In answer to the questions:

1. Are the aims we have set ourselves in paragraph 10 the right ones? Do they miss anything important? Sustainable environment must come first. Sir George Young was beginning to recognise this. The long-term view must be taken, i.e. 50 to 100 years.

 

2. What balance should there be between "sticks" and "carrots" to achieve our aims? Can we conclude that neither works without the other? Yes, a balance is required between sticks and carrots, and you are right to conclude that neither will work (as well as it could) without the other. 

 

3. Recognising that funding available from the public purse is strictly limited, how best do you think our transport systems could be improved? Increase funding available by hiking up fuel and car taxes. Channel more funding into walking and cycling, highly cost-effective modes. Most journeys are short and could be easily walked or cycled – encourage it! 

 

4. To what extent should we be looking at the potential for restraining use of the car, van or lorry? How would any such restraints operate, and what would the effect be on personal mobility or national and regional competitiveness? Road traffic reduction is key – see above. Fiscal measures are effective, combined with reallocation of road space and speed limits enforced by roadside beacons on on-board telematics. Lower speeds = improved traffic flows, as demonstrated by M25 experiment. Also better for road safety and emissions, improving the environment for those choosing to walk or cycle. Alternative modes to be improved as the carrot, so access is maintained. Regional employment levels will be boosted as firms decentralise. Maintain competitiveness by cutting corporation and income taxes, i.e. low taxes on employment and profit, high taxes on pollution and congestion.

 

5. What roles should be played by pricing, fiscal policies, and regulation to achieve our aims? As above point 4, cut tax on that which you seek to encourage (e.g. high employment); raise taxes on that you seek to discourage (overuse of the car). Fiscal policy is highly effective in effecting changes to people’s habits over the long term – witness the decline in smoking as cigarette taxes have soared over recent years. Now is the time to point out that driving can seriously damage your health too! There is a role for road pricing into urban centres where pollution and congestion levels are highest, encouraging those affluent enough to escape to a countryside retreat, who then in turn have to drive regularly into town, exacerbating the problem. The obscenity of tax breaks on company cars and fuel must be ended now! 

 

6. What can we do to reduce peoples' need to travel? By adopting the policies recommended in this response, people will quickly discover they do not need to travel half as much as they do! They will move nearer to their jobs and schools, and start to make better use of video-conferencing etc. 

 

7. Would transport policy be enhanced by adopting a range of transport "targets", against which to assess progress? If so, what form should they take? Should they be national, regional or local? Targets can be effective, e.g. doubling cycle usage by 2002, set by Sir G Young in his National Cycling Strategy. They should be local and national; the local targets of the Road Traffic Reduction Act as passed by the last Parliament are of little use without accompanying national targets. 

 

8. Should Government develop new funding mechanisms or income streams for transport? If so, what form should they take? Yes – see above, road pricing etc. 

 

9. Against the background set out in paragraphs 15-24, which aspects of public transport do you think it is most important to improve in order to persuade more people to leave their cars at home and use public transport instead? Re: paragraph 16 integrated railway – the government must do all it can to integrate cycling with rail travel, that means decent cycle parking provision at stations and good provision for the carriage of cycles by train. Bike/train combination can be at its best an extremely effective door-to-door transport solution, often faster than the car, and should be price competitive with the car. That does not necessarily mean subsidising the train: the price relationship would change and the train gain competitive edge if petrol and diesel prices were hiked (see above). Reallocate road space in towns in favour of buses and trams – more bus lanes and bus only roads, so that bus services can cut through the traffic and maintain good timetabling. 

 

10. What practical measures would bring about more use of less environmentally damaging forms of freight transport such as railways, inland waterways and coastal shipping? Could the Government's freight grants scheme be improved further, and if so how? Fiscal measures again would send strong price signals to shipping companies who will base their decisions in their own commercial interest – if it works out cheaper to ship it by train or water, they will do so wherever practical. 

 

11. How can the contribution of ports and airports to regional and national competitiveness be enhanced without detriment to environmental objectives? Prioritise the environment! We have a responsibility to hand over a planet in good working order to our descendants. Short term pain perhaps for long term gain. Economic growth cannot go on being the ultimate objective of human activity; we cannot go on growing forever. Do we have to wait till half the planet is under water, and the other half is being frazzled via the ozone hole, before we come to understand and act on these simple and undisputed home truths?? 

 

12. How can we actively encourage more environmentally friendly vehicles and fuels, the development of less environmentally damaging technologies and innovations which reduce the need to travel? Petrol @ £15 a gallon would concentrate the minds of car manufacturers as well as car users. Even today’s technology can produce cars that would do 100 mpg, but the road lobbyists stick together and go on persuading us that we need high performance 4x4 supercars to go to the supermarket in. The government must take action to ban these inappropriate vehicles from the roads – they are suitable for use only on the racetrack, where most of them are derived. With strictly regulated and telematically controlled speed and acceleration limits, manufacturers would no longer be involved in these macho performance "mine’s bigger than yours" contests. 12 cylinders and 24 valves, 0-60mph in 5 seconds, top speeds of over 150mph, these would all be things of the past, and they could concentrate on fuel economy and safety aspects for vulnerable road users (ban bull bars please!) Vehicles with lower top speeds would have less need to be built like tanks to withstand high speed crashes, so they would be significantly lighter and therefore more fuel efficient too. 

 

13. How can we integrate land use planning and transport more effectively, with a more strategic approach, so as to cut unnecessary journeys? Read and act on the principles espoused in Harley Sherlock’s book Cities are good for us. 

 

14. How can we ensure, for example through the taxation system, that the prices faced by transport users more accurately reflect the wider environmental and social costs? Largely answered above – motorists to pay full, including (external) costs imposed on society by their motoring habits. 

 

15. What is the appropriate role of national, regional and local levels for the provision and regulation of transport? What role should be played by passenger transport authorities or executives, or by voluntary co-ordinating bodies such as planning conferences? We expect government to defend the country in times of war. And we expect the government to "do something" when there is a horrific train crash, such as Southall recently. Six people died at Southall, indeed a tragedy; national headlines for days on end. Likewise we expect government to act to protect its citizens from the horrors of 10 road deaths a day and 10,000 premature deaths a year due to poor air quality.  

 

16. What changes might be needed to the ways local authorities receive capital funding for transport, to encourage the development of integrated transport policies at the local level? More funding for cycling and walking solutions, with strong encouragement in guidance notes to local authorities to concentrate on providing these facilities. The consistent and scandalous under-funding of the London Cycle Network over recent years must not continue under the new government. Even funded to a decent level, cycle route provision is of minimal expense compared to other transport expenditure. In some Dutch cities, over 50% of journeys are made by bike. It is time that Britain woke up to this huge potential solution to many of our urban transport problems; government must now begin to take cycling seriously and fund it properly, following the Dutch and German examples, especially if it is genuine about attaining the NCS target to double the number of cycle journeys by 2002. 

 

17. Is there, as suggested in the previous Government's paper "Transport The Way Forward", a role for making greater use of economic instruments to influence how people choose to travel, such as increasing the price of public parking, possibly taxing companies' car parking provision, and charging for the use of roads? How should the receipts from such sources be used? Yes yes yes! I have made this case above. If the government has decided that it is time we became less dependent on the private motor car, as seems to be the case, then it is the government’s duty to influence people’s choices of travel mode in that direction. One of the government’s most effective tools in this regard is the adroit use of taxation. The overall effect should aim to be fiscally neutral, e.g. raise motoring taxes, cut income taxes. Transport expenditure likewise: cut spending on roads, increase spending on the alternatives that you want us to use: buses, bikes, trains. Certainly there is a good case for the three examples you suggest in the question if you want to influence the amount of car traffic travelling into town and city centres. Receipts should be used to improve the alternative modes that you want to encourage – build more and better bike and bus lanes. I feel I am repeating myself here! 

 

18. What should be the role of urban traffic management measures? Learn from York. Measures should prioritise the green modes: cycling, walking and public transport. All traffic management measures and planning schemes should first consider the needs of these modes who should get absolute priority everywhere at all times. Adopt the `sail before steam’ principle throughout. The needs of the private motorist to be considered last, who should maintain access though at a low speed (certainly no higher than 20mph in all urban areas) and giving way to all other modes. Urban places should be pleasant places to work, live, shop, relax, exercise, holiday, in other words perform all normal human activity. As soon as we feel the need to escape to the countryside, there is mass pressure to travel. . Streets are for people, and cities are good for us! Let’s not forget it! 

 

19. How can we achieve economic growth which is less road traffic intensive, while still taking account of the role of national, regional and local transport policies in promoting national and regional competitiveness? This is a huge area for discussion. I would refer you to official Green Party thinking here. It has long been recognised that some of the most prosperous towns and regions in the country are not actually on the motorway network. There is extreme doubt about the better roads = stronger economy argument, mindlessly peddled by the Roads Lobby for decades. I look forward to the outcome of the government’s new SACTRA committee’s enquiry into these issues. 

 

20. In circumstances where demand exceeds road capacity at certain times, what priority might be given to scarce road space and how might that be delivered? It has sometimes been suggested that priority should be given to emergency vehicles; buses, coaches and taxis; goods vehicles; and disabled motorists - are these the right priorities? You have again forgotten about bikes and pedestrians! Give us more and better quality space and we will use it. Yes by all means ensure that buses and ambulances can get through, a fire engine stuck in a traffic jam is a mind-numbingly frustrating and pathetic thing to behold indeed. The new bus and coach lane from Heathrow to London along the M4 is a marvellously simple and cheap step in the right direction. 

 

21. How can we best take account of the differing accessibility needs of urban and rural communities? A case for long term vision required here. Daily car commuting over vast distances has become the norm for many as motoring has become cheap enough to permit it. The right transport and planning policies, as outlined above, will improve living conditions in towns and cities to the point where they will once again become desirable and even prestigious places to live. There would be short-term pain as higher fuel prices would hit harder those driving the greatest distances, likely to be rural dwellers, although that would be offset by the resurrection of more local facilities e.g. village shops and post offices, and improved rural public transport services as demand would rise from those seeking to make savings on their petrol bills. 

 

22. How can we increase the awareness of transport users about the consequences of their choices? Government information should be of high quality, frequent, and indisputable. Government should also give strong support to independently run transport awareness campaigns like National Bike Week and Car-Free Day. Government should aim to educate the public in a similar manner as it did over cigarettes – what about promoting the message Driving is bad for your health, i.e. by replacing a walk or cycle ride it deprives you of exercise; additionally air pollutants are known to concentrate inside cars at up to 18 times the roadside level, so you would be breathing cleaner air if you walked or cycled. 

 

23. How can we best ensure a high standard of safety across all modes? Largely addressed above: in a nutshell, SLOW CARS DOWN!!! Recognise that cars, lorries and motorbikes are the dangerous modes, cycling and walking are the vulnerable modes, and trains are the safe mode. Trains therefore need little attention, despite recent calls for billions to be spent following the fatal Southall crash. Pedestrians should not be penned off with guard railings, restricting their liberty, in recognition that "the road is dangerous". The danger must be tackled at source, and the roads made less dangerous. It is a fallacy to say the road is dangerous in fact, it is the cars travelling at inappropriate speeds on the roads which pose the danger. Any safety money has to be spent on cutting th