1. Eddingtons implications for transport funding Dr Adam Marshall Head of Policy, Centre for Cities National Transport Conference, 16 Oct 07

2. About Centre for Cities Non-partisan urban research unit Incubated at ippr – independent from 1 Nov 07 Work closely with cities, Whitehall, business Research focus = cities economic performance 2008 programme = City Growth, City Potential, Supporting City Economies (series of short reports)

3. This talk 1.Understanding Eddington 2.Policy developments since Eddington 3.The financial implications 4.What happens next

4. Media story: road charging Real story: transport investment If implemented: major re-prioritisation of Britains transport budget Key beneficiaries: large, economically successful urban areas – GSE and some Northern city-regions 1. Understanding Eddington

5. Five key recommendations: 1.Invest in existing networks 2.Target investment geographically 3.Target congestion, pinch-points 4.Better appraisal of economic benefits 5.Reform sub-national delivery structures 1. Understanding Eddington

6. Investing in Existing Networks: Rejection of need for High-Speed Rail Prioritise dull but important projects – e.g. New Street, Manchester hub, M62 Extend metropolitan transport networks in growing cities 1. Understanding Eddington

7. Target investment geographically: Growing urban areas and their catchments = London, Manchester, Bham, Leeds, Milton Keynes, Cbridge Key inter-urban corridors = WCML / ECML, Transpennine, Mways International gateways = access to ports/airports, capacity 1. Understanding Eddington

8. Target congestion and pinch-points Widespread road pricing – but no call for an explicit national scheme Road improvements to reduce bottlenecks. But a massive new road- building programme? What about places where there is little congestion, e.g. Liverpool or Hull? 1. Understanding Eddington

9. More weight to economic benefits Better appraisal needed Include wider economic benefits: Privileges cities, where agglomeration effects are strongest Value for money approach to appraisal with economic, social, environmental externalities. Difficult! 1. Understanding Eddington

10. Reform sub-national delivery structures Prioritisation of investment – e.g. through Regional Funding Allocations ( Sub-National Review) Bus regulation ( Local Transport Bill) Better planning procedures for Major Infrastructure Projects ( Planning WP) 1. Understanding Eddington

11. Range of co-ordinated announcements: –Lyons Inquiry (March 2007) –Draft Local Transport Bill (May 2007) –Planning White Paper (May 2007) –Sub-National Review (July 2007) –Ports Policy Review (July 2007) –Rail White Paper (July 2007) … all on-message with Eddington 2. Policy developments

12. Rail White Paper as an example: HLOS, 30-yr strategy: upgrade existing nets Capacity issues: 1,300 new carriages Addressing pinch-points: New Street Station, Reading Station, Gtr SE rail networks Dull but important signalling and infrastructure improvements Small quick wins: station upgrades 2. Policy developments

13. Top line: Eddington is good news for the Greater South East and Britains bigger city-regions… Why? 3. Financial Implications

14. 3. Financial implications Eddington investment priorities are URBAN Urban spatial focus: urban areas + catchments; inter-urban corridors (e.g. rail); gateways Invest in existing networks, tackle pinch-points Case for investment: agglomeration Integrated city-regional transport governance and investment

15. Focus on wider economic benefits and value for money appraisal = –Stronger case for urban transport improvements, which generate more agglomeration benefits –Option generation – need an economic case as well as a political case for investment! –Improved BCRs: better chance for govt funding, higher prioritisation within RFAs, etc. BUT not all urban areas are likely to benefit 3. Financial implications

16. Potential winners: –London, access to London from rest of Gtr SE –Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham city-regions –Smaller, successful cities dealing with pressures of success – e.g. Bristol, Cambridge, York, Brighton, Milton Keynes, Reading, Derby Potential losers: –Cities w/o major congestion or access issues – e.g. Liverpool, Newcastle, Sheffield, Hull 3. Financial implications

17. Inter-urban corridors: –Improvements to existing inter-city links –Rail: main lines, Transpennine, longer trains –Road: junction improvements, addtl lanes – but any major new road building beyond this?? Airports and ports: –Money for surface access improvements by road & rail – e.g. Manchester Airport, port of Liverpool 3. Financial implications

18. ROAD AHEAD: Formal DfT response to Eddington – move into implementation phase Local Transport Bill – Nov/Dec C-TIF allocations – Dec ? Planning Bill, Local Govt Bill – early 2008 NATA refresh – 2008/09 4. What happens next?

19. If Eddingtons logic is implemented in full: –Geographically concentrated investment –Focus on packages of small schemes –Invisible improvements –Ever greater prioritisation of limited ££ But can this agenda win over politicians – ever mindful of public opinion?

20. Questions or comments? Adam Marshall 020 7470 6119 a.marshall@ippr.org