TAPAS.network | 11 February 2022 | Editorial Opinion | Peter Stonham

Levelling up is a challenge for transport too

Phil Goodwin

IT IS EASY to look at the idea of ‘Levelling Up’ through either cynical or simplistic eyes. ‘It’s just a slogan’ or ‘Not enough money’ are familiar comments. For transport people, it would similarly be a mistake to just look for the bit in the policy about transport, and what the objectives or possible funding are for local schemes or service provision, and to say ‘so that’s where we fit in’.

But the subject is surely rather more of a challenge than that – for transport, just as it is for everyone concerned.

‘Levelling up is a moral, social and economic programme for the whole of government’ The Government’s new Levelling Up White Paper says.

The Paper sets out how to spread opportunity more equally across the UK.

Crafted by Michael Gove and Andy Haldane, the White Paper is an interesting and rather unusual document, at 332 pages worthy of scrutiny as a whole by those in transport, just as by others genuinely concerned at how the British Economy – and Society – is so unbalanced, unequal and, as a result, relatively unproductive.

It begins with an insightful look at how such variable conditions, and life chances, arise, exploring the History of Geographical Disparities internationally from Roman times to the era of Globalisation, and setting out the current scale of geographical disparities across the UK. This scene-setting overview explores key issues including Cities and Productivity, Social Mobility, Geographic and Economic Clustering, and Institutional Capital and Leadership. It tackles too Future Structural Factors Driving the UK’s Economic Geography – including transition to Net Zero, the impact of COVID-19, and technological transformation. Amongst the approaches, it looks at the idea of human, social, institutional and other forms of ‘capital’ as elements in understanding Geographical Disparities, and the role of public policy, and in particular Local Growth Policy. 

quotations 5

...the White Paper is an interesting and rather unusual document, at 332 pages worthy of scrutiny as a whole by those in transport, just as by others genuinely concerned at how the British Economy – and Society – is so unbalanced, unequal and, as a result, relatively unproductive.

In its quest to make a real difference, The White Paper sets 12 central missions by 2030, including plans to: close gaps in transport and connectivity but also to close the gap between the UK’s highest and lowest performing cities; improve educational attainment among children leaving primary school; and narrow the gap in healthy life expectancy between the best and worst performing areas of the UK.

A technical annex of the missions and metrics runs to a further 54 pages.

It can be regarded as a virtue of the White Paper that it treats improving local transport as just one of the dozen missions necessary to tackle regional inequalities, all of which must be pushed forward if the effort is to succeed.

Until now, decisions about transport investment have largely been taken in a silo by the Department for Transport, which holds the purse strings and determines how investment decisions should be taken, and which has been reluctant to take account of how transport investment can foster development to suit the circumstances in particular locations, since this complicates the standardised modelling. The expressed intention now is that central government decision-making will need to

be fundamentally reoriented to align policies with the levelling up agenda, and hardwire spatial considerations across Whitehall – surely a welcome development in its own right.

Sure, seeking to ensure Local public transport connectivity across the country will be significantly closer to the standards of London – with improved services, simpler fares and integrated ticketing is a desirable aim – and something that transport professionals are well placed to assist with.

But others of the eleven missions ought to be of concern to those in transport too.

Their input can surely help with the aim that Pay, employment and productivity will have risen in every area of the UK, with each containing a globally competitive city, and the gap between the top performing and other areas closing.

Also that public investment in R&D outside the Greater South East will increase by at least 40%. This additional government funding will seek to leverage at least twice as much private sector investment over the long term to stimulate innovation and productivity growth.

Likewise how the Gap in Healthy Life Expectancy (HLE) between local areas where it is highest and lowest will have narrowed, and that Wellbeing will have improved in every area of the UK, with the gap between top performing and other areas closing.

And let’s certainly hope that those in transport can materially help achieve a rise in the mission to elevate Pride in Place, such as people’s satisfaction with their town centre and engagement in local culture and community.

Transport is not an end in itself – and it is an integral element in the shaping and defining of communities and their functionality, self-esteem and economic performance, and social welfare and cohesion.

It is rather pleasing that ‘infrastructure investment’ is not what the White Paper is all about – including an absence of what would once have been a familiar call for ‘better roads’ to ‘drive economic growth’.

Taking a thoughtful, different and measured view of a very challenging topic is worth commending as a prospectus for change, though the hard part is making it all happen. Those in Local Transport should be seeking creative ways to play their part.

Peter Stonham is the Editorial Director of TAPAS Network

This article was first published in LTT magazine, LTT839, 11 February 2022.

d2-20220516-1
taster
Read more articles by Peter Stonham
Time for Total Transport to come out of the DfT’s ‘too difficult’ tray
NEW APPROACHES to how transport is most effectively planned and delivered tend to be more usually developed in modal, technological, operational or geographical silos, rather than all-embracing new paradigms. Changes generally emerge from disruptive new players, particular entrepreneurs breaking new ground and taking risks, technological revolutions, or challenging local political leaders prepared to stick their necks out. These are rarely characteristics to be found in centralised bodies or public authorities — least of all government departments.
Lessons from the Summit: thinking beyond the transport mantra
TRANSPORT PROFESSIONALS, whose role is essentially that of advisers and experts rather than decision makers, have to a significant extent become unrealistic, and perhaps complacent, in the degree to which they expect those with the authority to implement the ideas which the professionals believe are appropriate.
Dis-integration: Professionals’ thinking meets political reality
TRANSPORT PROFESSIONALS talk a lot about integrated policy, by which they mean planning and operating the different modes to maximise the overall societal benefit, and the ease and efficiency for individual users in terms of time, cost, comfort, safety and accessibility. It is a persuasive theory, but to understand it requires a considerable grounding in both conceptual and detailed thinking that most non-transport experts simply do not have or even recognise as significant. And examples of how it all works in practice are thin on the ground.
Read more articles on TAPAS
Lower Thames Crossing – Is this Tunnel a Bridge too Far?
The forthcoming examination of the revised National Highways proposals for a new downstream crossing of the Thames between Kent and Essex is likely to hear some very significant arguments about both the need for the major investment project, and the rationale behind its justification. They could also have an echo of the discussions on economic growth that have influenced the recent Conservative Party leadership elections. Here Phil Goodwin presents his analysis of the case expected to be tabled, and the wider issues it raises about scheme presentation, appraisal and political acceptability
Infrastructure obsession ignores optimising condition and capacity
Governments and political leaders like talking about infrastructure — most specifically new infrastructure. This Government in particular seems to want almost to be measured in terms of the quantity of infrastructure it can get delivered during its term — housing, roads, power stations, and airports, to name some obvious examples. It says all this is in the name of increasing economic growth and improving the overall economy for working people. But those people, of course, have other concerns, many related to the way that the nation’s existing infrastructure is being looked after.
Road investment framework is based on objectives and values from the past
In his previous contribution David Metz looked at the investment appraisal thinking revealed by the government’s recent Integrated Rail Plan for the North and Midlands. He found a new set of principles being applied, that he believes should prompt new approaches across all transport investment, including roads and multi modal strategy. He concludes his critique in the second of two articles LTT invited him to write.