Contact: Peter Murnaghan, ext 6920 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Before the summer recess of Parliament, a number of important policy statements were announced by the Secretary of State for Transport. This report provides a summary of those that have an effect upon transport in Hampshire:

(i) The Future of Transport White Paper, including the decision on South Hampshire Rapid Transit;

(ii) The Rail Review; and

(iii) The Regional Transport Strategy.

1.2 In addition, guidance was published on Local Transport Plans, but this is described in a separate item on this agenda.

2. The Future of Transport White Paper

2.1 The Secretary of State, in announcing the new White Paper, stressed the need for a long term strategy for a modern, efficient and sustainable transport system, backed up by sustained high levels of investment over the next 15 years. The Future of Transport has three core elements:

(i) Sustained investment over the long-term

- an additional £1.7 billion transport reform package for the railways, over and above previous plans for 2005/06 and 2006/07;

- spending on transport to increase by £0.5 billion a year in 2006/07 and 2007/08, rising by an average of 4.5% in real terms between 2005/06 and 2007/08. This higher level of spending will grow in real terms by 2.25% each year through to 2015; and

- emphasis on cost control and value for money.

(ii) Improvements in transport management

- reorganising the rail industry to improve performance, drive down costs and get better value from public spending (see the Rail Review for details);

- better traffic management to attempt to ease congestion on the road network;

- where capacity is being added, ensure that the benefits are locked in - for example, tolling on new roads or the introduction of High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes where they make sense; and

- looking at how to help local authorities combine better bus services with local charging schemes. A new transport fund has been established to support and encourage strategies to tackle urban congestion.

(iii) Planning ahead

- the Government proposes to lead the debate on road pricing, with the publication of the Road Pricing Feasibility Study, published at the same time; and

- the Government intends to ensure that regional and local planning is based on a shared view of priorities, deliverability and affordability. It is committed to sharing decision-making with regional and local stakeholders; there is potentially a reduced role for direct involvement of local transport authorities with a move to more regional decision making.

2.2 As part of this announcement, a commitment was given to seek appropriate powers to construct Crossrail, a heavy rail cross-London route direct from the west of the capital (Maidenhead and Heathrow) to the east (Brentwood and Ebbsfleet) via Paddington, Tottenham Court Road and Liverpool Street.

3. South Hampshire Rapid Transit

3.1 On 20 July 2004 Alistair Darling MP also made a long awaited statement on the three proposed light rail schemes, including the South Hampshire Rapid Transit (SHRT). In each case he was concerned about the costs of procurement. He said:

"Light rail can be very effective in persuading people to use public transport. Since 2000 new lines have opened in Croydon, Tyne and Wear, Manchester and Nottingham.

"Manchester's metro has been extremely successful. But plans for the extension have been dogged by successive cost increases. There's a similar pattern with the Leeds and South Hampshire tram proposals. In Leeds the Present Value of the public sector contribution was capped at £355 million, but is now estimated at £500 million. And in South Hampshire, the original £170 million Present Value is now £100 million more.

"And in each case there's no certainty that costs won't rise further. The National Audit Office was right to raise concerns; looking back over the last 20 years it has cost more to provide light rail here than elsewhere in Europe.

"No Government could accept these schemes as they are on the basis of these cost escalations. We cannot therefore approve them. We need instead to look urgently at how light rail could be made affordable, including the best approach for procurement. We will work with local authorities on the development of schemes, building on the recent NAO recommendations."

3.2 The decision to withdraw approval for the three light rapid transit schemes in procurement in the UK followed a report from the National Audit Office which recommended the process for allocating risk and procurement on light rail projects should be reviewed. At the same time the new White Paper for Transport revised the policy framework for transport, in particular emphasising the need to consider improving bus services as the first priority and car restraint measures. The Government, however, continues to state that it is committed to light rail, in the right circumstances and at the right price.

3.3 Discussions have since taken place with officials at the Department for Transport, with a view to delivering SHRT1 in line with the new policy framework set out in the White Paper and the need to serve employment, regeneration and housing as part of the growth in the South Hampshire Strategy. The officials further suggested that opportunities be examined for changing the procurement framework, to make SHRT1 more affordable. The scope of work and programme for re-examining the project is being developed with DfT officials.

4. The Rail Review

4.1 The Government has, for some time, been concerned about the ability of the rail industry to deliver infrastructure improvements, given its important role in meeting the demands of the country's growing economy. As a result, the Secretary of State, Alistair Darling MP, published a second White Paper `The Future of Rail' in July. This White Paper sets out a new structure for the rail industry, which will see Government Ministers taking key strategic decisions, whilst devolving more powers relating to passenger activities. The structure is proposed to be based upon six key changes:

(i) the Strategic Rail Authority will be scrapped after just four years and its planning functions and financial obligations transferred to the Department for Transport;

(ii) the current infrastructure owner, Network Rail, will take on a broader role, assuming responsibility for operating the rail network and its performance;

(iii) the track and train operating companies will work more closely together, with franchise boundaries, incentives and responsibilities brought into line with one another;

(iv) there will be an increased role for the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly, the London Mayor and the Passenger Transport Executives (PTEs) to procure extra services. Community Rail Partnerships will also be promoted to manage local branch lines;

(v) the Office of Rail Regulation will take over responsibility for safety regulation from the Health and Safety Executive and retain its system-wide responsibility for cost and monitoring outputs; and

(vi) for freight operators, the Government plans to provide greater certainty about access rights to the network and, particularly, to a group of key routes, which are yet to be identified.

4.2 In addition, the local Rail Passenger Committee process will be abandoned, with a single passenger watchdog, the Rail Passengers Council, reporting on a national basis to the Department for Transport.

4.3 The new arrangement is expected to see Network Rail specifying the timetables for franchisees, with reduced scope for commercial action by the train operating companies. There is no hint of a re-emergence of a funding source, such as the Rail Passenger Partnership, which facilitated the opening of Chandlers Ford station, by pump-priming incremental improvements to the rail network. One option to be explored is whether the role of the Solent Transport Partnership could be enhanced to become closer to that of a Passenger Transport Executive. The County Council intends to request funding from the new Transport Innovations Fund to study this possibility.

5. The Regional Transport Strategy

5.1 In the same month, the Government Office for the South East published the Regional Transport Strategy (Chapter 9 of Regional Planning Guidance for the South East - RPG9). This followed the consultation version circulated in March 2004 after a number of changes had been made to the draft prepared by the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA). There was very little difference between the consultation version and the final document, which maintains the policies, the concept of regional hubs, spokes and interchanges, as well as an investment framework to the year 2016, including improvements to the M27, SHRT and the need to investigate workplace parking or congestion charging as recommended by the South Coast Multi Modal Study. The policies in the Regional transport Strategy will now need to be taken forward in Local Transport Plans.

6. South East Plan

6.1 The development of the regional spatial strategy, the South East Plan, by SEERA to guide development in the period to 2026 will include a number of options for consultation. These options are being worked up by Members and officers in respect of the two sub-regional strategies for South Hampshire and the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley, together with a supporting Vision for Hampshire to cover the remainder of the county. Much of this work has been conducted to an accelerated timescale by district and county authorities in order to contribute to the draft South East Plan, which will be published in 2005. There are a great number of implications for transport and land use development, which will need to be tested during 2005, before the Plan is finally adopted. This timescale does not easily mesh with the preparation of the Local Transport Plan for 2006-2011 (see separate item on the agenda). The transport improvement schemes for the next five years need to be submitted to the Government by next July, before the blueprint for the region as a whole and Hampshire in particular has been approved for the twenty year period.

7. Conclusion

7.1 The timescales and direction provided by these articles of policy provide a challenge in meeting the needs of Hampshire's transport over the coming decade and beyond.

Recommendation

That this update of national and regional policies be noted.

9021/PJM