Political Solutions
Transport Reform
Politicians of the 21st Century know only too well that the lifeblood of industry is pumped through the arteries of our road and rail systems. It is essential for industry that our workforce is able to access a transport network that enables them to go to work. It is essential for education that our children have access to transport when going to school, college and university. It is essential to the economy that consumers have the transport to access retail outlets for food, clothing and luxury purchases. It is essential to business that access is available to business deliveries and production distribution. It is essential to the leisure, entertainment, hospitality and heritage industries that people have transport access to enjoy the diverse forms of attractions available for those who possess the money to enjoy the fruits of their labour.
Politicians of the 21st Century also know only too well that our train system is inadequate, bursting at the seams in rush hour and prone to breaking down. Underground trains struggle to cope with swarms of commuters. Buses are inhospitable at best and unable to service adequately the needs of women with small children and buggies, shopping habits, anyone who might be a little unsteady on their feet and expensive to use given all of the above.
In addition to the previous considerations, politicians are keenly aware of the issues regarding global warming and the perceived need to be seen to champion its cause. As a consequence it seems that every politician and councillor, regardless of political persuasion, are keen to make the car driver's lot as miserable and as difficult as possible, whilst creating an infrastructure that is hostile to the motorist and promotes the very transport system that could not possibly cope with more commuters.
So what should Britain's transport system look like?
Background
The Commission for Integrated Transport web site states that the UK transport system has been starved of investment for the last 50 years. Those who use the system get poor service at a high cost. The commission suggests that the poor service forced people to use their cars whether they wanted to or not. On this last point I am not so sure. It is apparently a statistical fact that there is a high car dependence within the UK. This commission would recommend that we abandon the car and use either a bicycle or walk. The idea, I would hope, does not extend to the elderly who are not only a bit beyond pedalling down the high street with zimmer frame in tow but are also hard pressed to find the money to get on a bus in the first place.
Not everyone can afford a car of course; and by the way that oil prices, car insurance, speed cameras, road tolls, car tax and congestion charges only ever rise in cost, more people are likely to find themselves socially excluded along with the poor and the isloated. So instead of becoming overwieght by using a car and not exercising, people are more likely to become overweight by not going anywhere and vegetating in front of the TV.
Proposal
Under investment is not exclusive to the UK. The Commission for Integrated Transport show that other countries fared better or worse but hardly shining examples of best practice. Governments have spent incredible amounts of money with huge corporations to deliver a workable transport network for Great Britain. I think most people will hold the belief that the UK may have demonstrated a little wisdom in not wasting even more money on the transport system as it is structured today. Both the Labour and Conservative Governments have had over 50 years between them to create a half decent transport structure. Why on earth today's politicians think that pushing more people out of cars and onto trains, buses and bicycles will make things better beggars belief. This, in my opinion, is a sign of political parties without new ideas, grasping at straws to find the right short term political platform with which to attract voters. I think that 50 years is long enough. The politicians have had their turn and they have failed spectacularly.
Over the last 50 years, the inner cities have seen the high street shops dying a slow and agonising death. Supermarkets have largely been to blame, although we - the shopper - must take some credit for encouraging their expansion. What started off as supermarkets in town then became large shopping complexes that were largely accessible only by car. Moreover, with the cheaper supermarket shops being built further away from residential areas, consumers shopping habits adapted accordingly. When I go shopping with my wife we will have between us around fifteen shopping bags; a large shopping trolley full of food. I would like to know from our politicians how anyone would be able to use public transport with food provisions for one month? Their response might be that we should only shop once a week but does that not now present the prospect of four journeys rather than one? What ever politicians may want, be it fewer cars on the road, less pollution, less congestion etc, they will have to concede to the fact that the motor car will always be the best and most convenient way to get from A to B.
So let us get to grips with the UK transport system by looking at overhead trains - especially commuter train networks. In general they are overcrowded and unreliable but picking on the worst line might just be the way forward. I would not spend enormous amounts of money on the entire rail network because that method has already demonstrated for 50 years what a waste of time and money it would be. It is time for people to stop tinkering with a load of broken toys and try to mend just one. One rail line, one commuter service - the worst one - to study in isolation and invest in that one line where it is likely to make an improved service. If it goes wrong or it doesn't work then we have spent a few million pounds rather than countless billions. That means that all the money we don't spend can be saved for the time that we have found out what works well and then seek to integrate the idea into one more line, then another and then another.
What this method will do, in theory at least, is to spread the cost of investment evenly over the entire rail network structure. As new techonlogy and maintenance schedules become due we no longer have to look at rolling it out all in one go accross the train network. Investment will be concentrated in small areas at a time, which means having the money to do things properly rather than skimp accross the board to make ends meet. I wonder which political body will have the courage to look beyond a five-year governmental term?
Buses compete with all other road transport and until we look seriously at how we 'share' the road there will always be problems with congestion. Is it not madness to take our children to school (by car or on foot for that matter) in the middle of the morning rush hour where buses, cars and lorries fight to reach their destination? Wouldn't it be better to even things out a bit?
Large vehicles are on our roads everywhere; Thirty-eight ton monsters with huge trailers trying to negotiate our narrow streets. It may be a sensible suggestion to insist that some large delivery vehicles travel on specific roads at night between the hours of midnight to seven am - be that toward their destination or away.
School children should start their educational day at 8:30 rather than 9:00. Too many people, adults and children , are trying to reach a destination by 9:00am. Doesn't it make sense to stagger journey times? And while we are on the subject of travelling times, we should adopt the idea of putting our time in line with the rest of Europe so that fewer children are out in darkness when traffic accidents tend to increase. I believe that the health and well being of our children getting to school and coming home safely, far outweighs the grumblings of Scottish Farmers who can work whatever hours they want.
Underground trains in London (I cannot speak with any authority for other underground networks) is already at capacity. No amount of modernising the underground system can increase the level of travel already achieved. The notion of pushing more people onto underground trains is just plain silly. Businesses may wish to reconsider the necessity of attracting people to an already overcrowded city and think about going to a less busy area.
Stop congestion charges! They will never achieve what it was meant to achieve. While the motorist will stump up the money, albeit grumbling whilst they do, they will still use their car. The big city centres like London, Manchester, Birmingham etc are begging to be turned into semi pedestrian zones with only buses, certified taxis and cyclists being allowed entry. Delivery Vehicles will be allowed into the pedestrian zone during the hours of midnight to seven in the morning - including refuse vehicles. No other vehicles will be allowed in (There are always some exceptions but there is no point in trying to write an exhaustive list at this stage). This will give the inner cities cleaner air, cleaner buildings, less noise and more space to display art, street entertainment, cafes etc.
Buses should always be free to pensioners. Child fares should be at a discount only for the time it takes to get to school and up to an hour at school's end. If anyone has shared a bus with twenty or so abusive, shouting, boistrous children will understand how stressful the journey can become for both the passengers and the driver.
It is a matter of record that people in Great Britain were known for their willingness to form a queue and take thier turn. It was considered polite and a recognition of the first come first served entitlement. It was a practice considered inherently British. The free-for-all pushing and shoving at the bus stop today is indicative of the type of social downward trend that the elderly in particular will experience with disappointment. I believe that it is a priority to find a way to get that politeness and mutual consideration back. I wonder what people would think of the queueing barriers used successfully by theme parks, banks and airports. It is either that or a concerted campaign to educate people on how to conduct themselves when using a public system that everyone is equally entitled to use.
Greater use of bicycles may only be successful if there is greater access to secure, theft free bicycle parking facilities. The police are far too busy filling out paperwork on speeding motorists to bother with one of the 439,000 bicycles stolen every year ((2007) http://www.moneynet.co.uk/news/insurance-record-bike-thefts-in-uk-18132575.shtml ). This compares to 214,000 cars, of which 65% were stolen outside the owner's home ( http://www.autolok.co.uk/Pages/press_06081c.htm). Also it may be more attractive for cyclists to use bicycles in city areas that are predominantly car free.
END
