TAPAS.network | 17 July 2024 | Editorial Opinion | Peter Stonham

Labour starts its transport journey…But who is deciding the path?

Peter Stonham

IN JUST A WEEK OR SO since the General Election, the new Labour Government has been very active in asserting the arrival of a new era in British politics.

Though not the highest of profile areas, transport has had its fair share of attention, particularly in the choice of the full ministerial team of five, led by Louise Haigh, taking forward her former role as Shadow Transport Secretary, but with two particularly interesting ministers in support — Lord Peter Hendy, spearheading Labour’s rail agenda, and Lilian Greenwood given the interesting title of Future of Roads Minister — alongside Simon Lightwood leading on Local Transport, and Mike Kane responsible for Aviation and Maritime.

Hendy comes with a huge set of experience in the industry at TfL, Network Rail, and beyond, and Greenwood will have learned a lot during her period as Chair of Transport Select Committee between 2017 and 2019.

However, it is already becoming clear that lead responsibilities on some major transport-related issues will be under the wing of other wider policy-setting cabinet members, particularly Chancellor Rachel Reeves, Deputy Prime Minister and Housing, Communities and Local Government Secretary, Angela Rayner, and Energy and Net Zero Secretary Ed Milliband.

It is meanwhile interesting to reflect on where the new prime minister, Kier Starmer, places transport in his own map of the economic and social issues he wants Labour to address. His record to date on speaking about transport matters shows a much lower level of personal interest and intervention than either of his recent predecessors, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Johnson in particular had a number of enthusiasms in the transport field, expressed during his time as both Prime Minister and Mayor of London; and Sunak spent the last couple of years taking strong positions on the balance between HS2 and local transport expenditure, and the rights and needs of the motorists.

In the previous Labour Governments from 1997 to 2010, though Prime Minister Tony Blair was not known for his transport opinions, he had this subject area well covered by his high-profile and heavyweight deputy, John Prescott, a transport enthusiast, who spearheaded the formation of a mega department covering the Environment, Transport and the Regions. Whilst this was welcomed by many professionals as at last integrating planning, development and the built environment with transport, it actually proved an unwieldy and somewhat incompatible mix of subject matter and policy priorities, eventually to be dismembered.

This time round, it looks as though a more ad-hoc arrangement for bringing together decisions across a similar territory is shaping up — in which new transport secretary, Louise Haigh may be the junior partner to Reeves, Rayner and Milliband. Already Reeves has been the one to launch the Government’s drive to “sort out” planning and infrastructure policy, with Rayner set to lead on the major push to build more homes in a hurry, an area in which of course appropriate and sustainable transport provision is a key consideration. As yet, Haigh has not even been able, within one of her priority areas of boosting public transport use, to announce an extension of the £2 maximum bus fare.

green quotations

Announcements on the matter of infrastructure may turn out to be the litmus test of where the Labour Government is heading on the issue of transport priorities and integrated thinking. Chancellor Reeves has made early pointed references to getting decisions made and spades in the ground on infrastructure projects, as part of the drive for economic growth.

In other areas of local transport detail, Labour’s policies on matters like roads, parking, speed limits, Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, authorising and regulating new mobility modes, and creating new mass transit systems - as well as on airports and aviation - are yet to be revealed. A conversation between the new Labour Government and the powerful set of local metropolitan mayors, almost all now Labour, has begun, but led by Starmer as Prime Minister himself. As LTT closed for press, a response to the metropolitan authorities’ wish list of hopes for policy and legislation on transport sent to the Prime Minister by the Urban Transport Group, which represents these mayoral and city-regional authorities, was being awaited in the form of the substance of the legislative programme being set out in the King’s Speech to the new Parliament.

Announcements on the matter of infrastructure may turn out to be the litmus test of where the Labour Government is heading on the issue of transport priorities and integrated thinking. Reeves has made early pointed references to getting decisions made and spades in the ground on infrastructure projects, as part of the drive for economic growth, seemingly embracing a range of types of projects from energy facilities like wind farms and the water sector, to road and rail. We will thus watch with great interest for decisions on major road schemes like the Lower Thames Crossing, A66 upgrade, and Stonehenge Tunnel, - as much for the basis of which they are made- and how the next projects are to be considered and prioritised in the RIS National Highways plans, and those of Network Rail/Great British Railways.

In this issue, Professor Phil Goodwin strongly urges a pause and fundamental review of both existing and projected roads schemes, making a strong case that the basis of which many were initiated has changed and that new Government’s objectives and priorities need to be reflected in the schemes chosen to go forward. This raises another interesting dimension, about which comment has previously been made in this column a number of times, i.e. the tradeoff between the quest for economic growth, a re-ordering of social equity, and protecting the environment.

There are also difficult choices at both a local level and nationally in terms of broader issues like climate change and the need to decarbonise.

It has been made very clear by Starmer that firing up economic growth is nis number one priority, which many will argue needs substantial infrastructure renewal and expansion, in the transport sector as much as any. Alongside this, the construction industry will expect a strong pipeline of work to maintain activity and jobs, no-doubt arguing that cancellation of a tranche of road scheme is just what the doctor wouldn’t have ordered.

The next few months will reveal the practical realities of Labour’s priorities and programme. Until then, it remains unclear just how much of a new broom on transport Kier Starmer’s Government will actually be.

Peter Stonham is the Editorial Director of TAPAS Network

This article was first published in LTT magazine, LTT896, 17 July 2024.

d2-20220516-1
taster
Read more articles by Peter Stonham
Building great communities for the future, not just homes for now
IN THE GOVERNMENT’S mission to deliver the 1.5 million new homes it believes the country urgently needs, the proposals just tabled by the New Towns Taskforce for a dozen new towns, or major urban extensions, are a very significant step. As well as identifying the most appropriate locations, the Taskforce has had much to say about the design and development processes that should be followed to create the best possible new neighbourhoods and local economies for the inhabitants of them. And on the way the lives of those in the new settlements can be most desirably supported with public services - with transport and mobility provision a key part of that.
Time to redefine ‘road safety’?
THE ANIVERSARY of the introduction of compulsory seatbelt wearing 40 years ago usefully prompts some reflections on the changing perceptions and priorities relating to what has traditionally been known as ‘road safety’. As does the fact that a significantly amended version of the Highway Code, introducing the concept of a road user hierarchy of responsibility for the first time, was issued a year ago, as explored in a contribution to this issue from Tom Cohen.
Infrastructure planning: NISTA’s the word as the Treasury takes control
FEW WILL DOUBT that the current Government has a very strong mission to enhance the nation’s infrastructure in the pursuit of greater economic growth, and the support to sectors it believes will be fundamental to the future shape of the economy. Not only is it structuring its spending plans and quest for private sector investment to this end, but is changing the planning system and other processes to make investment projects easier to deliver and less constrained by so called ‘red tape’, NIMBY objections and legal challenges.
Read more articles on TAPAS
‘One thing to rule them all’. Why not a single package for ALL Mobility Services – and how users pay for them?
Listening to discussion at the Local Transport Summit, John Dales concluded that it’s not only time for a comprehensive rethink of how we manage the use of our streets, but that this should logically be connected to a new way of getting users to pay for the roads they travel on too. And maybe all this can be put into a comprehensive overall mobility access package that really shows people all the options they have to choose from
Lining up to embrace motorists just makes our politicians look silly - and it will have no winners
The past few weeks have seen a febrile atmosphere engulf discussion about transport policy. It has been driven by an illogical obsession amongst politicians with pleasing ‘the motorist’, says John Dales. He thinks that it is all based upon a misreading of the public mood and a feeding frenzy amongst some media commentators. Surely it is time to be more grown-up about some crucial issues.
Most decisions have climate consequences. But can we really seek to embrace them all?
THE LAST FEW YEARS have seen much debate and legal challenge on how the impacts of transport projects, particularly highway schemes, should be properly assessed and appraised for their wider environmental consequences. A significant number of major road schemes have been delayed whilst the various stages of challenges have been pursued by environmental activists going to court.