The modern tram is flourishing again! The GreaterManchester, Nottingham, West Midlands and SouthYorkshire systems are all benefitting from extensionsand new routes. Most dramatic of all is the floweringof Manchester Metrolink from a few lines to acomprehensive network, with 2013 seeing theopening up of section after section to the public.

On the 23rd of May, the South Manchester line openedto East Didsbury – including a new stop at DidsburyVillage, enabling passengers to travel by rail toManchester for the first time since Beeching shut downDidsbury station in the late Sixties.

Earlier in the year, the former heavy rail line fromManchester Victoria to Rochdale via Oldham was fullyconverted to Metrolink with on-street extensions intoRochdale and Oldham town centres to follow in 2014.

Also opened this year was the East Manchester routeto Droylsden. Construction is underway on furtherextending the East Manchester Line and on a newroute to Wythenshawe and the airport.

So busy, extensive and successful has the networkbecome that the city centre will need a second routethrough it as one line across the city centre can nolonger handle all the trams.

Meanwhile in the West Midlands, work is nowunderway on extending the Midland Metro tramroute from Snow Hill through to the heart of the citycentre and a revitalised Birmingham New StreetStation. Whilst in Nottingham work is ongoing toextend the very successful NET tram system to thesouth and southwest of the city, through an extensionto Chilwell, and a second extension to Beeston andClifton with both to open in 2014.

the voice of urban transport

In South Yorkshire, a revolutionary new tram-trainsystem is on its way. Tram-trains can share traditionalheavy rail networks with regular trains as well asglide through city centres using traditional on-streettram tracks. Increasingly common in countries likeFrance and Germany, tram-trains are cheaper torun than conventional trains, release the pressure onbusy city centre heavy rail stations and, crucially,allow passengers to get on at their local suburbanstation and get off right outside their city centre highstreet place of work or retail destination. From wherethey live to where they want to get to – direct.

The first UK tram-trains will operate on the existingSheffield Supertram network and over Network Railtrack to serve Rotherham. Once up and running, theSouth Yorkshire tram-train pilot will be a workingdemonstration of what this technology could do forother big city rail networks. This breakthrough will sitalongside another breakthrough for the tram whichis Manchester Metrolink giving a major UK urbanarea an extensive tram network rather than stand-alone lines. The tram is back!

Light rail renaissance

pte

gn

ew

sle

tter

Issue 31 Sep

temb

er 2013

pte

gn

ew

sle

tte

rIn the run-up to the Spending Review pteg workedwith partners to make a strong case for localtransport spending in the big urban areas beyond thecapital. Although some of the details have yet toemerge, the strong evidence base that ptegpresented helped ensure a much better deal for localtransport outside London in the 2013 SpendingReview than was the case from the 2010 SpendingReview. And this isn’t the end of the story as we willbe further developing the evidence base assembledfor this Spending Review for Budgets, AutumnStatements and Spending Reviews ahead.

The case for local transport spend on the bigconurbations outside London is particularly stronggiven that the Government wants to see immediateeconomic benefits for the investment it is putting in.Unlike mega infrastructure projects, local transportschemes can be started quickly and bring multiplebenefits. As block funding is replaced with morecompetitive schemes there are plenty of project bidsthat didn’t win funding that can quickly be dusteddown and started up.

Spending on road maintenance can quickly be turnedinto jobs, reduced congestion, better use of roadspace and fewer accidents - one reason why theObama administration is pursuing a ‘fix it first’transport spending policy.

Getting cycle use to a critical mass in the bigregional cities will require some sustained spending –but again, when compared with mega infrastructureschemes it is both cheap and easy to fund.

Spending on buses must be one of the biggestbargains in transport policy. Every pound spentsupporting the urban bus reduces congestion for allroad users, provides the jobless with access toemployment opportunities and means young peoplecan get into education and training. It’s a socialpolicy that cuts travel times for ‘white van man’ anda transport policy that helps tackle the high costs oflong term social problems. How many publicspending programmes can claim that?

The problem in the past has been that despite themerits of the case for spending on local transport, ithas still lost out to London, national rail and morerecently to national roads. London and national rail(decision makers and journalists use trains – theydon’t use buses outside London) have just had morepolitical clout and will cause more damagingheadlines if cuts take place. One thing’s for surethough – the case for urban transport spending –beyond London – has been fought much harder thistime and there’s a sense that the message is gettingthrough.

Spending Review The cities make their transport pitch

City leadershipOur largest regional cities are key to the prospects for the wider UK economy, yet their room formanoeuvre has been boxed in by tight control from Whitehall and a sense that leadership in the widercity regions has been too diffuse.

Following on from the success of Greater Manchester’s Combined Authority (which formalises workingarrangements between city leaders), other city regions are now following their lead – with SouthYorkshire and West Yorkshire planning to set up respective Combined Authorities (CAs) by 2014, and the North East also aiming for the same deadline. With transport seen as key to their areas’economic performance, these arrangements allow for District Leaders to have more direct say overtransport strategy. This is something that District Leaders in areas not yet planning a CA also wish to see.

The process of change in each city region is rapid but not homogenous, as governance proposals evolvein a way that meets local circumstances, with the final outcome for city region transport planning anddelivery not yet clear. However what is clear is what a key priority transport is for decision makers in thecity regions – reassuring at a time of local government funding reductions.

The air we breathe

Buses in Liverpool, equipped with environmentally friendly hybrid engines to keep down emissions.

pte

gn

ew

sle

tter

Poor air quality kills. The public health impacts of poorair quality are on a par with those of obesity, road trafficaccidents and passive smoking. Poor air quality leads topremature deaths and can aggravate cardiovascularand respiratory conditions. The impacts are unequal,with the young, the old, people living in deprived areasand people with existing heart and lung conditionsparticularly vulnerable. Most air pollution originates intowns and cities and road transport is the largest sourceof air pollutants in those areas.

Yet despite all this, air quality has had a relatively lowprofile in debates on public health, transport and urbanpolicy priorities. This is beginning to change. Theimpetus to act stepped up in early May 2013 when theSupreme Court ruled that the UK government was failingits legal duty to protect people from the harmful effects ofair pollution as set out in the EU air quality directive.Environmental groups that brought the action against theUK government argued that 16 cities and regions,including London, Manchester, Birmingham andGlasgow, will suffer from illegal levels of NO2, nitrogendioxide – until as late as 2020 or 2025.

Transport’s contribution to these air quality problems canvary from area to area – as can the relative contributionsof buses, trains, cars, light vans, HGVs and taxis.Amongst the solutions are replacing dirtier old vehicleswith cleaner new vehicles and retrofitting existing vehicleswith technology to reduce pollutants. The £5m ‘CleanBus Technology Fund’, recently announced by theDepartment for Transport, is a step in the right direction.Local authorities will be able to bid for grants of up to £1million to upgrade local buses with pollution-reducing

technologies such as cleaner engines or exhaust after-treatment equipment. The announcement comes hot onthe heels of the announcement of the winners of thelatest round of the Green Bus Fund. PTE areas haveachieved considerable success in all four rounds of thefund, providing a significant boost to the numbers ofnew, state-of-the-art green buses on our city streets.

Alongside vehicle improvements, other options availableto improve air quality include implementing LowEmission Zones or other tougher regulatoryenvironments, as well as balancing measures, such ascompensating for the increased pollutants associatedwith new or enhanced national infrastructure throughpaying for the greening of vehicles that provide localservices.

There is also read across into the debate about the rateat which transport can be electrified. Take-up of electriccars has been relatively slow so far but as the technologybecomes more mainstream and the incentives align, thiscould change. Options are also opening up for moreviable and affordable electric buses which charge theirbatteries wirelessly and during short stops on route. Atrial in Milton Keynes will be the first UK application ofwhat could be a viable basis for the start of a global shiftfrom diesel to electric buses.

Making the air we breathe in our cities cleaner willrequire technological solutions like this, alongsideoverarching strategies and regulatory frameworks and -above all - the will to push air quality up the list oftransport priorities.

pteg represents the six English Passenger Transport Executives (PTEs). Bristol and the West of England, Leicester City Council, Nottingham City Council, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and Transport for London are associatemembers of the group. If you would like to be added to our mailing list for future copies of the newsletter, and otherinformation on pteg, then contact us at:

pteg Support Unit ■ 40-50 Wellington Street ■ Leeds LS1 2DE ■ Tel: 0113 251 7204 ■ www.pteg.net ■ Email: info@pteg.netpte

gn

ew

sle

tte

r

Think of education policy and transport is probablynot the first facet that comes to mind. Yet howchildren and young people get to school or college isan important issue. An estimated 100 million schooland college bus journeys are made each year in thePTE areas and around £200-250 million is spent onsubsidising and supporting these bus services.

The vast majority (70%) of this money is spent byLocal Education Authorities (LEAs) on purchasingtransport for pupils with special educational needs ordisabilities (SEND) or on season tickets (usuallysubsidised by the PTEs) for mainstream pupils whoare eligible for free home-to-school transport. Theremaining budget is accounted for by PTE support tobus services for school travel and support ofconcessionary fares schemes for young people.

The extent to which PTEs are involved in the day today organising, funding and procuring of schooltransport varies – in some areas LEAs retainresponsibility, in others PTEs plan and commissionservices on behalf of the LEAs as well as supportingdedicated school services.

Given the sums – and planning - involved, it isimportant for PTEs and other transport authorities tokeep up-to-date with any changes to education policythat may affect how children and young peopletravel. And this is a period of considerable change.

The traditional pattern of LEA-maintained primaryand secondary schools catering for local pupils to theage of sixteen is rapidly being replaced, and this isexpected to have a profound impact on the demandfor bus travel and the costs of providing it.

Developments such as increased choice of learningestablishments, the consolidation and specialisation of

FE colleges, growing numbers of apprenticeships withFE components and personalised budgets for SENDpupils are all likely to increase the complexity (andlength) of individual journeys and affect the ability toplan and procure transport on a large andcoordinated scale.

Meanwhile, a bulge in the population of school agechildren, the raising of the participation age from 16to 18 by 2015 and increased expectations that SENDpupils will use mainstream transport could all generateadditional demand for bus services. Add this tocontinuing pressure on personal, household and localgovernment finances and it is not difficult to envisagebus service delivery coming under increasing strain.

However, despite these challenges, there are alsoopportunities for PTEs and these have been exploredin an internal report commissioned by pteg fromschool transport specialist Sian Thornthwaite of STCand Tim Larner of Strata. The report analyses thevarious trends in education policy and concludes thata number of options are available to the PTEs as theyposition themselves to respond effectively.

Depending on local circumstances, PTEs could, forexample, take on a primarily ‘signposting’ role orperhaps become more of a lead broker for transportservices on behalf of an increasingly wide range oftransport commissioners – from individual schoolsand parents, to academy trusts and colleges.

Whilst there is no universal ‘right answer’, the reportconcludes that careful attention to medium-termplanning for the changes ahead and increasingdialogue with local partners in LEAs and majoreducation providers will be a common theme for thefuture. We will continue to work with our members asthey navigate this changing landscape.

Evolvingeducationpolicy – thechallengesfor PTEs