CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
"Cameron to announce £15bn plan to improve UK's 100 road blackspots"
(12 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
Q. When's a boost not a boost?
A. When you sink the money into a big tarmaccy-black hole, never to see it again.Posted 10 years ago # -
Although the DfT describe it as "UK’s first ever long-term Roads Investment Strategy", and Cameron was expected to talk about "Britain’s future", the proposals aren't for UK or Britain, they are only for strategic road network in England.
And the Guardian headline use of 'blackspots' is referring to congestion/delays rather than the more common use as accident/crash area. So this is about building more roads to encourage more traffic, and cause more congestion.Posted 10 years ago # -
If this is 'new' money (rather than previously announced plans bundled up in a new press release on a slow news day), then presumably there will be "Barnett consequentials" for devolved nations/regions?
So, what will the SNP administration spend the £1 billion plus 'extra' money on?
'We' could make some suggestions.....however I anticipate an announcement about speeding up A9 dualling, or somesuch.
Posted 10 years ago # -
then presumably there will be "Barnett consequentials"
Not if the totality of the spend is designated as being of 'national importance'. Neither Crossrail nor the renewal of the London sewerage system have Barnett consequentials.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Aha.
"The government is planning to spend £15bn to tackle more than 100 of the most notorious problem hotspots on England’s roads by the end of the decade, "
So, £3 billion per year (on average). If there are "Barnett consequentials", they'll be less than £300 million per annum.
Still, that could build a lot of active travel infrastructure. Or a few km of dual carriageway north of Perth somewhere.
Posted 10 years ago # -
IWRATS - I don't want to be a bore, but the Scottish Government does get Barnett consequentials from Crossrail, see:
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11722&page=68#post-162627
The Thames Tideway Tunnel will be privately financed, although the UK Government has offered the developers several financial guarantees - so they can secure finance at a reasonable cost.
As with most of these huge infrastructure projects, it seems like the private sector will walk away with a huge pile of cash and London water users will be paying through the nose for this for many years. The National Audit Office have flagged up that Thames Water appear to be pulling a fast one and should be injecting much more of their own cash into the project, but it doesn't seem like anyone is listening.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Morningsider
I stand admonished and informed, thank you. Clearly my information pre-dates the decision to allow consequentials on Crosrail.
What do you think of the billions to be spent on
UKIPmotorways?Posted 10 years ago # -
IWRATS - this is just a re-announcement of previous of commitments. Also, it relates to expenditure in the next Parliament - which is by no means certain.
It's difficult to say much more than that, as it isn't clear how these roads will be financed. Also, it isn't clear whether these projects have been approved and just need cash, or whether there are still approvals needed - this is a hugely lengthy process.
Obviously, the announcement goes against all the commitments on climate change - but that's hardly surprising. What isn't mentioned, is that the UK Government is turning the Highways Agency into a company (publicly owned - for now?) and looking to make "efficiency savings" in the region of 15-20%.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Obviously, the announcement goes against all the commitments on climate change"
Related -
"
Car makers have been ordered to make it clear in advertisements that claimed fuel economy figures are unrealistic.
"
http://www.mumsnet.com/cars/info/news/the-truth-about-official-fuel-economy-figures
Posted 10 years ago # -
I watched some terrestrial television in the Horshoe Bar in Glasgow yesterday. There were car adverts of course, and they still seem to depict the cars flying around on empty urban roads.
Was there not a push on to have cars depicted in adverts clogging up rain-soaked flyovers like they really do? Or did I imagine that?
Posted 10 years ago # -
"cars depicted in adverts clogging up rain-soaked flyovers like they really do"
Or, even more realistic, double parked on an "arterial link road" in a town or city centre, quietly rusting away while the driver is conducting important and highly essential business at the hairdressers/betting shop/tanning salon/convenience store.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
