Better Transport

Through the Government, we spend a lot of money every year making sure we can travel – £8 billion a year to maintain roads, £2.5 billion to support bus networks, for example. Money isn’t the only thing, and it does need to be spent wisely, but it is a consideration that cannot be overlooked. To reduce car dependency, money will need to be spent. Thankfully, more money can be spent on measures that reduce car dependency without the overall transport budget having to increase.

Good, targeted investment pays off, as shown in the North West. Decision-makers in the region spent the biggest proportion of local transport money – the local transport capital settlement, arising from the local transport plans – on integrated projects. Integrated projects include bike lanes and bike racks at train stations, bus lanes and clean, welcoming bus shelters – measures that make public transport a more attractive option. In addition, the region had one of the highest levels of rail investment and one of the higher levels of bus funding through the Kickstart programme. 

Of course there is room for improvement. Fares could be lowered. And the numbers of pedestrians and cyclists killed by cars each year is too high; the second-highest in the country.

Your turn

What do you think of these results? Score the scorecard.

Want to know more? Read the full research or a summary report. 

Some comments we've received

Craig Ward in Blackburn: "If the NW of England came 1st then God help the rest. There is so much wrong with the provision of public transport that it's difficult to know where to start. What the region urgently needs is a regional transport authority with the powers of at least the old PTEs. At present the county councils of Lancashire and Cumbria have so little control over public transport provision beyond subsidising bus services,as well as limited budgets, that their efforts are relatively minor. Lancashire do well in the provision of rural bus services which are fairly well integrated with trains at locations such as Clitheroe, Carnforth and Silverdale. However, when it comes to rail service provision they make little difference and have very limited powers. Lancashire have worked hard to encourage the Community Rail Partnerships but again are restricted by the finances and powers available to them."

Andrea Franks in Liverpool: "Results about right. Good practice in this area is wonderful Merseyrail, on which a bike can be taken free at all times and with no restrictions. I wish more rail operators would do as well."

Nicola Wareing in the North West: "I am trying to get into cycling again but the roads are too busy and there aren't many cycle lanes, plus I would feel self-consious on the road or pavement. The bus and tram are quite expensive. There should be more ways to put off driving so that buses can be more regular and it is safer for non-drivers."

Mark Swinton in Kendal: "I am not surprised by the scorecard result for my region: there is generally good public transport available here, but few people seem inclined to use it and I suspect that this is to do with the ridiculously high prices charged by train and bus operators even for short journeys that would be much cheaper if undertaken by car. In general, throughout the country, it seems that people have developed a "car culture" that will need to be tackled by incentivising the use of public transport, through continuing improvements and lowering prices with corresponding increases to the cost of motor travel - perhaps by the introduction of more toll roads as in Europe. An especially worthy initiative in Kendal is the Lakes Line Rail Users Group, promoting the short rail link from Oxenholme to Windermere with stations at Kendal, Burneside and Staveley; onward connections are available at Oxenholme to Manchester, Scotland (via Glasgow) and even the continent (via London and the Eurostar international rail service) so it would be good to see LLRUG aided in their campaign to encourage increasing use of the line."

Clare in Liverpool: "I'm fairly surprised the NW came out top. I would not have been surprised to see it near the top, however. I've lived in Liverpool for most of my life but have also lived in the East and West Midlands, the South and London. I was surprised by the dependency people in these regions had on their cars as opposed to the NW. Mind you; I come from a family which didn't have a car very often so I was used to having to get around in other ways. Also; I don't know if it's true but I feel that the greater level of poverty in the NW contributes to the diminished reliance on private motor transport. Liverpool isn't a very pleasant place to cycle in. Motorists tend to have worse attitudes than those I normally encountered in the South and West and East Midlands. There may be less dependency on motor vehicles but there is still WAY too much motor traffic in terms of volume."

Andy Yuille in Lancaster: "Surprised given that the majority of regional transport money (RFA) was spent on road-building!"

Bob Jeffery in Salford: "The North West scores highest for transport, you have got to be having a laugh?  The deregulated bus market is a shambles, with many areas of my own conurbation extremely poorly served by public transport. Greater Manchester as a whole is blighted by textbook urban sprawl, car ownership is extremely high, and rising."

Regional results

East Midlands East of England North East North WestSouth EastSouth West West Midlands Yorkshire & the Humber