Report of
the Portfolio Committee on Transport on its study tour to
The Portfolio Committee on Transport having undertaken a study tour
to the UK from 7 to 10 April 2008, reports as follows:
1.
Introduction
The Transport Portfolio Committee undertook a study tour to
The following members formed part of the delegation: Mr J P Cronin, Chairperson (ANC); Ms N P Khunou (ANC); Mr O M Mogale (ANC); Ms B Thomson (ANC); Mr S B Farrow (DA) and Ms N C Nkabinde (UDM) and also Ms V Mafilika (Committee Secretary).
2.
Purpose of the visit
2.1 The objective of the study tour was to
gain a greater understanding of the public transport institutional capacity being
put in place in preparation for the 2012 London Olympic Games. In
2.2 The South African government has
identified public transport as the major legacy to be achieved from the hosting
of the 2010 World Cup. In a previous Portfolio Committee report tabled in
Parliament (ATC 30 November 2007), based on oversight visits to South Africa’s
2010 host cities, the Committee raised several concerns in regard to the
capacity and institutional coordination of our planning, financing and
implementation of integrated public transport systems and other public
transport challenges for 2010. These concerns related to both
2.3 Accordingly, the principal focus of the
Committee’s study tour was on the institutional coordination in the provision
of public transport for major sporting events in
2.4 To enhance information sharing and constructive feedback from the study tour, the Committee requested that the Department of Transport (DoT) make available, if possible, a senior official responsible for 2010 preparations. The DoT responded positively to this request.
3. Findings:
3.1
In the 1980s major public
transport reforms were undertaken in the
3.2
Bus services, which had been
typically owned and operated by local governments, were also privatised in the
1980s and 90s. As the Committee learnt in
3.3 With the market domination of several private operators now consolidated, the worst of the fragmentation resulting from these measures may now be over. However, the general consensus among those with whom the Committee interacted was that the reform measures of the 1980s had resulted in many problems, including the cutting back of public transport services, significant fare hikes, under-investment in recapitalisation, and operational problems as different (and competing) operators failed to harmonise what had previously often been single, integrated networks.
3.4
Against this background, in
both
4.
Transport for
4.1 The Greater London Council has an executive mayor, directly elected
every four years. The GLC, in turn, has a Scrutiny Committee which oversees
four entities – the London Development Agency, the Metropolitan Police
Authority, the London Fire Brigade and, by the far the largest entity,
Transport for London. TfL was formed in 2000 out of
14 different public organisations and in 2003 London Underground also became
part of the TfL. The TfL
has a board appointed by the Mayor, who is also the chair of the board. Its role is to implement the
Mayor’s Transport Strategy for
4.2 TfL manages
4.3 In 2002, TfL
and the Metropolitan Police Service established the Transport Operational
Command Unit. Its role is to tackle and prevent crime on
4.4 TfL officials informed the Committee
that since 2000
4.5 At the heart of the turn-around,
the delegation was told, that there has been a major improvement in bus
services.
4.6 The great majority of buses are provided
by private bus companies with some 15 major companies now operating on 700 bus
routes governed by some 500 contracts for these routes. However, TfL owns and operates one bus company and uses this as a
public sector comparator – a bench-mark against which to assess the performance
of the private companies. Bus contracts are tendered according to EU
legislation. They are awarded for five years with a possible extension for two
years if the operator exceeds targets. Some year-to-year flexibility is allowed,
with 60% of contracts changing every year, allowing for incentives and
sanctions based on demonstrated performance of the operator. The delegates were
told by the TfL vice chairperson, Dave Wetzel, that
they particularly incentivise service levels and
notably driver performance and skills. This helps to encourage bus operators to
employ more staff and to continuously enhance their training. The TfL designs the routes, specifies the kinds of buses for
different routes, sets fares for routes and collects all fares. All buses are
required to be low-floor, and bus movements are monitored centrally by TfL in real time using CCTV and direct radio contact with
drivers. The bus control center is currently moving to GPS monitoring. TfL also conducts on-board and bus-station inspections and
employs an agency to do “mystery passenger” surveys to assess performance.
4.7 The other principal public
transport carrier is London Underground. LU is one-hundred percent operated by TfL and the work-force is employed by it. Around one
billion customer journeys were made on the Tube in 2006/07.
4.8 Docklands Light Rail carries more
than 60 million passengers annually, a figure which is expected to rise to 80
million by 2009.
4.9 TfL launched the
Oyster card in 2003, which is now the
4.10 The Committee was told that funding
for the operation of these public transport systems is derived partly from
fares and partly from a nationally-provided operating subsidy administered by TfL. The proportion of funding derived from fare revenues
and from the subsidy is roughly equal.
4.11 In 2004, TfL
secured a ground-breaking, five-year funding settlement with Government on
grant levels and borrowing upon winning the 2012 Olympic bid. It is now
rolling-out its £10bn investment programme to improve
and expand
4.12 TfL has already begun delivering
transport infrastructure improvements for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games – after playing a strategic role in
securing the event for the capital. Examples include an extra carriage on all
Jubilee line trains and an increase in fleet size in order to boost capacity on
the line by 17 per cent. Also, an express, high-speed Javelin train will carry
passengers from central
4.13 Overall authority for the 2012 Olympics
is with the International Olympic Committee, below the IOC is the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG – a
coordinating structure), and the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) which has
implementing responsibility for stadiums, transport, the Olympic village, etc. TfL liaises directly with the ODA. Three senior TfL executives are working full-time on the 2012 event and
around 25 senior staff members responsible for different sectors (tube, buses,
walking and cycling, travel demand management, etc.) are also allocated to 2012
work directly with ODA. The ODA itself has 35 persons working on transport. The
delegation was told by an ODA representative that “we can be lean, because we
are not project managing, but client managing” – i.e. the actual construction
and project management of transport infrastructure is handled by private
contractors.
5.
The Greater
5.1 Unlike
5.2 The GMPTE does not actually run passenger
services, but is responsible for:
·
Subsidising some bus services which are considered socially
necessary but would not otherwise be viable, and providing bus stops and
shelters.
·
Managing
the funding and administration of concessionary fares for the elderly and
disabled etc. GMPTE also runs "Ring-and-Ride" services for the
disabled.
·
Specifying
fares and service levels of local train services operating from the county.
·
GMPTE
also owns the Manchester Metrolink light rail system,
which is operated by a private company on a fixed contract.
·
GMPTE
is also responsible for providing information about public transport services,
and operates multi-modal ticketing schemes.
5.3
Senior
GMPTE officials provided the Committee with a briefing on the transport
planning, implementation and legacy from the hosting of the 2002 Manchester
Commonwealth Games.
5.4
At
the time, it was the largest ever sporting event in the
5.5 The transport planning and implementation
required a multi-agency approach and five main work streams – parking, public
transport, stadium shuttle (from the City centre to
the main venues at Sportcity), traffic management and
communications.
5.5
Parking
preparation included:
·
7000
park and ride spaces, at three sites (existing sporting venues)
·
up to 9000 park and walk spaces within 1km of Sportcity.
5.6 Public transport preparations focused on efficient use of existing rail, bus and Metrolink networks; enhanced services especially for evenings and night; new ticketing arrangements; improved information.
5.7 The stadium shuttle involved:
· Dedicated bus services between the city centre and Sportcity
· These were free and frequent services with greater priority
· A “city link” walk route to and from the City – of about 2kms
· A temporary bus station in the heart of Sportcity.
5.8 Traffic management interventions involved traffic signal installation and improvements and improved pedestrian and vehicle signage.
5.9 Public transport communications included
· A website with transport linkages routes and other information
· A dedicated transport section in the official spectator guide
· Special public transport supplements in local newspapers
· Information kiosks and call centres
· An advertising campaign and community relations
· Announcements and information on the Games Radio Station.
5.10 According to the officials briefing the Committee, the GMPTE surpassed its own expectations for the event. They had aimed for a 50/50 mode split in terms of private/public vehicle usage. In practice, the split turned out to be 20/80, with 1 million public transport trips and 200,000 few car trips undertaken.
5.11 The officials briefing the Committee underlined the following as key conclusions and lessons learnt from the hosting of the 2002 Games:
· The need for a comprehensive, clear and robust strategy;
·
The imperative of working
cooperatively through a multi-agency approach – for instance, when there was
insufficient staff to operate metal detectors at sport
venues, extra staff were brought in from
· Well thought out command and control. Examples given were of empowering local decision-makers to be able to make on-the-ground decisions about dispatching shuttles to particular venues when unforeseen challenges arose.
·
The use of appropriately
qualified volunteers. Bus companies, for instance, encouraged their drivers
from other cities to take paid leave in
6. Congestion Charging
6.1 A major transport demand
management intervention by TfL is congestion charging
in central
6.2 In
·
Reducing
congestion
·
Making
radical improvements to bus services
·
Improving
journey time reliability for car users
·
Making
the distribution of goods and services more efficient
·
Achieving
a significant reduction in CO2 and other emissions.
6.3 The Congestion Charge was
introduced by TfL in February 2003, following
extensive public and stakeholder consultation. It was extended westward in
February 2007.
6.4 The charge does not apply on
weekends, public holidays, or the working days between Christmas Day and New
Year's Day when traffic levels are lighter.
6.5 The motivation for introducing
congestion charging is that
6.6 The £8 daily charge can be paid
online, by telephone, by text message, at selected shops, petrol stations and
car parks, or by post. The charge can be paid for a day, week, month or year at
a time; monthly and annual payments carry a discount of three and 40 days
respectively. Vehicle movements into and within the zone are captured on an
extensive CCTV camera network.
6.7 Since the introduction of the
Pay Next Day facility in June 2006, drivers pay £8 until midnight on the day of
their travel in the zone, or £10 if they pay the following day after travelling in the zone. Drivers who have not paid the
charge by midnight on the charging day after they travel in the zone receive a
Penalty Charge Notice of £100, which is reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days.
Businesses and other organizations operating a fleet of at least 10 vehicles
can register for TfL’s Automated Fleet Scheme.
6.8 Certain categories of vehicle –
such as taxis, motorcycles, bicycles and buses - are exempt from the charge or
receive a 100 per cent discount. Residents within the congestion charging zone
can register for a 90 per cent discount. Disabled persons’ Blue Badge holders
are eligible to register for a 100 per cent discount and so pay no daily
charge.
6.9 By law, all money raised by the
Congestion Charging scheme must be spent on improving transport in
6.10
According to the last annual impact monitoring report (published June 2007):
· The number of vehicles entering the
original charging zone has fallen by 21 per cent, compared with 2002
· Congestion in the western extension
has been cut by 20 to 25 per cent after the first three months of operation,
against comparable levels in 2005 and 2006
· Significant improvements in bus
services have been sustained
·
Cycling
levels within the zone are up 43 per cent since the introduction of the
Congestion Charge.
·
Significant
reductions of polluting emissions.
6.11 In
6.12 The GMPTA has decided to delay
implementation until they have completed improvements in their public transport
infrastructure and services, including station upgrades.
7. Conclusion and recommendations
7.1 As the Committee had anticipated, many of the major
sporting events-specific measures undertaken in
7.2 The Committee also appreciated
from the outset that, whatever their own public transport challenges, a
relatively effective, extensive and integrated mass public transport systems
already exist in London as it prepares for the 2012 Olympic Games. Likewise,
they existed in
7.3 In addition, both the
Commonwealth and Olympic Games are, essentially, single city events, whereas
the 2010 FIFA World Cup will involve nine host cities and considerable
inter-city travel.
7.4 Notwithstanding these
qualifications, the Committee believes that the role and institutional capacity
vested within the respective transport authorities of London and Greater
Manchester offer an important insight into how South Africa might greatly improve
the city-level planning, implementation and regulation of integrated mass
public transport systems for 2010 and beyond.
7.5 While the National Land
Transport Transition Act (2000) makes provision for municipal transport
authorities, in practice only one has so far been established and with mixed
results. The Transport Department has recently published for comment the
National Land Transport Bill (April 2008). The Bill deals in some detail with a
fresh attempt to establish transport authorities in the municipalities. It also
makes provision for the roll-out and regulation of public transport for major
sporting events and for the role of transport authorities in this regard. The
Committee will be dealing with this legislation in the course of this year. The
Committee believes that the city-level public transport institutional
coordination in
Report to be considered.