Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of
the effect on the success of their ‘Global Britain’ initiative
that, for a second year in a row, the Inrix Global Traffic
Scorecard has found London to have the highest traffic delay
times of any city in the world.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Transport () (Con)
My Lords, the balance of transport choices in London, including
the relative importance given to car traffic, is a matter for the
mayor and Transport for London. However, with the opening of the
Elizabeth line last year, London’s reputation for efficient and
modern transport has been demonstrated globally, an achievement
for which many, including the noble Lord, can share credit.
(Con)
My Lords, with bicycle lanes that have not increased the uptake
of bicycling as a mode of transport, with ULEZ extended to parts
of London that neither need nor want it, and with a Labour-run
local authority now tendering out its speeding enforcement to
unsleeping robots to maximise its revenue, does my noble friend
the Minister not realise that people are at the end of their
tethers and expect the Government to act to defend them from
these depredations?
(Con)
My noble friend is asking me to withdraw from the devolution
agreement for London. We have no plans to do that, and I
encourage Londoners to hold the mayor to account.
(Lab)
My Lords, I congratulate the Minister on what the Government have
done to get more bicycle lanes and footpaths since Covid. The
problem is that so many people are getting fed up with car
drivers and cycle lanes are now very full. Can the Minister say
whether she has any plans to increase the number of cycle lanes
in London or anywhere else?
(Con)
The Minister has no plans, because it is not up to the Minister
to have those plans; it is up to the Mayor of London. The Mayor
of London continues to invest in cycling and walking—that is his
choice. The Government remain committed to cycling and walking as
natural choices for the shortest journeys.
(LD)
My Lords, there are many parts of London where 20 miles per hour
zones have not yet been implemented by local authorities. There
is good evidence from areas that have introduced them that they
work very well in making the traffic flow more smoothly in areas
of high congestion. Do the Government intend to encourage local
authorities across Britain to look at this solution to congestion
and delays?
(Con)
As the noble Baroness well knows, the Department for Transport
does not operate roads other than the major motorways. It is for
the local authorities operating those roads, having consulted
local people, to make those decisions, including the introduction
of 20 miles per hour speed zones.
(Con)
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that it must have been an
absolute miracle with divine intervention that enabled the most
reverend Primate the to get a speeding
ticket in central London? Is my noble friend not right that this is a
desperate situation? Whatever happened to the policy of lane
rentals that was meant to charge contractors for taking up the
space of roads while making alterations? It was meant to give
them an incentive to complete works on time and to get rid of the
spectacle we see all the time of roadworks with nobody
there—including nobody working over the weekend—causing absolute
chaos for the people of London.
(Con)
I am grateful to my noble friend for moving that question on.
Lane rental schemes are a key part of the challenge of making
sure that roadworks are taken down as soon as possible. In
London, 69% of the TfL route network—the bit operated by the
Mayor of London—is currently covered by lane rental schemes. I
encourage all local transport authorities to look carefully at
lane rental schemes, as they really can help to get roadworks
finished on time.
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
My Lords, despite the funding announced in the Budget, the
Government have still slashed pothole funding by almost a quarter
in real terms since 2020, and cuts to local government funding
leave councils unable to meet this gap from other funds. Does the
Minister believe that the millions of potholes which remain
unfilled, including those on cycle ways—we have 45 kilometres of
them in Stevenage—contribute to traffic delays across the UK?
(Con)
The Government are investing £8 billion over the next two years
in all types of road enhancements and improvements, including
£200 million for maintenance and potholes.
(Con)
Is my noble friend the Minister comfortable that London is now
rated the most congested city in the world? Is she equally
comfortable that our major retailers in the West End are
suffering in relation to trade from people coming into our
country? Finally, even the City of London, the centre of finance,
is itself complaining that this is affecting the City badly.
(Con)
I think there is a slight question of clarification here. The
data that my noble friend cites actually misses out several
cities in the world. Lagos’s traffic is 10 times worse than
London’s, and in Seoul it is twice as bad—so London is not the
worst. However, what we have to understand, and what the
Government understand, is that one needs a mixed economy for
transport. Of course, car usage is important, but particularly in
London, where excellent public transport is available, we need to
make sure that we use that more. I note that traffic is back to
100% of pre-pandemic levels, but the Tube remains persistently
below them. I think that the Mayor of London should be doing more
to get people back on the Tube.
(Lab)
My Lords, it is quite clear that London’s traffic is grinding to
a halt; I drive in it regularly. I have talked to the people
doing work on my house, doing boilers—brickies, and this sort of
thing. They say that they can achieve only two tasks a day rather
than three, and this has a real economic impact on their lives
and on this city of ours. It is a disgrace, and something must be
done to speed it up and allow a freer flow of traffic.
(Con)
I absolutely encourage the noble Lord to speak to his friend and
colleague who currently holds the mayoralty for London. It is up
to him to think about how that balance is achieved. I agree that
there are challenges with regard to economic activity for those
people who need to use the roads, and that is why the balance of
transport is so important—and I believe that more can be
done.
(LD)
My Lords, I entirely welcome what the Minister has said about the
high quality of public transport in Greater London. A similar
quality for the north of England—an Elizabeth line between
Manchester and Leeds, for example—would transform the economy of
the north. Is that among the Government’s priorities for a
long-term strategy for levelling up in the country?
(Con)
That is slightly beyond the scope of the Question. Obviously, the
Government are committed to the integrated rail plan for the
north, and the noble Lord will know that we are investing £5.7
billion under the CRSTS for sustainable transport schemes in many
of our major cities.
(Con)
Is my noble friend aware that many of us look back with fond
nostalgia to the days when London had one mayor living in the
Mansion House? Would not it be a very good idea if we looked
again at the whole idea of giving so much power to such an
incompetent man and instead had a proper London authority? Bring
back the old days!
(Con)
My Lords, sometimes it is impossible to go back to the old days,
and this Government have no ambition to withdraw from the
devolution settlements that are in place.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, I invite the Minister, the noble Lord, , and other Members of your
Lordships’ House to join us on the annual bike ride of the All
Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling on 13 June so that Members
of your Lordships’ House can see that getting out of cars and on
to bikes cuts congestion, is good for health and the environment,
and a much quicker way to get around London.
(Con)
That is excellent free advertising for the noble Lord, and I am
sure that many in your Lordships’ House will join him.
of Hudnall (Lab)
My Lords, I think that the Minister in an earlier answer told the
House that the Government had set aside £200 million for the
repair of potholes. I assume that that is across the whole
country. If it is not—and she is shaking her head—could she tell
the House what estimate the Government have made of the cost per
pothole?
(Con)
I shall write to the noble Baroness with further clarification of
my remarks, because the £200 million is in addition to other
funding and, unfortunately, I do not have that figure with me
today.
(Con)
My Lords, on the basis of the evidence that we have so far of the
effect of the Elizabeth line on the traffic flow through London,
should we not now be dusting off the papers about the possibility
of a Crossrail 2? It should not be forgotten.
(Con)
My Lords, there are many competing demands on the Government’s
resources. Certainly, Crossrail 2 would have its benefits, but we
need to look at that in the context of other projects that might
come to pass.
