SC(3) CR-T15

Sustainability Committee

Inquiry into Carbon Reduction in Wales: Carbon Reduction by Transport

Response from Wales Environment

Wales Environment Link (WEL) is a network for voluntary environmental and countryside organisations in Wales, most of whom have an all-Wales remit. WEL is officially designated the Intermediary Body between the government and the voluntary environmental sector in Wales. Our vision is to increase the effectiveness of the environmental sector in its ability to protect and improve the environment through facilitating and articulating the voice of the sector.

Many of WEL’s members will be responding individually to this consultation, our joint response therefore focuses on key issues of collective concern.

How WEL has come to agree this response

The production of consultation responses within the WEL network is an inclusive and comprehensive process. Whilst WEL recognises that all consultation responses must be given equal treatment, we would ask the Committee to note WEL’s protocol for writing consultation responses, as well as the number of organisations that have signed up to this response.

1. WEL’s Energy and Transport Working Group met to discuss and agree common positions within the group.

2. Attendees were asked to contribute to drafting the response.

3. Co-ordinator circulated first draft around WEL members via email, members provided comments and suggested improvements to wording.

4. Any point over which there was disagreement was further discussed via email.

5. A second draft was sent around the relevant WEL e-groups and Council, inviting further comments and sign-up.

6. The final draft was circulated to WEL Council and relevant e-groups offering a final chance to sign up.

WEL is pleased to be given this opportunity to respond to the consultation document of the Assembly Sustainability Committee concerning transport carbon emissions and their reduction.

Summary of response

• WEL advocates Wales making a fair contribution towards the international effort to stay below 2ºC warming by delivering a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions of at least 80% by 2050. This equates to at least a 3% cut each year across the whole Welsh economy starting now.
• WEL believes that there are no particular challenges unique to Wales in reducing CO₂  emissions from transport, and there is therefore no reason for Wales not to be reducing carbon emissions from transport.
• WEL is of the opinion that Wales is being prevented from achieving CO₂ emissions reduction from transport due to:
• Transport and planning policies which do not have CO₂ reduction and sustainability at their heart;
• Insufficient prioritisation of financial resources to improve access to, and the quality of, sustainable modes of transport;
• Insufficient promotion of / education about sustainable modes of transport.
• In order to put CO₂ reduction at the heart of government transport policies, WEL suggests that a sustainable transport hierarchy be used as a guiding model. This will require a fundamental shift in the traditional approach to transport and planning policy, focussing on accessibility rather than mobility.
• WEL suggests that the Welsh Assembly Government has not been successful in utilising the powers available to it in order to reduce CO₂ emissions from transport; and that this is demonstrated by an increase in emissions from the sector, and the proportion of WAG financial resources targeted towards unsustainable modes of transport.
• WEL believes that financial resources need to be reallocated, away from air transport subsidies and road-expansion, and towards integrated, accessible, sustainable modes of transport across Wales.
• There are a number of sustainable transport initiatives in Wales, and other administrations, that could be rolled-out and integrated across the country if sufficient support was provided.
• There are numerous means of reducing CO₂ emissions from transport that can be achieved without the introduction of further legislative competence. However, WEL believes that it would be beneficial for Wales to gain legislative competence over the Matters relating to transport and highways as outlined in GoWA 2006.
• Significant public policy areas relating to CO₂ emission reduction from transport are outwith even the potential 'devolved competence’ of the Assembly Government; WEL therefore suggests that the Assembly consider pushing for the expansion of GoWA 2006 so as to include such exceptions.
• Specific annual targets in each sector should be at least 3%, and more wherever possible; with targets for the transport sector being more than 3%, and certainly not less.

General questions

1. Is the proposed 3 per cent annual reduction target by 2011 'in areas of devolved competence’ sufficient to enable Wales to make its full contribution to meeting UK-wide targets? If not, what targets should be put in place?

In addition to the response provided by WEL to question 1 of the Committee’s consultation paper on household emissions,(1) WEL advocates Wales making a fair contribution towards the international effort to stay below 2ºC warming by :

• delivering a reduction in CO₂ emissions of at least 80% by 2050, which equates to:
• at least a 3% cut each year across the whole Welsh economy starting now.

WEL would also like to take this opportunity to express our concerns about the One Wales CO₂ reduction target, which we believe can be enhanced in the following way.

While we have welcomed the commitment to targets of a kind, the restriction to 'areas of devolved competence’ represents only a part of total Welsh emissions. In addition, the date by which this is to be achieved, 2011 misses the opportunity to contribute to the 2010 UK / Kyoto targets and for every year we delay, makes the annual cut necessary, to reach an 80% reduction by 2050, increasingly more challenging.

With respect to the complexities of devolution, WEL believes that Climate Change poses such a serious threat to people and biodiversity in Wales and around the world, that a bilateral agreement must be reached with the UK Government so that this targeted reduction of at least 3% per annum can apply to the Welsh economy as a whole, with both Governments working towards this agenda.

2. Should the emission reduction target be based on Welsh consumption, or production, or both (i.e. should it take into consideration the carbon dioxide generated in Wales (production), or the carbon dioxide emissions that Wales’ residents are responsible for, regardless of their source (consumption)?

Please see WEL’s response to question 2 of the Committee’s consultation paper on household emissions.(2)

Questions specific to transport emissions of carbon dioxide:

3. What particular challenges does Wales face in reducing carbon dioxide emissions from transport, and how can these challenges be overcome?

Whilst it could be said that Wales faces challenges in reducing CO₂ emissions from transport - such as its physical geography, its rurality, the age of public transport stock, or its car-dependant culture - WEL believes that these constraints are no different to those found in other parts of the UK. WEL is therefore of the opinion that Wales does not face any particular challenges unique to Wales in reducing CO₂ emissions from transport.

Conversely, WEL believes that Wales does have some particular advantages that are unique to Wales, and that there is therefore no reason for Wales not to be reducing CO₂ emissions from transport. For example:

• A quarter of households all over Wales do not have a car and rely on public transport or walking or cycling;
• Wales does not have any large airports, and therefore has time to develop appropriate policy that can avert the problem faced by hosts of the UK’s largest airports;
• Wales has a number of local-level sustainable transport initiatives, which reflect the support for sustainable transport that already exists here (see examples provided in response to question 7).

WEL therefore suggests that Wales is being prevented from achieving CO₂ emissions reduction from transport due to:

• Transport and planning policies which do not have CO₂ reduction and sustainability at their heart;
• Insufficient prioritisation of financial resources to improve access to, and the quality of, sustainable modes of transport;
• Insufficient promotion of / education about sustainable modes of transport.

These issues are discussed in more detail below.  

4. Do the current transport policies of the Welsh Assembly Government give sufficient emphasis to carbon reduction?

WEL is concerned that WAG’s current transport policies do not give sufficient emphasis to CO₂ reduction. WEL believes that 'sufficient emphasis’ would require all policies and strategies having sustainability and CO₂ reduction at their heart. To date, this only applies to certain schemes specifically labelled as 'sustainable travel’ initiatives, rather than this being the aim of all policies.

In order to put CO₂ reduction at the heart of government transport policies, WEL would suggest that a sustainable transport hierarchy be used as a guiding model - in the same way as the waste hierarchy is used as the model for the development of sustainable waste policy. Our hierarchy of priorities is therefore:

• Reducing the need to travel;  
• Reducing emissions from travel by using CO₂-free or low-CO₂ modes of transport such as walking, cycling and public transport;
• Minimising emissions from remaining travel, and only use CO₂-intensive modes of transport for urgent and vital journeys.

This requires a fundamental shift in the traditional approach to transport and planning policy, focussing on accessibility rather than mobility.

WEL notes that there are a number of existing and proposed WAG policies that relate to transport, but has chosen to focus on the following:

Environment Strategy for Wales

WEL suggests that the Committee ask the Minister when Action 2 of the Environment Strategy for Wales will be implemented, which commits WAG to:

"Calculate the carbon emissions which current and proposed policies generate and use this information to adjust policies to deliver carbon savings” by March 2007 (for current policies).

The ongoing scrutiny of this commitment should play a vital role in ensuring that every Strategy within WAG is working to reduce CO₂ emissions annually by at least 3% per annum.

Transport Strategy Wales

The Wales Transport Strategy, and the associated Walking and Cycling Strategy for Wales, have still not been published. The Transport Strategy’s three key themes, as outlined in the consultation document are:

• to achieve a more effective and efficient transport system
• to achieve greater use of the more sustainable and healthy forms of travel
• to minimise the need for travel

Furthermore, according to Action 5 of the Environment Strategy for Wales, it will be:

"subject to a full SEA, that will help to deliver outcomes relating to:

• reducing the impact of transport on greenhouse gas emissions; air pollution; water pollution; noise pollution; land contamination, light pollution and habitat fragmentation
• conserving and enhancing biodiversity, soils, landscape, heritage
• addressing the impacts of climate change including managing flood risk”

As the Strategy has not yet been published, it is difficult for WEL to comment on whether it does, or does not, give sufficient emphasis to CO₂ reduction. However, WEL suggests that:

• the second theme of the WTS be strengthened to "maximise the use of the more sustainable and healthy forms of travel”;
• setting targets for road traffic reduction be included as an additional, central objective; and
• that Action 5 of the Environment Strategy should be amended to read: 'minimising the impact of transport on greenhouse gas emissions’, rather than simply 'reducing’.  Furthermore, there must be targets that sit alongside this as 'minimising’ is not strong enough as a measure of progress towards the point we must reach.

One Wales and recently announced transport priorities

WEL welcomes the commitments in One Wales to "make travel between communities in different parts of Wales both easy and sustainable”, via improvements to public transport, and investments in sustainable modes of transport.  

WEL also welcomes the sustainable transport initiatives announced by the Minister for Economy and Transport recently in Plenary - including a Safe Routes in Communities programme; a Sustainable Transport Towns Initiative; and ticket integration. However, WEL notes that the discussion about the new Government’s transport priorities was typical of most transport discussions in the Assembly, and seemed to focus heavily on North-South Wales transport links. Whilst obviously important, this does appear to overestimate the demand for north-south travel and overlook the fact that 60% of all car journeys in the UK are under 5 miles.

Subsidising national and international air links (including the North-South airlink)

WEL highlights this as an obvious example of the contradictory nature of its policies on transport and those on CO₂ emission reduction. The Assembly Government provides an annual fare subsidy of around £800K to the providers of the north-south air link; WEL believes that these funds should more sustainably be used to further promote rail travel in Wales.  Moreover, whilst other modes of transport, through various taxes, pay something towards the environmental and social problems they cause, airlines and their passengers do not. Airlines pay no duty or VAT on aviation fuel and there is no VAT on either air tickets or new aircraft. This results in the effective subsidising of the airline industry with resultant ticket prices falling in real terms over the past decade.  WEL therefore believes that the Government should end the effective subsidising of the airline industry.

Local Authority responsibilities

Under the Transport Act 2000 Local Authorities were charged with developing safe, integrated, efficient and effective transport policy within their areas. Under the Traffic Management Act 2004 Local Authorities were also charged with the expeditious movement of traffic in their area. WEL suggests that these responsibilities should be expanded to include targets for reducing CO₂ emissions from transport within their Authorities - similar to the household emissions targets included in Local Authority Policy Agreements. Local Authorities should also be charged with requiring organisations in their authority to develop green travel plans. The draft Transport Strategy did not set requirements for regional or local activity to reduce CO₂ emissions from travel. It did not present a prescriptive approach, rather allowed for a degree of flexibility in how its suggested actions are adopted. This leaves open the possibility that the sum of local action will not deliver national objectives.

Cross-departmental policy development

WEL notes that there is not always sufficient integration between policy areas, meaning that action by some Government departments may counter the objectives of climate change policy, and increase demand for unsustainable forms of transport. Obvious examples of this include Wales A Vibrant Economy’s promotion of economic growth and the North-South airlink referred to above.  

5. To what extent has the Welsh Assembly Government been successful in utilising the powers available to it in order to reduc5. e carbon dioxide emissions from transport?

WEL suggests that the Welsh Assembly Government has not been successful in utilising the powers available to it in order to reduce CO₂ emissions from transport.

According to the Greenhouse Gas Inventories for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 1990-2005, "road transport is the largest single source of CO2 after power generation and iron and steel, and comprises 14.4% of the total Welsh carbon dioxide emission in 2005, which is 12% of all Welsh GHG emissions…The emission has risen by 9.3% from 1990 to 2005”.(3)

The proportion of spend of WAG financial resources (see question 6) further suggests that WAG have not been successful in utilising the powers available to it in order to reduce CO₂ emissions from transport.

The importance of addressing transport emissions is demonstrated by the fact that transport is one of the biggest components of our Ecological Footprint - a calculation WWF uses to assess our impact on the planet (which demonstrates how much land is required to provide us with all the resources we need, and how much land is required to absorb our waste).

Transport is also the fastest growing source of CO₂ emissions in the UK and EU, dominated by car use, with air travel the fastest growing component within this sector. Currently, the transport sector is responsible for 25% of UK CO₂ emissions, of which road transport accounts for 85%. Passenger cars account for around half of all transport-related CO₂ emissions, and around 15% of an individual’s Ecological Footprint is attributable to personal transport.

As referred to above, reducing this impact can only be achieved through changing our behaviour or 'patterns of consumption’ in two ways: by switching to more ecologically benign forms of travel (mainly, those which produce less CO₂ emissions), and by reducing our mobility. The primary determinant of which option is most appropriate is an assessment of the need to travel.

6. Could alternative targeting of Welsh Assembly Government financial resources lead to greater reductions in transport emissions than is currently being achieved? If so, where could additional resources lead to greatest impact? (Please provide details to support your evidence).

WEL is of the opinion that, to date, WAG financial resources have been overly targeted at unsustainable modes of transport.

Sustrans Cymru’s report, Sustainable Transport for Wales(4) states that:

• 76% of the Assembly Government 2005/6 budgeted expenditure for transport was for roads;
• The Assembly Government plans to subsidise air services and fund road projects to boost Cardiff airport; [now underway]
• Less than 2% of the Assembly Government’s 2005/6 budget for transport was for walking and cycling;
• Less than 16% of the Assembly Government’s transport budget went on buses and community transport;
• Under 2% of the Assembly Government’s 2005/6 transport budget was allocated to road safety;
• 'Smart measures’ to promote sustainable transport represented just 0.05% of the transport budget in 2005/6

WEL believes that financial resources need to be reallocated, away from air transport subsidies and road-expansion, and towards integrated, accessible, sustainable modes of transport across Wales.

WEL’s 'Policy Priorities for the National Assembly for Wales 2007’ asks the Assembly to:

• Commit more financial resources to improve walking, cycling and public transport infrastructure with a focus on services at a local and regional level.
• Commit not to use the provision in the Transport (Wales) Act to subsidise air transport in Wales but, instead, to use available funds to improve North-South sustainable, public transport linkages.
• Support for the pilot 'road user charging scheme’, with money made to be reinvested in more sustainable modes of transport.

WEL does not support new road building schemes where it damages the environment and is likely to contribute to an increase in CO₂ emissions. There should be a presumption against road building unless clear environmental benefits can be demonstrated and where CO₂ emissions can be reduced as a result. We seek sustainable ways of tackling congestion through traffic reduction, traffic calming and improvements to public transportation systems as an alternative to the car. We believe that there is clear evidence that road building is generally not a solution to the problem of increasing traffic. WEL does not believe we can continue to build our way out of congestion - in many cases the creation of new roads creates and releases demand which leads to long term traffic growth. WEL believes that we must reduce our travel and mobility using local shops and services whilst encouraging developments which reduce the need to travel, so that community services and facilities are located within easy reach to where people live.

There are a number of sustainable transport initiatives in Wales that are currently underway, or have been researched, that could be rolled-out and integrated across the country if sufficient financial support could be provided. Examples of these include:

Community Sector

The 'dial-a-ride’ bus service, funded by Carmarthenshire County Council, allows people to telephone a special number and arrange for the bus to divert off its route and come to pick them up. The bus provides an additional local bus link for people who don’t have access to any other public transport, and enables them to get to local shops, health centres, and leisure facilities.

Public Sector

Singleton Hospital is a large site that suffers from transport congestion, parking problems and poor access for staff, visitors and patients. Swansea NHS Trust embarked on a Sustrans 'Active Travel’ project (5) and employed a dedicated Travel Plan Coordinator, to develop a travel plan and encourage active travel. Swansea NHS Trust conducted a staff behaviour survey to find out how people commuted to and from the hospital site, then used home postcodes to identify alternative routes available to commuters, by public transport or the accessibility of the National Cycle Network. As a result of the travel survey the Trust is:
- creating incentives to try to change commuter travel behaviour, including a new shower block, drying rooms, pool bikes, new lockers, secure bike storage and
- developing a targeted information campaign to encourage staff to try out the alternatives.

Tourism industry

The National Trust supports a number of green transport schemes including buses operated by Pembrokeshire Greenways and Cardi Bach. In 2005, Pembrokeshire Greenways buses carried over 45,000 people, avoiding 20,000 car trips. Information for visitors includes details of how to visit National Trust properties by public transport; many properties also have cycle facilities and run special promotions for those arriving on bike or by foot.

The Council for National Parks’ report, Tackling Traffic: Sustainable leisure transport in National Parks - an overview of National Park Authority involvement(6), outlines a number of recommendations to help National Park Authorities provide and promote sustainable transport. These are based on, and recommend the strengthening of, innovative good practice already underway in National Parks in the UK. CNP is therefore seeking the establishment of a new ring-fenced Sustainable Transport Fund to be made available to National Park Authorities and CCW in order to act on these recommendations. The recommendation is for each National Park Authority to receive an annual additional sum of £111,000 to be ring-fenced for sustainable transport work.

The existing schemes in Wales’ three National Parks (and their surrounding areas) - the Snowdon Sherpa, Beacons Bus and the Puffin Shuttle. All have proved to be extremely valuable public transport alternatives, and could all achieve so much more if they had more funding and formed part of a more extensive network of revenue supported leisure transport services. All have proved that they not only save car traffic in the Parks, and hence emissions and congestion, but when appropriately implemented can also bring economic benefits to the communities and areas they serve.

WEL believes that non-car based tourism could be encouraged by requiring all new visitor attractions to use visitor travel planning. Such a requirement would have a low cost to Government and could be incorporated into the planning process. Visit Wales should also promote travel planning for existing attractions.

WEL would also like to take this opportunity to remind the Committee of the additional economic benefits to be gained as a consequence of refocusing financial resources towards sustainable modes of transport:

Climate Change

The Stern Review, published last October, estimates that if we don’t act to address climate change, the overall costs and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least 5% of global GDP each year, now and forever. If a wider range of risks and impacts is taken into account, the estimates of damage could rise to 20% of GDP or more. In contrast, the costs of action - reducing greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the worst impacts of climate change - can be limited to around 1% of global GDP each year.

Health

Research undertaken by Sustrans has demonstrated that money spent on cycling and walking could save the NHS huge amounts of money and help defuse the obesity "time bomb”. Their analysis into the economic benefits of a number of local walking and cycling schemes reveals that every £1 spent on a route generates a benefit worth £20, compared to the slimmer average return of other transport schemes such as rail and roads, which is typically £3 for every £1 spent. The benefit to cost ratio is calculated by attributing a monetary value to a number of factors, from public health benefit (i.e. the cost saving of a healthier population), the savings to employers whose fitter workforce take less time off, and the time saved through shorter journeys, particularly during the school run peak periods. The costs include the investment costs of safe routes, maintenance expenditure, and losses to the Treasury that might result from tax revenue decreases due to reduced fuel sales as people switch from using their cars to walking and cycling.

Tourism

At least 75% of tourism and leisure trips within the UK are made by car(7). Figures from Visit Wales show that 67% of tourists in Wales - including both international and domestic visitors - use a car during their stay; in National Parks as many as 98% of visits are made by car. In Wales 42% of the miles travelled per person per year are for leisure, that is higher than the total distance travelled for journeys to work. The National Trust warns that the tourism industry’s dependence on car-based visits creates risks which threaten to undermine the market. These include:

• lack of accessibility for the 25% of Welsh households without a car;
• visitor dissatisfaction - congestion is cited as a primary reason for declining visitor numbers at some National Trust properties;
• visual blight - overspill car parking or lines of traffic can spoil the setting of a fine country house, area of wild coastline or mountain;
• noise pollution - motor vehicles disturb the peace and tranquillity of the countryside much valued by visitors;
• costs of providing traffic infrastructure and car parks.

Integrated planning for tourism and transport is therefore essential, as are incentives or requirements for tourist attractions to encourage non-car based visits.

What examples from other administrations (devolved, UK and overseas), where other means have been used to achieve reductions in transport carbon dioxide emissions, could be adopted in Wales under current powers?

7. As highlighted in the above response to question 6, there are a number of examples of best practice in Wales itself that have already been researched, or implemented, and that could be rolled-out and adopted across the country under current powers.

In addition to these, we would highlight the following examples from other administrations of reducing carbon emissions from transport:

Households - Travel Smart

Sustrans’ Travel Smart programme(8) works with households offering tailor-made information and support, enabling people to walk, cycle and use public transport more often. It delivers measurable and sustained reductions in car use by enabling people to make a few changes to their daily travel choices when and where it suits them best. The programme has demonstrated that one-third of people’s journeys have no objective reason to use a car; and its trials - in more than a dozen towns - achieved an average 14 per cent reduction in car use. It estimates that to roll the scheme out across the UK would cost the same as 17 miles of new motorway.(9)

School transport - Sandringham School, Hertfordshire(10)

A wide range of measures has been used to promote walking, cycling and bus use. Prior to the project 40% of pupils were driven to school, but this fell to 28% over a two year period. The Local Authority's view is that 30 - 40% of the success is due to road safety measures and the rest, due to good promotion and the involvement of local people. This can be through public meetings, leaflets and publicity, letters, etc. Approximately £110,000 was provided by Hertfordshire County Council to support the scheme.

City schemes

- Paris 'Velib’(11)

The local authority in Paris has deposited 20,000 heavy-duty bicycles in 750 or so special racks around the city and anyone who wants one simply swipes his or her ordinary travel card and pedals off wherever they want to go. The bike does not have to be returned to the same pick-up point. The first half hour of pedalling time is absolutely free but, if you fail to return the bike after 30 minutes, you get charged an extra Euro and the penalties go up the later you are. Paris City Hall expects to have about 20,000 regular Velib users by the end of the year and plans to double the amount of Velib stations around Paris.

- Groningen, Netherlands(12)

The Dutch city of Groningen, with 185,000 inhabitants, proves that bicycle transportation can reign supreme: people there make about 150,000 trips by bicycle every day. Overall, 37 percent of area commutes are made on bikes. With an official town bicycle planner, Groningen has created an infrastructure it refers to "continuous and integral," which includes massive surface and underground bicycle parking facilities, dedicated bike paths, and two-way bike lanes even on one-way auto streets. Since the early 1980s, 30 city bicycle parking facilities have been developed, including one underground facility at the central train station that sells bikes, repairs bikes and offers valet and secure parking for more than 4,000 bikes. Parking is financed through a low-cost annual membership program that costs $50 a year, while bike valet positions create significant numbers of jobs at the public parking facilities and also at 15 local schools.

In 1986 Groningen developed what is believed to be Europe’s first dedicated bike policy document, which focused on a broad spectrum of bike transportation and awareness programs. Educational programs now include teaching the health and economic benefits of cycling. They have programs to introduce new immigrants to cycling. Many of them came from places where the car is the ultimate status symbol so it is important to show that in Holland, they can get around very easily by bicycle, status symbols aside.

Groningen's bicycle planning has not occurred in a vacuum, but rather complements an integrated scheme that includes low-priced parking facilities for cars, strong public transport and careful public transit linkages between car parking areas and centres for employment and education. With these amenities, cars use, especially in the city centre, was successfully restricted without impacting local business.

- London Congestion Charging Scheme(13)

The introduction in February 2003 of a £5 congestion charge to drive within Central London cut traffic levels by over 20%. London is the latest of a number of cities to introduce such a scheme. The first was Singapore in 1975, where traffic levels were reduced in a similar way to London and, with regular adjustments to the charging system, road traffic has been held at that lower level ever since. such pricing schemes often require technological innovation as well. The central London Congestion Charging Scheme, for example is operated through a network of number plate recognition cameras that can distinguish (by links to computer databases) between motorists who have, and those who have not, paid the charge and also identifies those who are exempt. The system can also allow for temporary exemption, such as an accident leading to traffic being diverted through the congestion charging zone, by ensuring that those vehicles are not fined for non-payment. Exemption's to London's congestion charge, includes alternative fuel cars, so this behavioural change mechanism also stimulates a technological response as well.    

Private Sector - Vodafone(14)

One example of a travel plan in the private sector is that of Vodafone(15), which was introduced in 1998 as a condition of its new office planning application (via a section 106 agreement under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in the UK). Funded by the company itself, a coordinator has been assigned to manage the travel plan. The Vodafone travel plan relies on a combination of parking cash out rewards and good quality, frequent and reliable work buses. Apart from these, car sharing, shuttle buses between Newbury and Theale stations, cycle facilities improvement and good financial incentives for walking, cycling and so forth have also been introduced. In a comparison between travel patterns in 1998 and 2001, a reduction of nearly 10% in the number of car trips was achieved. The average annual running cost per employee is about £430.  

National strategies - Scottish Parliament

National Transport Strategy consultation document included possible measures to:

• promote new technologies and cleaner fuels;
• to manage demand; and
• to reduce the need to travel.

The document also outlined proposals for developing indicators on these three themes to help monitor progress. The Scottish Government has also formed a Sustainable Transport Team.

Further examples of best practice that we believe could easily be adopted, include:

Local Authorities

• Attract businesses or 'starter unit’ providers around existing transport nodes, through reduced business rates and other fiscal incentives
• Provide local collection points or subsidised secure delivery containers to enable home deliveries of local produce
• Create home-zone areas (included in Local Transport Plans)
• Create local centres with independent local shops and service providers
• Provide initial funding of alternatives to private car ownership, such as car clubs
• Provide fiscal incentives for residents who reduce, or give up, the use of their car
• Provide secure bicycle storage and/or cheap bicycle hire at suburban stations
• Increase residential, employment and service density around transport nodes
• Provide support for 'walking buses’ for all local primary schools
• Provide oil recycling initiatives for biodiesel

Individuals

• Support local facilities
• Work from home where possible
• Use internet ordering and home delivery services
• Cycle or walk where possible
• Use public transport
• Join a car club
• If car ownership is deemed unavoidable, use alternative fuels and fuel efficient vehicles

An example of bad practice - Biofuel policies

Earlier this year, a number of UK environmental NGOs expressed their concern about the UK Government’s proposed Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) which could, in its present form, "see businesses producing biofuels by destroying rainforests and wetlands, not only threatening endangered habitats and species but also releasing far more carbon into the atmosphere than could ever hope to be saved by replacing fossil fuels”. (16)

Oxfam has also expressed its concern about European proposals to make it mandatory by 2020 for ten per cent of all member states' transport fuels to come from biofuels. They say that "biofuels may offer the potential to reduce poverty by increasing jobs and markets for small farmers, and by providing cheap renewable energy for local use, but the huge plantations emerging to supply the EU pose more threats than opportunities for poor people. The problem will only get worse as the scramble to supply intensifies unless the EU introduces safeguards to protect land rights, livelihoods, workers rights and food security”.(17)

Here in Wales the Minister for the Environment, Sustainability and Housing recently announced that a consultation on a 'Wales Biomass Energy Strategy’ can be expected in the next couple of months. In light of this, WEL has made an urgent plea to the Welsh Assembly Government to consider its recommendations(18) for ensuring that bioenergy production and use in Wales develops in a sustainable way - achieving significant greenhouse gas savings, whilst avoiding damaging impacts on the natural and historic environment.

8. In the context of the Government of Wales Act 2006, which further means of reducing carbon dioxide emissions from transport could only be achieved with the introduction of further legislative competence for the National Assembly for Wales?

As demonstrated in our response to question 6, there are numerous means of reducing CO₂ emissions from transport that can be achieved without the introduction of further legislative competence.

However, WEL believes that it would be beneficial for Wales to gain legislative competence over the Matters relating to transport and highways as outlined in Field 10, Schedule 7 of GoWA 2006. These are:

• Highways, including bridges and tunnels.
• Traffic management and regulation.
• Transport facilities and services.

For example, Sustrans Cymru has recently submitted a petition to the Assembly that  proposes a Walking and Cycling Paths Legislative Competence Order. The proposal is that:

• Field 10 (highways and transport) of Part 1 of Schedule 5 to the Government of Wales Act 2006 be amended as follows:
• After Field 10 : highways and transport insert "provisions relating to highways and other paths for the sole or shared use of cyclists and pedestrians or to facilitate the use of highways by cyclists and pedestrians”

This petition is supported by a number of WEL’s member organisations, as well as a number of other organisations in Wales.

Additionally, one relevant policy field in Schedule 7 for which the Assembly Government is empowered to seek legislative competence would appear to be 'the powers and duties of local authorities and their members and officers’. The Assembly Government might wish to seek powers over Local Authorities in order to allow the hypothecation of funding upon the delivery of Sustainable Development and climate change policy objectives within their powers and responsibilities - such as the hypothecation of transport grants.

Schedule 7 of the Act, also lists exceptions to those Matters for which such legislative competence could be sought.  Exceptions listed having relevance to this consultation on CO₂ emissions from transport include:

• Road freight transport services
• Regulation of use of motor vehicles and trailers on roads, their construction and equipment and conditions under which they may be so used
• Provision and regulation of railway services, apart from financial assistance, which (a) does not relate to the carriage of goods…
• Aviation, air transport, airports and aerodromes, apart from (a) financial assistance to providers or proposed providers of air transport services or airport facilities or services, (b) strategies by the Welsh Ministers or local or other public authorities about provision of air services…

According to Schedule 7, therefore, significant public policy areas relating to CO₂ emission reduction from transport are outwith even the potential 'devolved competence’ of the Assembly Government; (although there is no similar restriction in the provisions of Schedule 5). WEL therefore suggests that the Assembly consider pushing for the expansion of GoWA 2006 so as to include such exceptions.

In the meantime however, a lack of powers must not become an excuse for Wales not to reduce CO₂ emissions. Joint working with the UK Government in non-devolved areas, including areas of competence that are likely to remain at the UK level, should be urgently sought and reported upon.  

9. If specific carbon dioxide emissions targets are to be set for Wales, should those targets be subdivided into shares by sector? If so, what share of the total should reductions by the transport sector comprise?

In addition to the response to question 8, provided by WEL to the Committee’s consultation paper on household emissions, WEL(19) would like to add the following points:

• WEL advocates Wales making a fair contribution towards the international effort to stay below 2ºC warming;
• delivering a reduction in CO₂ emissions of at least 80% by 2050;
• this equates to at least a 3% cut each year across the whole Welsh economy starting now.
• Specific annual targets in each sector should be at least 3%, and more wherever possible.
• Specific, annual, emission reduction targets for the transport sector should be more than 3%, certainly not less.

Wales Environment Link values the opportunity to take part in this important consultation process and trusts the above response will be taken into consideration by the Sustainability Committee.

The member organisations of Wales Environment Link that sign up to this consultation response are:

Association of Rivers Trusts (Wales)
Butterfly Conservation Wales
British Mountaineering Council
Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales
Council for National Parks
Keep Wales Tidy
National Trust Wales
Cymdeithas Eryri - Snowdonia Society
Ramblers Cymru
RSPB Cymru
Sustrans Cymru
Wildlife Trusts Wales
WWF Cymru

References:

(1) WEL response to NAW Sustainability Committee’s consultation on household emissions - http://www.assemblywales.org/bus-home/bus-committees/bus-committees-third-assem/bus-committees-third-sc-home/bus-committees-third-sc-agendas.htm?act=dis&id=60809&ds=10/2007

(2) WEL response to NAW Sustainability Committee’s consultation on household emissions - http://www.assemblywales.org/bus-home/bus-committees/bus-committees-third-assem/bus-committees-third-sc-home/bus-committees-third-sc-agendas.htm?act=dis&id=60809&ds=10/2007

(3)AEA Energy and Environment, 2007

(4) Sustainable Transport for Wales, 2006, Sustrans Cymru – based on a report by Transport for Quality of Life - http://www.sustrans.org.uk/webfiles/Wales%20Policy%20Docs/STW%20-%20Executive%20Summary%20(English).pdf

(5)Sustrans’ Active Travel Projects, http://www.sustrans.org.uk/default.asp?sID=1144332723000

(6) Tackling Traffic: Sustainable leisure transport in National Parks – an overview of National Park Authority involvement, Council for National Parks - http://www.cnp.org.uk/docs/Tackling_Traffic_full_report.pdf

(7) Visit Britain 2006.

(8) Leading the way in travel behaviour change, 2006, Sustrans - http://www.sustrans.org.uk/webfiles/travelsmart/TravelSmart%20info%20sheet%202006.pdf

(9)‘Coming soon to your home: a personal adviser on how to get to work by bus’, The Guardian -  http://www.guardian.co.uk/transport/Story/0,,2200714,00.html

(10) Managing Transport Energy Power for a Sustainable Future, Edited by James Warren (2007), The University Press, Cambridge

(11) BBC News

(12) http://karlenzig.typepad.com/karlenzig/2007/06/the_future_of_c.html

(13)Managing Transport Energy Power for a Sustainable Future, Edited by James Warren (2007), The University Press, Cambridge

(14) Managing Transport Energy Power for a Sustainable Future, Edited by James Warren (2007), The University Press, Cambridge

(15) Managing Transport Energy Power for a Sustainable Future, Edited by James Warren (2007), The University Press, Cambridge

(16) ‘Green fuels’ could be bad for the environment’ http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/green_fuels_could_be_bad_f_10042007.html

(17) Biofuelling Poverty - EU plans could be disastrous for poor people, warns Oxfam, http://www.oxfam.org.uk/applications/blogs/pressoffice/2007/11/biofuelling_poverty_eu_plans_c.html

(18) Bioenergy in the UK: Turning Green Promises into Environmental Reality, http://www.waleslink.org/documents-for-downloading/joint-link-publications/Bioenergy%20in%20the%20UK_Link%20paper_final.pdf

(19) WEL response to NAW Sustainability Committee’s consultation on household emissions - http://www.assemblywales.org/bus-home/bus-committees/bus-committees-third-assem/bus-committees-third-sc-home/bus-committees-third-sc-agendas.htm?act=dis&id=60809&ds=10/2007

For further information please contact:
Michele Aitchison
Advocacy Officer for Wales Environment Link
Baltic House
Mount Stuart Square
Cardiff
CF10 5FH
Telephone: 02920 431 716
E-mail: maitchison-wel@wcva.org.uk