Early Signs of New Government’s Approach to Active Travel
The Labour manifesto didn’t say much about the party’s approach to active travel. What clues as to the new government’s approach can we pick up from its first days in office?
The New Transport Ministers
Louise Haigh
Louise Haigh is Secretary of State for Transport.
On taking up the role she spoke about trains and buses, enabling local leaders to increase passenger numbers.
She wants:
‘a modern, integrated experience for all passengers, ensuring that travel across modes is easier, more reliable, more efficient, quality, accessible and safe.
And finally, weaving through every priority and everything we do will be greening our transport networks’.
Louise haigh
Haigh intends to move fast and fix things.
A press release set out her five key priorities:
- improve performance on the railways
- improve bus services and grow usage
- transform infrastructure to promote social mobility and tackle regional inequality
- deliver a greener transport network
- better integrate transport networks
Simon Lightwood
Simon Lightwood, MP for Wakefield and Rothwell, is the Transport Minister with responsibility for active travel.
Other Transport Ministers
The other transport ministers are:
- Lilian Greenwood – Future of Roads
- Mike Kane – Aviation, Maritime and Security
- Peter Hendy – Rail
Greenwood has joined Kidical Mass rides in the past.
Kane has taken an interest in reducing shipping emissions, and questioned the previous government’s failure to publish a Clean Maritime Plan.
Simon Lightwood’s Comments about LTNs
Simon Lightwood contributed to a debate about LTNs in May this year in response to a petition calling for an independent review of LTNs.
His comments were nuanced, but broadly positive. These are some extracts from it.
‘Low-traffic neighbourhoods have become a common part of many communities across the country in recent years. They play an important part in delivering safer streets and cleaner air and in helping encourage people to use active travel to get around. We know that benefits local economies, improves physical and mental health and brings down carbon emissions.
In many areas, LTNs have become a core part of life for the communities who live in them, with many enjoying the reductions in noise and air pollution thanks to the reduction in congestion as a result of roads being closed to through traffic. Obviously, there often need to be exemptions: emergency services, public transport, permit holders, and sometimes taxis. However, the overall reduction in most through traffic from LTNs is still significant.
Studies have shown that in areas where LTNs have been introduced, traffic has been reduced by 32% on average, with only a 4.5% increase in traffic on boundary roads. Nitrogen dioxide pollution has fallen by up to 9% in some areas with those schemes. Inside LTNs in Waltham Forest, road injuries have fallen by up to half compared to before the schemes were introduced. Data shows that 61% of people living in low-traffic neighbourhoods support the schemes. It is important to talk about the benefits of the schemes, because, despite what the Government try to say, the evidence shows that for the most part they are popular with local people and effective at achieving the desired reduction in levels of pollution and road injuries.
However, not everybody who lives in low-traffic neighbourhoods supports the schemes. Some have legitimate criticisms of how the schemes have been designed and implemented. In some individual cases there has arguably been a failure to consider the needs of particular groups, including—as is the subject of one of the petitions—those with limited mobility and blue badge holders. We can all agree that local authorities that introduce the schemes should ensure that accessibility needs are carefully considered and prioritised as proposals are designed and consulted on.
Labour’s position on low-traffic neighbourhoods is clear: they are decisions that should continue to be made by local authorities, not be decided by diktat from Whitehall or Westminster. Of course, these decisions must be made with proper consultation, and the concerns of each community must be taken on board. Central Government have a role to play in ensuring that is the case, but if we go too far we risk undermining the independence and autonomy of the elected local decision makers who know their areas best.
Although I appreciate the strength of views in the petition that calls for a review of LTNs, as colleagues have noted the Government recently commissioned a review and published it just weeks ago. It came after the Prime Minister claimed that he wanted to stop “hare-brained” safety schemes and the so-called “war on motorists”, so let us look at some of its findings. Some 58% were unaware that they lived in low-traffic neighbourhoods altogether. Of those who were aware, more people were positive than negative. A clear majority of people were concerned about the number of vehicles travelling through their areas, and they were equally concerned about the pollution that they caused. That is not exactly the outcome it appears the Prime Minister was looking for when he commissioned the review. Perhaps that is why it was reported that the Government tried to permanently shelve it.
Despite the Prime Minister’s and the Transport Secretary’s desperate attempts to politicise local transport issues such as road safety, school streets and reducing local air pollution, the evidence tells us that these schemes remain largely popular, and that they are effective and inobtrusive for most people. Although the Prime Minister may be keen to airbrush history, not too long ago these very schemes were championed by the most senior figures in his own party’.
simon lightwood mp in may 2024
While this sounds good in many ways, it is problematic for those of us who live in areas with backward councils like North Yorkshire.
We will need strong guidance from central government to local authorities, to ensure that councils have an obligation to prioritise active travel. Without that, we will be condemned to a continuation of the car-dominated status quo.