Improving Local Transport:how small reforms could make a big

difference

Tony Travers, LSE

Stephen Glaister, Imperial College

Local government and transport

• A key area of policy concern

• Not one of local government’s leading priorities in recent years

• LGA’s project

• How to develop transport within context of wider political debate

• Build on existing strengths….

Key drivers of this project

• ODPM interest in ‘city regions’• DfT interest in strengthening transport

provision, especially in cities• Treasury interest in regional productivity• Lyons Inquiryand, most importantly……• LGA/local government concerns to

strengthen local democaracy

Political background - 1

• Transport• Evolution of Regional Assembly/RDA role

– also planning, housing

– Strongly supported by ODPM, Treasury

• TfL seen as a major success– bus ridership, congestion charge

• Possible threat to PTAs– insufficient powers

– political lack of friends

– ‘City Regions’……

Political background - 2

• City Regions• probably bigger than metropolitan districts, but

smaller than regions?

• supported by Treasury, ODPM– GDP

– productivity

• possibly with elected city regional mayors

• metropolitan districts generally seen (by ministers) as too small, fragmented

The purpose of our proposals

• To stimulate debate

• To accommodate the different interests of local and central government

• To improve the quality of government

• To avoid unnecessary upheaval

• To deliver better services to the public

The proposals

• To ‘build out’ from the PTA/PTEs and larger unitary authorities

• with a view to extending the idea to other authorities/areas

• To deliver a number of government objectives, eg, city government, productivity and transport improvements

• To build on GLA/TfL example

The new authorities - 1

• Enhanced governance• Leaders of met. districts; unitaries and other councils

as PTA ‘board’• possibility of adding authorities to existing PTAs or

unitary-based ‘new PTAs’

• More powers• Bus, rail network determination, frequencies, fares to

be retained by authority?• Possible ‘joint authority’ over major roads?• Planning and regeneration powers from regional

authorities?

The new authorities – 1a

• Additional powers (inc. finance) unlikely without enhanced political leadership

• existing joint authorities not always ‘loved’

• Risk that if LG does not provide a ‘city region’ option, the Government will impose one

• at regional or city-regional level (not ‘met. county’)

• Either local government provides a vehicle, or one risks being imposed?

• probably at the regional level

The new authorities - 2

• Increased financial autonomy• fare income?• Lyons Inquiry

– congestion charge/road pricing– NNDR add-on– tourist tax– ‘environmental taxes’

• Transport Innovation Fund support to smooth transition

• Prudential Borrowing

Expected results

• New ‘metropolitan’ or ‘city region’ units with stronger governance

• PTEs already in place

• without massive and costly reorganisation

• Capacity to operate with enhanced powers over full metropolitan/city region area

• Financial autonomy to deliver projects that local people/businesses will pay for

Impediments?

• Not 100% of what central departments or local authorities want

• Need to reform ex-London bus/train arrangements

• competition rules?

• Existing PTAs may prefer to risk abolition• Central government’s willingness to try an

experiment

Conclusions

• Proposals are evolutionary not revolutionary

• TfL has shown how it is possible for a transport-based authority to lead the way in terms of local autonomy

• ODPM, DfT appear to support the idea• White Paper

• due in June or July

Improving Local Transport:how small reforms could make a big

difference

Tony Travers, LSE

Stephen Glaister, Imperial College