Transport webchat with Ruth Kelly

20 September 2007

Ruth Kelly, Secretary of State for Transport, spent over an hour answering your questions on transport this morning.

The Secretary of State answered questions on pollution, rural bus services, cycling, air travel and railways in the session.

Read the transcript:

Moderator says: Morning, welcome to today's webchat with Ruth Kelly, the Secretary of State for Transport. Ruth has just arrived so we should be starting shortly!

Ruth says: Hello. Good to be here, look forward to answering your questions if I can.

Becky hobbs milne: Why is it that public transport is still so inaccessible to disabled people? I'm thinking especially of the Underground in London, but disabled people everywhere will know the impossible struggles they face, and how isolating it is.

Ruth replies: I agree with you, this is a huge challenge for us, making public transport accessible to disabled people or those who find it difficult to use trains, buses and coaches is a priority for me. We introduced a law which says that public transport has to be made accessible. But clearly it is taking time to implement. By law all new trains, buses and coaches must now have features making them accessible to disabled people. It is also a question about how accessible or how easy stations are to use and last year the Government committed £370 million to improving them over the next 8-9 years.

ray cook: now you have introduced new disability badges will the enforcement come with them. Will there be heavy fines to deter people from misusing them.

Ruth replies: This is clearly an issue of increasing concern to people. Last week my colleague Rosie Winterton announced new measures to reduce blue badge fraud and the new blue badge will have a hologram attached on it to help enforcement. I am also thinking about how we can use new technology to counteract fraud in the future.

m.williamson: You say that there are too many cars on the road, yet public transport is quite expensive to use. I find in the area I live in that children are charged full fares to travel on buses during the week, e.g . I went shopping with my child who is thirteen and to travel two stops before we walked the rest of the way to the supermarket it cost 90 pence. I find in Bedfordshire to take the family in to town is quite expensive. Is there any way that affordable and regular transport can be provided.

Ruth replies: It's not always economic for bus operators to put on services in rural communities so we are introducing new measures which should come into force shortly which should help local authorities work together with bus companies to plan exactly what services are required and this will be backed up by the Rural Bus Subsidy Grant which is over £50 million a year. The key here is to get local authorities really involved in making sure that sufficient public transport is available in all communities.

Jane Bennett: I work for the Forum of Private Business (FPB) which represents over 25,000 smaller businesses in the UK. Our members are extremely concerned that the introduction of congestion charging across the country will mean that their businesses will be threatened. Smaller firms cannot transport their goods on public transport, however they will be charged for the new transport schemes. Larger firms will be able to absorb the costs of congestion charging, however smaller firms will have to increase their prices and will subsequently become less competitive. Our members would like to ask how and when they will be consulted about the implementation of these new transport schemes?

Ruth replies: We have no current commitment to introduce national road pricing but we are actively thinking about how to deal with congestion problems in the future. The fact is that sitting in traffic jams is no good for commuters and its no good for businesses. This is a real economic issue facing our country which will need to be tackled. Of course we will consult actively with everybody affected before any decisions are taken.

D Skrytek: The Government, along with local government, claims to be reducing CO2 emissions, yet plans for more roads, airport expansion, building of incinerators, unsustainable biodiesel plans, destruction of biodiversity - especially in Country Parks supposedly left for the people - all scupper such plans.
Here in Derby in particular, there are many community groups set up to fight the above and these are growing in number and size. How does the Minister square the above facts with the supposed CO2 reductions?

Ruth replies: You obviously feel strongly about these issues! But of course you are right to be concerned about how we tackle what is an enormous threat to our planet. The UK has, as you know, been right at the forefront of international efforts to tackle climate change and one of my officials is currently representing the EU at international negotiations to reduce worldwide emissions. On the domestic front, we have already published a draft climate change bill which sets out a statutory target for a reduction in domestic emissions of 60% by 2050. For my part, I am determined that transport plays its full part. So, for example, we have been pushing the European Commission to include aviation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme which is proposing to put a cap on EU wide aviation emissions at 2004-2006 levels and we are arguing for a mandatory target for new car emissions to apply across Europe. At the same time as all of this is going on, we are already investing significant amounts of money in public transport infrastructure.

Ben: Unlike your predecessors Darling and Alexander, you don't seem to have made a a very positive commitment to road pricing on taking office. Are you rethinking this policy?

Ruth replies: No. The Eddington Report, which was published December 2006, pointed out that to meet traffic demand in the future either the Government would have to spend billions more than is currently being spent every year building new roads or introduce some form of demand management or would see a huge rise in congestion over the next decade. Clearly there are going to be tough choices ahead and I will be responding to the Eddington Report shortly but what I am interested in is seeing proposals from individual parts of the country about their local solutions to tackling local congestion, some of which include a form of road pricing alongside significant public transport investment. It will be interesting to see how these work in practice before we take any decisions on whether there should be any national proposals.

David Charlesworth: Electrified Railway clearly have huge environmental benefits. However this Government record on extending the electrified network is pitiful.

Why doesn't this Government support the further electrification of the railways as a way of tackling climate change?

Ruth replies: Well we are certainly committed to investing in the railway. I recently set out plans for the railway to double in size over the next 30 years - the first fully funded plan for growth since the war. Our priority however has to be in the short term, dealing with real capacity constraints and the over crowding that people are often faced with. In a limited budget there are always tough decisions to be made but electrification is certainly not ruled out. As the electiricy mix changes in the future, there may be a case for electrification as an economic response to environmental considerations and we will keep that under review.

Jorge Solis: My MP (Bury North) says that this government's policy "has been to build a large number of cycle lanes in most towns and cities as part of the process of building a national network of safe cycling routes". Yet all I see is green paint on the side of the road. Why can't the UK have 'proper' segregated cycle lanes like other countries?

Ruth replies: I am clear we have to do more to encourage cycling. It's good for the environment but it's also good for people. These decisions are usually taken by local authorities as part of their responsibilities for local transport planning but it's certainly the case that they can introduce segregated cycle lanes where it is an offence for a driver to enter the cycle lane. Enforcement of course, is for the police.

Ben Rattigan: Will the Secretary of State intervene in the Tees Valley metro plan and expand the scheme to the Hartlepool area from the outset and also bring the scheme forward to benefit an area with the worst public transport infrastructure?

Ruth replies: There are lots of questions from all of you out there about local transport schemes and I understand that these are probably the most significant for you. However, I am really keen that decisions are made as close to local people as possible and not from Whitehall. It is not always my role to intervene in what are rightly local decisions. I am not sure if this is one that may or may not end up coming to the department. If it is, then I will have to look at the case on its merits.

Darren Greenfield: What are Ruth's thoughts on the breakup of BAA's London airports (e.g. forcing BAA to sell Gatwick)?

Ruth replies: This is something that is currently with the Competition Commission - they are the experts. The key thing is that passengers get the best possible experience and Britain continues to benefit from its status at the global hub.

nicola weekes: Having come from the DCLG, do you see it as odd that your last department is responsible for urban environments and public space, but the DfT for streets? How is it possible to enable the DCLG to put people at the heart of their communities, when the streets that dissect them are run by a department whose main function is to ensure high levels of motorised mobility?

Ruth replies: As I have already said, I am very keen that decisions are taken as close to people as possible and that view was reinforced by my experience of being Communities Minister. Most local roads are the responsibility of local authorities. It's just trunk roads that come under the Department's responsibilities. But the exact threshold of who takes the decisions on particular planning applications is currently under discussion in Government as we consider the future Planning Bill.

essi ahari: Will we meet the 2010 KSI targets? What will we be working towards thereafter?

Ruth replies: We have got one of the best road safety records in the world but nine people still die needlessly every day. That is why we are determined to stamp out bad and irresponsible driving which endangers us all. The good news is that we are on track to meet our target of reducing, by 40%, the number of accidents in which someone is killed or seriously injured and we have met our 2010 target of halving the number of children killed or badly hurt three years early. We are currently working on our strategy for after 2010. I can't tell you the details but we will certainly be seeking further improvements.

Chris Wood: Is it not obvious to the government that the only way to have an integrated transport link to cut traffic is by nationalising the rail service. This would also take into account profits being reinvested into the transport service. Why will the government not do this?

Ruth replies: The answer is that it wouldn't make sense to re-nationalise at a time when the railway is on a sound and stable financial footing, is delivering real improvements in performance and reliability and for the first time in 50 years is expanding rapidly. I think that the Railways Act which was introduced in 2005 addressed the key organisational problems in the railway by setting up Network Rail, a non-profit making company. Now is just not the time to be thinking about further change.

ivor hopkin: Is more use to be made of the traffic officer service as this seems to be a totally under utilised service in its present format.

Ruth replies: They are definitely doing good work alongside the police helping to ease congestion on our highways. It is always good to hear some positive feedback and we have got over a 1000 of them now and of course we will keep their role under review.

David Rogers: When does Government propose to completely exempt the least polluting vehicles (electric/hybrid/smart cars etc), from road charges/tolls and permit them to use bus/taxi lanes?

Ruth replies: I know the Mayor of London is already thinking along these lines with the congestion zone. Last year's budget set out a variable VED (Vehicle Excise Duty) rate on vehicles which exempts the least polluting cars from excise duty. Any future changes are of course, a matter for the Chancellor.

David Spong: Cycle Paths for Bikes: what are you doing to encourage more people to use a bike more often instead of the car ?

Ruth replies: We should be doing more, I think this is really important. Before I moved to transport, my predecessor had just doubled investment in cycling which I think was a really good move. It will mean that lots more schools will be able to provide safe routes to school and more children will be able to have bikeability training which is the modern form of cycling proficiency. Most funding for cycling, however, comes from local authorities and I am clear that there are really big benefits to local areas from investing in cycling. One of the things I want to think about over the coming months is how we can encourage more people to use their bikes.

Max Rodgers: Ruth, what is your view on the safety seat policy brought in by the ex Minister for Road Safety Dr Stephen Ladyman MP. Will this continue under Mr Brown?

Ruth replies: Having four children under the 135cm height restriction I think it is vital that we do what we can to improve safety on the roads and of course this will be one of the ways in which we help meet our targets in reducing the amount of child deaths and serious injuries.

tim jordan: Working in local Govt our aim through central Govt policy is to reduce the need to travel by car. One of the most logical options for interurban travel at peak times is to use the trains. When will the govt use joined up thinking with regard to train fares instead of allowing peak demand on the railways to be priced out of the market?

Ruth replies: There is a lot of misinformation in relation to what is going on about fares. Most fares are regulated by the government including peak time commuter fares. These regulated fares are currently lower in real terms than they were 10 years ago. Of course some first class, open and premium fares have gone up but the cost of some of the cheapest fares are falling just as fast. But the real test of our policy will be whether more people use the train in future. Passenger numbers have been growing rapdidly in recent years and we expect that to continue in the future.

Ruth says: Thanks very much for all your questions. Transport is really important and I will be doing everything I can to meet the big challenges on the economy as well as ensuring that we meet our environmental obligations and widen individual opportunity.

Moderator says:
Thanks for all your questions.

Don't forget that we have another webchat next week with Health Minister Lord Darzi who's leading the biggest ever public consultation on the future of the NHS.

• Put a question to Lord Darzi