Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Eddingtons implications for transport funding Dr Adam Marshall Head of Policy, Centre for Cities National Transport Conference, 16 Oct 07.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Eddingtons implications for transport funding Dr Adam Marshall Head of Policy, Centre for Cities National Transport Conference, 16 Oct 07."— Presentation transcript:

1 Eddingtons implications for transport funding Dr Adam Marshall Head of Policy, Centre for Cities National Transport Conference, 16 Oct 07

2 About Centre for Cities Non-partisan urban research unit Incubated at ippr – independent from 1 Nov 07 Work closely with cities, Whitehall, business Research focus = cities economic performance 2008 programme = City Growth, City Potential, Supporting City Economies (series of short reports)

3 This talk 1.Understanding Eddington 2.Policy developments since Eddington 3.The financial implications 4.What happens next

4 Media story: road charging Real story: transport investment If implemented: major re-prioritisation of Britains transport budget Key beneficiaries: large, economically successful urban areas – GSE and some Northern city-regions 1. Understanding Eddington

5 Five key recommendations: 1.Invest in existing networks 2.Target investment geographically 3.Target congestion, pinch-points 4.Better appraisal of economic benefits 5.Reform sub-national delivery structures 1. Understanding Eddington

6 Investing in Existing Networks: Rejection of need for High-Speed Rail Prioritise dull but important projects – e.g. New Street, Manchester hub, M62 Extend metropolitan transport networks in growing cities 1. Understanding Eddington

7 Target investment geographically: Growing urban areas and their catchments = London, Manchester, Bham, Leeds, Milton Keynes, Cbridge Key inter-urban corridors = WCML / ECML, Transpennine, Mways International gateways = access to ports/airports, capacity 1. Understanding Eddington

8 Target congestion and pinch-points Widespread road pricing – but no call for an explicit national scheme Road improvements to reduce bottlenecks. But a massive new road- building programme? What about places where there is little congestion, e.g. Liverpool or Hull? 1. Understanding Eddington

9 More weight to economic benefits Better appraisal needed Include wider economic benefits: Privileges cities, where agglomeration effects are strongest Value for money approach to appraisal with economic, social, environmental externalities. Difficult! 1. Understanding Eddington

10 Reform sub-national delivery structures Prioritisation of investment – e.g. through Regional Funding Allocations ( Sub-National Review) Bus regulation ( Local Transport Bill) Better planning procedures for Major Infrastructure Projects ( Planning WP) 1. Understanding Eddington

11 Range of co-ordinated announcements: –Lyons Inquiry (March 2007) –Draft Local Transport Bill (May 2007) –Planning White Paper (May 2007) –Sub-National Review (July 2007) –Ports Policy Review (July 2007) –Rail White Paper (July 2007) … all on-message with Eddington 2. Policy developments

12 Rail White Paper as an example: HLOS, 30-yr strategy: upgrade existing nets Capacity issues: 1,300 new carriages Addressing pinch-points: New Street Station, Reading Station, Gtr SE rail networks Dull but important signalling and infrastructure improvements Small quick wins: station upgrades 2. Policy developments

13 Top line: Eddington is good news for the Greater South East and Britains bigger city-regions… Why? 3. Financial Implications

14 3. Financial implications Eddington investment priorities are URBAN Urban spatial focus: urban areas + catchments; inter-urban corridors (e.g. rail); gateways Invest in existing networks, tackle pinch-points Case for investment: agglomeration Integrated city-regional transport governance and investment

15 Focus on wider economic benefits and value for money appraisal = –Stronger case for urban transport improvements, which generate more agglomeration benefits –Option generation – need an economic case as well as a political case for investment! –Improved BCRs: better chance for govt funding, higher prioritisation within RFAs, etc. BUT not all urban areas are likely to benefit 3. Financial implications

16 Potential winners: –London, access to London from rest of Gtr SE –Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham city-regions –Smaller, successful cities dealing with pressures of success – e.g. Bristol, Cambridge, York, Brighton, Milton Keynes, Reading, Derby Potential losers: –Cities w/o major congestion or access issues – e.g. Liverpool, Newcastle, Sheffield, Hull 3. Financial implications

17 Inter-urban corridors: –Improvements to existing inter-city links –Rail: main lines, Transpennine, longer trains –Road: junction improvements, addtl lanes – but any major new road building beyond this?? Airports and ports: –Money for surface access improvements by road & rail – e.g. Manchester Airport, port of Liverpool 3. Financial implications

18 ROAD AHEAD: Formal DfT response to Eddington – move into implementation phase Local Transport Bill – Nov/Dec C-TIF allocations – Dec ? Planning Bill, Local Govt Bill – early 2008 NATA refresh – 2008/09 4. What happens next?

19 If Eddingtons logic is implemented in full: –Geographically concentrated investment –Focus on packages of small schemes –Invisible improvements –Ever greater prioritisation of limited ££ But can this agenda win over politicians – ever mindful of public opinion?

20 Questions or comments? Adam Marshall 020 7470 6119

Download ppt "Eddingtons implications for transport funding Dr Adam Marshall Head of Policy, Centre for Cities National Transport Conference, 16 Oct 07."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google