By Johnny Sharp

It’s that rare event: a government policy that benefits from cross-party support. Ahead of the Devolution Bill, the official white paper from late last year stated: “It is nonsensical that the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has to agree before councils can set rules on where people can ride bikes or climb trees in parks. It is costly, inefficient and patronising that the Secretary of State for Transport has to agree to a new cattle grid or to converting a footpath into a cycle lane.”

Jim McMahon, Minister for Local Government and English Devolution, explained, “The aims of this programme are simple: it puts more money in people’s pockets [and] leads to quicker, better, cheaper transport, designed with local people in mind.”

Image: Rural lane in High Weald, East Sussex. Credit: Shutterstock.

“We know that the transport sector is still one of the largest emitters of CO2. It’s an important nut to crack in terms of the decarbonisation story,” says Rupert Clubb, Director of Communities, Economy and Transport at East Sussex County Council, who are one of a number of local authorities who took up the invitation to be part of the government’s Devolution Priority Programme.

“We’re still waiting to see the full details of the Devolution Bill, but in the consultation documents, which sought views on proposals to form Mayoral Combined Authorities for those areas on the Devolution Priority Programme, there were quite a few paragraphs on transport and local infrastructure, specifically around buses and active travel and rail. 

“It’s also been proposed that mayors will have a statutory role regarding the rail network, so while we wait to see what powers that specifically involves, that’s a positive step, and we would hope also that the relationship with National Highways will [also] be strengthened.”

It’s that rare event: a government policy that benefits from cross-party support. Ahead of the Devolution Bill, the official white paper from late last year stated: “It is nonsensical that the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has to agree before councils can set rules on where people can ride bikes or climb trees in parks. It is costly, inefficient and patronising that the Secretary of State for Transport has to agree to a new cattle grid or to converting a footpath into a cycle lane.”

Jim McMahon, Minister for Local Government and English Devolution, explained, “The aims of this programme are simple: it puts more money in people’s pockets [and] leads to quicker, better, cheaper transport, designed with local people in mind.”

“We know that the transport sector is still one of the largest emitters of CO2. It’s an important nut to crack in terms of the decarbonisation story,” says Rupert Clubb, Director of Communities, Economy and Transport at East Sussex County Council, who are one of a number of local authorities who took up the invitation to be part of the government’s Devolution Priority Programme.

“We’re still waiting to see the full details of the Devolution Bill, but in the consultation documents, which sought views on proposals to form Mayoral Combined Authorities for those areas on the Devolution Priority Programme, there were quite a few paragraphs on transport and local infrastructure, specifically around buses and active travel and rail. 

“It’s also been proposed that mayors will have a statutory role regarding the rail network, so while we wait to see what powers that specifically involves, that’s a positive step, and we would hope also that the relationship with National Highways will [also] be strengthened.”

Challenges ahead

One of the biggest obstacles for some local authorities is encouraging modal change in transport, as Clubb acknowledges: “When you look at rural areas, there’s quite high levels of car dependency because the public transport infrastructure isn't as well developed as it is in towns and cities. 

“So how do you support those communities with alternative forms of transport? Because the argument always is ‘Well, I have to use my car because there is no other option.’”

There are initiatives afoot, though, to address these issues. “A number of authorities have developed things like demand responsive transport models to support rural communities,” says Clubb, “And I think they can work quite well in terms of an alternative.”

Meanwhile, investment in initiatives such as improved cycle paths and better, more sustainable street lighting, will now be easier to activate, with further funds potentially available from central government for local authorities to spend as they see fit. Consultation documents have pledged a 30-year ‘investment fund’ from the Mayoral Combined County Authority, a figure which will be confirmed in the government’s Spending Review, due in June.

The question also remains around whether mayors use a ‘carrot or stick approach’ when trying to make modal change happen. Greater London’s ULEZ scheme has been a highly publicised (and controversial) but punitive addition to the long-established congestion charge, while emissions-based parking permits have been introduced in London boroughs including Hounslow and Newham, rewarding lower-emitting motorists, and a similar scheme is currently under consultation in Reading.

Either way, these will be options that local authorities can decide on more easily and put into practice without needing time-consuming and restrictive endorsement from central government, and Clubb agrees it’s good news on the road to net zero: “There’s an opportunity in those combined authorities to set out plans for a high-quality public transport infrastructure that can help speed up the decarbonisation journey.”

Read more from CIHT: Local delivery of net zero features at conference.

Image: Rural lane in High Weald, East Sussex. Credit: Shutterstock.