Greater Manchester Environment Plan 2019–2024
Chapter 6: Our transport strategy
An in-depth analysis of city region’s environment policy and where it falls short, presented in a series of 10 chapters related in the style of a fictional leader using language the crisis calls for #TellTheTruth
To start with we need to make the North’s Transport Strategy more about creating a sustainable and healthy way to move that doesn’t cost the earth and less about making us all more productive economic units (6) .
Indeed, putting profits before people can be the only explanation for our double-bluff on the airport. Bear with me while I untwist this double-speak.
Greater Manchester has agreed to emit only 71m tonnes of carbon by 2100 as part of this Environment Plan — that does not include many things such airline emissions — because those are accounted for at a national level, that much is true.
But what you won’t read in the Environment Plan — because it’s a bit awkward really — is that our ‘carbon-neutral by 2038’ pledge as designed to Tyndall’s science-based model, assumes that our airport emissions will remain flat and then dramatically fall off after in the 2030s.
4. In fact, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and 10 GM councils are backing a huge expansion of the airport that will see passenger numbers rise from 35m to 43m passengers.
And erm, no we don’t have any mitigation plans for the resulting increases in carbon emissions. I mean, if people want to fly, what can we do?!
What’s that I hear you say? ‘How about a small per-passenger flight levy to invest back into paying for all these things we need to upgrade but can’t afford, like our houses?’
You might think that a no-brainer, but we have no plans to do that — and I couldn’t possibly comment on why that is (yes we councils are the majority (64.5%) shareholder in Manchester Airport Group).
To be clear, these airport emissions that we will be presiding over, will mean we have to find even MORE cuts from the other sectors — such as housing and transport and industry — than outlined in the plan.
The plan that we already acknowledge only gets us half way there.
Are you getting the picture yet? Heavy, isn’t it!
Bad air is our number one public health risk.
Now onto the Clean Air Zone — good news its ‘coming soon’! By the end of 2021 we’re going to introduce a GM-wide pollution penalty for buses, taxis, HGVs, coaches and by 2023 we’ll add vans and minibuses — the biggest in Europe. Hurrah!
However, when I say soon …. this does depends on getting £116m from the government to dish out to owners of those vehicles to get them up to scratch (£59m for HGVs, £29m for buses and coaches, £28m for taxis and private hire) .
And I’ve said we won’t do it at all unless we get this money — which you might think is, well, a little bit of a gamble (given London only has £48m).
And you could say, what’s the point of the Clean Air Zone if it doesn’t come in until after we’ve spent public money cleaning up these dirty vehicles …. if it excludes cars .. and it leaves our air polluted for another five years…
I wanted to include cars, I really did — after all there are currently 285,000 cars in GM in breach of air pollution quality standards (which is far more than the 2,000 buses, 9,000 minicabs and 11,000 HGVs added together, as some of the bus operators have pointed out… )
I didn’t include cars because …..
I really couldn’t face the backlash from drivers / I really think the financial cost will hit our poorest citizens hardest (delete as appropriate).
Of course, it may be that we do have to consider other measures to meet our targets on reducing car journeys — given it seems a lot of people who drive cars are not willing to change behaviour under any circumstances.
Even with the Clean Air Zone, we can’t deliver air quality of legal levels on all our roads until 2024. I know that sounds shocking given 10 people a day are dying and we are being threatened with legal action for allowing the number one threat to public health in GM to continue — but what can I say?
On the upside, we will have an all- electric bus fleet in GM by 2035 — I know that is a long way away but we’re so far behind. It’s not just us this is a problem right across Europe.
Out of 2,000 buses in GM — only three are electric at the moment. We hope we can get that up to 70 by 2023, as well as installing some clever tech to make another 170 cleaner by then too.
Now over to lorries and vans. Almost all of our goods (87%) are moved by road in diesel-powered HGVs or LGVs. Ouch! And we only move 7% by rail and a fraction by water — and that’s gonna have to change.
We’ll improve the rail system to take more of this — but hauliers — we need you to help us here.
Because honestly — you’ve now seen the climate science and the carbon commitments we need to deliver — and your solution of scaling back the clean air zone is simply not an option.
Where else do we look guys? The time for Nimbyism is well past. We all have to do our bit.
The thing we reeeeaallly need to do — is get the government to give GM a devolved transport budget and related powers.
If there was one thing* that could improve our ability to tackle climate change, it’s this. (*enough about planes..)
I have already made a start on buses, using a new UK law (free bus passes anyone?), though I know it is taking longer than I hoped and the bus companies are mounting a well-funded powerful rearguard action.
27. But without those wider powers — and thus budgets — we can’t regulate the transport operators or hold them to account. Or integrate services such as trams and trains. Or stop spending as much money on roads for cars that we’re meant to be not using as much, and spending it instead on walking and cycling infrastructure.
Chris Boardman our Walking and Cycling commissioner has made a great start on building the Bee network — £200m+ to be spent on new or improved infrastructure and frankly not before time, including 18 new schemes this spring.
Because we know fear of vehicles and lack of protection is the single biggest reason people do not cycle (cycling — remember, that thing we have to increase massively to help cut pollution and our Co2 emissions) — so all the schemes in the world won’t help if we don’t provide routes that are safe.
But Boardman is a straight-talking guy and reckons our region needs a whopping £1.5bn to make the Bee Network what it needs to be to deliver that 11% increase in sustainable travel.
I have to break it to you for all his good work so far — unless the government subs us that as part of the £3bn we need to invest in our transport network, you can kiss goodbye to hopes for much more than we’ve got now in terms of cycle and walking infrastructure.
We won’t have a spare bean.
I know £3bn sounds a lot but it’s a fraction of what is committed to roads nationally every year (money we currently can’t get access to).
That’s gotta change.
So you might want to add that to your list of voting considerations too.
This page is part of a series critiquing and presenting the Greater Manchester Environment Plan, in the style of fictional leader Sandy Turnham.
All measures and facts and descriptions are accurate as far as my understanding but some artistic licence has been taken with tone in order to #TellTheTruth.
3. Our homes and the energy we use
5. Our cars and how we get around
7. Our food and the waste we create
8. Our businesses and their responsibility
