The Wardman Wire

New Lib Transport Policy

The Lib Dems have launched a new transport policy, (here, pdf, 27 pages, 200k). I’m not wholly convinced, but I’ll start with a question mark over some of the internal logic.

Section 2.1.3

Overcrowding has increased year on year, particularly on major commuter routes into cities. Demand for rail travel is growing each year, with a 40% increase in passenger miles travelled by rail since 1996, a 66% increase in rail freight in the last decade and a forecast 30% growth in demand for rail passenger miles by 2016. The existing network will reach ‘capacity’ within 10-15 years and we need to plan now to avoid this.

Section 2.5.1

Despite Labour’s promise to reduce traffic levels, road traffic has risen 12% since they came to power and congestion is forecast to rise by up to 30% by 2025, costing the economy £24bn. Despite years of evidence to the contrary the Government continues to attempt to build their way out of congestion, building 15 times more miles of trunk road than railway since coming into power.

Section 1.1.5

Public transport has become more expensive, with the cost of travelling by bus or train rising in real terms since 1997 while the cost of motoring has fallen 10%. As a consequence, Britain has become ever more dependent on the private motor vehicle, with its damaging knock-on effects for the environment.

So:

• a 66% increase in rail freight since 1998.
• a 40% increase in passenger miles since 1996.
• and a 12% increase in road traffic since 1997.

Equals:

• Britain has become ever more dependent on the private motor vehicle, with its damaging knock-on effects for the environment.

Errrr … am I alone in thinking that that little lot doesn’t stack up to the suggested conclusion?

The data presented supports a conclusion that dependency on roads is reducing in the face of increased use of rail.

We all know that the market share of rail is quite low, and that it isn’t helped by (for example) a standard open return second class fare from Euston to Manchester Picadilly costing £230.00 (Saver = £62) - but I don’t reach this conclusion from these statements.

Wrapping Up

I’m open to correction and all that, and I may return to this on a level of philosophy.

I am not keen on “regulate! regulate! regulate!” approaches since they fail the green “remove, reduce, reuse, recycle” test which needs to applied to bureaucracy just as much as it does to Coke cans.