National Transport Strategy

Post Reply
Jdsk
Posts: 24639
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

National Transport Strategy

Post by Jdsk »

If we had one what would be your most important heads...

I'll start the bidding with:

Improving health and wellbeing
Reducing environmental impact

Jonathan
Jdsk
Posts: 24639
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Jdsk »

Here's something from another thread:
If we in this country were serious about vehicle pollution then we could massively reduce it without xxx. Over the lockdown the roads were empty and folk got on with life, it was tough but we did it, life was temporarily restructured. Similarly we could curtail road use and both demand that folk had essential reason to use their motor vehicle and find equitable ways to cap personal mileages. So in broad terms: work either from on near home, be educated locally or on-line, shop near home, holiday near home and use public transport. With regard to daily activities such as work and education I believe that a green transport plan should be required by all the parties involved, it will be painful but so are the results of pollution (in its many forms).
Jonathan
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by [XAP]Bob »

I'd also aim for varied.

Too many people only see one transport mode, and accept all it's flaws for any journey, despite there being far better approaches for the vast majority of journeys.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Nearholmer
Posts: 3929
Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Nearholmer »

A transport strategy can, I think, only ever be what might be called a sub-strategy, it has to serve some higher objectives ….. one rarely opts to travel, or shift goods about, just for the fun of it (hard as that may be for enthusiastic cyclists, who do precisely that, to believe).

Instances might be a transport policy designed to serve colonial exploitation (there have been many), or primarily to serve the needs of defence or offence (often how monarchs and governments first got a finger in the transport pie), or commerce (C18th Britain, where turnpikes arose for that reason).

So, asking about transport policy for the UK begs the question: what are we trying to achieve here?

Nail that, and we can start looking at what transport provisions might best serve those ends.

PS: “communication strategy” might actually be more useful too, again with long historical precedence in the need for rulers to communicate with their agents in order to achieve rule in practice.
Steady rider
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Steady rider »

https://www.transport.gov.scot/our-appr ... -strategy/
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... t-strategy

https://bicyclensw.org.au/the-first-nsw ... -strategy/
If they reviewed their helmet laws, that could also help.

Long term funding agreements, proportion for walking, cycling, roads, trains, etc.
2-3% of total transport budget for cycling.
https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_t ... ng_60.html
£46.9 total spend
£1 billion required for cycling per year.
Biospace
Posts: 2008
Joined: 24 Jun 2019, 12:23pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Biospace »

So, asking about transport policy for the UK begs the question: what are we trying to achieve here?
Absolutely.

Would better transport mean more motorised travel miles per person, and should that be an aim?

Ultrafast internet could mean that business travel will reduce significantly over the next half century, so is prioritising high speed rail a good allocation of resources?

Should transport for tourism be given greater priority given its growing importance in the UK economy?
tb
Posts: 137
Joined: 10 Jan 2007, 12:51pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by tb »

Hi Jonathan,

This is a great question and I'm fascinated by the current (media) turmoil associated with the environment, air quality and how we use our energy resources for moving around the planet.
I'm well over sixty years now and I've always been in favour of cycling where and when I'm travelling solo and I have a bicycle to hand, it's the obvious choice for me. However I'm also aware that many of my peers, most of them much younger than me have no interest or sometimes the necessary ability to ride a bicycle, electric or otherwise...
(I have to declare here that I am also a car driver when required)

My main concern is this.....the current train of thought suggests that we all need to move away from private vehicle ownership, yes?, either petrol or electric..... it's still private vehicle ownership and this entails huge resources to build each and every one so don't be fooled by the sales of electric vehicles..... this is no great panacea for mankind. After all we are just replacing one environmental disaster for another.
So wake up ye Government transport people.....if you really and seriously want people to move away from private vehicle ownership then we need an affordable ......integrated public transport system that works......omg it's bleedin' obvious!

but then hold on.....how does that fit into our current fiscal model........it does'nt......so keep buying cars folks
Carlton green
Posts: 3645
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Carlton green »

Ultrafast internet could mean that business travel will reduce significantly over the next half century, so is prioritising high speed rail a good allocation of resources?
Prioritising the likes of HS2 and not discouraging long distance high speed daily commuting isn’t wise. We do need quick and efficient rail services, but note those two particular adjectives. For long distance travel, when it’s truly needed by passengers, the electric equal of the 125’s should be fine and further electrification of the rail network should be a priority.
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
Steady rider
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Steady rider »

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/how-much-e ... ild-a-car/

a link to a pdf provides data

The whole approach should be based on providing for cycling first, then work out for other means of travel.
https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/s ... -transport
https://www.statista.com/chart/28710/en ... transport/
Nearholmer
Posts: 3929
Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Nearholmer »

Interesting that nobody has specifically mentioned the transport of goods.

It was an awfully long time back in history when all of our material needs were met from within easy walking distance, in fact I wonder if the very fact of being human, as opposed to what came before, might be tied-up with meeting material needs by trade over distance, rather than in the immediate locality.
Stevek76
Posts: 2085
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Stevek76 »

Carlton green wrote: 20 Mar 2023, 8:04pm Prioritising the likes of HS2 and not discouraging long distance high speed daily commuting isn’t wise. We do need quick and efficient rail services, but note those two particular adjectives. For long distance travel, when it’s truly needed by passengers, the electric equal of the 125’s should be fine and further electrification of the rail network should be a priority.
Literally nobody (ok well there's probably a few out there) does daily long distance commutes. That market didn't exist in the way you seemed to think it did even before COVID, what there was has been thoroughly killed off by that event. The bulk of intercity demand is leisure, people wanting to see friends, family, go on holiday, go to university or go on day trips.

Are you suggesting that you don't value these people's trips such that you'd deliberately build a new rail line far slower than it could be, worsening it's competitiveness vs car/air, worsening it's ability to replace intercity services on three existing lines (and thus the capacity release for local trips) for what, a nominal 10% cost saving that you'd definitely lose more of in benefits and possibly a very slim reduction in ecological damage but quite possibly not given even 200kph still have very large turn radii.

Really don't get the logic here, clearly very few other countries think that's a sensible idea either.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Nearholmer
Posts: 3929
Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Nearholmer »

I’ll say it again: to even start drafting a transport strategy, you need a higher level strategy as to what the country is trying to achieve.

Notice that before it ever mentions a train, lorry, car, van, bike or whatever, the Scot’s one says:

“The vision is underpinned by four interconnected priorities: Reduces Inequalities, Takes Climate Action, Helps Deliver Inclusive Economic Growth and Improves our Health and Wellbeing.”

Notice in there “economic growth”, not stasis or contraction, growth, and I’d wager that any such strategy for the rest of the UK would, by common consent, say the same, ditto that for any other country. That’s why nations build new transport links, and improve old ones, and it’s been going on since the dawn of history.

So, an early question for this forum to answer before putting pen to paper is: do we want economic growth, or not, and if not do we wish to retain exactly the economic and material prosperity we have now, or to wind back to a lower level?
Carlton green
Posts: 3645
Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Carlton green »

Stevek76 wrote: 20 Mar 2023, 8:36pm
Carlton green wrote: 20 Mar 2023, 8:04pm Prioritising the likes of HS2 and not discouraging long distance high speed daily commuting isn’t wise. We do need quick and efficient rail services, but note those two particular adjectives. For long distance travel, when it’s truly needed by passengers, the electric equal of the 125’s should be fine and further electrification of the rail network should be a priority.
Literally nobody (ok well there's probably a few out there) does daily long distance commutes. That market didn't exist in the way you seemed to think it did even before COVID, what there was has been thoroughly killed off by that event. The bulk of intercity demand is leisure, people wanting to see friends, family, go on holiday, go to university or go on day trips.

Are you suggesting that you don't value these people's trips such that you'd deliberately build a new rail line far slower than it could be, worsening it's competitiveness vs car/air, worsening it's ability to replace intercity services on three existing lines (and thus the capacity release for local trips) for what, a nominal 10% cost saving that you'd definitely lose more of in benefits and possibly a very slim reduction in ecological damage but quite possibly not given even 200kph still have very large turn radii.

Really don't get the logic here, clearly very few other countries think that's a sensible idea either.
I’d really like to see published data on the reasons why people travel, but over the years - including recent ones - I’ve come across quite a number of people who commute into the big cities by train and they have significant journeys. Part of the reason for that is property prices and part is that typically the big cities aren’t nice places to live in … both those issues could be tacked and doing so would negate reasons to travel excessive distances.

We’ve talked before and you’ll know that I wouldn’t have built HS2 at all. The Northern cities really need connectivity to each other rather than to London, and folk commuting short distances to work need transport more than casual users. Do I value the journeys of people wanting to see friends, family, go on holiday, go to university or go on day trips? Obviously I’m in favour of rail travel and I do value their journeys, and I value them in whatever part of the country that they are in. Do I feel that their journeys need to be high speed? Not at all, we once got by with trains for which 80mph was fast and cross country services are rarely fast but they are effective - effectively is what we need, but instead we have a vanity project.
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
Nearholmer
Posts: 3929
Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am

Re: National Transport Strategy

Post by Nearholmer »

If you want to know how, where, and to some extent why people travel within the UK, this is a good start https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... we-commute

Regarding long distance rail commuting into cities: yes, people do, especially to London, although that has reduced since Covid (it was actually falling noticeably before Covid too).

If you look in the stats, the average rail commute is 63 minutes, which on some routes gets you a good long way. I worked most of my life in or around London and colleagues were travelling in from Rugby, Peterborough, Swindon area, Sussex and Hants coasts etc. I was travelling 50 miles each way by rail (back door to office inside an hour most days, 15 minute bike to station, 30 minute train, 15 minute walk, or bus if it was raining). But, across the country, only 5% of the working population commute by rail, it is predominantly a thing in SE England, West Midlands, Greater Manchester, and Edinburgh-Glasgow corridor.

Why do people do it? House prices and environment (really important for people with children), and it can take just as long to commute a lot less distance if you live closer in. I used to tease colleagues who came from Ruislip for instance that their trip took longer than mine.

You might be surprised by who commutes long distances too. Nurses, police officers, construction workers, fire fighters, engineers, court staff, a bloke I knew who specialised in French-polishing pianos ….. all sorts of jobs.
Post Reply