www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | papers@parliament.uk | @commonslibrary

DEBATE PACK

Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East

By Louise Butcher Richard Cracknell

Summary This debate will take place between 2.30 and 4.00 pm on 25 April in Westminster Hall. The Member who secured the debate is Huw Merriman MP (Con., Bexhill and Battle).

This brief provides:

• A statistical overview of the area covered by Transport for the South East (Medway, Kent, Surrey, Hampshire, East and West Sussex, the Isle of Wight and the Berkshire Local Transport Body area);

• An overview of Transport for the South East (TfSE), its priorities and the devolved context within which it sits;

• An overview of key transport infrastructure in the TfSE area, including ports, airports, rail and road networks; and

• Some key transport challenges for the TfSE area, including cross-area connectivity, Dover, Gatwick and the road and rail networks.

Contents

1. Statistical overview: the

South East of England 2 1.1 Demographic changes in

South East England 2 1.2 Population growth 2 1.3 Travel to work 3 1.4 Public expenditure on

transport by region 6

2. Transport for the South

East (TfSE) 7 2.1 What is it? 7

Transport strategy 7 Sub-National Transport Bodies (STBs) 8

2.2 The devolved environment in the SE 9

3. Key transport

infrastructure 10 3.1 Ports 10 3.2 Airports 11

Gatwick 11 Southampton 12 London Ashford/Lydd Airport 12

3.3 Major roads 13 3.4 Rail 15

4. Transport challenges 18 4.1 Connectivity across the region

(not to and from London) 18 4.2 Dover, Brexit and Operation

Stack 18 Brexit 19 Operation Stack 20

4.3 Gatwick 21 4.4 Road network 23

Infrastructure 23 Safety 24

4.5 Rail network 25

The House of Commons Library prepares a briefing in hard copy and/or online for most non-legislative debates in the Chamber and Westminster Hall other than half-hour debates. Debate Packs are produced quickly after the announcement of parliamentary business. They are intended to provide a summary or overview of the issue being debated and identify relevant briefings and useful documents, including press and parliamentary material. More detailed briefing can be prepared for Members on request to the Library.

2 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

1. Statistical overview: the South East of England

1.1 Demographic changes in South East England

London and the South-East regions account for 28% of the GB population. In numerical terms, the South-East region has around 100,000 more residents than London; both have populations of just over 9 million, each accounting for 14% of the GB total.

Source: ONS Subnational Population projections (English Regions 2014-based, EWS &

GB 2016 based) via Nomis

1.2 Population growth

Overall, the population of Great Britain is projected to grow in the coming decades, driven particularly by growing numbers of elderly people. Regions in the South-Eastern corner of Great Britain are projected to have some of the highest growth rates for all age groups.

Region/country millions % of GBNorth East 2.7 4%North West 7.2 11%Yorkshire and The Humber 5.5 8%East Midlands 4.8 7%West Midlands 5.9 9%East 6.2 10%London 9.1 14%South East 9.2 14%South West 5.6 9%

England 56.0 87%

Wales 3.1 5%Scotland 5.4 8%

Great Britain 64.6 100%

POPULATION BY REGION/COUNTRY - 2018

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 3

Source: ONS 2014 sub-national population projections

1.3 Travel to work There are distinct differences between the pattern of means of transport used to get to work in London compared with other regions/countries. The pattern for the South-East region is like areas outside London. In the South East 71% of those in employment mainly travel to work by car and 10% by rail. In Great Britain outside London, 74% of those in employment go to work by car.

In London 29% of those in employment go to work by car; 38% go by rail (including underground); and 15% by bus or coach.

4 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

Source: DfT Table TSGB0108

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

Car

Bus/coach

Rail

0

20

40

60

80

100Walk

USUAL METHOD OF TRAVEL TO WORK BY REGION OF RESIDENCE (% OF THOSE IN EMPLOYMENT) OCT/DEC 2016

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the Sou

Table TSGB0108Usual method of travel to work by region of residence, Great Britain: October to December 2016

Percentage /thousands

Region of residence Car Motorcycle Bicycle Bus/coach National Rail Other rail1 All rail Walk Other modes2

Number in employment

('000s)3

North East 74 * 1 10 2 1 4 10 * 1,201Tyne and Wear 64 * 3 14 3 3 6 11 * 523Rest of North East 81 * * 6 * * * 9 * 679

North West 74 1 3 7 3 1 4 10 1 3,396Greater Manchester 70 * 3 10 3 2 5 10 * 1,317Merseyside 71 * 2 9 5 * 6 11 * 629Rest of North West 80 * 2 4 2 * 3 9 * 1,450

Yorkshire and The Humber 73 1 2 7 4 * 4 11 1 2,590South Yorkshire 74 * * 12 * * 3 8 * 622West Yorkshire 74 * * 8 5 * 5 10 * 1,113Rest of Yorkshire and The Humber 72 * 5 4 2 * 2 15 2 854

East Midlands 80 * 3 5 1 * 1 11 * 2,284

West Midlands 78 1 2 6 3 * 3 9 1 2,708West Midlands (met. county) 74 * 3 10 4 * 4 8 * 1,262Rest of West Midlands 83 * 2 2 2 * 2 10 * 1,446

East of England 70 1 4 3 10 1 11 10 1 3,019

London 29 1 6 15 14 24 38 10 1 4,576Inner London 14 2 10 17 10 32 42 13 2 1,918Outer London 39 1 3 13 17 18 36 8 1 2,658

South East 71 1 4 4 9 1 10 10 1 4,537

South West 74 1 5 5 2 * 2 14 1 2,709

England 67 1 4 7 6 4 11 10 1 27,020Wales 80 * 3 4 2 * 2 10 1 1,429Scotland 70 * 2 10 5 * 5 11 2 2,612

Great Britain 67 1 3 7 6 4 10 10 1 31,061

1. Includes underground, light railway systems and trams. Source: Labour Force Survey, Office of National Statistics2. Includes taxis. Last updated: November 20173. Includes all in employment, including those who did not answer the question on usual method of travel to work. Next update: December 2018

Telephone: 020 7944 3094Email: subnational.stats@dft.gsi.gov.uk

The figures in this table are National Statistics

Rail

6 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

1.4 Public expenditure on transport by region

Public expenditure on transport, especially in London, is dominated by spending on railways. In the South East, public spending on rail transport per capita is higher than in other non-London regions in England but around one-quarter of that for London. The South East, however, fares less well in terms of public spending on local transport. Spending per head on local roads and local public transport is lower (or equal lowest) in the South East than any other non-London region in England.

Source: HC Library Transport Spending by Region (16 Feb 2018)

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 7

2. Transport for the South East (TfSE)

2.1 What is it? TfSE covers the following geographic area:

It says that it is “One voice for the transport needs of people and businesses in the South East” and that it is “working closely with national Government on our transport needs and intends to become a statutory body by 2020”. What this means is that it is working towards becoming a Sub-National Transport Body (STB) (see below).

TfSE was launched on 4 March 2018. It brings together the area’s 16 transport authorities and five local enterprise partnerships to work directly with the Department for Transport. It will also involve Highways England and Network Rail, transport operators, transport users and other key interest groups. At the first meeting of TfSE, partners elected Cllr Keith Glazier, Leader of East Sussex County Council, as chairman with Cllr Tony Page, Deputy Leader of Reading Borough Council and representative of the Berkshire Local Transport Forum, as vice-chairman.1

Transport strategy TfSE states that it is working to develop its transport strategy out to 2050:

At the heart of Transport for the South East is our evolving transport strategy for the region; a strategy to transform travel in ways which improve people’s lives and help the economy to grow.

Our strategy will take us to the year 2050. We know the South East, like the rest of the country, will be vastly different in 30 years’ time. The ways we travel, how we work, live, communicate, consume and spend our leisure time will all be radically different. The purpose of our strategy work is to anticipate and adapt to

1 TfSE press notice, “Partners launch Transport for the South East to transform travel

and enhance economy”, 4 March 2018

8 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

these changes. We can shape the future, with the right investment, technology and insight to guide us.

Our final strategy, the blueprint for transport in the South East, will be completed at the end of 2019. But work is already under way on its building blocks. The first of these is our Economic Connectivity Review. This is a study of how the South East’s economy works, how it connects to national and international markets and which are the key corridors of transport where investment will have the greatest effect.

The study is being conducted by consultants Steer Davies Gleave and will be published in draft in May 2018 for key partners and stakeholders to give us their views on this initial blueprint.

We’ll be consulting with partners, businesses and residents across the South East once we have drafted the final strategy for our region. This will guide the work of Transport for the South East from the moment it becomes a statutory body, expected to be by 2020.2

Sub-National Transport Bodies (STBs) STBs are largely the consequence of the Cameron Government’s drive towards English devolution, and in particular the ‘Northern Powerhouse’ idea championed by then Chancellor George Osborne and longer-term campaigning by northern MPs in largely Labour areas to help ‘rebalance the economy’ by having the north take control of its own affairs. One of the bodies to come out of this was Transport for the North (TfN). In the 2015 Budget Mr Osborne announced that legislation would be introduced to establish TfN as a statutory body.3 Section 21 of the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 provides for the establishment of STBs to advise on strategic transport decisions and priorities for the local area. TfN became the first STB on 1 April 2018.4

The intention is to give the regions of England, outside London,5 legal powers and duties to advise transport ministers on investment priorities in their own areas and on strategic transport schemes to boost growth. Statutory status is intended to give the groups “the permanence they need to plan for the long term”.6 During the debates on what became the 2016 Act the then Transport Minister, Andrew Jones, said that: “By working with properly established STBs across the country, we will ensure that money is spent on projects that will support growth in each area’s economy and, through that, the country as a whole”.7 He went on:

The new bodies are intended to create a link between Whitehall and Westminster and the constituent members of combined authorities. They will be able to develop transport plans for their

2 TfSE, The South East in 2050: Our Strategy [accessed 19 April 2018] 3 HMT, Summer Budget 2015, 8 July 2015, para 1.301 4 By virtue of the Sub-national Transport Body (Transport for the North) Regulations

2018 (SI 2018/103); debated in Parliament on 18 December 2017 and 10 January 2018

5 London already has a region-wide transport body in Transport for London (TfL), set up under the Greater London Authority Act 1999; this would be a devolved matter for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland

6 DfT press notice, “Regions to be offered legal powers to transform transport”, 11 November 2015

7 PBC Deb 17 November 2015, cc596

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 9

areas, and come together to tackle issues that are currently decided here or in Whitehall rather than by local councils, relating to, for instance, longer-distance road or rail networks or systems that cross geographical areas, such as a smart ticketing system extending across the north. This is not about broadening their responsibilities to take powers away from other areas; it is about taking powers from Whitehall, increasing accountability, and ensuring that decisions are made locally.

[…] The Secretary of State will still be in charge of the national network. He will still be the final decision-maker in relation to the overall national transport strategy, and the way in which money is allocated to different schemes and areas. At first, STBs will advise him on strategic transport priorities for their areas to help promote economic development, but over time they will be able to advise him on how they can develop their roles and take on more responsibilities for improving transport planning, or provide for other enhancements to economic development in their areas.

[…] STBs will take a strategic-level view across an area to improve transport infrastructure and services, and address how that can support the economy. This involves assessing which transport schemes deliver most benefit from their investment, and how best to improve regional connectivity.8

2.2 The devolved environment in the SE The Government has not agreed any ‘devolution deals’ with areas within the area covered by TfSE.9

Attempts were made during 2015 and 2016 to negotiate a devolution deal with Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, and latterly with Portsmouth, Southampton and the Isle of Wight. A report emerged in November 2017 that a devolution deal for the Solent (Southampton, Portsmouth and Isle of Wight are the participating councils) was still with the Secretary of State a year after being submitted.10 This had followed a previous bid for the whole of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight in 2015.

A health ‘devolution’ partnership was agreed in 2017 in the ‘Surrey Heartlands’ area, consisting of the areas covered by Guildford & Waverley, North-West Surrey and Surrey Downs clinical commissioning groups.11

The TfSE area is covered by five Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs):

• Solent, Enterprise M3, Coast to Capital and Thames Valley Berkshire lie entirely within the TfSE area;

• the South East LEP does not: it covers East Sussex, Kent and Medway (which do lie within the TfSE area) and Essex, Thurrock and Southend-on-Sea (which do not).12

8 Ibid., c598-600 9 Details of the ‘devolution deals’ process can be found in HC Library briefing paper CBP

7029, Devolution to local government in England 10 “Leaders frustrated at Solent devo deal delay”, Local Government Chronicle, 28

November 2017 11 See the Surrey Heartlands Devolution Trilateral Agreement, June 2017. The area

covered relates to NHS areas, which differ from county and district council areas. 12 See the map at http://www.lepnetwork.org.uk/leps/

10 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

3. Key transport infrastructure

3.1 Ports There are a significant number of ports across the TfSE area, though many are smaller harbours which specialise in discrete areas. Some of the larger and/or more well-known ports and harbours in the region include:

• Thamesport and Sheerness in Kent • Ramsgate, Dover and Folkestone in Kent/Thanet; • Portsmouth, Southampton and Lymington in Hampshire; and • Cowes on the Isle of Wight.

Comprehensive area maps showing all ports are available on the Ports.org.uk website.

On 24 April 2018 the Government published its Port connectivity study. It has three relevant case studies:

• London and Medway; • Solent (Portsmouth, Poole & Southampton); and • Kent and Sussex (Dover, Ramsgate, Newhaven and Shoreham).

The Government summarised the economic benefits of the UK maritime and ports sector in its Brexit sectoral analysis impact assessment. On ports it said:

The UK ports sector is one of the largest in Europe, handling some 484 million tonnes of freight in 2016, of which 207 million was traded with the EU. In the same year UK ports also handled 22 million international sea passengers, of which 14.7 million were travelling to or from France and 2.7 million were travelling to or from the Republic of Ireland.

According to recent estimates commissioned by Maritime UK, UK ports directly employ nearly 24,000 people and directly contribute £1.7bn in GVA.

As well as directly employing tens of thousands of people throughout the UK, ports also support other business both at the port and in surrounding locations. They act as catalysts for a range of other economic activities on the port estate (for instance, distribution and recycling).

Most of the UK’s biggest ports, managing the majority of total tonnage handled in the UK, are in the private sector and their ownership is international in nature. The strong competition between ports drives an efficient market.

There is considerable variation in the share of EU trade across ports. Around one fifth of trade at Southampton, Belfast and Milford Haven is intra-EU, whereas nearly all (99%) freight moved through the Port of Dover is intra-EU.

Most goods entering or leaving the UK on a vehicle (to or from the EU) go through a ro-ro (roll-on/roll-off) port or terminal. By far the largest of these is the Port of Dover, which benefits from relatively short sea crossings due to its proximity to Calais and Dunkirk. Short crossing tend to be favoured for time-critical cargoes, including, for example, items such as perishable foodstuffs.

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 11

Vehicles and their occupants travelling from continental Europe through ro-ro ports or terminals currently undergo immigration checks but are not subject to routine customs controls. Because of the nature of the trade and the fact that the majority of ro-ro ports are space constrained, it would not be desirable to hold vehicles for any amount of time in order for customs declarations to be lodged.13

3.2 Airports The main commercial airport in the TfSE region is obviously Gatwick, but both Southampton and London Ashford/Lydd also perform important functions.

The Airports Commission, under the chairmanship of Sir Howard Davies, was set up in September 2012 and tasked with making recommendations as to the timing and scale of any future airport capacity. Although it shortlisted a new runway at Gatwick in its interim report, it ruled this out in favour of Heathrow in its final report published in July 2015. The Government has since proceeded with a National Policy Statement (NPS) designed to support expansion at Heathrow.

Gatwick Gatwick is owned and managed by a consortium led by the private equity infrastructure investment fund Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP). GIP owns 42% of the company. Other shareholders include:

• South Korea National Pension Service (12%)

• Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (15%)

• CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement System (12.7%)

• The Future Fund, an Australian sovereign wealth fund set up by the Australian Government in 2006 (17.2%)

NOTE: There have recently been reports that GIP is considering selling its share of Gatwick for an estimated £10 billion.14

GIP bought Gatwick from BAA plc (now Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited) in late 2009 for £1.5 billion.15 A report by the Competition and Markets Authority, seven years after Gatwick’s sale, found that overall the forced divestment of the former BAA’s London airports portfolio had led to growth in passenger numbers and routes served. It concluded that “the quantifiable benefits … relating to the benefits from increased passenger numbers such as improved connectivity and choice and downward pressure on fares, would total around £870 million by 2020”.16

13 Maritime and Ports Sector Report, published by the House of Commons Committee

on Exiting the European Union, 2017, paras 7-12 14 E.g. “Gatwick Airport owner Global Infrastructure Partners mulling £10bn sale”, City

A.M., 15 April 2018 15 “BAA agrees deal to sell Gatwick for £1.5bn”, Financial Times, 21 October 2009; 16 CMA press notice, “CMA report shows benefits of BAA break-up”, 16 May 2016

12 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

A new system of airports regulation came into being in 2014. The CAA granted a licence to Gatwick in February 2014. The licence includes commitments that Gatwick gave on airport charges for the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2021. The licence includes conditions that require the airport to address issues such as cleanliness, queuing times, seating availability and information provision in the passenger interest. In addition, it must develop and update robust contingency plans to ensure it is well prepared for potential disruption and can manage it effectively when it does occur.17

Southampton Southampton Airport is owned and operated by AGS Airports, a consortium of the international infrastructure companies Ferrovial and Macquarie. It was sold by Heathrow Airport Holdings18 in October 2014 along with Aberdeen and Glasgow for a combined reported price of £1 billion.19

Southampton published its master plan in November 2006, setting out its plans for development within its current boundaries.20 There were reports in 2014 that that airport was intending to add a 150 metre starter strip to the existing runway within 10 years.21

London Ashford/Lydd Airport London Ashford is ultimately owned by Saudi-based FAL Holdings, with a minority of shares held by Atlantic Bridge Aviation Ltd..

In January 2007 the airport submitted formal planning applications to Shepway District Council for a runway extension and other improvements. Both of these applications were called-in by the Secretary of State in June 2010.22 A public inquiry finished looking at the proposals in September 2011 and in April 2013 the Government gave the go ahead for a 294m runway extension with a 150m starter extension and a new passenger terminal.23 The runway extension was expected to be complete by the end of 2017.24

In April 2016 the Government announced that Ashford would be the permanent home of search and rescue helicopters in the south east.25

17 CAA press notice, “CAA publishes licences for economic regulation at Gatwick and

Heathrow”, 13 February 2014 18 of which Ferrovial owns 25% 19 “Aberdeen, Glasgow and Southampton airports sold in £1bn deal”, BBC News, 14

October 2016 20 Southampton Airport, Our vision [accessed 23 November 2016] 21 “Runway expansion could create 1000 new jobs at Southampton International

Airport”, Southern Daily Echo, 13 March 2014 22 Letter from GOSE to Shepway District Council, 22 June 2010 23 Letter from CLG/DfT to London Ashford Airport, 10 April 2013 and London Ashford,

The Future of Lydd Airport [accessed 23 November 2016] 24 “Lydd Airport £55m investment ‘set to create 200 jobs’”, Kent Online, 4 February

2016 25 MCA press notice, “Lydd Airport made permanent home of search and rescue

helicopters in the south-east”, 13 April 2016

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 13

3.3 Major roads This map of the Strategic Road Network (SRN) in the TfSE area, managed by Highways England, shows the main roads and some of the key planned projects out to 2020:

14 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

The move to Highways England from 1 April 2015 involved a multi-year funding settlement, called a Roads Investment Strategy (RIS). On 1 December 2014 the Coalition Government published an overview of the first RIS. The appendices to the document set out the specific schemes to be delivered in every English region as part of the 2015-21 RIS.26 It included a headline £15 billion investment figure for this RIS period.27 The funding breakdown is given in the ‘key facts and figures’ companion document. It gave a figure of £15.2 billion in capital committed over this period, which included £9.4 billion spending on major improvements (£6 billion of pre-December 2014 commitments, and a further £3.4 billion committed in the RIS).28

The RIS schemes to 2021, listed for the South East and London region (which does not exactly map on to the TfSE area), are as follows:

26 DfT, Road Investment Strategy: Overview, 1 December 2014, pp28-41 27 ibid., p5 28 DfT, Road Investment Strategy – Key Facts and Figures, 1 December 2014; further

details in: DfT, Road investment strategy: investment plan, 1 December 2014; other RIS documents available on the Gov.uk website

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 15

There are project pages for each of these schemes on the Highways.gov.uk website, showing their stage of planning/delivery.

3.4 Rail This map shows the railway network in the TfSE area:

16 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

Network Rail (NR) is the publicly-owned body which owns and manages the vast majority of the rail infrastructure. There are several different types of work that NR undertakes on the rail infrastructure:

• Operations is the day to day running of Network Rail’s teams, for example managing signalling and responding to incidents.

• Maintenance involves work to prolong the life of existing assets on the railway.

• Renewals involve replacement of the railway infrastructure with equivalent parts. Investment in maintenance and renewals is required to ensure the reliability and performance of the railway.

• Enhancements are improvements to the railway which are delivered to meet the policies of funders (generally government).

Over the last twenty years, the number of rail journeys on Britain’s railways has doubled; as a result, many parts of the network are at or near full capacity. It is generally agreed that enhancements are required to increase capacity for both passengers and freight. More broadly, transport connectivity (including enhanced rail links) is seen as a key driver of increased productivity, growth and regional economic rebalancing.

Investment in rail infrastructure is planned and delivered in five-year cycles known as control periods. In the past the Secretary of State and Scottish Ministers separately determined the strategic goals and funding available for operations, renewals and enhancements by issuing a High Level Operating Statement (HLOS) (which sets out what the government wishes the railway to achieve) and Statement of Funds Available (SoFA) (which sets out the funds which are likely to be available).

Specific outputs and regulatory measures are then set by the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) through a multi-step, complex process known as the periodic review. NR then produces business and delivery plans describing how it will deliver the agreed outputs within the control period. Network Rail also plans for investment in the railways for up to thirty years through its long-term planning process.29

During Control Period 5 (CP5) (April 2014 – March 2019), NR’s ability to deliver efficiently has come under intensive scrutiny due to cost overruns and having to cancel various enhancement schemes. As a result of various reviews there has been an impetus towards organisational change at NR, including a devolution of responsibility from the centre to routes, and efforts to address the barriers which prevent third party involvement in planning, delivering and investing in rail infrastructure.

In July 2017, the Secretary of State published the HLOS for CP6 (2019-24), with the SoFA following in October 2017. The funding amounts to almost £48bn for England and Wales, with £34.7bn coming directly from government grant. Enhancements have mainly been taken out of the control period process, with the Secretary of State proposing to use a “pipeline” approach to developing and delivering these projects. Large programmes, such as Crossrail and HS2, are already planned and

29 Network Rail, Long-term planning [accessed 20 April 2018]

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 17

delivered outside of the control period process through special purpose vehicles.

Details of the schemes and works in the NR’s South East region can be found on the South East Route page of the NR website.

The TfSE area is served by the following rail services:

• Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern (under its various brands);

• Southeastern; • South Western Railway; • Great Western Railway; • CrossCountry; • London Overground; and • Eurostar.

Information on the first five of these can be found in the HC Library briefing on rail franchises: CBP 1343.

There is a specific railcard for the TfSE area and beyond, called the Network Card, which gives 1/3 off off-peak journeys across the network.30

30 For the area covered, see: https://www.network-railcard.co.uk/clientfiles/files/Map.pdf

18 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

4. Transport challenges The five LEPs across the TfSE region (see section 2.2, above) are already funding strategic transport schemes through their multi-billion pounds Local Growth Funding (LGF) awards. However, while some of these would benefit the whole TfSE area many are more local-specific. They vary between schemes to improve international connectivity through facilities and connections to ports and airports; dealing with local ‘pinch points’ and congestion on the road network; improving local rail facilities and other issues. They are all driven in part by a desire to leverage economic growth for the area.

Some key areas have been highlighted below, but Members will of course have their own concerns and interests.

Please note that important sustainable transport and transport mobility issues like cycling, decarbonisation and bus services tend to be dealt with on a more local level and are not covered here. As none of the authorities in the TfSE region are mayoral combined authorities they do not have powers like bus franchising.

4.1 Connectivity across the region (not to and from London)

Economic connectivity across the South East is one of TfSE’s key areas of interest (see section 2.1, above). It is sometimes the case that connectivity in the region is seen as connectivity to and through London rather than within the other constituent parts of the region (e.g. connecting Southampton to Gatwick, or Dover to the A3/M3 corridor).

As can be seen in the map in section 3.3, above, other than the A27 which runs along the south coast, there are no east-west major road connections. So the transport of goods, for instance, would have to be on smaller and often unsuitable roads or would have to go into London, travel on the M25 and come back out again on a radial-spoke basis.

Rail presents a similar story: the map in section 3.4 shows that again other than a coastal service operated by Southern, travel from Thanet to East Hampshire, avoiding London, could involve three or four train operators. For rail freight, the picture is even more dire – there is one key freight route from Dover into London and another from Southampton into London and no cross-regional main routes at all.31

4.2 Dover, Brexit and Operation Stack Ports in the South East are facing uncertainty at the moment due in part to the as yet unknown impacts of Brexit and also from the longer-term issues associated with insufficient transport links to transport goods and passengers to and from ports.

31 See, e.g., NR, Freight Network Study: Long Term Planning Process, April 2017, p17

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 19

Brexit On Brexit, in a February 2018 article David Dingle, chairman of Maritime UK, said that the industry’s biggest concerns were for Dover and Holyhead due to “new customs requirements that could cause particular challenges for roll-on roll-off ferry ports which handle tens of thousands of HGVs travelling between the UK and the EU each day”. However, he said that there “is a wider problem, which stems from the lack of recognition of the importance of our ports and the areas around them in the planning system”:

Even if the economic benefits of ports themselves are recognised, once you leave the port gate, you find right away that connectivity to the main markets, and to the other ports, is poor: there is not enough capacity on our rail network, too few lanes, roads and bypasses on our motorway network, and difficult junctions in key bottleneck areas to allow for the smooth transfer of goods […]

We need better domestic connectivity all around the country […] Our existing road and rail connections to our ports are long overdue for improvement, and, with the export supply chain in mind, their development should be considered as important – if not more so – as the other major transport infrastructure operations underway in the UK at the moment…32

In a July 2017 paper Dover MP Charlie Elphicke set out what he saw as the five key Brexit challenges for Channel pots like Dover:

1. Resilient Roads to the Channel Ports. The new Thames Crossing taken forward at speed, the M2/A2 upgraded and dualled all the way to the Channel Ports and the planned M20 Lorry Park to be delivered on time.

2. Open for Business with systems ready on day one to ensure that customs controls are handled seamlessly, with long queues avoided and technology used to speed customs processing.

3. A New Entente Cordiale to extend the Le Touquet Treaty to cover customs cooperation and build a new era of deeper co-operation with France.

4. A Brexit Infrastructure Bill. It takes years to build the simplest road. Yet we have less than two years to get ready. A powerful new law to speed through administrative processes would enable vital projects to be delivered on time.

5. One Government at the border to ensure order. There is a mind boggling array of ministries, quangos and agencies with border responsibilities. There should be a single ministry where the buck stops. This will avoid muddle and confusion that would otherwise undermine our ability to be ready on day one.33

The Port of Dover itself has been working to increase capacity for a number of years, in particular through its flagship Dover Western Docks

32 “Invest in rail and road links before we jump the EU ship”, City A.M., 16 February

2018 33 Charlie Elphicke MP, Ready on Day One: Meeting the Brexit Borders Challenge, July

2017

20 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

Revival (DWDR). The South East LEP is providing Local Growth Funding for improvements to the A20:

The A20 Improvements project is to remodel two roundabouts (Prince of Wales and York Street) located on the A20 adjacent to the Western Docks in Dover to reconfigure into two traffic signal controlled junctions. These will promote free flowing traffic along the A20 in order to support major housing growth and town centre regeneration (Dover Town Investment Zone) in Dover as well as enable traffic movements in and out of the Western Docks.

Operation Stack The other main issue for the Channel ports, particularly Dover, is Operation Stack. In its June 2016 report on Operation Stack the Transport Select Committee explained:

he road network connecting Dover and Folkestone to the rest of the UK is of both local and national importance. Most of the road freight entering or leaving the UK does so through the Port of Dover or the Channel Tunnel. When cross channel services are disrupted—by bad weather, operational difficulties, industrial action, or security concerns—long queues of large goods vehicles (LGVs) can quickly build up.

The Kent Police use Operation Stack when disruption is prolonged. This involves the closure of parts of the M20 in stages to provide a place to hold queues of LGVs with the aim of keeping as much of the north and south bound carriageways open as possible. When Operation Stack is used it causes significant costs and inconvenience for a large part of the UK economy and it has a number of local impacts with the community in south-east Kent bearing the brunt. Hauliers and businesses incur costs associated with delay and loss of goods (such as perishable loads), drivers are stopped for long periods on a motorway with poor facilities, and the disruption affects local communities and the local economy.34

In order to deal with the issues caused by Operation Stack the Government proposed an off-road lorry park. It leased Stone Hill Park (formerly Manston Airport) as a short-term solution while consulting on plans for a permanent lorry park. It set aside £250million to build a permanent lorry park near junction 11 of the M20, capable of holding around 4000 LGVs. The Transport Committee was unconvinced of the merits of this solution.

On 15 November 2017 the Government announced that it was withdrawing its decision to site a lorry park at Stanford West on the back of a judicial review and would instead start the process to promote a lorry park through the normal planning process. In the meantime, Highways England is developing an interim solution to be in place by the time the UK leaves the EU at the end of March 2019. The Secretary of State, Chris Grayling, said:

Highways England have developed a number of options that, while continuing to hold HGVs on the M20, would allow non-port traffic to continue to travel in both directions reducing the levels

34 TSC, Operation Stack (First Report of Session 2016–17), HC 65, 1 June 2016,

summary

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 21

of traffic disruption seen in Operation Stack. This could, for example, be through holding HGVs in the centre of the motorway rather than on the coastbound carriageway. Different technologies ranging from steel barriers to moveable barrier systems could be deployed to deliver these solutions. A final decision on which option to take forward will be made in early 2018, with a view to completing delivery by March 2019.35

There was a Parliamentary debate on Operation Stack and lorry parking in Kent on 25 October 2017.

4.3 Gatwick As indicated in section 3.2, above, the Government has decided to support expansion at Heathrow over Gatwick. Information on airspace trials and Gatwick’s background with expansion are set out in HC Library briefing paper CBP 2893.

Most recently, in its submission to the Transport Select Committee’s Airports National Policy Statement inquiry, Gatwick set out why its believes it is the best choice for expansion. Amongst other benefits, it argues that in terms of economic benefit and transport connectivity:

• Economic Benefit. The updated analysis now shows Gatwick ahead of Heathrow, generating the greatest benefit for the UK economy. The net public value of expanding Gatwick is estimated by the DfT to be £72.6-74.4bn, which is £1.8-4.8bn higher than Heathrow. This economic advantage is even more pronounced (£5.0-8.0bn) when the benefits enjoyed by the very large number of international to international transfer passengers are excluded in assessing the net value to the UK, in line with long established Government guidance stating that such international to international passengers be excluded when quantifying UK economic benefit for the obvious reason that a passenger that merely passes through a UK airport does not share any of its economic benefit within the UK. Taking into account the much higher scheme costs of Heathrow expansion (£6.4bn vs £14.9bn) which must be recouped through airport charges, the net economic benefit of Gatwick expansion becomes ever clearer.

• Surface Access. The updated evidence continues to reflect the uncertainty regarding the extent to which the costs of the required surface access investment at Heathrow are greater, when compared with Gatwick. However, the Draft does not make it clear that Gatwick continues to offer to finance and take the risk of developing all of its required surface access infrastructure, whereas Heathrow is looking for the taxpayer to contribute to its much costlier and riskier surface access schemes. 36

The Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC), which has consistently argued against expansion, has set out the negative externalities of expansion at Gatwick:

35 Road haulage update: Written statement - HCWS246, 15 November 2017 36 Written evidence submitted by Gatwick Airport Ltd (NPS0051), November 2017

22 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

We are totally opposed to a second runway at Gatwick: it would be an environmental disaster.

The town of Crawley with 110,000 residents would suffer severe noise and pollution. The proposed new airport boundary would be only 100 yards from residential areas. The character of parts of Surrey, Sussex and Kent would be altered for ever as a result of urbanisation, noise, pollution and traffic congestion.

The Airports Commission found that a new Gatwick runway would increase noise two-fold or three-fold.

A second runway would double the number of aircraft in the sky. New routes over previously peaceful areas or doubling the number of aircraft on existing routes would cause great disturbance, distress and anger […] In quiet rural areas, or in the AONBs which surround Gatwick, aircraft noise causes serious disturbance over a much wider area than in urban areas with a consequent increase in the number of people affected […]

The Airports Commission found that a second Gatwick runway would mean that over 50,000 people would suffer worse air quality; that more schools and hospitals would suffer pollution than would be the case with a new NorthWest runway at Heathrow; and that more households than at Heathrow would be placed at risk of health-damaging air quality.

An Air Quality Management Area (where there is a risk that pollution may exceed legal limits) has already been designated in Crawley within 1 mile of the proposed new airport boundary.

It has been estimated that a second runway at full capacity would mean around 100,000 more vehicles a day in the Gatwick area, causing serious road congestion and delays.

Gatwick’s aim to achieve a tenfold increase in freight would mean more commercial vehicles, increasing pollution and congestion.

A second runway would mean around 90,000 extra people a day using rail services in the Gatwick area. Most of the improvements planned at present for the Brighton-London line are necessary to deal with natural growth, so the result would be standing room only on many services.37

Gatwick is one of the priorities of the Coast to Capital LEP and states that it will “be supportive of exploring additional avenues for growth, improvements to surrounding infrastructure and meeting the emerging skills needs”. In connection with this, there is the issue of Gatwick Railway Station. The station was redeveloped in 2014 but a further, major redevelopment by 2022 has just been announced by Network Rail and Coast to Capital:

The proposals submitted to Crawley Borough Council aim to reduce crowding at the station, improve passenger flow and provide better connections between the railway station, airport terminals and onward travel destinations.

Proposed improvements include:

• almost doubling the size of the rail station concourse

37 GACC, Response to the Consultation on the Draft Airports National Policy Statement

2017, 18 May 2017, Q2

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 23

• eight new escalators, five new lifts and four new stairways to improve accessibility and passenger flow

• widening platforms 5 and 6 to reduce overcrowding

• better connections to the south terminal with improved passenger information

• an attractive new roof structure.

The proposals will accommodate forecast rail growth up to 2036.38

4.4 Road network Infrastructure As set out in sections 3.3 and 4.1, above, the Strategic Rail Network (SRN) across the TfSE area is largely concerned with links into London and the two ‘radial routes’ of the M25 around London and the A27 along the coast. There are upgrades planned on many of these routes to 2021 (section 3.3).

However, there are those who have argued that this leaves other vital routes, dubbed a ‘major road network’ (MRN), underfunded and unprioritised. On the map below, the current SRN is in blue and a proposed MRN is in red:

LEPs are investing in improvements on these sorts of roads and the Government has recently consulted on the potential benefits of designating an MRN:

To give our economy an even stronger boost, to unlock housing and to relieve communities overwhelmed with traffic we see a strong case for increasing investment on the most important roads currently managed by local authorities. We have built on the work of the Rees Jeffreys Road Fund report, A Major Road Network for England [and are now putting] forward proposals for creating a network of England’s most important routes which complement our motorways and strategic trunk roads.

We propose to create a Major Road Network, of approximately the same mileage as the network for which Highways England is responsible. We propose to create a specific new funding stream which will be dedicated to investing in this network and raising

38 NR press notice, “Major proposals unveiled to upgrade Gatwick Airport station”, 9

April 2018

24 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

the performance standards which motorists experience on it. The Government cannot deliver this programme in isolation; involving local and regional interests will ensure that the improvements are of most value to the economy […]

Improving the roads in this network will enable more reliable travel for road users, more certainty over freight deliveries and more capacity for the journeys which are the lifeblood of our economy. This investment can improve quality of life by opening up land to allow much-needed housing and the development of bypasses to relieve communities of intrusive traffic.39

In creating this network, the Government has five central policy objectives, to

• Reduce congestion; • Support economic growth and rebalancing; • Support housing delivery; • Support all road users; and • Support the SRN.

The Government is proposing that local authorities and Sub-national Transport Bodies (like TfSE in the future), or regional groups will develop Regional Evidence Bases that will include an assessment of the network and identification of priority corridors. Regional Evidence Bases will inform the development of the MRN Investment Programme.40

Some have criticised the proposals for prioritising new road building (e.g. bypasses) and have argued that the money would be better spent on maintenance and renewal to make existing roads work better.41

Safety Responsibility for dealing with local road safety largely rests with local road safety partnerships. These tend to involve the local police and councils as well as other bodies and together they manage road safety programmes; manage any safety camera network and gather data, as well as developing broader strategy to make the roads safer.

For example, in Kent, the number of people killed or seriously injured (KSI) in road crashes fell by 50% between 2000 and 2010. The Road Casualty Reduction Strategy for Kent is aimed at delivering a further 33% reduction by 2020. The aim of the Hampshire and the Isle of Wight Safer Roads Partnership is to provide a focussed and intelligence-led response to the problem of speed related casualties. The Sussex Road Safety Partnership has most recently reported the following activity:

39 DfT, Proposals for the Creation of a Major Road Network: Consultation, 23 December

2017, p5 40 Ibid., p8 41 e.g. Campaign for Better Transport, see: CBT press notice, “Major Road Network

plans a missed opportunity to fix roads and transport, say campaigners”, 23 December 2017

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 25

4.5 Rail network Over the past couple of years there have been ongoing issues with performance of the rail network across large parts of the South East. This has been in part due to a confluence of factors affecting Southern and to a lesser extent other services, namely: major, long term infrastructure works at London Bridge and Victoria stations and elsewhere; changes to timetables; ongoing industrial action and externalities such as adverse weather events.

Customer satisfaction, franchise performance (in terms of delays and cancellations) and patronage have all suffered as a result. The transport select committee has undertaken a series of inquiries looking at these issues, in particular their reports on improving the rail passenger experience (October 2016) and rail franchising (February 2017) looked at issues facing Southern (a network brand for the TSGN franchise).

There are franchise-specific factsheets, published by the rail regulator, which provide a summary of key statistics for each passenger train operating company. These were updated in November 2017. For TfSE-area franchises the factsheets can be found at the following links:

• Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern (under its various brands);

• Southeastern; • South Western Railway; • Great Western Railway; • CrossCountry; and • London Overground.

26 Number CDP 2018-0100, 24 April 2018

There are concerns that the experience of TfSE passengers is unlikely to improve in the near future. There were reports last week that passengers should brace themselves for worsening services over the next five years, as increased passenger numbers and freight put pressure on the route. The BBC reported:

Rail commuters of South East London and Kent might want to sit down.

If you thought your commute was bad now, it will get worse for the next five years.

That's the message hidden away in an official Network Rail report on the South East Route. It serves South East London, Kent and Sussex and is one of the busiest in the country.

Around 5,000 passenger trains run every day over almost 2,000 miles of track.

Almost 68,000 passengers travel on this route into central London during the peak hour of 08:00 to 09:00 each weekday but its infrastructure is amongst the oldest.

And spending on the bridges, tracks and signalling has not kept up and there has been a huge historic lack of investment in infrastructure.

The report says "the route's asset base is incredibly fragile with an on-going potential for low frequency, high impact failures".

"A number of critical assets are degrading beyond a condition which can be addressed by preventative interventions," it states.

At the moment, 89.3% of trains arrive within five minutes of the planned time (PPM).

That is set to drop to 87.2% in 2020 and will not get better than it is at the moment until beyond 2024.

Network Rail doesn't deny services will be hit.

A Network Rail spokesperson said: "Our plan for the South East route for the 2019-24 funding period sets out how we would invest more than £3bn to operate, maintain and renew the busiest and most congested part of Britain's rail network - delivering a safe, reliable railway in the South East which moves half a million people and thousands of tonnes of freight every day.

"We've had to make some tough decisions in recent years regarding our day-to-day spending, with more maintenance work required than on less busy parts of the network to keep ageing infrastructure working reliably.

"At the same time, we've delivered huge investment in upgrades such as the Thameslink Programme, which will deliver significant benefits for passengers in the years ahead through better connectivity and more frequent services.

"Our plan for the next five years would see Network Rail and train operators continue to deliver good levels of punctuality to record numbers of passengers on a railway which, for many people, offers a turn-up-and-go service at the busiest times of day.

"We know this will put additional pressure on what is already the busiest and most congested part of the network, which is why our plan includes new Digital Railway technology to squeeze all we

Parliamentary debate 25/4/18: Transport for the South East 27

can out of the network and keep passengers moving safely and reliably."

The grim realisation for commuters though is there is little chance at the moment of an improvement to their service.42

These reports are based on Network Rail’s South East Route Strategic Plan, published at the beginning of February 2018.

42 “Southeastern customers face worsening services”, BBC News, 18 April 2018

DEBATE PACK Number CDP 2018-0100 24 April 2018

About the Library The House of Commons Library research service provides MPs and their staff with the impartial briefing and evidence base they need to do their work in scrutinising Government, proposing legislation, and supporting constituents.

As well as providing MPs with a confidential service we publish open briefing papers, which are available on the Parliament website.

Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publically available research briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated or otherwise amended to reflect subsequent changes.

If you have any comments on our briefings please email papers@parliament.uk. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing only with Members and their staff.

If you have any general questions about the work of the House of Commons you can email hcinfo@parliament.uk.

Disclaimer This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties. It is a general briefing only and should not be relied on as a substitute for specific advice. The House of Commons or the author(s) shall not be liable for any errors or omissions, or for any loss or damage of any kind arising from its use, and may remove, vary or amend any information at any time without prior notice.

The House of Commons accepts no responsibility for any references or links to, or the content of, information maintained by third parties. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence.