eddingtons implications for transport funding dr adam marshall head of policy, centre for cities...

Eddington’s implications for transport funding

Dr Adam MarshallHead of Policy, Centre for Cities

National Transport Conference, 16 Oct 07

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)

This talk

1. Understanding Eddington

2. Policy developments since Eddington

3. The financial implications

4. What happens next

• Media story: road charging• Real story: transport investment

• If implemented: major re-prioritisation of Britain’s transport budget

• Key beneficiaries: large, economically successful urban areas – GSE and some Northern city-regions

1. Understanding Eddington

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

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

Target investment geographically:• ‘Growing urban areas and their

catchments’ = London, Manchester, B’ham, Leeds, Milton Keynes, C’bridge

• Key inter-urban corridors = WCML / ECML, Transpennine, M’ways

• International gateways = access to ports/airports, capacity

1. Understanding Eddington

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

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

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

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

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

Top line:

Eddington is good news for the Greater South East and Britain’s

bigger city-regions…

Why?

3. Financial Implications

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

• 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 gov’t funding,

higher prioritisation within RFAs, etc.

• BUT not all urban areas are likely to benefit

3. Financial implications

• 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

• Inter-urban corridors:– Improvements to existing inter-city links– Rail: main lines, Transpennine, longer trains– Road: junction improvements, addt’l 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

ROAD AHEAD:• Formal DfT response to Eddington – move

into implementation phase• Local Transport Bill – Nov/Dec• C-TIF allocations – Dec ?• Planning Bill, Local Gov’t Bill – early 2008• NATA ‘refresh’ – 2008/09

4. What happens next?

4. What happens next?

• If Eddington’s 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?

Questions or comments?

Adam Marshall020 7470 6119

a.marshall@ippr.org