130 likes | 281 Views
Sub-regional working in transport. Charlotte Dixon Regional and Local Transport Strategy and Funding DfT. The need for joint planning and delivery in transport Progress to date: examples of local authority success The draft Local Transport Bill How does this “fit” with MAAs?.
E N D
Sub-regional working in transport Charlotte Dixon Regional and Local Transport Strategy and Funding DfT
The need for joint planning and delivery in transport • Progress to date: examples of local authority success • The draft Local Transport Bill • How does this “fit” with MAAs?
The need for joint planning and delivery in transport: Existing arrangements • Most transport powers in England outside London are held by: • County or Unitary Councils outside the six former met counties • Passenger Transport Authorities and Metropolitan District Councils in the metropolitan areas • Powers and duties are widely drawn, in recognition that different areas have different priorities • But transport needs often don’t fit with local authority boundaries
Progress to date: The Local Transport Plan • Local Transport Authorities have duty to include their policies in a Local Transport Plan • In the former metropolitan areas the duty is a joint duty on the PTA and the MDCs • Elsewhere, local authorities can use general local government powers to prepare joint plans if they wish • All authorities produced their second 5-year LTPs to start in April 2006.
Joint LTP Planning Joint LTPs were prepared by: • PTA and MDCs: Tyne & Wear, Merseyside, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands • Four unitary authorities: Greater Bristol • Urban unitary plus part of a county: Greater Nottingham, Derby Joint, North Staffordshire, Luton & Dunstable, Central Leicestershire • Two unitaries plus part of a county: South East Dorset
Greater Nottingham Plan Area • 1x unitary authority (City of Nottingham) • Plus part of Nottinghamshire County Council: • 3 x districts (Broxtowe, Gedling, Rushcliffe) • 1 x part of a district (Hucknall electoral wards of Ashfield district)
Perceived benefits of joint working • Economies of scale • Access to shared resources • More efficient use of resources • Transport planning & delivery matched to functional areas
Funding arrangements • Most transport funding is through RSG and two large capital blocks for Integrated Transport and Highway Maintenance • Blocks are distributed to authorities by needs-based formula • Where authorities prepare joint plans, DfT takes advice from the authorities on how funding should be distributed between them
Other Joint Planning The Tees Valley example: Middlesbrough, Darlington, Redcar & Cleveland, Hartlepool and Stockton-on-Tees The Solent example: Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton • 20 year sub-regional strategies • Individual LTPs: 5 year plans for transport • Solent Transport Partnership – highways, bus, trains, HA
Draft Local Transport Bill • Enables reviews of transport governance in metropolitan areas and elsewhere • Enables establishment of joint authorities outside existing PTA areas • Can also cover membership, powers, boundaries etc • Proposes that in metropolitan areas PTA should lead on joint Plan
How does this fit with MAAs? • We already have joint planning, reporting, targets, funding and delivery in many areas • Some important metrics, eg congestion, bus patronage, only sensible at sub-regional level • Currently transport targets are not agreed with government. • But LAAs will include the possibility of “designated” transport targets • Should be straightforward to allow this also for joint Plans, with the contribution to the designated target included as one of the 35 targets for each of the relevant authorities • DfT welcomes the possibility of transport being embedded in wider sub-regional agreements