The government has approved a £92bn investment towards over 50 road and rail upgrades. But some say the plans don’t go far enough in supporting public transport
The government last week confirmed funding for more than 50 transport upgrades in England and Wales, including the long-delayed A66 Northern Trans-Pennine route and a West Midlands rail hub scheme.
The £92.8bn package is aimed at boosting economic growth, unlocking housing and reducing journey times for commuters. It also seeks to create 42,000 jobs and 39,000 homes across city regions in the North and Midlands.
Critics are asking, what impact will the road upgrades have on carbon emissions, and do the plans favour roads over public transport? But a number of industry professionals have embraced the upgrades, seeing them as an opportunity to enhance infrastructure efficiency and economic prospects.
“This investment creates jobs not only in the construction of the schemes but also in the supply chain. Our members will play a significant role in supplying raw materials for construction,” Jonathan Walker, head of policy at Logistics UK, told Construction News.
“More efficient corridors and infrastructure routes encourage businesses to invest alongside them. I expect to see greater investment by businesses in our sector, as improved roads and junctions make it easier for them to access markets,” he added.
Lorraine Gregory, director of the Civil Engineering Contractors Association Midlands, told CN that funding for these investments is underpinned by the recent Spending Review, which committed £113bn over the rest of this parliament, focusing on transport, energy, housing, defence and innovation.
The commitment is further supported by publication of the government’s 10-year infrastructure strategy last month, which outlined the government’s plan to invest £725bn over the next decade.
She said: “We believe all regions and nations in the UK must be given the opportunity to maximise the benefits infrastructure investment brings, and that delivering investment in all parts of the country is fundamental to creating the successful UK economy we all want to see.”
David Barnes, the Chartered Institute of Building’s head of policy and public affairs, told CN that a significant investment in the built environment was essential to the UK’s future.
However, in recent years, this investment has often fallen short due to the scale and urgency needed to address the major challenges.
He said: “Better infrastructure boosts productivity not just by improving transport or supporting the economy directly, but also by making people feel happier, safer and healthier.”
The Association for Consultancy and Engineering (ACE) also welcomed the investment package, seeing it as a development of projects that have been “hanging around for years”.
Ben Brittain, director of public affairs at ACE, told CN: “These projects have remained stalled for so long because the current delivery and funding model is fundamentally broken.
“It is overly exposed to shifting political priorities, which can change overnight.”
Marie-Claude Hemmings, director of policy at ACE, told CN: “The current government has spent its first year getting the policy right. Now the delivery is slowly being unveiled, and we look forward to the publication of the construction pipeline later this month.”
However, transport campaign groups have complained that the funding package favours roads at the expense of rail projects.
A spokesperson from Campaign for Better Transport told CN: “Public transport produces far less carbon emissions, making it more sustainable. Cars, vans and lorries account for around 95 per cent of all transport emissions. The more roads we build, the more traffic we create.
“The best way to ease congestion, cut journey times and bring greater access to jobs and opportunities across the country is not by building more roads. It is by prioritising public transport and reducing future car dependency by putting new housing in the right place where it can be connected to public transport, walking and cycling networks from day one.”
Chris Todd, director of Transport Action Network, told CN: “When looking at scheme design, we should be looking at solutions that align across government priorities including decarbonisation, protecting the NHS and safer streets. It is also important to invest in solutions that genuinely deliver high-value returns and minimise harm.
“If this was followed, roads would be a solution of last resort, and transport emissions would be more under control than they are at present.”
He suggested that many of the schemes will most likely increase congestion, rather than accelerating economic growth.
Instead, he recommended alternative investments to better support economic growth. “Many people without car access, who are often less economically active, would benefit from non-road investments, boosting the economy and reducing reliance on state support,” he said.
“There are around 14 million people at a very high risk of transport-related social exclusion. Investing in roads does little for them.
“We need public transport and active travel to improve productivity in urban areas. It increases physical activity, benefits the NHS by reducing costs and improving services, and it leads to less absenteeism, which is good for employers and results in more productive staff.”
As part of an inquiry into rail investment pipelines, on Wednesday (16 July) rail minister Peter Hendy defended the government’s decision to pause rail schemes, declaring there “isn’t the money to do everything”.
