The 1990s paradigm shift - Transport Policy and Planning in Great Britain - page 115

The instigation of [the Great Debate] appears to have been a genuine attempt to
find a way forward with a transport problem increasingly conceived as being one
of changing people's travel behaviour in the short, medium and long term. It was
also a difficult problem for the Conservatives to resolve as intervening to manage
travel demand ran counter to philosophies of personal choice and personal freedom.
(Vigar 2002 pp. 76-77)
The Government's credibility in leading the debate was helped by the fact that it
had recently hived off its executive responsibilities for trunk roads to a new Highways
Agency. This removed the 'lop-sidedness' (in favour of roads) which had long
characterised the staffing of the Department of Transport.
Whilst the Great Debate was under way three innovations were made, all very
much in line with the RCEP report: the preparation of a National Air Quality Strategy
(under the 1995 Environment Act), a National Cycling Strategy, and the publication
of sustainable development indicators.
The National Cycling Strategy was prepared by a steering group of representatives
from the public, private and voluntary sectors, chaired by a Government Minister
(DTp 1996a). It adopted very ambitious targets similar to those proposed by the Royal
Commission - for a doubling of cycling journeys by 2005 and a further doubling by
2012. Unlike the air quality strategy however these targets had no basis in legislation
and neither central nor local government was under any obligation to pursue their
implementation. In practical terms the more prominent action in relation to cycling
was a grant of £42m by the Millennium Commission towards the cost of a 4,000-km
national network of cycle paths co-ordinated and promoted by the charity Sustrans.
The long-awaited statement of Conservative Government policy on transport was
published as 'The Way Forward' in 1996 (DTp 1996b) . It set out the Government's
views 'on a sensible direction for policies into the next century'. After all that had
gone before, this aspiration was somewhat underwhelming. Even amongst groups
which might have been expected to be supportive of Conservative policy, the paper
generated disappointment.
The absence of specific proposals could be attributed to the fact that a General
Election was only a year or so away which the Conservative Government was not
expected to (and did not) survive. However the paper did formally embrace the
shift away from road investment towards management and restraint measures and
contained several initiatives which were carried forward into the programme of the
subsequent New Labour Government.
'The Way Forward' was published as the Government's formal response to the
RCEP report but on several key issues the hopes of the Royal Commission were
dashed. The Commission's recommendations for national traffic targets and for shares
amongst the different modes were rejected. The Government made much of the value
of economic instruments, but the fact that the effectiveness of its main weapon - the
fuel duty escalator - had been badly blunted by the falling cost of fuel itself was ignored
(RCEP 1997).
One of the reasons for the Government's rejection of national traffic targets was the
extent of variation in local conditions. Its view therefore was that targets for reducing
road traffic and encouraging alternative modes were best pursued at local authority
level. The pressure group Friends of the Earth advanced their belief in the value of
targets by promoting a Private Members Bill, passed as the Road Traffic Reduction
Act 1997, aimed at local authorities. A similar Bill relating to national traffic levels