COMMISSION ON THE POWERS AND ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR WALES

Submission by the Director, Wales Transport Research Centre, University Of Glamorgan

Professor Stuart Cole

Rationale

The key objective of integrated transport is to provide for a split between accessible and affordable modes of travel which are both sustainable and become the preferred modes of travel in Wales.

However, Wales has different spatial characteristics from densely populated urban areas (e.g. Cardiff, Newport, Merthyr, Ebbw Vale, Swansea, Wrexham), through major towns (e.g.Neath, Port Talbot, Llanelli, Aberystwyth, Llandudno) and important rural centres (e.g.Carmarthen, Haverfordwest, Castell Newydd Emlyn, Llandeilo, Brecon, Newtown, Ruthin, Denbigh) to deep rural Wales (e.g.Ceredigion, Gwynedd). The potential for transfer to public transport therefore, varies between urban and rural areas. But even such a difference can be narrowed.

However, improvements are required in the public transport system before car users can be persuaded to change and non-car owners be able to make reasonably timed and priced journeys.

Its responsibilities only provide the National Assembly with a national role in roads and a role in road/rail transport through its links with local authorities. This therefore severely limits its ability to balance investment between the best solutions to transport problems. This is highlighted in two analyses of options for transport investment in the south Wales corridor and the Cardiff-Newport conurbation. An Arup report (1999) showed the bus/rail/traffic management schemes had a significantly higher economic NPV (return) compared with the road options. A paper for the Institute of Welsh Affairs, (Cole, in Agenda, 2000) compared the costs of the M4 investment proposals to a series of rail enhancement expenditures suggested a similar outcome.

Local Transport Plans(LTP’s) , the centrepiece of the UK Government’s proposals for the co-ordination of transport movements, have a crucial role in promoting integrated and sustainable transport. They must be seen in the context of users and suppliers and backed by appropriate policies, powers and resources. The policies and proposals in the LTP’s must relate and support the UDP’s and be compatible in a regional context. An integrated transport policy is not anti-road nor pro-public transport; rather it seeks to optimise investment expenditure on a sustainable basis. It means getting best value for the investment made but bearing in mind the long-term consequences which personal travel and movement of freight has on the environment, health and quality of life. It is not a low cost policy nor need it be unaffordable.

The models discussed in the Policy Review of Public Transport (PRPT, 2001) present several options. The proposal set out above formalises much of what is currently the reality. A national/regional model offers benefits in terms of a framework for policies to be consistent in all parts of Wales to fund and deliver public transport.

The provision for bottom up decision making by county councils through the consortia/boards will ensure that the diverse characteristics of need are provided for. The distinctive needs of urban Wales and rural Wales highlight the reality that while decisions on the rail franchise have to be made by the Assembly, decisions on local bus and associated public transport (including taxis) have to be made regionally/locally, and the whole operation has to be integrated into one total journey network.

- a national Wales rail network
        (Wales and Borders franchise)

- the national road network

- bus policy (regulation)

- regional public transport policies

- local roads

- land use planning

- bus quality partnerships

- traffic management

NAfW

NAfW (from DT)

PTB’s/CC’s

CC’s

CC’s

CC’s

CC’s

Transfer of powers

If the desire is to achieve an integrated transport policy for Wales the following responsibilities, powers and functions would need to be transferred from London to the Assembly Government and local authorities who between them would have the policy making role for, and power to finance:-

-    road construction investment and maintenance

-    bus service frequencies, routes, and subsidy/contract payment levels

-    investment incentives

-    rail investment (DfT/Network Rail/SRA)

-    rail passenger service levels and contractual arrangements with TOC’s (SRA) (block grant would be increased by an amount commensurate with current expenditure)

-    environmental issues

-    land use/development

-    current powers of the Traffic Commissioners (DfT)

-    traffic reduction/traffic management policy and regulation (DfT/NAW)

-    personal safety of pedestrians, cyclists and provision for those groups

-    mobility impaired people

-    liaison with Sustrans in Wales

-    airport development and air service development and regulation (with appropriate private sector involvement) (DfT, CAA)

-    bus industry regulation (DfT)

-    public transport policy generally (DfT)

-    rail regulation (Rail Regulator) and user group representation (RPC-Cymru Wales)

-    regulatory framework for taxis/private hire cars (part DfT, local councils)

-    port development and shipping services promotion (DfT)

-    integration of road/rail freight operations (PACT) (National Rail, DfT)

(Note: Names in brackets indicate present holders of that responsibility where these are not the National Assembly.)

The 4I’s

In an English Tourism Council study (ETB, 2000; ETC, 2001) the following 4 Is were identified as the integration equation for passenger transport:-

Information + Interchange + Investment = Integration

The absence of any of these elements will hinder or even prevent the development of an integrated passenger transport system.