London's transport - Observations on social inclusion

Good public transport is vital for socially excluded communities. It is often critical in opening up new employment opportunities, in enabling people to develop broader social horizons, and in offering older and disabled people the chance to lead a more fulfilling life. Last year's transport report from the Social Exclusion Unit found that almost a fifth of people living in low-income areas had not applied for a particular job in the previous 12 months because of transport problems, and 37 per cent of young people felt the lack of good transport facilities was the biggest barrier preventing them from getting to work.

London's Mayor, Ken Livingstone, regards improved public transport as critical to regenerating the capital's deprived areas and providing easier access to jobs. This, along with the need to manage traffic levels, is what drives his support for new tram links, better rail services and more buses.

Livingstone has advantages the rest of the country lacks. Because he controls the private bus companies operating in the capital, he is able to marry bus services with his wider policies. He wants to be able to do the same with trains, which is one reason he is seeking control of London's rail network, too. He also believes that the proposed new tram lines, the Olympic bid, the £10bn Crossrail scheme, a second runway at Stansted airport and a new road bridge over the Thames in east London will be catalysts for economic regeneration and social inclusion.

But is he right? All the studies show that socially excluded people are looking to make relatively short journeys to work and to socialise, at prices they can afford. This points to the importance of cheap and efficient bus, rail and tram services on a local level. It seems that the most effective way of tackling social exclusion would be to focus on London's local town centres, to build up their economic viability, their social and recreational amenities, and to ensure that they are linked through good public transport to their hinterland.

This puts a real question mark over the relevance of the large-scale transport projects. The Mayor would argue that these schemes are key to providing the wider transport network that will assist London's economy. But the fear is that they will concentrate yet more of London's wealth in already prosperous areas. It is the City of London that is the most vocal supporter of Crossrail. It is big business that is backing airport development and the Olympic bid. It is middle-class car commuters from Kent who are likely to benefit most from the proposed road bridge over the Thames. Designed to facilitate long-distance travel, these big projects are likely to remove the focus from London's local town centres and thus may work against social inclusion. And some of the schemes, such as the river crossing or new runway, will increase traffic, noise and air pollution in low-income communities.

The big projects are also the most expensive. Livingstone would do well to consider what similar amounts of money would achieve if targeted specifically at the transport needs of socially excluded communities.

The starting point for any transport system designed to reduce inequality is the pedestrian. Ken Worple, in his book In Our Backyard, maintains that "transport and regeneration policies which fail to give full recognition to the basic importance of walking are simply not sustainable". He argues that many unemployed people will never gain the self-confidence to seek jobs if they feel intimidated walking around their local area. Good walking conditions are also essential for older and disabled people.

The Social Exclusion Unit's transport report downplayed the role of cycling in tackling inequality. It was a big missed opportunity. Three-quarters of all journeys made in the UK are less than five miles long, and more than 90 per cent of households own a bicycle. A cycling revolution could dramatically increase access to jobs for unemployed people.

In addition to walking and cycling, another building block of an equitable and enabling transport system is door-to-door transport. Schemes such as Taxicard and Dial-a-Ride, which provide a lifeline for many people, are better in London than in most parts of the country, but there is a great deal of room for improvement.

The overriding aim must be to make every form of mainstream transport fully accessible to all people. That essentially means local travel tailored to local communities, rather than mega-bucks mega-projects.

John Stewart is chair of the board of Transport 2000

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website