New normal?

September has brought to an abrupt end the dreams of the summer of a linear recovery from COVID-19, where empty office blocks would spring back into strip lit life and zoned out commuters would again be grazing the shelves of Prets.

However, once more the virus has shown that it is not prepared to enter into reasonable negotiations and come to a compromise. And now as September turns the temperatures down to a level the virus prefers, its resurgence could signal the start of a new normal. Just not the new normal we were hoping for back in the summer. Instead, this could be a new normal of oscillating restrictions which fall short of the national lockdown of the Spring but which is nothing like the life we used to have pre-COVID.

For public transport, this has already meant a levelling off of the growth that was occurring and in some cases the start of a gentle dip. In many areas, this has happened just before an unstoppable force (growth in patronage) collided with an immovable object (socially distanced capacity) which for many areas alleviates what would have been a very difficult problem to solve. If public transport patronage does stay in the 40 to 50% band during this new normal, then the case for a longer term COVID-19 funding support for this period is strengthened. Because – as in the national lockdown – public transport will continue to play a key role in getting essential workers where they need to be. Whilst in addition doing more than that because unlike during the national lockdown, we will be seeing less empty vehicles as public transport continues to provide wider life support for local economies.  Again, this strengthens the case for stable rather than provisional additional COVID-19 funding support to close the revenue gap caused by the pandemic. We will soon find out if this is to be the case with Transport for London’s latest funding deadline approaching on 17 October, funding for the five LRT systems outside London and Blackpool on 26 October and with bus on the precipice of funding withdrawal being triggered at any time with eight weeks’ notice.

Face coverings are also part of our new normal – and no longer something that’s only necessary on public transport (which also helps reduce the associated stigma for public transport). Enforcement and messaging is helping to support high levels of take up in general – but the more prevalent the virus becomes, the more passengers will see those who aren’t covering up as unacceptably selfish and a threat. Face covering use can also decline as the day turns into night and in particular among peer pressured groups of young people (including school children). The situation is further complicated by the fact that anyone can also self identify as someone for whom face covering regulations don’t apply by saying that they are not required to wear one due to an unspecified disability or medical reason. Whilst there are good reasons for this, it is also clearly open to abuse.  The Government’s approach to face covering use has been to incrementally ratchet up the rhetoric and the fines. However, it’s far from clear that this will be enough to get to where we should be. Which is that there should only be three types of people using public transport – those wearing face coverings; those who are legitimately exempt; and those who aren’t wearing a face covering and as a result won’t be on public transport for very long and/or whose bank account will be diminished as a result. If that’s the end state we want, then we need to move from the incremental to something more decisive. This could include giving transport authorities more enforcement options given only the police can enforce at present (such as being able to empower additional staff to support the police on enforcement as TfL can), as well as moving beyond informal self identification of exemption status.

Free wheeling on active travel?

A feature of the Summer was active travel euphoria as leisure cycling soared, main roads into city centres were adapted with pop up cycle lanes for mass commuting, and the Government’s active travel strategy declared that Copenhagen and Amsterdam should watch out as Britain would soon be at their shoulder.  As we enter Autumn, the euphoria is wearing off as a culture war backlash rages in London and elsewhere (which has spilled over into Parliament and the Cabinet) over the pace of change. A battle between the metro and the retro, and between those who like the way their street now looks and feels and are willing to give the new a try, and those for whom the inconvenience they feel it causes is the last thing they need in their busy lives in the middle of a pandemic. Meanwhile, a hoped-for exponential growth in utility cycling, where offices remain closed, is proving challenging in many areas. Whilst Government has called on local authorities to be swift, consultative and simultaneously excellent in every way on cycling, it has, and is, also dragging its feet on getting the cheques out of the door that local government needs to fulfil these goals. As this timeline shows, the second tranche of the funding originally announced in July has still not been paid out.

Momentum is everything if the current moment isn’t to be looked back on as a false dawn for active travel. This means we need to speed up the flow of funding for local government to crack on and for more capacity at the centre (at the Department for Transport and at the new Active Travel England body). At this critical point in the battle for hearts and minds, we also need more air cover from Government. A summer manifesto of active travel ambitions with a foreword from the PM is a big deal, and was and should be rightly celebrated – but its not enough on its own and needs to be reinforced as the going gets tougher.

Jonathan Bray is Director at the Urban Transport Group

COVID-19 funding gap filled… for now

mma-slide-image

It would make no sense for Government to cut COVID-19 funding life support for light rail systems whilst it is rightly investing millions every week on expanding and renewing them.

 

This time, Government funding to close the gap caused by coronavirus on bus and tram had run out before a new funding deal was put in place. The deal (announced on 8 August) gives light rail in England outside London three months support before another funding cliff edge – with bus support now on a rolling deal with eight weeks’ notice of termination (but no clarity on what the criteria for termination might be). Meanwhile, the funding for additional public transport capacity (up until half-term) for schools came through just three weeks or so before the schools restart.

It’s clearly good that the Government is continuing to stand behind public transport financially. However, the way it’s being done is increasingly tangled with funding arrangements by mode and area becoming more divergent following the latest funding round. Transport for London, light rail outside London (not including Blackpool), buses outside London and national rail services are all now on funding deals on different time periods, and with different criteria (or no clear criteria) for decision making. Dealing with the consequences of last minute, cliff edge approaches to decision making (with all the cash flow and legal implications) also soaks up a phenomenal amount of time for our members and our staff.

The Treasury is also looking to scale back and escape from the COVID-19 funding arrangements as soon as they can – hence the short term nature of the deals and the deadline stand offs. This is scary stuff for transport authorities because there is little chance of patronage (and therefore income) returning to where it was pre-pandemic anytime soon – and the local authorities that stand behind transport authorities are underfunded for COVID-19 themselves. Any scaling back of funding support therefore could hit bus services in particular and hard. The reasons for this include that there’s only so much you can do at the margins to cut costs on light rail without shutting them down completely. Plus local transport authorities with light rail systems have all sorts of financial and legal obligations to the light rail systems that they own – which they don’t have for bus services, which are owned by somebody else. Other factors on bus include the return to normal de-registration periods for bus services, which combined with funding uncertainty or retrenchment, could trigger a wave of de-registrations of commercial services. The Government is also still looking to local authorities and transport authorities to continue to pay out on an indefinite basis concessionary travel reimbursement at pre COVID-19 rates (i.e. for concessionary journeys that are not currently being made). This is something which is not sustainable given the state of wider local government finances.

All of this casts not only a long shadow over the ability of transport authorities to plan ahead but also the Government’s longer term aspirations for urban transport and the ‘levelling up’ agenda. This includes the Prime Minister’s intent to turn around a declining bus sector with the £3 billion of additional Government funding which it announced prior to the pandemic. It also includes the millions that are being poured into renewing and expanding light rail systems which is happening right now. It makes no sense therefore to pull the rug from under public transport funding in the short term – if you are trying to build it up in the medium to long term. The way out of this conundrum could be the Spending Review and the national bus recovery strategy in the Autumn, which would be the logical point to build a bridge between an increasingly ragged emergency patch and mend approach designed to keeping the wheels turning on public transport for now and the more sustainable and robust  arrangements which will be needed in order to segue into supporting the Government’s expansionist agenda for public transport post COVID-19.

The stabilisers are off

Waltham-Forest-Orford-Rd_47f2a5c6ce58a7f1225e360da5263fae

London Borough of Waltham Forest

 

To be clear, I’m all in with the active travel revolution set out in the Government’s new manifesto for Britain’s roads. How revolutionary is it? Very. Traditional street hierarchies turned upside down, only the best will be good enough on active travel infrastructure, go to sleep in Detroit and wake up in Delft. However, in one way not so revolutionary in that it’s the traditional centralised England approach of “we like what we’ve got in London so you need to do the same – chop chop, no backchat about the voters, and make sure nothing happens without our approval”. We are about to test whether this can work and in the way that it didn’t for road pricing for example. We are going to find out whether the populace has a universal latent desire to cycle which is about to be liberated – or creatures of habit who have enough on their plate without all this. More likely a bit of both which will play itself out in a form of street theatre. We are going to find out whether politicians in power locally (and almost as importantly, in many places in opposition) are going to be prepared to expend electoral capital on resisting any local backlashes (Waltham Forest being the shining example). We are also going to find out whether national politicians are going to stand behind the policy when the going gets tough locally and politicians of their own party are leading the backlash locally. And whether we can go from a standing start in many areas to ambitious transformation to high quality schemes which get it right first time.

So, if we are going to go Dutch (and not die trying), then there’s going to need to be more resources, both centrally (at Department for Transport and at the new Active Travel England), and locally. Not just capital but revenue too, in order to pay the people to design good schemes which communities can buy into. Wherever we can, we also need to be thinking more widely about ‘future streets’ when the opportunity comes from active travel funding. Because the street of the future need not only to be easier to navigate on foot or by bike, but also needs to be more climate resilient (shade and drainage), give buses priority, be sensitive to the needs of different types of disability as well as being responsive to a host of other legitimate outcomes too. The Headrow scheme in Leeds city centre is a good example of what I’m talking about – better for active travel but buses too, and also the opportunity was taken to put the pipes in at the same time for a district heating scheme – as well as street trees. All of which costs money, takes skills and resources and involves trade-offs.

Intercity – make the going easy

Maybe it’s been sorted now, but a few weeks ago if you travelled by rail from Newcastle to York and on LNER services, seat reservations were compulsory, on Cross Country you could sit anywhere and on Trans Pennine Express it was like full lockdown never ended – two metre distancing and the bare minimum of seats on offer per carriage. The exciting world of consumer choice now extends to the approach to a pandemic it seems. The railways’ bizarre bazaar of make believe ‘big four’ branding, pot luck fares and take your pick public health tactics looks like an increasingly strange and strained indulgence when the whole thing is an artifice propped up and puppeteered from Whitehall with public money. Never mind the legions of lawyers, economists and consultants that the taxpayer pays for to keep up the front of house pretence that the railways are a dynamic, competitive and private sector market. With patronage hammered by COVID-19 the fight back is going to be tough for rail as it is, so why waste time and money perpetuating this expensive fiction when you could cut through it all by recreating a national intercity network again. Guaranteed frequencies for the nations’ major cities on a more consistent basis, straightforward long distance fares and intercity a big player on the national travel scene again.  This is something that you could market and promote the hell out of, get your story straight for the twists and turns of the pandemic to come, and sell on the basis of the environmental credentials that people do care about rather than make believe identities that nobody cares about.

Jonathan Bray is Director of the Urban Transport Group 

Gear change… is it finally time to get excited by the Government’s vision for cycling?

Commuters on bicycle paths

The Government’s new vision for active travel landed late last month and has caused a stir that has gone much further than the usual cycling and walking policy circles. Titled ‘Gear change’, its bold aim is to make cycling and walking the logical choice for short journeys, increasing mode share and reducing congestion. It will capitalise on unprecedented growth in active travel during the coronavirus lockdown period and boost public health, reducing the burden of inactivity and improving resilience to future COVID-19 outbreaks.

To achieve this, the range of policy areas and interventions that are covered is astounding. Promises to review the Highway Code, implement new traffic management powers, provide long term funding, create a zero emission city centre, new design guides, and new planning powers are just the start.

This is clearly an exciting but also challenging time for local authorities, who will have to plan and deliver change on a scale which is not comparable to what has gone before.

Due to the breadth of policy areas covered in the strategy, we have co-authored this piece to discuss how it might impact our different areas of work. So, what excited us about this announcement?

Tom Ellerton, Researcher

TE Staff card

One of my roles at the Urban Transport Group is to look after our active travel workstreams and professional network group. For me, two key elements of the new announcement are the long-term funding commitments and the new design guidance.

A new Cycling and walking investment strategy (CWIS) will be set out in the upcoming Spending Review. The key difference from the first CWIS is the attachment of funding – £2 billion, creating a programme on a similar scale to what we usually see for roads and the railways. This is a huge boost for local authorities who can now plan ahead with greater certainty to deliver a long-term programme of change rather than scraping around in a stop-start funding environment.

The new design guidance is long overdue and will provide local authorities with a steer as to the standard of schemes that they should be looking to implement. It has often been said that bad infrastructure can be worse than nothing at all. If we are to deliver behaviour change and get more people walking and cycling, we need to ensure that the infrastructure works for everyone, so the commitment that all new schemes must be safe for a 12-year-old is a very welcome change.

A new body called Active Travel England will be set up to monitor schemes and ensure that they are within the guidance, as well as providing support to local authorities and gaining some say in planning decisions. It will be crucial to develop good links between this body and local authorities to ensure that we can work together on delivering what is a very ambitious vision.

Clare Linton, Policy and Research Advisor

Dr Clare Linton headshotMy work at the Urban Transport Group spans a whole range of policy areas, from freight to smart transport futures, sustainability to planning – and the new vision for walking and cycling has something for all of them!

Transport is now the largest emitting sector in the UK, contributing around a third of carbon dioxide emissions in 2019, with the majority from road transport. In March, the Department for Transport published the Transport Decarbonisation Plan, which sets out how transport will meet net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Shifting demand to public and active travel is a key pillar of this plan, and the new cycling and walking vision demonstrates how this is a clear priority across Government. Active travel is the ultimate zero emission mode and delivering strong ambition for walking and cycling could transform how we travel in our cities and reduce carbon emission in the process.

The vision sets out the role for cycling in ‘last mile’ deliveries and the need for freight consolidation schemes in urban areas to make our deliveries more sustainable and efficient. These are both measures we argued for in our 2018 report ‘White van cities’ which looked at how we can manage the massive growth in van traffic in our urban centres. It would have been good to see a recognition that walking could play a greater role in last mile deliveries. A 2018 study in London found that overall round times for a parcel carrier could be shorter if fewer stops were made and a greater number of deliveries and collections were made on foot. It can also be easy to dismiss cargo bikes as only able to deliver small packages… but last year active travel charity Sustrans managed to move their entire London office by bike, as this YouTube video shows, so let’s think big for cargo bikes!

In our 2019 report ‘The place to be’, we demonstrated how transit oriented development can put public and active transport at the heart of new developments to create more sustainable choices for those who live and work in these areas. In particular, sustainable transport needs to be considered from the outset in planning new developments. As Tom mentioned, Active Travel England will act as a new planning body to ensure that sustainable transport is part of the planning process and help authorities to deliver on the ambition set out in this vision.

Let’s get started

We have done a lot of work over the years making the case for active travel, so it is great to see that this battle is being won. However, our professional network will continue to play a vital role through our active travel group. We have strong connections with key stakeholders in Government through to major NGOs in this space, who will be vital in enabling our members to deliver the greatest benefit from this vision. Previous work shows that where we get active travel schemes right, we can change our cities for the better. It is deeply encouraging that one positive we can take out of the coronavirus crisis, is to make active travel more prominent in our city regions. Let’s get started!

By Tom Ellerton and Clare Linton

Download ‘Gear change’, the Government’s vision for cycling and walking