Ramblers Q&A - September 2003
Members of the Ramblers' Association had an opportunity to put questions to Kim Howells MP, when he was Minister for Transport courtesy of this website. Below are his answers.
Question 1
Where I live, close to central London, the community is cut in two by a main road with impassable barriers along almost all its length; pedestrian crossings are pitifully few and inconveniently sited. Recent road works have included spending public money on replacing these railings with expensive-looking new ones - despite evidence that removing barriers and improving accessibility for all does not lead to more pedestrian accidents. This approach was underlined by the then minister, Mr Spellar, when he described the quality of public spaces as "peripheral" to the DfT's concerns in evidence to a recent Select Committee Inquiry into the Government's Living Places initiative.
What is the Minister going to do to correct the attitude in his department and among local authorities that it is important to smooth the path of drivers but fine to - literally - place obstacles in the way of those on foot?
Question 2
Can the Minister ensure that future road improvement works, particularly those that are likely to result in an uninterrupted flow of high speed motor traffic, will always include safe facilities for pedestrians to cross, without requiring a significant deviation from the routes that people customarily take?
Answer (for Questions 1 & 2 which cover similar areas): There are sites where guardrailing produces safety benefits. For example, many accidents at pedestrian crossings occur on the immediate approaches to the crossings and so short sections of guardrailing used here can be beneficial. In order that we can publish sound advice on using guardrailing where it can produce benefits we have commissioned a research project to help understand the conditions where guardrails can be beneficial and where, as Mr Oliver asserts it might be possible to make some access a little easier if life and limb is not endangered. In urban areas in particular the need for guardrailing may be removed by other measures such as reducing volumes of traffic and traffic speeds.
The Department is also to commission research this financial year, to examine the design of informal pedestrian crossings. These are crossing points that are outside the remit of the current legislation which includes Zebra and Pelican crossings, and are typically pedestrian islands with dropped kerbs. Reducing conflict between pedestrians and other road users crossing the carriageway will remain a key element in encouraging journeys on foot. Informal crossing places are environmentally friendly, visually less intrusive and simple to install and maintain. They may play an important role in removing some of the barriers and make walking more convenient and comfortable as well as safer. The choice between formal and informal crossing places will remain with the local authority although the Department will be issuing advice based on this research.
There is, by the way, no question of the Department not being concerned about the quality of public spaces. This is not a peripheral concern. Along with other Government departments we are working hard to improve access, security, design and the aesthetic appeal of public spaces wherever possible.
Question 3
What will you do to make rural roads safer & more useful to walkers, particularly in cases where the road forms an essential link between two rights of way?
Answer: There are a number of measures already in place to improve the safety of walkers on rural roads. Local authorities already have powers to set local speed limits. This includes 30mph speed limits for villages, many of which are already implemented. Local Authorities do not need to await l guidance from central government before setting a lower speed limit.
My Department looked at this issue in our road safety document "Tomorrow's Roads - Safer For Everyone". This proposed the development of a rural road hierarchy defined (by the condition of the road and it's usage. A progress report was published in November 2001. We intend to build on its recommendations to develop better speed management measures for rural roads.
The report also identified some barriers to implementation, including signing problems, and how to ensure compliance with the different speed limits without having a detrimental effect on the rural landscape. For example differing speed limits on rural roads have to extensively marked by signs every time the speed limit changes. Evidence has shown that while rural communities want lower speeds they don't always want the additional signing that goes with it. We are working with local authorities and practitioners to resolve these issues.
We are already making progress. Guidance to local authorities on the use of Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS),was published in March this year. VAS are set at a trigger speed and will remain blank until a vehicle hits that predetermined speed. When this happens, the VAS will flash a warning of a hazard ahead and may also show the message 'SLOW DOWN'. Trials have showed VAS to be particularly effective ahead of hazards such as junctions or dangerous bends in the road. We are also planning to publish advice on village entry signing later this autumn. This will assist local authorities in introducing more 30mph speed limits in villages.
In addition the Countryside Agency's Quiet Lanes initiative, supported by the Department, aims to maintain the character of minor rural roads which are appropriate for shared use by walkers, cyclists, horse-riders and motorised users. Quiet Lanes will, wherever possible, be integrated with off-road routes in order to provide networks for non-motorised users. There are currently two Quiet Lanes National Demonstration Projects being run in north Norfolk and west Kent. The Department has been monitoring these schemes and the final results are due to be published in late 2003.
Question 4
My no.1 one Q would be to ask him when the HA is going to publish its survey of R0W crossing of trunk roads. We were promised it in the Spring and everybody including HA (SE) were eager to see it out when it was discussed at the regional users committee with HA in May. I feel more strongly about safe and unsafe crossings than any other RA subject, stronger even than SDNP or best environmental outcome on A3 at Hindhead.
Answer:
The Highways Agency advise me that unfortunately the publication date for the review has been put back. The work has taken longer than anticipated and they want to be sure all aspects are comprehensively covered. The Highways Agency expect to publish it by the end of October. They also plan to publish their expected programme of improvements for 2004/06 by the end of January.
Question 5
I am from the Manchester and High Peak Area of the Ramblers'Association and we try to organise our walks using public transport as much as possible,
often using the train as there is a very good network in the Greater Manchester area and out into the adjacent counties. However, we are concerned to hear that these local rail services may be under threat, owing to cuts in services announced earlier this year by the Strategic Rail Authority and such measures as the suspension of funding for passenger schemes such as the Rail Passenger Partnership Fund by the Strategic Rail Authority. We fear that these measures will lead to line closures and service withdrawals, resulting in the public, including many ramblers, being forced to abandon the train in favour of the car. This cannot be good for sustainable development and we urge the Government to reinstate the funding necessary to ensure that a fully adequate local rail service is maintained. Can you assure me that you will give serious consideration to this?
Answer: It is encouraging to read about individual and group efforts to reduce car dependency and to look to use public transport wherever possible. I want to dispel any concerns that the Government is not committed to the railways. We're currently investing £73 million a week into the network with the aim of increasing passenger usage. Twice as much as was being invested previously. The recent SRA timetable changes were aimed at easing congestion on the busiest parts of the network such as Birmingham New Street. Since privatisation 20% more train services have been added to the network. On some routes, for example Virgin Cross Country this has caused train services to become less reliable.
The time table changes should be seen in context. 18,000 train services run on our network every day, while the SRA announcement affected just 180 services. These changes will help reduce congestion at key pinch points on the network and make services more reliable for passengers.
I recognise that many will be disappointed by the SRA's decision in January to suspend the Rail Passenger Partnership scheme, which offered funding for enhancements to local rail services. The SRA does not intend to terminate the RPP scheme but for the present the focus is on seeing through schemes which have already been agreed. For the duration of the 2003-04 financial year the SRA will continue to allocate £20 million for RPP, which will be spent on honouring those commitments.
Question 6
As a local councillor, I got Guildford Borough Council to agree and publish a walking strategy, "to make pedestrian journeys pleasant and safe and to ensure that the route needed by the pedestrian aims to be the shortest and most direct and is made safe" At the public consultation stage, this was very well received by the public. When is the Government going to move past the stage of producing tentative statements and issue such a strategy and give this most basic form of transport its proper priority?
Answer:
On 30 June DfT issued On the move: by foot, a discussion paper on encouraging more walking journeys and improving conditions for pedestrians. This can be found on our web site at:
www.dft.gov.uk/ stellent/ groups/ dft_localtrans/ documents/ downloadable/ dft_localtrans_022250.pdf
The consultation period on this paper ran until the 26 September and we are currently looking at the responses that we received. I am sorry that you might have missed an opportunity to contribute. We hope to publish a follow-up document that will take account of the responses before the end of the year.
I congratulate you on your proactive approach to encouraging walking in your area because it is at local level that real change and improvements must be driven forward, in light of local needs and knowledge. We have asked all councils to develop a local walking strategy as part of their local transport plans.
Question 7
Why does the Government 'invest' in road improvements, yet struggle to find money to 'spend' on improving conditions for walkers?/ Have you any intention of pushing walking higher up the Government agenda?
Answer:
As I noted in my response to Keith Chesterton's question, the Government has recently published its discussion paper on walking. This can be found at:
www.dft.gov.uk/ stellent/ groups/ dft_localtrans/ documents/ downloadable/ dft_localtrans_022250.pdf
We are now assessing the contributions that we received during the consultation period. However, decisions on how and where to spend money on walking routes and pedestrian schemes are best taken by the local authorities, using their knowledge of local needs and circumstances.
We have substantially increased the money for transport made available to Local Authorities. Through the 10 Year Transport Plan we are ensuring consistent funding to help local authorities to take a longer term view of the needs of their local areas. This additional funding has enabled a major expansion of schemes to make conditions safer and more pleasant for walking. Over the 5 year period of the first Local Transport Plans, local authorities estimate they will deliver 650km of improved footways, walking routes and pedestrianisation schemes. For example in Nottingham they are replacing unpopular, badly lit subways with new surface level crossings. In Chesterfield, a derelict stretch of canal has been redeveloped into an attractive and accessible series of footways, which link into a nearby long-distance footpath.
The Government is also providing £89 million to help local authorities pilot schemes to improve the quality and safety of their public spaces through a scheme called the Liveability Fund.
You can find details at:
www.odpm.gov.uk/ stellent/ groups/ odpm_urbanpolicy/ documents/ page/ odpm_urbpol_023298-01.hcsp
Question 8
The law governing the approval and management of highways is the Highways Act 1980. Many of its provisions have been, and are being, flouted firstly by paths having been classified as vehicular highways without any conclusive evidence to show that past landowners have so dedicated them, and secondly by vehicle users driving over unsuitable paths described as "Byways open to all Traffic". This is a pseudonym for public carriage road, there being no conclusive evidence that they had ever been dedicated by past landowners as anything of a higher status than bridleway. It is obvious that they have been erroneously classified as vehicular highways, eg under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 S.54, ignoring mandatory provisions of the Highways Acts past and present. Despite numerous attempts to get a logical explanation from the Department of the Environment for their classification as Byway open to all Traffic, and despite the Nolan Commission recommendations in its "Standards of Conduct in Public Life" that decisions should always be accompanied by adequate explanations, the DOE has steadfastly refused to explain why the Highways Act is irrelevant to the issue. Would you please explain why drivers of motor vehicles and motorcycles should have the right to vanadalise with impunity our minor rights of way which have never had the character of a highway of higher status than bridleway, please? If, in fact, these ways are required as vehicular highways, why have the landowners concerned not been compelled firstly to construct them to the minimum standards required under the Highways Act before they beome liable to maintenance by the highway authority? Alternatively, if it can be shown that they have been accepted as vehicular highways under the provisions of The HA 1980 S.37, why have the highway authorities concerned not built and maintained them to the minimum standards prescribed in the Highways Act?
Answer:
My colleagues at DEFRA advise me that, when considering applications to modify the definitive map (the local authorities' legal record of rights of way) to show vehicular rights, the local authority and the Planning Inspectorate can only take into account whether public rights can be proved to exist. The relevant legislation does not enable them to take any other factors to be taken into consideration.
Broadly, a public right of way for vehicles may be established in law by long use, generally by 20 years continuous use. A 'byway open to all traffic' (BOAT) can be defined as a highway over which the public have a right of way by vehicle, but which the public mainly use by non-vehicular means (i.e on foot, by bicycle or by horse). The responsibility for maintenance may be public or private and not all will have sealed surfaces.
Where problems do occur on a BOAT, there are a number of things that can be done now to restrict or manage the use of vehicles so problems are kept to a minimum, especially if all the various interests get together with the local authority to develop solutions. A publication called 'Making the Best of Byways', published in 1998, provides advice on managing the different sorts of traffic on byways. This went to all local authorities, and DEFRA are now working to bring out an up-to-date version.
When voluntary management measures fail, or are inappropriate, the local
highway authority has the power to limit the use of motorised vehicles on
rights of way by introducing a 'traffic regulation order' (TRO). Traffic regulation orders can restrict certain types of vehicles or restrict vehicular use to certain times or certain seasons, or even ban vehicular traffic altogether in areas where there is a serious problem.
Question 9
The use of Paths, Bridleways and ancient roads (not sure of correct term) by motorised vehicles. In the Peaks we get bikes and motor bikes using bridleways and footpaths that are not suitable for them and annoy others in the countryside. Earlier this year I was in Cumbria just south of Kirby Stephen on "Lady Anne's Way". While this track was graded for use by motorised traffic is was really just a footpath. It had been used by coaches in the past but is unsuitable for motorbikes or 4x4s. Motorbikes were using the track and causing damage to the track, the environment (noise and exhaust) I think many of these routes should be downgraded to stop motorised traffic and more effort should be put into illegal usage.
Answer:
'I can assure you that I share your concern about the damage being done by the illegal or inappropriate use of rights of way by motorcycles and four
wheel drive vehicles My colleagues at DEFRA are currently taking a fresh look at this issue. We must achieve the right balance between the sometimes conflicting interests of those who need or want vehicular access and the interests of walkers, riders, and cyclists..
It is important to note that there are already a number of offences that can be used to deal with illegal vehicular use on footpaths and bridleways.
In particular, section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 has recently been strengthened by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 by widening its application to included non road-legal vehicles, such as quad bikes and scramblers. By applying it to 'restricted byways' (a new category of right of way) and by ensuring that the burden of proof falls on any one prosecuted under this section to prove that they have a right to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle there.
In addition, the police now have powers to seize vehicles that are being driven in a careless and inconsiderate manner and in a way that causes alarm, distress or annoyance. This measure was introduced in response to growing public concern about the anti-social use of vehicles. If you have an interest in its legal base, it was implemented under the provisions of Sections 59 and 60 of the Police Reform Act 2002. Defra are keen to see more proactive enforcement of the offences available and have recently discussed this with officials from my department and the Home Office.
Further more DEFRA are currently reviewing the Government's policy on motorised use of rights of way and will shortly be publishing proposals in a public consultation paper
Question 10
Do you think walkers should have the right to know what pesticides have been
used where rights of way cross sprayed fields (currently farmers have no
mandatory obligation to inform them), and do you think farmers should have
to provide on-site information to walkers to give them this right?
Cannot answer as Minister for Transport.
Question 11
When will some of the old 3 bar type stiles be replaced? Having to lift over heavy dogs that can't squeeze through this type is spoiling our weekly walking in North Somerset.
Cannot answer as Minister for Transport.
