Transport Action Network (TAN) have published its submission to the urgent review of the UK Department for Transport’s infrastructure capital spending portfolio, commissioned by Transport Secretary Louise Haigh MP.
The review was launched on 30 July, the day after Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves MP revealed a £22bn gap in the public finances during the current year and cancelled the A303 Stonehenge and A27 road schemes amongst other savings.
TAN says the roads programme for England left behind by the Conservatives is unaffordable. It is an outdated relic of mid-twentieth century thinking, not least in the vast carbon emissions it will generate from both construction and extra traffic. TAN’s submission lists the top 16 proposed road expansions which it argues should either be cancelled outright or at least paused for further scrutiny.
The schemes’ published costs are a staggering £15bn, with even these figures mostly out of date and likely to be underestimates. The controversial Lower Thames Crossing alone accounts for at least £9bn and is one of several showing poor value. The £1.5bn A66 scheme would cost more to build than it would ever generate in economic benefit.
TAN urges the Government to divert some of the savings from cancelling new roads into fixing the existing pothole-ridden network – a pledge from Labour’s own General Election manifesto. The submission also provides examples of sustainable transport investment schemes across England projected to generate far higher economic and environmental benefits at lower cost whilst increasing the share of passenger and freight conveyed by rail. The advantages of TAN’s approach are assessed alongside Labour’s 5 Missions for government covering growth, clean energy, public safety, opportunity and health.
TAN Founder and Director Chris Todd said:
“It’s a myth debunked 30 years ago that road building grows the economy and eases congestion. Not only is the previous Conservative government’s roads programme unaffordable but even a cursory look at its own traffic projections shows congestion will worsen even if all the new roads were built. This review gives Labour a once-in-a-generation chance to consign this outdated and wasteful approach permanently to the past.
“Roads policy for England needs to sit in the context of a national transport strategy, similar to the one developed by the Welsh Labour Government. This was advocated in Juergen Maier’s recent Rail and Urban Transport Review.”
TAN Roads and Climate Campaigner Rebecca Lush said:
“Some of the funding saved by cancelling the worst schemes should be put to work enacting the Labour Government’s vision for rail freight as well as public transport and active travel. It would make trains, buses, trams, cycling and walking far more attractive propositions and bring both environmental and health benefits. This would be far better value than blowing billions on destructive road building.”
Jen Craft MP (Labour, Thurrock) said:
“I am deeply concerned that the proposed Lower Thames Crossing (LTC) will fail to deliver on its goals. Rather than easing congestion on the existing crossing, research suggests that it will simply increase traffic and exacerbate already high pollution levels in Thurrock, which already has very poor air quality.
“In my view, investing billions in road expansion is not the answer. Instead, we should focus on improving other forms of transport by expanding bus services, enhancing rail links including freight to take lorries off the road and delivering on cross river public transport solutions like the proposed KenEx tram service. These options collectively offer cleaner, longer-term solutions to congestion while benefiting local communities.
“Ecological concerns will remain unaddressed by this project and any relief it offers at the Dartford Crossing will be short-lived. We must prioritise sustainable alternatives which would better serve our economy and environment without the detrimental local impact of the LTC and at a fraction of the cost.”
Dr Lauren Sullivan MP (Labour, Gravesham) said:
“I remain opposed to the Lower Thames Crossing, as I have from day one. I have concerns over the environmental impact, noise disturbances, and health concerns for those living closest to the tunnel portal and the approach in Gravesend. I also have real concerns about the wider effects on the traffic on the A227, which will see increased traffic through Meopham, Vigo and Istead Rise for people that will cut through to the M20. Without improvements to the Bluebell Hill junction this will have significant impact on my constituents and businesses in the area.
“The negative impact on the environment and ancient woodland and the wider impact on Gravesham are not yet mitigated. This includes local core asks around skills and training, free or discounted travel for Gravesham residents, increased environmental improvements, infrastructure to support the use of hydrogen fuel, improved leisure infrastructure connected to the new Cascades Leisure Centre, proper supply of housing for LTC construction workers and the impact on two Traveller sites.
“We need to see more focus on public transport solutions, in line with our environmental goals, such as an expanded river crossing service, more affordable bus travel and a fit for purpose train network to encourage less cars on the road.”
Peter Dowd MP (Labour, Bootle) said:
“I have opposed National Highways’ A5036 Port of Liverpool Access Road since the route was announced in 2017 and have made known my opposition to any attempt to build a road through Rimrose Valley Country Park in my constituency for over 25 years. It would destroy this much loved open space which is essential for our community’s health and wellbeing and our efforts to combat the climate emergency.
“Rather than facilitating more and more road freight through our communities and the accompanying pollution which comes with this, I believe solutions that are compatible with Labour’s missions for economic growth and modal shift, such as rail freight, represent a better long-term investment. I welcome Transport Action Network’s report that highlights poor value road schemes including the A5036 Port of Liverpool Access Road.”
Bill Esterson MP (Labour, Sefton Central), Chair of the House of Commons Energy Security & Net Zero Committee, said:
“I have consistently opposed the Rimrose Valley Road since it was proposed and continue to oppose it.”
Mick Whelan, General Secretary of train drivers’ union ASLEF said:
“ASLEF strongly supports the Labour Government’s Missions of promoting economic growth while moving rapidly towards Net Zero. Transport Action Network’s report shows it would be folly to spend billions on new trunk roads which would achieve neither. In a time when scarce public funds must be invested wisely, ASLEF urges the Government to prioritise passenger and freight rail schemes, local integrated transport systems embracing trams and buses and active travel projects.”
Silviya Barrett, Director of Policy & Research at Campaign for Better Transport said:
“Instead of spending on unaffordable and unnecessary road building, the government and local authorities should be improving our existing roads and expanding public transport and rail freight networks as a way to grow local economies and reduce traffic. We cannot build our way out of congestion, it’s time for a new approach that’s fit for a sustainable future.”
Elaine Clark, Chief Executive Officer of Rail Forum said:
“Rail Forum welcomes the challenge provided by the TAN submission to the review of the DfT’s infrastructure capital spending portfolio. If the UK is to grasp the imperative of decarbonising our economy we must break the cycle of road building that leads to increased road traffic. Taking long-term decisions that unleash the potential of rail, encouraging modal shift and driving economic growth is a far better use of the public funding available”.
Comments