the better.Hope your reading this Sandy.
20

Calum Crubag,

26/10/2008 14:56:19
How about nationalising the railways instead of the banks?

Maybe Labour need to get back to their basics instead of lounging about on private yachts with billionaires.

Or maybe we need full Scottish contol of our transport?
21

Joe Macdelta.,

26/10/2008 16:48:27
(Union organisers would pull out big wads of Notes and buy the odd drink for a union member.)
#4 What union were you in, oor shop steward hasnt put his hand in his pocket since he took the job, he widna buy a drink for anybody unless somebody gave him the money up front.
22

Nikostratos,

26/10/2008 16:49:36
Labour move back ahead in Scotland
October 26th, 2008

YouGov has a new poll of Scottish voting intentions in the Sunday Times. The full voting intentions, with changes from YouGov’s last Scottish poll in September are:

In a Westminster General election CON 20%(+3), LAB 38%(+6), LDEM 11%(-2), SNP 29%(-5)
23

We are responsible for ourselves.,

26/10/2008 18:41:45
A Scotland Votes Analysis of today’s Sunday Times /Yougov opinion poll shows the following breakdown of the 73 constituency seats in the Scottish
Parliament ;

SNP 37 (+16)
Lab 29 (-8)
LD 4 (-7)
Con 3( -1)

http://www.scotlandvotes.com/

So more than fifty percent of the seats...Poor Nikos.
24

Eve,

Scotland 26/10/2008 19:56:53
wow Labour broke promieses. (no suprise there)

Well I've never read any thing like that in this news paper!

That must be a 1st.

25

truthsleuth,

26/10/2008 23:30:55
#6 Hmm

Contact the RAC Foundation theithe figures were reported by them.
26

truthsleuth,

26/10/2008 23:37:46
For all you petrol brained racers Your OWN organisation the RAC reported

– 18% cheaper to buy and run a car, including
fuel costs, in 2008 than 1988.
– 28% cheaper to buy and run a car, excluding
fuel costs, in 2008 than 1988.

So get your heads out of the exhaust piper and get back into the REAL world.

Sh*t its more useful than you are and certainly smells less.
http://files.the-group.net/library/rac/files/pdf_1797.pdf page 7
27

truthsleuth,

26/10/2008 23:46:52
#18 GrahamH,

NOT TRUE
The problem was a gentleman called Alistair Darling yes the same one as transport minister stopped the tram schemes because of 'cost escalation' and yet Road schemes where costs had eescalated even further went ahead eg M1 widening.

So get your facts together and don't believe the spin put about by your confederates they have their heads up their exhaust pipes even further than you do.
I believe certin motorway schemes in Scotland also suffered from cost escalation far greater than the tram shemes M8 and M74 were involved - have you forgotten.

Tram schemes in Manchester Nottinham and Croydon have been a success.

So the quicker you North opf the Border get Alistair Gordon and Douglas back the better.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.