Will Labour spend more on transport?

It seems that the short tenure of Transport Ministers is not just a phenomena restricted to the Government. Labour has had three different Shadow Secretaries of State for Transport in the space of 10 months.

The new Labour Shadow Trans-port Secretary, Andrew Smith - who replaced Clare Short in the recent reshuffle - brings with him to the transport portfolio a number of attributes and experiences to be welcomed by the construction and transport industries.

First among these is his experience of the working in the shadow Treasury team. Too often in recent years the Department of Transport has lost out in its annual battle with the Treasury over funding; spending on the transport infrastructure has been slashed as a result.

As a previous chair of Oxford City Council's planning committee, Smith should have a good appreciation of the issues involved in transport planning.

And as the member for Oxford East, which includes the Rover Cowley car plant, he will be aware of the issues affecting the motor industry, particluarly the industry's role as a major British employer.

Smith provides the transport brief with a potentially talented advocate but one who will need to be convinced of the benefits of increased transport spending.

Working in transport with Smith is Keith Bradley, MP for Manchester Withington, who has been moved from the Social Security portfolio. Bradley was previously a city councillor, serving as a director of both the Manchester Ship Canal and Manchester Airport.

The third member of the shadow transport team is Glenda Jackson, Labour's famous MP for Hampstead and Highgate. She is currently the shadow London Transport spokes-person and has been a strong advocate of increased investment in London's public transport infrastructure.

Traditionally Smith's number two would get the railways portfolio. But Labour said this week that no decision had yet been made over who will be Smith's deputy. Sources indicated that Labour may break with tradition and avoid designating either Bradley or Jackson as number two.

The transport policy document Consensus for Change gives the best guide to Labour's current thinking on transport as yet.

Labour has all but ruled out building major new motorways or new routes. However there is support for spending on road maintenance. The party recognises that, if spending on new roads is ruled out, the current road network will have to be better maintained and managed.

Expenditure on road transport will be made to compete against the demand for inceased spending on rail and the iron-fist of a Treasury team under Gordon Brown.

A positive indication about the future direction of transport policy came from Tony Blair in his speech to launch The Road to the Manifesto. Blair said that Labour had practical proposals for "upgrading road and rail".

Could this mean an increase in spending from the paltry 0.6% of GDP the UK spends on transport infrastructure currently towards the European average of 0.85% of GDP?

The Labour Party has expressed a commitment to reduce the environmental impact of the road network. In Consensus for Change, a number of suggested solutions are made which include:

n switching taxation from car ownership to car use with more energy efficient cars benefiting from paying lower levels of tax;

n increased investment in public transport to take passengers out of cars;

n tighter planning guidelines to reduce the need to travel;

n easier interchange between different modes of transport;

n better management of the road network.

On another front Labour remains opposed to motorway tolls but suggests that local authorities may introduce charging schemes at a local level as part of an integrated transport strategy.

Labour also recognises that a small number of roads, especially bypasses and small-scale road links to aid business and local communities, still need to be built. But only, Labour says, as a last resort. Those that are to be built will have to pass strict environmental impact assessments in consultaiton with local communities.

Whilst Labour recognises that, for the foreseeable future, the vast bulk of freight will be carried by road it seeks to improve the efficiency and reduce the environmental impact of carrying freight by road. Measures suggested include:

n changes to the taxation system to penalise lorries travelling long distance and discourage trucks running empty;

n limiting the access of large lorries to some areas;

n Tougher enforcement of vehicle and safety requirements;

n Encourage the transportation of freight by rail by supporting investment in rail and inter-modal links.

Consensus for Change talks about increasing investment in public transport, but there is little - apart from minor changes to the tax system - outlining how these changes in transport use would be financed.

Indeed in May 1996 Graham Allen - the then Shadow Minister for Roads, Shipping and Aviation - in a speech said: "While the DoT will continue to have a substantial budget the working assumption must be that there will be no additional public funds for transport projects."

Previously Labour had let it be known that public transport improvements would be funded by shifting spending from roads to rail. This option has been removed by the Government's cuts to road spending.

Both parties see the private sectoras the main source of spending on transport infrastructure. The phrase "partnership between the public and private sector" has often been used. Yet the benefits to the private sector of getting involved in building transport infrastructure are not made clear.

Whichever party is in government, it is unlikely that there will be any short term increase in funding for the road network or public transport. But in the medium term government has to face up to the need for increased transport spending as the current transport system fails to meet the demands placed upon it.