Monday 6 December 2021

Do your bit to save London's public transport

 The current TfL funding settlement from Government expires in 6 days’ time on 11 December 2021.

 

To help to decarbonise the transport network, TfL would need an investment of £70m for the first three years, to support zero emission buses and £125m per year for healthy streets and active travel.

 

The London Assembly on December 2nd  called on the Government to provide a new long-term sustainable funding model and to include the £1-1.5bn of additional investment funding each year that TfL requires, as part of the next funding settlement.

 

Elly Baker AM, who proposed the motion, said:

 

London was largely glossed over in the Chancellor’s recent Budget. Transport for London was left out in the cold, despite the fact that it is hanging over a financial cliff-edge due to the pandemic.

 

Our transport system urgently needs proper investment from the Government to drive forward the whole country’s economic recovery and boost our efforts to meet legally binding commitments to reach net zero and clean up our air.

 

Cities should be empowered by Governments so they can be at the forefront of tackling the climate emergency.

 

The full text of the motion is:

 

This Assembly notes that the Government’s October 2021 Budget and Comprehensive Spending Review confirmed £7bn to level-up urban transport in cities around England, but there was no new funding announced for Transport for London (TfL). Furthermore, the current TfL funding settlement from Government expires in 11 days’ time on
11 December 2021.

 

The Assembly notes that the TfL submission to the Government’s spending review outlined plans to invest £2.5 - £3bn per year over the long term, to meet the Government’s climate change, levelling up and economic recovery ambitions. To help to decarbonise the transport network, this investment would include £70m for the first three years to support zero emission buses and £125m per year for healthy streets and active travel.

 

The Assembly believes that if the Government is serious about the UK’s legally binding decarbonisation and air quality commitments then funding must be provided to TfL.

 

This Assembly therefore calls on the Government to provide a new long-term sustainable funding model and to include the £1-1.5bn of additional investment funding each year that TfL requires, as part of the next funding settlement.

 The TfL Finance Committee listed these impacts if emergency funding was not forthcoming from the Government:

  • 18 percent reduction in London bus services, with 100 routes to be axed (a seventh of the network) and reduced frequency across 200 more (about one third of all additional routes).
  • 9 percent service reduction across the London Underground with possible scenarios including permanent closure of the 115-year-old Bakerloo line or the Jubilee, Metropolitan or Hammersmith & City lines.
  • Non-replacement of ageing train fleet (for example 50-year-old Bakerloo trains) with rolling stock renewal contracts cancelled.
  • Scrapping of bus electrification with existing bus vehicles to be kept in service longer to reduce costs.
  • No progress towards Vision Zero (safety), decarbonisation, improving air quality or active travel to support a shift towards more sustainable modes of transport.
  • End of capital expenditure on disability access for transport passengers, with non-renewal of “step free” assets resulting in “more frequent failures of lifts and escalators”.
  • London’s road assets to “remain in current degraded condition” with a “high risk of unplanned bridge and tunnel closures”.
  • ·Cancellation of TfL supply chain contracts impacting on 43,000 jobs in Derby, Falkirk, Bolton, Liverpool, Yorkshire, and Ballymena, Northern Ireland.
  • The cuts are so deep that by TfL’s own admission they will push London’s transport system into a state of “Managed Decline”.


KEEP LONDON MOVING CAMPAIGN

 

London Travel Watch in a campaign called Keep London Moving to fight the the budget cut and is urging people to write to their MP, London Assembly members and councillors as part of the campaign. On their website you just have to fill in your postcode to automatically send a letter to all of them. LINK

 

London faces a transport funding crisis. 

Transport for London have been getting financial support from the Government because of the pandemic, but this funding deal is due to expire on the 11th of December. If London's transport doesn't get the money it needs after that date, we could see an 18% reduction in bus services and a 9% cut to Tube services as well as a complete end to all active travel funding. This could result in a million fewer public transport journeys a day and drive a significant number of Londoners back into their cars. 

Public transport and active travel enables the poorest and most excluded individuals to get to work and access education and services. Affordable, reliable and frequent public transport services are also essential if London is to reduce its carbon emissions and clean up the toxic air which shortens the lives of thousands. 

Time is running out but you can still make your voice heard. 

If we act now, we can remind politicians that public transport and active travel is vital to all Londoners and people travelling in to the city. Let your MP, London Assembly member and councillor know why we need to #keeplondonmoving.

3 comments:

David Walton said...

Trains were packed even pre Covid days. Government ambiguity on face masks 'the science' has since proven commercially catastrophic for TFL and you can't put that genie back in the bottle. For most of Europe wearing a face mask in confined poorly ventilated spaces is no big deal and there never was a debate, it was just a basic public health protection measure.

Why is London so poor at active travel and the 'local' in its massive population growth new non town neighbourhoods, more roads, more vehicles South Kilburn to 2041 seems a pretty dumb for developer colony only market fix and makes absolute mockery of Brents climate and ecological emergency overarching policy.

Stephan said...

„Non-replacement of ageing train fleet (for example 50-year-old Bakerloo trains) with rolling stock renewal contracts cancelled.
Scrapping of bus electrification with existing bus vehicles to be kept in service longer to reduce costs.“

Why do people keep feeding the idea that switching to renewables / going green means scrapping and replacing (= consumerism) vehicles in the name of the environment? The ULEZ follows the same bad pattern.

I don’t mind old trains nor old buses. They can be maintained and switched to renewable fuels (ideally those from waste like biogas or used vegoil). This doesn’t need as much investment as buying new and switching to completely new tech and new infrastructure.

It’d love to sea mayor acting sustainably with tax money as well. Sadly London missed the chance to vote Khan out.

It seems we are constantly being sold the idea that we should buy new and scrap old in order to be green and protect the climate.
this is fundamentally wrong.
The sustainably way to go is to use what we have until it breaks and switch fuel sources, which would also not deprive people or companies of their assets.
That’s as much true for combustion engines as it is e.g. for gas boilers (no expensive heat pumps needed).

It seems the current, politically correct way of „going green“ is driven by lobbyism or lack of basic knowledge of technology or just by the idea that green = spending, taxing, spending, and buying ready-made „solutions“ off the shelves, led by the state, not individuals.

And a word on air quality: This is massively over-hyped. The air has historically never been as clean as today.
Yet the hype is anything but proportionate.
Improvements are always a good idea but in a measured and fair way. The ULEZ is one of the worst examples and it sends a completely wrong message- the same again: scrap in the name of the environment, pay up or buy new- spend and be left out of pocket.

These patterns must change!

Anonymous said...

What are our 2 Brent Labour MPs going to do to stop this Labour Mayor taking away vital public transport links from one of the poorest boroughs in London, especially when half the borough has just been hit by ULEZ?