Transport Planning Society’s Chair comments on the Manifestos

We are rapidly approaching polling day in what promises to be one of the most significant elections for many years. As the day for UK voters to cast their votes draws closer, the Transport Planning Society (TPS) has reviewed each party’s approach to transport policy and compared them with our five key priorities for a new government.

Our manifesto for a sustainable transport system

We published our member-led manifesto in November 2023, outlining our five key asks for an incoming government. These were:

1. Introduction of a National Transport Strategy for England that aligns with spatial planning and the devolved nations’ transport strategies
2. Delivery of an integrated, accessible and affordable public transport system across the UK
3. Investment in safe, secure active travel routes
4. Reduced reliance on the car and introduction of traffic reduction targets
5. Encouragement of a sustainable switch to low-emission vehicles

How do the party manifestos measure up against these priorities? And how confident can we be that the next Government will plan and fund the creation of the fair, integrated and decarbonised transport system we need to support the UK’s sustainable development? 

The overall approach to transport

Despite the heated rhetoric of the election campaign, there are some interesting similarities between the manifestos of the main parties when it comes to transport. They all emphasise the importance of devolving further powers and funding from Whitehall to local decision-makers, including city regional mayors. All stress the importance of reforming and investing in the rail network and improving local bus services. There is a strong focus on maintaining existing transport assets, including a shared commitment to fixing potholes. All the main manifestos mention support for active travel. Decarbonisation is also a common theme, although this is generally in the form of tactical commitments to expanding access to EVs and improving the EV charging network rather than a strategic approach to reducing transport’s overall emissions.  

But there are also some important differences in the main parties’ approaches. The Conservative manifesto is much more overtly supportive of driving, motorists and additional investment in the Strategic Road Network through the next Road Investment Strategy. It also pledges to use a Backing Drivers Bill to roll back – or at least make more difficult – delivery of local measures such as the London-wide ULEZ, LTNs and 20 mph zones. Labour’s manifesto makes a welcome commitment to a “long-term strategy for transport” and giving regional mayors power to “create unified and integrated transport systems”. This is presumably how they plan to deliver the mode shift targets “to lower emissions from the transport sector” set out in their Rail policy document. And while Labour’s manifesto acknowledges that cars “remain the most popular form of transport”, their commitment to fix one million potholes annually is overtly funded by reallocating money from the A27 bypass. On aviation, the Liberal Democrats explicitly commit to taking steps “to reduce demand for flying”, whereas Labour and the Conservatives focus on so-called Sustainable Aviation Fuels.

Partnering with an incoming government to shape the future of transport

Overall, the party manifestos are diverse in focus, approach and ambition. It is striking that transport features prominently in all the main manifestos, although the level of detail varies widely. 

We were pleased to see that many of the manifestos include measures that align with the TPS Manifesto, such as Labour’s commitment to developing a long term strategy for transport . Each of our five priorities were included in some form in one or more of the manifestos. Most prominent were commitments to deliver an integrated, accessible, affordable public transport system, and encourage a switch to lower-emitting vehicles. This is unsurprising, given the preference for carrots over sticks at election time. 

Less evident were commitments to reduce the nation’s reliance on cars by introducing traffic reduction targets, although Labour has committed to mode shift targets to support decarbonisation. 

We look forward to working with whoever forms the next government, representing the views of TPS members and helping to shape transport policy and practice over the next five years and beyond. 

Labour

The Labour Manifesto is split into three sections covering roads, rail and other issues.

Labour promises to ‘maintain and renew’ the road network to ensure all road users can use it safely while reducing congestion. In practice, this means:

• Fixing one million potholes a year
• Tackling soaring car insurance
• Restoring the phase-out date of 2030 for new cars with internal combustion engines
• Supporting buyers of secondhand electric cars

The last two bullet points relate to the TPS’s fifth priority, encouraging a sustainable switch to low-emission vehicles. While reducing congestion is welcome and supports our fourth priority, the manifesto lacks detail on how Labour plans to do this – though their commitment to setting modal shift targets to lower emissions is encouraging. It’s good to see recognition of the value of the road network to non-car users but it is important that commitments to maintenance and renewal aren’t implied commitments to expand strategic capacity. It is striking that Labour will use reallocated funds from the “poor value for money” A27 bypass to pay for the repair of 1 million potholes annually, suggesting a limited ambition for major new investment in capacity enhancements. 

Labour commits to a “long-term strategy for transport, which aligns with our first priority around developing a national transport strategy . This is linked to providing certainty in funding in order to support the efficient delivery of infrastructure. There is a similar commitment to reducing the use of competitions for distributing funding to local authorities. This is very encouraging, and, when coupled with Labour’s mode shift, will hopefully see England join Wales and Scotland with a proper and adequately funded strategic plan for the transport network.

Labour’s flagship transport policy is arguably nationalising rail. As contracts with existing operators expire, Labour will bring them into public ownership without costing “taxpayers a penny in compensation”. The TPS’s second priority calls for the establishment of Great British Railways to unify the rail network and properly fund major public transport projects. Labour states that Great British Railways, the new public-owned operator, will ‘deliver a unified system that focuses on reliable, affordable, high-quality, and efficient services; along with ensuring safety and accessibility.’ 

The rest of Labour’s transport policy is limited to a paragraph focused primarily on buses. It is encouraging to see the commitment to empower local leaders, including Metro Mayors, to take ownership of local bus services, in part by promoting franchising. This will help deliver an integrated, accessible and affordable public transport network as our second priority outlines. It is also good to see an intent to ‘promote active travel networks’, although the lack of any further detail is disappointing. Tram projects, and other attempts to close regional economic performance gaps, were notably absent from the manifesto.

Labour’s approach to transport is largely positive, hinting at the direction the industry must head. But it lacks the detail needed to set out clearly how we are going to get there. The manifesto arguably places too much implied importance on the car as a mode of trave,l whereas we urge the need to reduce car use in a sustainable future transport network. 

Conservative

The Conservative manifesto signals a continuation of the policy direction we’ve seen for the past five years. It maintains a focus on the road network, shaped by the Prime Minister’s Plan for drivers. It also promises to introduce a ‘Backing Drivers Bill’ in the first King’s Speech that will:

• Stop local efforts to introduce road pricing
• Reverse the Ultra Low Emission Zone expansion in London

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and 20 mph zones will require a local referendum. These policies will hinder our fourth priority and divert funds away from committing to other priorities like active travel, or public transport. As we’ve stated elsewhere, the Conservative approach fails to recognise the need to reduce vehicle miles travelled in order to reduce transport’s carbon emissions. 

There were some positives in the manifesto. The Conservatives pledge the £36bn freed up from HS2 will be used to fund a range of local or regional transport schemes, including funding for smaller cities, towns and rural areas, Northern Powerhouse Rail and new bus routes across the North and Midlands. We were pleased to see the commitment to extend the £2 bus fare cap. However, the scheme requires further research to understand the full benefits and who receives them. We would also prefer if the decision was devolved to Local Transport Authorities to decide which routes to subsidise. A plan to provide powers to local councils to ban pavement parking is also positive.

We were also encouraged by the promise to create Great British Railways and introduce pay-as-you-go contactless ticketing. Both policies, if implemented correctly, will have a measurable improvement on rail’s customer experience. The theme throughout these policies is a promise to make sustainable travel cheaper and easier. Both touch on our second priority and so should be welcomed by transport planners.

Active travel was absent from the manifesto besides a vague commitment to improve safety for cyclists, pedestrians and vulnerable road users. We would like to see Active Travel England have a more significant role in the transport stakeholder landscape, with increased funding and authority.

Liberal Democrat

The Liberal Democrat (Lib Dem) manifesto focuses heavily on the affordability and sustainability of transport. Their manifesto aims to:

• Reduce the costs of EV charging
• Protect motorists from unfair petrol and insurance costs
• Make public transport more affordable – particularly for young people
  • Extend £2 bus fare cap
  • Explore the introduction of an annual pass for railways
  • Extending half-fares on buses, trams and trains to 18-year-olds.
  • Working with operators to introduce a ‘Young Person’s Buscard’, similar to the Young Person’s Railcard, giving 19- to 25-year-olds a third off bus and tram fares.
• Integrate ticketing systems and introduce a daily fare cap

These policies are set against the backdrop of the cost-of-living crisis and the rising travel costs for almost all modes. We were pleased to see a focus on pricing as we explored this in our manifesto, particularly in the context of ticketing reform.

We were also encouraged to see the approach to aviation. The Lib Dems were the only party of the main three to recognise the need to reform taxes for flying to encourage sustainable long-distance travel where possible. They promised to focus taxes on those who fly the most, and those who use private jets. They will introduce a requirement for airlines to show the carbon emissions for domestic flights compared to rail, and ban short domestic flights where the rail option for the same journey is less than two and a half hours.

The Lib Dem's commitment to Northern Powerhouse Rail is promising. They understand the importance of connecting the key northern cities to the region's economic development. This is further displayed by the promise to review the cancellation of HS2’s Northern leg. A question surrounds what their proposed ‘Railway Agency’ public body would look like. Is this Great British Railways or something different? And if it is different, how exactly?

We were also disappointed to see no mention of active modes, or a positive approach to planning reform within their manifesto. 

Reform. Green, Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru

Reform

The Reform manifesto manages a single page on their transport priorities and is perhaps unsurprisingly light on detail. There are unhelpful and, we would argue, misguided commitments to end of the ‘war on motorists’ with legislation to scrap ULEZ, clean air zones, 20mph limits and low traffic neighbourhoods which are somewhat at odds with TPS’s transport priorities. However there is also a commitment to improve integrated transport solutions which will be more welcome by transport planners. Commitments to simplify funding are also welcomed.

Green

The Green Party manifesto unsurprisingly focuses on reducing emissions, particularly as the transport sector is the largest emitter in the UK. They acknowledge this in the first line of their transport section which states that ‘Our transport choices account for around a quarter of UK carbon emissions.’ They go on to say we must make it easier to travel sustainably to tackle the climate crisis.

The Greens promised to re-introduce the fuel duty escalator, a policy we have long been campaigning for. We mention the need to address the implications of lost revenue from fuel duty as we electrify in our fifth manifesto priority. They go one step further and commit to introducing road pricing, in some form, as revenue declines. Accepting the need to reduce miles travelled by car is admirable and aligns strongly with our fourth priority. However, the unconditional opposition to new roads may be considered unrealistic and unhelpful in some locales. A better approach would be to a strategic roads review like the one carried out in Wales and to focus enhancements on locations which most benefit sustainable road users (bus, bike, EVs), coupled with strategic demand management such as road user charging.

The Greens recognise the role active travel and public transport will play in a sustainable network. We were pleased to see their promise to adopt Active Travel England’s objective for 50% of trips in England’s towns and cities to be walked, wheeled or cycled by 2030. Clarity on how this can be practically achieved would be useful. The same is true for public transport. It’s great to see a commitment of £19 billion over five years to improve services, but further detail is required on how this will be allocated. It isn’t clear if the rest of the manifesto's public transport policies add up to the £19 billion figure.

Scottish National Party

The Scottish National Party (SNP) manifesto is brief and concerned with transferring powers from Westminster to Scotland. The opening paragraph of their transport section outlines how their ambition is ‘constrained by resources and powers controlled by Westminster.’ This is most obvious in their promise to establish a fully devolved railway under public ownership.

They outline four calls to the UK Government:

• Transfer full powers for complete integration of track and train to Scotland
• Promote a fair and affordable transition to zero-emission transport fuels
• Strengthen incentives to purchase cleaner vehicles
• Invest in safer roads

In our manifesto, we call for a devolution of powers and funding to Local government, including the devolved authorities. Regional transport decisions should be made at a regional level, rather than Westminster.

We also commend the promise to encourage greener transport fuels and vehicles. This point is clearly made in our fifth priority.

Road safety is crucial, but investment must be strategic. Funding must be focused on safety and demand management instead of capacity increases.

Plaid Cymru

Similarly to the SNP manifesto, Plaid Cymru focuses on Wales receiving a fair investment from Westminster and devolution to deliver services properly. They call for Wales to receive the “£4bn of transport funding to which it is entitled under the Barnett Formula for money spent by the UK Government on HS2, which is clearly an England only project.”

The Plaid Cymru manifesto is notably the only one to mention passenger safety, besides road safety. They rightly identify safety as a key issue for many public transport customers and promise to introduce a statutory duty for operators to guarantee safe trips. This would incorporate:

• Consistent and transparent incident reporting instruments
• Improved lighting and bilingual audio announcements (on vehicles and streets)
• A strong operator employee presence on services

Each measure will improve safety, increasing ridership and patronage for operators.

It was great to see a commitment for new housing developments to have sufficiently future-proofed growth in public transport, but we would have liked for them to go further and condition successful planning applications on having the required levels of sustainable transport options necessary to achieve wider policy goals, notably decarbonisation.

- Ben Plowden, Chair, Transport Planning Society -