Road Maintenance: Evidence of local under-spend

1.  Increased support from central government is key to improving the quality of the local road network. If local roads are to be improved it is essential that this money is not diverted elsewhere at a local level. There is mixed evidence on the extent to which local authorities 'raid' road maintenance funds to support other responsibilities. However, with flexibility over both revenue and capital spending, there is greater potential for any such raiding to be detrimental to road maintenance. The Government must monitor local authorities that systematically under-spend. If the under-spend jeopardises the ability of the local authority to eliminate the maintenance backlog then the Government should take action. Ultimately, this may mean ring-fencing road maintenance budgets until the targets are met. As a first step to prioritising local road maintenance, we recommend that the Department publish an annual comparison of the planned and actual expenditure on road maintenance along with details of road quality for each local authority. People need better information about the performance of their local authorities. (Paragraph 17)

Road Maintenance: Rural unclassified road network

2.  Minor rural roads are in an appalling state and continue to decline. This has not been helped by the recent changes to funding allocations between local authorities. The Department should determine if changes to the scheme of revenue allocation mean the decline will continue. It must also develop a strategy to halt this trend. (Paragraph 26)

Road Maintenance: Tackling the backlog

3.  The highway departments of many local authorities have been decimated over years of funding cuts. The problems caused by previous short-termism have now come home to roost and only one quarter of local authorities are able to provide good or excellent highway services. The results too often are a lack of information about the scale of the problems, a significant skill shortage and badly managed systems. A local commitment to funding and prioritising highway services and good public information are an essential part of this. Central and local government must ensure that local road maintenance does not slide down the public service agenda. (Paragraph 40)

Road Maintenance: Summary

4.  We welcome the significant increase in funding for local road maintenance provided by the Department since 2001. The extra money provided by the Government will clearly help to improve the condition of the road network. Evidence to date suggests that the rise in the maintenance backlog of road surfaces may have been halted. (Paragraph 41)

5.  It is far less obvious that the Government is on-track to meet its target to eliminate the backlog of local road maintenance by 2010. The local road network is still in a much worse state than throughout the 1970s and 1980s and the true extent of the backlog is not yet known. Even the extra money provided has not made up the hole in expenditure between 1994 and 2001, nor has it allowed for recent increases in the costs of construction. In addition, there are almost 25 per cent (5 million) more vehicles on the roads today than in 1991 and 38 billion more miles are travelled by road every year. Our road network is subject to increasing amounts of wear and tear and costs more to maintain. The Government appears to have underestimated the size of the problem. (Paragraph 42)

Road Maintenance: Footways

6.  The Minister told us that it is the Department wants to eliminate the footway maintenance backlog. Such a policy is long overdue. Poorly maintained footpaths create constant difficulty for any pedestrian. They are a particular danger for the elderly and disabled. A failure to maintain footpaths also ignores the large costs to the NHS and the national economy from tens of thousands of trips and falls. Footpaths are getting worse. We have little confidence that, taken with an apparent bias towards road maintenance, the backlog will be cleared. In November 2001 the then Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions committed itself to publish a national walking strategy. This has still to be done and is indicative of the continuing mismatch between the rhetoric and action on walking by the Department. The strategy should set out how the footway maintenance target will be met. It must be published without delay. (Paragraph 49)

Road Maintenance: Street lighting

7.  The dilatory performance of OFGEM and the DTI in addressing the issue of street lighting connections is preventing local authorities from getting more out of their street lighting budgets. The DTI must resolve this issue urgently. (Paragraph 57)

8.  We support the use of street lighting that reduces light pollution and is more efficient. Local authorities should give due attention to this matter when replacing the large numbers of street lights that are beyond their current design life. We note that the Select Committee on Science and Technology has recently launched an inquiry into Light Pollution and Astronomy. We trust that it will give adequate attention to the need to ensure good road safety and to reduce street crime. (Paragraph 59)

9.  The Minister for Transport has stated that the backlog in street lighting will be cleared by 2011. It is hard to share his certainty when the extent of the backlog is unknown. If this claim is to be credible, we expect a fully costed programme to be developed as part of the review of the 10 Year Plan. The Department should also provide indicative allocations of funding for street lighting as part of any future local transport plan settlements and consider whether further measures are required to ensure progress in this important area. Street lighting should not be the poor relation to road and pathway maintenance - they are all part of a safe and secure street environment. (Paragraph 60)

Road Maintenance: Two wheelers

10.  12 per cent of all of the legal claims processed through the Cyclist Touring Club's legal aid service relate to road-maintenance related incidents. If more than one in ten car accidents were as a result of poor maintenance then there would be a national outcry. (Paragraph 61)

11.  Local authorities and Government are letting cyclists down by failing to ensure the road network is kept in a condition safe for them to use. This must be a key factor in deterring potential cyclists and in the disappointing levels of cycle use. We recommend that the Department publish a revision of its "Cycle Friendly Infrastructure" advice. This should contain a review of maintenance procedures and techniques. (Paragraph 65)

Road Maintenance: Powered two wheelers

12.  The Department should review its maintenance guidance to ensure the needs of motorcyclists are properly understood. (Paragraph 66)

Road Maintenance: Bridges

13.  The issue of bridge strengthening has been known about for some time yet the requirements to upgrade the network are still unknown. The Government should produce a costed action plan in agreement with local authorities and the freight industry and solve this problem. (Paragraph 69)

Road Maintenance: Private finance

14.  We agree with the Department that PFI for road and street lighting maintenance will only be applicable in a minority of cases. Greater funding through traditional channels will be necessary to clear the backlog. Good maintenance is the least that the travelling public deserve. (Paragraph 76)

Road Maintenance: Targets

15.  The wide range of indicators for measuring road condition do not yet paint a consistent picture of progress. The Government should set out clearly which indicators will be used to measure progress. (Paragraph 77)

16.  The Department has not yet set out the criteria that each measure would have to meet for the maintenance backlog to be eliminated. It should do so immediately to allow objective monitoring of progress. (Paragraph 78)

Street Works: The gas-mains replacement programme

17.  We are surprised and disappointed that traffic disruption was not a major consideration in developing the gas mains replacement programme. The HSE should immediately re-investigate whether it is safe to provide greater flexibility in the programme of replacement to allow local authorities greater influence on the timing, and therefore co-ordination, of works. (Paragraph 82)

Street works: Co-ordination

18.  We recommend that Utilities and Highway Authorities be required to provide notification of major works 12 months in advance of their planned starting. We also suggest that attendance at co-ordination meetings is made mandatory for all companies wishing to carry out major works. Emergency repairs and reconnections to people cut off from their Utilities must continue to take priority over disruption to traffic. However, the timing of new connections and other minor repair work should be more flexible. We recommend that Local Authorities be given stronger powers to direct the timing of such works on the busiest routes. (Paragraph 91)

19.  We recommend that the period of protection for newly resurfaced roads be extended from twelve months to two years. This will help to ensure better forward planning and co-ordination. However, if such a scheme is to work, local authorities will have to provide details of their forward programmes of planned resurfacing over longer periods so that all parties involved can co-ordinate their works. (Paragraph 97)

Street works: Damage to roads

20.  If the long-term damage to roads caused by excavations is proven, local authorities should be able to reclaim these costs from utility companies. We expect the Department to bring forward powers through section 78 of the New Road and Street Works Act to enable this. This will be more practicable than an extension to the two year guarantee period. (Paragraph 98)

Street works: Reducing delays

21.  The introduction of parts of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 has been badly managed. There is an unacceptably large discrepancy between the overrun charges that could be levied, those that are actually invoiced and those which have, to date, been paid. (Paragraph 102)

22.  The purpose of Section 74 is to reduce disruption caused by street works which overrun. We do not know that this is yet happening. What is clear however, is that no-one was properly prepared for the introduction of the scheme and that this has led to large numbers of fines being generated that are subsequently waived or are currently in dispute. The Department is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the legislation and must therefore take responsibility for this mess. We see no reason why the current system cannot be made to work properly. (Paragraph 107)

23.  We recommend that a new but lower fine is introduced for failure to notify completion of works or failure to clear a site completely. The Department should review its 2001 Code of Practice to ensure that the interpretation of the Act is consistent amongst utilities and local authorities. Clear guidance will ensure that the Act works to reduce congestion on the streets rather than increasing it in the courts. (Paragraph 108)

24.  We do not believe that lane rental offers a sensible way to reduce disruption caused by street works. The works undertaken by utilities are necessary. The objective of any charging scheme should be to charge for inefficiency in carrying out the work, not for carrying out the work in the first place. The overrun charging system (Section 74) already provides a mechanism to achieve these objectives and should be made to work properly. (Paragraph 112)

Street works: Permit systems

25.  The introduction of a new system with a myriad of different types of permits would be complicated. We understand that such a system would also include charging for overruns as at present. The track record of Section 74 does not promise a smooth introduction for any new system. There has not yet been any consideration of the cost of introducing such a system for what could be only a small number of cities. Indeed, whilst the Department was able to describe the New York scheme, it was not able to quantify the benefits that would be brought about from introducing it here. On the basis of such flimsy evidence we question the necessity of introducing a permit system which will further dilute effort and attention away from the key issue of managing the systems currently in place. (Paragraph 115)

Street works: Ensuring quality repairs

26.  The Department must continue to ensure that the incentives to speed up street works do not compromise the quality and durability of the repairs to the road and path surfaces. (Paragraph 116)

Street works: Traffic managers

27.  We note that the legislation to introduce Traffic Managers is expected to place a statutory duty on the Manager to "keep traffic moving". We regret the implication that road traffic movement is more important than pedestrians, safety or the environment. Keeping traffic moving is important and already a key function of local authorities. It could and should be done better. However, it must be seen within the wider context of the Government's own Integrated Transport White Paper and within the policies and targets of each local authority. We are unconvinced as to the benefits of, need for and skills available to create Traffic Managers. We recommend that the Government submit any legislation to introduce such measures to this Committee for scrutiny in draft. We also recommend that the Department give consideration to, and report on, the full policy, practical and financial implications of such posts before submitting the draft legislation. (Paragraph 125)

Street works: Better information

28.  It should be standard practice for there to be a single point of contact within local authorities for all queries relating to roadworks. Better information at the road works themselves would also help people understand why work is being carried out. None of these improvements require legislation and could be achieved through better dissemination of best practice. The Department should take the lead in ensuring that this happens. (Paragraph 126)