DOCSLIB.ORG

TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 1 TRANSPORT COVER HDS:TRANSPORT COVER HDS 12/12/07 16:02 Page 1 After years of high taxation and underinvestment in transport we face gridlock on our roads and deadlock in transport policy. While the case for road pricing is clear and has been made for a long time, the public is wary of anything that could turn out to be yet another stealth tax. Towards better transport Towards The solution we propose and investigate is to improve our infrastructure now and to repay the costs using road pricing revenues collected in the future. This way, the infrastructure can be built without delay and the funding gap met using private Towards better finance. Not only would our infrastructure be improved but we would have adopted the most efficient means of managing road space for the future. transport This report explores the experience of PFI in transport. It then moves on to detail the institutional and fiscal frameworks Funding new infrastructure governing the sector. It finds that while our current systems of with future road pricing revenue governance and taxation are broadly compatible with road Hartwich and Briar Lipson, edited by Oliver Marc Wellings Richard pricing and the concomitant deployment of private finance, certain frameworks look more likely to promote efficient long- term investment in transport infrastructure than others. Until transport policy takes a different direction, Britain’s transport network will continue to deteriorate while our roads become even more congested. This report shows that there is a way to get Britain moving again. Richard Wellings and Briar Lipson edited by Oliver Marc Hartwich £10.00 ISBN: 978-1-906097-12-7 Policy Exchange Policy Exchange Clutha House 10 Storey’s Gate London SW1P 3AY www.policyexchange.org.uk TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 1 Towards better transport Funding new infrastructure with future road pricing revenue Richard Wellings and Briar Lipson edited by Oliver Marc Hartwich Policy Exchange is an independent think tank whose mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which will foster a free society based on strong communities, personal freedom, limited government, national self-confidence and an enterprise culture. Registered charity no: 1096300. Policy Exchange is committed to an evidence-based approach to policy development. We work in partnership with aca- demics and other experts and commission major studies involving thorough empirical research of alternative policy out- comes. We believe that the policy experience of other countries offers important lessons for government in the UK. We also believe that government has much to learn from business and the voluntary sector. Trustees Charles Moore (Chairman of the Board), Theodore Agnew, Richard Briance, Camilla Cavendish, Richard Ehrman, Robin Edwards, George Robinson, Andrew Sells, Tim Steel, Alice Thomson, Rachel Whetstone. TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 2 About the authors Dr Richard Wellings Edinburgh, she worked as a Par liamentary Deputy Editorial Director, Institute of Researcher for Grant Shapps MP. Economic Affairs Dr Richard Wellings is the Deputy Dr Oliver Marc Hartwich Editorial Director at the Institute of Chief Economist, Policy Exchange Economic Affairs. He is a deputy editor of Dr Oliver Marc Hartwich is Policy Exch - the journal Economic Affairs and works on ange’s Chief Economist. He was born in the production of the IEA’s monograph 1975 and studied Business Admin istra tion series. After graduating from Oxford and Economics at Bochum University (Ger- University, he undertook a PhD on trans- many). After graduating with a Master’s port policy at the London School of Degree, he completed a PhD in Law at the Economics, which he completed in 2004. universities of Bochum and Sydney (Aus- Subsequently, he wor ked as a researcher for tralia) while working as a Researcher at the A & F Consulting Engineers, before join- In s titute of Commercial Law of Bonn Uni- ing the IEA in August 2006. He con- versity (Germany). Having published his tributed two papers to The Railways, the aw ard-winning thesis with Herbert Utz Market and the Government (IEA, 2006) Verlag (Munich) in March 2004, he moved and is co-authoring a forthcoming book to London to support Lord Matthew Oak - on road privatisation. eshott of Seagrove Bay during the process of the Pensions Bill. He is the UK Rep res en t- Briar Lipson ative for the German think tank the Institute Research Fellow, Policy Exchange for Free Enterprise. He is the co-author of Briar Lipson is a Research Fellow at Policy Unaffordable Housing: Fables and Myths, Exchange specialising in Economic Bigger Better Faster More, Better Homes, Competitiveness. After gr a d uating with an Greener Cities and The Best Laid Plans. He MA in Economics from the University of joined Policy Exchange in January 2005. © Policy Exchange 2008 Published by Policy Exchange, Clutha House, 10 Storey’s Gate, London SW1P 3AY www.policyexchange.org.uk ISBN: 978-1-906097-12-7 Printed by Heron, Dawson and Sawyer Designed by SoapBox, www.soapboxcommunications.co.uk 2 TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 3 Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive summary 5 1 A competitive disadvantage: Britain’s transport infrastructure 8 2 The case for road pricing 14 3 Harnessing private finance 20 4 The institutional framework 32 5 Taxation and investment 46 6 Additional policy options 57 7 Conclusions and recommendations 65 www.policyexchange.org.uk • 3 TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 4 Acknowledgements Policy Exchange would like to thank Serco, Bevan Brittan and an anonymous charita- ble donor for their financial support. The authors would like to thank all those who met with them to discuss aspects of the research, as well as Nick Boles, David Worskett and two anonymous referees for their advice and comments. In addition we would like to thank Philippa Ingram for proof-reading and Oliver Marc Hartwich for his insight, expertise and ongoing edi- torial support. 4 TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 5 Executive summary Transport has become one of the key restraints on Britain’s economic growth “ As a method of allocating a scarce resource, to and quality of life. Successive governments ration roads without employing road user charges is have failed to provide the standard of infra- comparable only with the Soviet system of queuing: structure necessary to keep up with an something so discredited as to be considered increasingly mobile and dynamic econo- ridiculous in almost every sphere of life but motoring my. Traffic congestion is now endemic, ” affecting not just large cities but also the core motorway network and small towns. It currently costs our economy in the tackle congestion. Inefficiency of govern- region of £20bn per year, a figure set to rise ment transport spending is a serious prob- significantly in the coming years. This will lem. Just 6 per cent of passenger travel is harm our future economic competitiveness undertaken by train, compared with 84 per and growth. cent by car, yet the railways receive annual International comparisons suggest that subsidies totalling almost £6.5 billion – the UK is close to the bottom of the table nearly as much as the government spends when it comes to transport infrastructure. on roads. The apparent misallocation of Among the world’s leading economies, the resources reflects the fact that transport UK has the most crowded and congested infrastructure investment has become roads, and the fewest motorways. Each detached from consumer demand. The year more than 1.6 million passenger kilo- absence of price signals means it is difficult metres are travelled on each kilometre of for government planners to allocate expen- Britain’s road network: more than twice diture efficiently. the European average. The UK also per- As a method of allocating a scarce forms poorly in terms of the quality of its resource, to ration roads without employ- public transport. ing road user charges is comparable only Clearly a step change is needed in the with the Soviet system of queuing: some- quality of Britain’s infrastructure. Not only thing so discredited as to be considered would this improve our global competi- ridiculous in almost every sphere of life but tiveness – it would also improve the day to motoring. The waste and inefficiency of day lives of the travelling public. such a system is painfully obvious to anyone The deficiencies of UK transport infra- who has sat in congestion and traffic jams. structure do not reflect a shortage of tax But the greatest barrier to pricing – pub- revenues from transport. In 2006 private lic opinion – has arisen not because the road users paid around £32bn in trans- public cannot appreciate the need for it. It port-related taxes. Of this £32bn, just is instead because, having endured decades £8bn was spent on the road network. And of special taxation for the benefit of gener- of this £8bn – which is enough in theory al spending, motorists do not trust govern- to construct at least 400 miles of six-lane ments to introduce pricing from which motorway – a large proportion was spent they will benefit. on repairing damage to the roads (caused One solution, as proposed in this report, primarily by good vehicles) and another is to upgrade transport infrastructure now, significant portion on anti-traffic and safe- and then, once users have began to experi- ty measures. New roads have also tended to ence substantial benefits, introduce the be built for political reasons rather than to road user charges necessary to cover the www.policyexchange.org.uk • 5 TRANSPORT HDS:TRANSPORT HDS 12/12/07 13:49 Page 6 Towards better transport costs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rail Accident Report
    Rail Accident Report Fire on HGV shuttle in the Channel Tunnel 21 August 2006 Report 37/2007 October 2007 This investigation was carried out in accordance with: l the Railway Safety Directive 2004/49/EC; l the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003; and l the Railways (Accident Investigation and Reporting) Regulations 2005. © Crown copyright 2007 You may re-use this document/publication (not including departmental or agency logos) free of charge in any format or medium. You must re-use it accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and you must give the title of the source publication. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This document/publication is also available at www.raib.gov.uk. Any enquiries about this publication should be sent to: RAIB Email: [email protected] The Wharf Telephone: 01332 253300 Stores Road Fax: 01332 253301 Derby UK Website: www.raib.gov.uk DE21 4BA This report is published by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch, Department for Transport. Rail Accident Investigation Branch 3 Report 37/2007 www.raib.gov.uk October 2007 Fire on HGV shuttle in the Channel Tunnel 21 August 2006 Contents Introduction 6 Summary of the report 7 Key facts about the incident 7 Key findings 7 Recommendations 9 The Incident 10 Summary of the incident 10 The parties involved 10 Location 10 Train and rail equipment 11 Events preceding the incident 11 Events during the incident 12 Consequences
    [Show full text]
  • The Channel Tunnel (United Kingdom – France)
    Draft for Consultation The Channel Tunnel (United Kingdom – France) Source: Ramboll Location The English Channel between Folkestone (England) and Coquelles (France) Sector Water crossing, fixed link, rail and road Procuring Authorities Government of the United Kingdom, Government of the Republic of France Project Company Getlink Group (previously Eurotunnel) Contract Obligations Design, Build, Finance, Maintain, Operate, Transfer (DBFMOT) Start of Operations 1994 Financial Closure Year 1987 (syndication of the Project Finance Facility) Capital Value GBP 9.5 billion (USD 11.8 billion – 1994 value) Contract Period (years) 99 Key Facts No governmental subsidies, 100% Project Finance 1/12 Draft for Consultation Project highlights The Channel Tunnel is a circa 50 kilometre (km)-long rail tunnel linking Folkestone, Kent, in England, with Coquelles, Pas-de-Calais, near Calais in northern France, beneath the English Channel at the Strait of Dover. It is the only fixed link between the island of Great Britain and the European mainland. It allows the city of London to be directly connected by train to Paris, Lille, Brussels, Amsterdam and Cologne – thanks to the Eurostar and Thalys train lines. The Channel Tunnel was officially opened in 1994. Train operation consists of shuttle trains conveying cars and coaches and other trains conveying heavy goods vehicles between the two terminals. Other trains using Getlink infrastructure are operated by the respective owners. Getlink, previously Groupe Eurotunnel (until 2017)1, is a public company which manages and operates the Channel Tunnel, including the Eurotunnel Shuttle vehicle services, and earns revenue on other trains through the tunnel (DB Schenker freight and Eurostar passenger trains).
    [Show full text]
  • The Channel Tunnel Rail Link: Opportunities and Problems for Regional Economic Development
    THE CHANNEL TUNNEL RAIL LINK: OPPORTUNITIES AND PROBLEMS FOR REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, David Matthew Smith Thesis Submitted to the University of Plymouth in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Geographical Sciences University of Plymouth December 1992 THE CHANNEL TUNNEL RAIL LINK: OPPORTUNITIES AND PROBLEMS FOR REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. David Matthew Smith ABSTRACT The regional economic impact of the Channel Tunnel has engendered much public and private sector interest. Previous studies examining the regional implications of the Tunnel have argued that related development pressures will be largely confined to South East England, further widening the "North-South" divide. Economic Potential Analysis was earlier employed by Clark el. al. (1969) and Keeble et. al. (1982a) to model the geographical impact of the Tunnel on the relative accessibility of the UK regions. The conclusions drawn from these studies support the proposition that the South East would gain at the expense of the more peripheral regions. However, the important implications of a rail-only Tunnel have yet to be modelled. The results of the present study show that opportunities created by the Tunnel could be spread more evenly than had previously been predicted. However, following a review of the legislative and policy environment of the Tunnel and related infrastructure, it is argued that as a result of British Government inaction the more peripheral UK regions are likely to be unable to maximise any potential benefits created. Nonetheless, the overall regional economic impact of the Tunnel will depend ultimately on the reactions of the business community (Pieda 1989a&b).
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Construction Projects an Information Processing Approach Managing Construction Projects an Information Processing Approach Second Edition
    www.ebook3000.com Managing Construction Projects An Information Processing Approach www.ebook3000.com Managing Construction Projects An Information Processing Approach Second Edition Graham M. Winch Professor of Project Management Centre for Research in the Management of Projects Manchester Business School The University of Manchester A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication This edition fi rst published 2010 © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and 2002 Blackwell Science Ltd Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing programme has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientifi c, Technical, and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell. Registered offi ce John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom Editorial offi ce 2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA For details of our global editorial offi ces, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell. The right of the author to be identifi ed as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.
    [Show full text]
  • The Channel Tunnel
    Source: Getlink Group The Channel Tunnel Procuring authorities Government of the United Kingdom, Government of the Republic of France Project company Getlink Group (previously Eurotunnel) Contract obligations Design, build, finance, maintain, operate, transfer (DBFMOT) Start of operations 1994 Financial closure year 1987 (syndication of the Project Finance Facility) Capital value Location GBP9.5 billion (USD11.8 billion – 1994 value) The English Channel between Folkestone (England) and Coquelles (France) Contract period (years) 99 Sector Water crossing, fixed link, rail and road Key facts No governmental subsidies, 100% Project Finance 8 | GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE HUB CASE STUDY: THE CHANNEL TUNNEL Project highlights The Channel Tunnel is a roughly 50 km rail tunnel countries initially for a period of 55 years, then linking Folkestone, Kent, in England, with Coquelles, extended to 99 years until 2086. Getlink’s head Pas-de-Calais, near Calais in northern France. The office is located in Paris. tunnel extends beneath the English Channel at the Originally estimated at GBP 4.8 billion in 1985 Strait of Dover. It is the only fixed link between the (about USD6.2 billion, 1985 prices), the Channel island of Great Britain and the European mainland. Tunnel’s total cost was much higher than It allows the city of London to be directly connected expected, reaching GBP9.5 billion by the end of by train to Paris, Lille, Brussels, Amsterdam and its construction (about USD14.5 billion in 1994).2 Cologne – thanks to the Eurostar and Thalys Project costs were vastly underestimated and an train lines. overrun of 80% was incurred.3 This was due to The Channel Tunnel was officially opened in 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • Tunnel Vision? Completing the European Rail Market
    HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 24th Report of Session 2010–12 Tunnel vision? Completing the European rail market Ordered to be printed 29 November 2011 and published 8 December 2011 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 229 The European Union Committee The Committee considers EU documents in advance of decisions being taken on them in Brussels, in order to influence the Government’s position and to hold them to account. The Government are required to deposit EU documents in Parliament, and to produce within two weeks an Explanatory Memorandum setting out the implications for the UK. The Committee examines these documents, and ‘holds under scrutiny’ any about which it has concerns, entering into correspondence with the relevant Minister until satisfied. Letters must be answered within two weeks. Under the ‘scrutiny reserve resolution’, the Government may not agree in the EU Council of Ministers to any proposal still held under scrutiny; reasons must be given for any breach. The Committee also conducts inquiries and makes reports. The Government are required to respond in writing to a report’s recommendations within two months of publication. If the report is for debate, then there is a debate in the House of Lords, which a Minister attends and responds to. The Committee has seven Sub-Committees which are: Economic and Financial Affairs and International Trade (Sub-Committee A) Internal Market, Energy and Transport (Sub-Committee B) Foreign Affairs, Defence and Development
    [Show full text]
  • Project Investment and Project Financing
    Project Investment and Project Financing A study on Business Case and Financing Models Simiao Wang Project Management Submission date: July 2012 Supervisor: Bjørn Andersen, IPK Co-supervisor: Agnar Johansen, SINTEF Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Production and Quality Engineering Master Thesis in Project Management Norwegian University of Science and Technology Trondheim, Norway 2012 Master of Science in Project Management Written by Simiao Wang Responsible supervisor at NTNU: Professor Bjørn Andersen Co-supervisor at SINTEF: Agnar Johansen Abstract The importance of the front-end decision-making phase in projects is being increasingly recognized. Project front-end phase management is believed important. Even few studies focus on this area; many themes in project front-end phase are discussed extensively. The dissertation has two aims: the first aim is to integrate the current studies in project front-end phase, link and organize the different themes altogether in a systematical approach and present the output as a whole in the form of business case. Business case, which is a process that orderly covers most themes in project front-end study, is integrated and presented to guide the project sponsors for their decision making process on whether to finance a project or not. The second aim is to look at the next immediate step after business case which is financing the project. Project financing is a special financing method which is seen as a well-establish tool that helps project sponsors initiate a project when they lack of money in the outset of the project. However, project financing can lead to big problems.
    [Show full text]
  • The Official History of Britain and the Channel Tunnel
    THE OFFICIAL HISTORY OF BRITAIN AND THE CHANNEL TUNNEL This authoritative volume presents the first official history of the British Government’s evolving relationship with the Channel Tunnel project from the early nineteenth century to 2005. The building of the Channel Tunnel has been one of Europe’s major projects and a testimony to British-French and public-private sector collaboration. However, Eurotunnel’s current financial crisis provides a sobering backcloth for an examination of the British Government’s long-term flirtation with the project, and in particular, the earlier Tunnel project in the 1960s and early 1970s, which was abandoned in 1975. Commissioned by the Cabinet Office and using hitherto untapped British Government records, this book presents an in-depth analysis of the successful project of 1986–94. It provides a vivid portrayal of the complexities of quadripartite decision-making (in two countries, with both public and private sectors), revealing new insights into the role of the British and French Governments in the process. Written by Terry Gourvish, Britain’s leading transport historian, this book will be essential reading for general readers and specialists with an interest in business history, international relations, public policy and project management. WHITEHALL HISTORIES: GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL HISTORY SERIES ISSN: 1474–8398 The Government Official History series began in 1919 with wartime histories, and the peacetime series was inaugurated in 1966 by Harold Wilson. The aim of the series is to produce major histories in their own right, compiled by historians eminent in the field, who are afforded free access to all relevant material in the official archives.
    [Show full text]