www.pwc.co.uk/publicsector Full speed ahead Talking Points Connecting our cities and regions Contents Foreword 1 Introduction 2 Getting the strategy right 5 Transport devolution 9 Funding the future 12 Transport appraisal guidance 14 Making the most of HS2 15 Future of rail and road 16 New technology 18 Conclusion 20 About the Smith Institute 23 About PwC 23 Contacts 23 Foreword The ability to move efficiently, The roundtable discussions, held in current opinion and, most importantly, conveniently and reliably from place to London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Leeds makes suggestions as to what could be place is something we all demand. We and Birmingham, covered similar done to improve connectivity within and rely on our transport system to get us questions: between the UK’s cities and regions. from A to B and to provide us with the • How well connected are the UK’s We would like to thank all those who goods and services we need. However, cities to London and to one another participated in the five roundtable events. the transport system is under immense and what added value can we gain We hope that this makes an informed strain. Traffic congestion has increased from better connecting our cities and and useful contribution to the debate on and capacity on major rail routes is regions? improving the connectivity across the UK. stretched. The problems are expected to get worse as demand increases, • Will new rail lines and increased especially in our major cities and their airport and road capacity significantly surrounding hinterlands. The solutions improve connectivity? Grant Klein are neither quick nor cheap, but as Partner, PwC • How far should transport devolution this Talking Points report makes clear, go to best meet the needs of our failure to invest in a more integrated and Paul Hackett citizens? better connected transport network will Director, Smith Institute leave UK plc at a distinct competitive • How can we pay for the much needed disadvantage. investment? To find out more about the scale of the • And, what will the impact be of new issue, and explore what can be done technologies on transport service to improve connectivity between our provision? cities and regions, we ran a series of These and other questions provoked roundtables in five major cities to hear a wide range of responses, which we the views of transport practitioners, have captured in this Talking Points experts and decision makers from the publication. It offers a snapshot of cities and city-regions themselves. 1 Introduction Transport trends are unequivocal over the next 20 years: there will be more journeys by car on the motorways and trunk roads; many more people will be using the railways; more freight traffic will be transported; and in London and other cities more people will be using the bus and rail networks. As the Government’s National Infrastructure Plan shows, road traffic is set to rise by up to 57% between 2013 and 2040, and passenger miles on the rail network are set to increase by 46% between 2011 and 2033.1 These trends will only strengthen with population growth and a growing economy. Addressing these challenges will require changes in policy, funding and infrastructure development if the UK is to maintain and improve its competitive position. Transport connectivity has improved in recent years, with more trains running between our major cities. In particular, connectivity between London and the major cities has improved – although it still takes much longer to travel by train 1 National Infrastructure Plan 2014 https://www.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/381884/2902895_NationalInfrastructurePlan2014_ acc.pdf 2 from London to UK cities than from Both national and local government London. The government is expected to London to Paris.2 However, as Figure 1 recognise that the stakes are high. In the cede more transport powers to combined shows, the connectivity of some of the PwC/Smith Institute survey of councillors authorities, like Greater Manchester, other major cities to each other (especially with lead responsibility for transport in although the transfer of powers to other for rail) is well behind connectivity to and 2014, some 70% of respondents thought city-regions will be on a deal by deal basis from London. that in the near future public transport and will now include a requirement for a provision in their area would decline.5 directly elected mayor. Transport campaigners argue that even There are also frustrations locally about with HS2 nothing less than a significant the way in which central government Nevertheless, central government and the and sustained increase in transport allocates transport funding to the cities, national transport bodies now seem to see investment in existing networks will as well as growing criticism over the way transport devolution as part of the improve connectivity and see off a future in which transport projects are evaluated. solution. As we discuss in the following of even worse congestion and more sections, this change in mind-set allows pollution.3 Furthermore, a failing Local government continues to call for for a different conversation and new transport system with sub-optimal more funding for local transport services collaboration between local, regional and connectivity will undermine our national (especially for discretionary subsidised national transport bodies. These new competitiveness and prosperity and bus services) as well as for more partnerships are not a substitute for exacerbate regional inequalities. investment in connectivity between sustained investment in the nation’s road Transport is an area where the UK lags neighbouring towns and cities.6 The new and rail network, but they should help to internationally, being ranked just 27th in combined authorities and their Passenger prioritise and address local issues and the World Economic Forum’s 2014-15 Transport Executives (PTEs)7 are also allow for the development of a more Global Competitiveness Index, and falling calling for more devolution of transport integrated transport network. since 2011-12.4 powers to city-regions on a similar basis to 2 London to Paris takes 2hr 20min, compared with London to Edinburgh (roughly the same distance) which takes 4hrs 30mins. The average travel speed of London to Paris is 127mph, compared with an average of 87.2mph for London to Manchester, Cardiff, Birmingham, Edinburgh and Leeds 3 Campaign for Better Transport briefings 4 World Economic Forum: Competitiveness Rankings http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-report-2014-2015/ rankings/ 5 PwC/Smith Institute ‘All change – delivering future city transport’, 2014 6 LGA ‘Funding needed to save vital concessionary bus services’, 2014 7 The PTEs provide, plan, procure and promote public transport in six of England’s largest conurbations: Greater Manchester (Transport for Greater Manchester), Merseyside (Merseytravel), South Yorkshire (SYPTE), Tyne and Wear (Nexus), West Midlands (Centro) and West Yorkshire (West Yorkshire Combined Authority). 3 Figure 1: City-to-city connectivity by rail and road 2015 406 miles 6h miles 40m 6h 30m Edinburgh 298 miles 205 miles 5h 4h 5m 4h 30m 3h 5m 420 miles 7h 4h 30m 225 miles 3h 40m 3h 40m 52 miles 55m 55m Leeds 120 miles Manchester 2h 5m 87 miles 2h 10m 1h 40m 196 miles 3h 25m 1h 35m 195 miles 3h 25m 3h 30m 2h 15m 235 miles 3h 50m 127 miles 208 miles 4h 10m 2h 15m 3h 35m 1h 25m 2h 7m 114 miles 2h 5m 2h 5m Birmingham 150 miles 2h 40m 2h 10m London Cardiff Fastest – 70-79mph average speed Journey time by car Medium – 60-69mph average speed Journey time by train Slowest – 50-59mph average speed Note: Train times taken as an average and Note: All averages are a combination of times for drive times all taken for journeys at 9am. journeys by rail and road Source: Train times National Rail Enquiries, road times Tom Tom Route Planner 4 Getting the strategy right A major talking point at our roundtables policy makers at our roundtables was that “In other European cities they have was the need for integrated, multi-modal greater local regulatory control over buses 30 year transport plans. Why transport strategies which can properly in particular would help promote fair can’t we do the same?” link local and national road and rail competition and better collaboration networks. It was said that progress was between public and private transport The shared view at all our events was that being made in terms of major projects like providers. Reference was also made to fair whilst a “mosaic of public transport HS2 and Crossrail, but that more effort pricing and the need for economic models”10 was inevitable, the key to was required to ensure that connections regulation to ensure reasonable pricing improving connectivity centred around were being made between different for customers and better value for money sustained investment and improving 9 modes of transport and between different for government. collaboration. It was said that without places across city-region boundaries. better integration traffic congestion would continue to increase, with harmful effects Our roundtable attendees said that in on the economy, environment and “Growth has been constrained for 11 many places transport services are too people’s quality of life. fragmented, in part due to the decades by the lack of transport capacity” commissioning of services by different Improving inter- and intra-city agencies. As the Institution of Civil connectivity must become a higher The perspective of transport practitioners Engineers comments, the divisions among political priority. If we want to rebalance at our roundtable events outside of transport modes, organisations and the economy and create the conditions for London was that it is difficult to join up a geographies are “most clearly seen in sustainable growth, it was agreed that transport network when the decision- locations with competing bus operators, there is no alternative but to invest in a making boundaries between the transport at the interface of rail and road-based multi-modal, joined up transport network.