Written evidence submitted by England’s Economic Heartland (SRI0046)

Introduction

As the sub-national transport body (STB) for the England’s Economic Heartland (EEH) region we welcome the opportunity to provide evidence to the Transport Select Committee on strategic road investment in our region.

STBs play a key role in setting the ambitions for strategic transport connectivity in regions across England and have growing profile within central and local government. EEH represents 13 local transport authorities (LTAs) from Swindon and Oxfordshire in the west to Cambridgeshire in the east, and from Hertfordshire up to North and West Northamptonshire.

In February 2021 EEH published its transport strategy outlining the connectivity priorities for the region. Through the consultation and engagement processes undertaken, the document represents a shared vision for the region’s strategic transport system. It captures the views of businesses, local communities and residents and the priorities of our Local Transport Authorities. To that end, the EEH regional transport strategy, and those of our neighbouring sub national transport bodies, provide the framework on which National Highways should be planning and prioritising its strategic priorities.

The strategic road network (SRN) plays an important role in the transport strategy and the region’s transport system. It supports economic growth, connects people and places and ensures the international gateways within EEH and our neighbouring areas are well served, for the benefit of the UK as a whole.

In parallel, it is worth noting the shift in approach that England’s Economic Heartland is taking in the way it plans and prioritises infrastructure going forward. The UK legal requirement to plan for net zero, changing travel patterns and technological shifts as well as the constrained fiscal environment, means we recognise the need to plan an integrated transport system where people and goods are moved in the most efficient and sustainable means. Yet, this will never be achieved properly while transport in England is siloed by mode. Integrated funding that is prioritised and planned in partnership with local, regional, and national bodies will allow for a shift in approach and a more affordable future-ready transport network.

Transparency and a clear process for developing, assessing, and delivering the Roads Investment Strategy is partnership will be vital if we are to ensure future roads programmes, including RIS3, deliver. EEH has welcomed greater engagement and collaboration that we have recently experienced in working with both the Department for Transport (DfT) and National Highways. We see this as a step change in the right direction to collaborative working, one which we hope extends into the way funding priorities are made in RIS3 and beyond.

National Highways’ licence was published prior to the formation of STBs. There is currently no specific reference to STBs relating to engagement in the development of the RIS, leading to a lack of consistency in the way that National Highways engages and reflects STB transport strategies. While RIS2 outlined the importance of STBs playing an active role in articulating the benefits of proposals in their areas, until the license is updated to reflect established regional transport strategies, National Highways’ relationship with regional priorities will be uncertain.

How effectively the RIS2 enhancements portfolio has been managed to date.

The enhancement portfolio has, overall, been well managed in the EEH region. Engagement with local transport authorities has meant that they are kept well informed and can input into the schemes and are aware of the impact through the construction phase.

However, it is disappointing that some schemes have not been moved forward, for example technology enhancements to reduce congestion and increase safety along the A34 (Botley and Peartree interchanges, Oxford). These were a priority scheme for our partners and included in our regional transport strategy. National Highways wrote to stakeholders in June 2022 noting that the work had been ‘slowed down’ and would be considered further in ‘due course.’ Further review of ‘localised safety and congestion interventions’ was promised, but detail on this, nor the study details have not been shared. Despite Oxfordshire County Council’s offer to work with National Highways, there has been reluctance to share details of options being considered and so meaningful input and support to this work has been limited.

We feel there could be greater understanding by National Highways of the limitations and opportunities provided by the planning process. Specifically, the limitations on the infrastructure that local highway authorities are able to require developers to provide to mitigate their development. This must be proportional to the development. However, there is an opportunity for National Highways to benefit from working with LTAs and their developers to deliver solutions to existing sub-standard parts of the SRN.

An example of this is the A5 Towcester Relief Road, where the infrastructure proposed by the developer to mitigate their development provides a much-needed relief road and alternative route for the A5 through Towcester. However, the standard of the highway proposed by the developer is not designed to SRN standards (i.e., the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges) as to require this would be not proportionate to the development. A partnership or top up fund available to National Highways where they can work with local highway authorities and developers to provide solutions to sub-standard parts of the SRN would have avoided lengthy discussions and extended periods of uncertainty.

Whether risks to the enhancements portfolio for the remainder of the RIS2 period are being well managed.

Schemes on hold in the EEH region include the A47 Wansford to Sutton (DCO decision recently extended) and A428 Black Cat (DCO granted but has been delayed following legal challenge). EEH is part of the A428 Strategic Stakeholders Board, and is kept updated of progress of the scheme, which is supported locally. We welcome this approach. It has helped National Highways secure strategic support and buy in for the scheme while also providing local transport authorities the means to provide expert advice and understanding of traffic impact through the construction phase.

What the impacts of delays and cost overruns are on the overall programme, and whether the revised programme can be delivered to schedule and on budget.

The complexity of delivery of large-scale infrastructure projects remains challenging. Development and delivery take several years, and with current levels of inflation are leading to increased costs and pressures on programme timelines leading to significant delays. In addition, skills shortages in planning, and the construction industry are adding further to delays.

Delays have resulted in a significant tail in the RIS2 programme. The major concern for EEH is the impact that this tail has on a future RIS3 programme. Looking towards RIS3, it is essential that all schemes that form part of the RIS2 tail are not automatically added into the programme for 2025-2030. They should be re-assessed to ensure they reflect updated national, regional and local priorities.

What progress is being made on planning for the next Road Investment Strategy

The EEH transport strategy sets out a clear vision to support the investment strategy for the next RIS period. EEH has also completed a series of connectivity studies and is developing an investment pipeline that will help to identify key areas for investment in the region across all modes.

The OxCam Connectivity: roads study, commissioned by National Highways and co-sponsored by EEH and DfT set out a new, shared approach to planning and prioritising investment priorities on the SRN within a defined study area. The team led by National Highways have worked collaboratively, taking into consideration regional priorities as well as local objectives at every stage of the process. The study’s outputs should form the basis for National Highways planning RIS3 investment within the defined area of the study. For areas of EEH beyond the OxCam road study area, National Highways have been working with EEH to ensure evidence gathered through the EEH connectivity studies, regional transport strategy and local evidence and priorities are appropriately captured and reflected in RIS3 priorities.

EEH’s central position in the country means that the region is included in nine of National Highway’s route strategies. We have assisted National Highways in the communication and consultation of the route strategies and co-ordination of consultation responses on behalf of our LTA partners. We welcomed the collaborative approach and flexibility provided due to the number of route strategies in our region. However, we feel that greater transparency of potential interventions and confidential early sight of documents prior to consultation would benefit both National Highways and the local authorities that we represent.

What lessons from RIS2 need to be incorporated into RIS3 to ensure it is achievable and delivers on policy objectives.

Clear and transparent stakeholder engagement is important in the development of any investment pipeline such as the RIS. National Highways’ engagement needs to go beyond monitoring a plan and focus on being collaborative, responsive, open and transparent. DfT and National Highways have made a significant step change in their approach to consultation and collaborative working in relation to STBs. This includes dedicated meetings, contacts within both DfT and National Highways, and working with STBs to support responses to consultations.

It is important that National Highways learn lessons from successfully delivered schemes such as the A14, which was opened ahead of schedule. Certainty for users and planning for minimal disruption for communities is important. To this end we are keen to ensure certainty of delivery of the RIS programme and therefore support a forward-looking approach and resolves issues early.

Important in this engagement is a clear communication of the process of how a final RIS process is set. Historically schemes or interventions have been put forward but have not appeared in a RIS document without clearly understanding of the interim period between initial engagement exercises and the final document. Setting and meeting expectations will be challenging with many competing priorities. Continued engagement with partners will be key to ensure that processes and decisions resulting from the RIS document are communicated with clarity. Often input has been provided into the RIS development process but feedback has been limited until the publication of the RIS. This has led to uncertainty about how decisions on interventions have been made.

The RIS programme needs to ensure that it supports and does not conflict with local objectives and in the future should align with regional transport strategies set by STBs. The RIS programme needs to consider the SRN’s role in accommodating for and encouraging multi modal connectivity, especially its role in providing for bus priority and long-distance coach priority as part of regional connectivity. It should also ensure it helps to facilitate and minimise its impact and severance on walking and cycling. There should also be the provision for the freight and logistics industry in the provision for driver facilities at a national level, especially in the EEH region where land values are high and there are competing demands for available land.

Learning from all the input into RIS3, EEH have requested early sight of consultation documents prior to them being released publicly, especially if proposals could be considered controversial. As a minimum, out of courtesy and to maintain good relationships, National Highways should inform local authority leaders, confidentially, if any elements of the route strategies or proposals in the route strategies could be controversial or contradict local policy.

Whether the Government’s current and forthcoming roads investment programme is meeting the current and future needs of consumers and business.

National Highways has a key role to play in ensuring the wider quality of life for communities is improved and enhancements should be assessed against this backdrop. EEH’s transport strategy sets out the policy that: ‘In identifying future investment requirements, we will prioritise proposals on the basis of value for money, their contribution towards achieving net zero carbon targets, and their contribution to wider sustainability, environmental net gain and health outcomes.’ This is a significant shift in the way we see roads investment in the future: for all sectors of society, not just road users.

There are key parts of the SRN in the EEH region which travels through local communities creating duplicity of the SRN’s function as both a strategic and local route. In our region this includes parts of the A34 (Oxfordshire), A5 (Towcester) and A1 (Biggleswade).

Consequently, there needs to be careful consideration of the SRN impacts on air quality, health, well-being, environment and carbon. This includes where there is significant impact on parallel routes when sections of the SRN are closed.

The Major Road network needs to be equally supported and funded as part the RIS Programme as part of achieving local objectives. Road users are not interested in the classification of a road but just that they can make their journey with ease. The local highway network forms a key part of creating seamless journeys and will very often form part of the start and end of a journey which includes the SRN.

Whether the Government’s roads investment programme aligns with other policy priorities, such as decarbonisation, levelling up, productivity and growth:

The needs outlined in the National Policy Statement for National Networks (published in 2014) is outdated and not in line with current decarbonisation commitments. This policy framework needs urgently reviewing to ensure that any study work that informs investment decisions is undertaken in the context of wider objectives and takes account of future uncertainties such as climate change.

It will be key that future RIS programme contributes to wider policies including decarbonisation, levelling up and supporting economic growth. Key to future programmes will be considering the future of the SRN in the context of a multimodal approach, alongside its role in facilitating local connectivity for all modes and its interaction with the major road network and local roads.

An opportunity to clarify its role is the ‘Plan to improve public transport on the SRN’ due to be published this year.

STBs collectively are collaborating on their work to develop pathways to net zero. National Highways through the RIS programme needs to actively respond to changing policy directions and RIS3 should be viewed as an opportunity to plan and assess schemes differently to meet the decarbonisation challenge and provides the opportunity to think more widely about the whole transport system.

In this regard more thought needs to be given to how the SRN can support longer distance bus and coach journeys alongside freight.

How RIS3 should take account of technological developments, and evidence on ways of increasing capacity on the Strategic Road Network (such as smart motorways and potential alternatives to them).

National Highways needs to embrace new technology as part of achieving net zero. Digital roads can help maximise the total capacity of the SRN without the need for major physical upgrades.

Schemes within the RIS programme should be subject to a review to determine if the same outcomes could be achieved through the introduction of smart technology to maximise and more effectively manage the capacity and demands of the existing SRN as an alternative to new construction. EEH have recently commissioned work on the use of smart junction technology that will allow for intelligent control of key parts of the highway network to manage both traffic flows and local traffic priorities.

National Highways also has a role in trialling and sharing learning from new technology such as: digitally enabled corridors that can then be replicated and connected to the MRN to create better connectivity and seamless links between the MRN and SRN.

February 2023