WEDNESDAY 18 NOVEMBER 1998

MR LAWRIE HAYNES and MR NEIL MACDONALD

  320.  I am sure Mr MacDonald has got the point.
  (Mr MacDonald)  I do not have any details with me of any information the Department has. That is actually outside my own particular responsibility, but I could undertake that someone could write to you if that would be useful.

Chairman:  That would be helpful. Mr Randall?

  321.  You spoke briefly about the possibility of giving better information to drivers. Do you feel that in itself might lead to more people taking trips by car?. Ultimately as you get congestion down you might have a vicious circle and encourage more people to go back on the roads.
  (Mr Haynes)  I think there are two points. Firstly, we have had our experience using our Midlands driver information system and that has demonstrated to us that using message signs and rail information that comes directly from the road and from police control offices can influence drivers. We are getting up to 40 per cent acceptance of the signs and people are diverting up to that level. That is the first demonstration that this type of technology can be very useful in road management. The second sign is that we are looking now to go forward into our regional control centres which are a national expansion of this Midlands information system. Within that there will be real-time information on the roads, there will be information with our Web site we now have so that people can make a judgement before they set off about what mode of transport they need to go on to get to their destination as efficiently as possible. So I do not actually see that providing more information will encourage more people to go by car. I think there is an opportunity, again working with the rail operators and bus companies and the like, to influence people off the roads on to other modes.

  322.  Following on from that, surely you have lost the argument, have you not, if you are relying on the motorist seeing the sign. The idea is to get the person out of the car in the first place.
  (Mr Haynes)  I think the approach here is to try and influence people, not force them. That is certainly the approach we are taking on our technology systems. We are looking to influence road users not control them and I think that is quite an important approach to take.

  323.  In your first reply to a question by the Chairman you spoke about performance indicators. Do you think it is a little bit unfair that the Agency can set their own performance indicators?
  (Mr Haynes)  We do not set our own performance indicators. We are very closely policed, if that is the right word, by the Department and ministers. Indeed, we have to write an annual business plan which is approved by ministers and we also have to write an annual report which again is subject to audit and review by the Department and ministers and indeed put in the Library of the House.

  324.  Which of those indicators are going to be most important in terms of seeing you are hitting your new objectives?
  (Mr Haynes)  I think the congestion indicators will be very important and the environmental indicators are very important, for example on air quality and noise because they are two areas of concern to a large number of people. So we will be looking over the next years to enhance those indicators and understand better the trends that they are creating.

  325.  You do not see there is any role then for an independent roads inspector?
  (Mr Haynes)  I think that is really a matter for ministers and the policy side to decide how they wish to police me but I do believe that at the moment we are very open in how we are achieving our business plan targets and I do believe that ministers take a very close interest in how well we are achieving as an Agency.

  326.  Could I follow up the point on the environmental aims and objectives that you have achieved. Can you give us some indication as to how you can see an improvement in the environmental impact within the communities and maybe developing or extending the role of motorways?
  (Mr Haynes)  I think the two most obvious indicators of the environmental impact on a community is through air quality and noise. On our M25 controlled motorway pilot we have been monitoring the air quality and we have seen a reduction in air pollution through that system.

  327.  What about the building of motorways near to public buildings like schools and hospitals? Have you any guidance as to how we will protect those people?
  (Mr Haynes)  Yes we have to under the EU Directives run an environmental impact assessment which is a very significant study. It is run by expert consultants and therefore we can identify areas of environmental impact on any particular route. Under the new assessment scheme that the Department and ministers have devised we now have to look at the five criteria that are in the White Paper to ensure that a road will not have a significant adverse impact, let's say, on the environment. That is tested and ministers make their decisions on the basis of that new assessment approach.

  328.  Do you think there is sufficient importance placed on the relationship between the various options? Transport 2000 have got worries about the new system and do not believe that it takes into account all the necessary factors. Do you have any worries on that account?
  (Mr Haynes)  I actually think it is a pretty reasonable approach to the decision making process. It is probably a question for Mr MacDonald but the Department has tried very hard, I think, to try and establish a very clear approach so that we get a uniform decision-making process across these particular issues.

  329.  How important is it that you take some account of the cumulative effect of different schemes? Is that something the Department is concerned about, Mr MacDonald?
  (Mr MacDonald)  It is something we are concerned about and there is a section in the roads review which is an attempt to assess what the cumulative impact is. In conducting the future road proposals the intention is to involve the statutory environmental advisers, English Nature, English Heritage and the Countryside Commission in the process so that they are involved from the outset and we get the benefit of their advice right from day one.

  330.  Finally, on the future of motorway and trunk roads. Do you think in future that you are going to be able to move from existing road management to a further clearer view of how you progress? In other words, are you still planning on the idea that you must manage existing road space or have you got some revolutionary thoughts about what the next five or ten years will bring you in terms of investment?
  (Mr Haynes)  I do not think we have any revolutionary ideas. We have got the route management strategy which is very similar to a whole route approach and assessing over a five and ten-year period what the impact of, say, congestion or noise or maintenance needs are on whole routes and I think that is a significant step forward. I think that will have an impact on our thinking and I think we will get much better focused investment on our routes and understand better the cross-modal implications of spend on any particular route. I think it is important to know from our assessment on congestion we believe that about 60 per cent of delays are caused by just the weight of traffic, 15 per cent of the delays are caused by predictable work such as roadworks and 25 per cent through accidents and incidents. So through our route management strategy we can identify using those figures the best approach for the longer term.

Chairman:  I think you have been extremely helpful. I apologise for keeping you waiting, Mr Haynes, but you were worth it. We are very grateful to you both. Thank you very much indeed. I am very grateful to members of the Committee for their discipline and their tolerance. Thank you.