Show Hide image

Meeting the infrastructure challenge

A willingness to embrace change, integrate digital technologies – and most important of all – consult with the public: these are all key ingredients of a successful infrastructure project. The New Statesman speaks to Derek Holden of URS to find out more

 The government has announced plans to make major investments in transport infrastructure. What does the average taxpayer expect to get in return?

People want reliable, predictable journeys that take a reasonable time at an affordable cost – and they expect these measures to improve whenever their taxes are being spent. These expectations remain the same whether we are talking about rail, road or aviation. And of course people need to be able to travel without undue risk to their personal wellbeing.

Safety will always be the paramount concern for the general public, even if most people never give investment in safety any real thought. Safe outcomes are simply taken for granted. For example, who would stop to remark on how steady the Humber Bridge feels in the wind? Or who would pause to wonder what steps had been taken to enable a Eurostar train to travel so serenely at 186mph?

There is an unquestioned assumption that transport infrastructure has safety built in. And this assumption is right and just how it should be. We in the engineering industry focus on safety all the time, of course. There is nothing more important in our business. If you are not obsessed with removing danger, then you are in the wrong job. It defines everything we do. Many people only really notice infrastructure when it goes wrong. Perhaps a challenge for both government and the engineering industry is to help more people understand the extraordinary work that goes into planning and delivering transport infrastructure, and making sure it is safe, reliable and able to meet 21st century needs.

Why is it important to invest in new infrastructure? Why not just improve what we already have?

We need to do both, of course. The movement of goods from place to place is the foundation of most business. Business is done by people, who travel to work or need to meet to collaborate. And if they are not travelling for commerce, they are generally doing so in connection with leisure.

If we fail to adapt to the evolving demand for transportation, or if we don’t make use of new transport technologies, there will inevitably be a negative impact on the economy. The financial returns of every pound spent on infrastructure are huge. But the improvements in infrastructure, and the way people live, work and travel, are the greatest benefit of all.

What kind of new transport technologies are you thinking of?

Last week, I travelled to Norway and was able to jump on the Airport Express into Oslo without stopping to buy a ticket. Forget the palaver of searching around for a ticket office; you simply swipe your credit card across a reader on the platform. Register your card online and you’ll receive a receipt by email. And back at Heathrow Terminal 5, you can just swipe your parking ticket in a pod and it will take you to your car.

These are just two examples of how the digital revolution is starting to transform the way we use transport, just as it rewired the retail industry. The American Public Transportation Association is not given to reckless forecasts, but in a recent paper it predicted that future public transport projects “will be built around the smartphone”.

On the face of it, this seems like a strange claim. How can a box of tricks in your pocket provide the cornerstone of a new railway? But this revolution is real and is already happening.

We already see smartphones used to book tickets and hold boarding cards, to collect fares and to plan journeys, as traffic-aware satellite navigation devices, or as a means to monitor congestion or delays, allowing travellers to reroute or even switch modes of transport mid-journey. There are even apps that allow people to pool their cars.

Just imagine where all this is going. At the moment, people typically need to make a conscious effort to seek out, understand and employ new capabilities. But we can expect digital technologies – with innovations we probably can’t imagine – to become ever more seamlessly embedded into the way we get from A to B.

How seriously is this kind of change being taken by government?

Digitisation is seen as hugely important by government. There are already great successes in this area in the UK, such as the Smart Motorways initiative. High-tech signage and remote monitoring of traffic allows variable speed limits and judicious use of the hard shoulder, squeezing the best out of the available road capacity. There are also plans to manage roadworks better, making full use of hard shoulders and alternative routes. And there is a lot more of that to come from the Highways Agency.

Policymakers are deeply aware of how much more effective and cost-efficient it would be for the UK to bring together all the different strands of infrastructure, and if digital thinking were to be fully embedded throughout the entire planning and policy process.

What is the future direction of UK transport infrastructure?

Integration is the key word here. We will see more seamless transport where commuter trains link into bus networks and cycle lanes; where intercity railways are dovetailed into airport services. Where everything is joined up, providing maximum efficiency and environmentally friendly transport.

SNCF, the French railway operator, for example, has made much of this approach, ensuring that its rail timetable is fully integrated with other transport forms, from buses to the availability of cycle rental facilities. This approach is going to evolve, with car-sharing trends increasing rapidly, especially for commuting.

The rejuvenation of King’s Cross station in London is also indicative of future trends. The station has been transformed into a bright and pleasant space, full of busy restaurants and shops. It provides a great example of how ambitious redevelopment can dramatically improve the customer experience.

So, in terms of policymaking, what is the key to successful infrastructure?

It is vital to take a long-term, strategic, integrated approach. We need visionary, transformational schemes such as HS2 and Crossrail, combined with practical shovel-ready projects that upgrade and improve the conditions on our existing transport network.

It is also essential to consult, communicate and achieve buy-in from the public whenever major change is envisaged. We need only assess the range of reactions to HS2, or differing viewpoints on airport capacity, to see that infrastructure policy can provoke very strong reactions among those affected. Local communities will identify more closely with transport infrastructure if they are given a voice in the planning or approval stage.

By contrast, there is more experience of community-financed and managed infrastructure projects in the US. Across the Atlantic, there has long been a tradition of regionally financed projects funded by local taxes raised to meet the transport demand of the populace. Perhaps that is a concept we will see more of on these shores, with transport infrastructure influenced very strongly by the needs of the local community.

As citizens, we want transport options that make our lives simpler and easier. Where efforts are made to move people out of cars for congestion or environmental reasons, for example, we need alternatives to be phased in at the right time. An integrated approach will consider multiple modes of transport including pedestrianised zones, cycling facilities, metro networks, trams, buses, taxis, cars and planes. Effective links between services are just as important as employing the right tool for the job.

Derek Holden is director – infrastructure, Europe, Middle East and India at URS

Getty
Show Hide image

Our union backed Brexit, but that doesn't mean scrapping freedom of movement

We can only improve the lives of our members, like those planning stike action at McDonalds, through solidarity.

The campaign to defend and extend free movement – highlighted by the launch of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement this month – is being seen in some circles as a back door strategy to re-run the EU referendum. If that was truly the case, then I don't think Unions like mine (the BFAWU) would be involved, especially as we campaigned to leave the EU ourselves.

In stark contrast to the rhetoric used by many sections of the Leave campaign, our argument wasn’t driven by fear and paranoia about migrant workers. A good number of the BFAWU’s membership is made up of workers not just from the EU, but from all corners of the world. They make a positive contribution to the industry that we represent. These people make a far larger and important contribution to our society and our communities than the wealthy Brexiteers, who sought to do nothing other than de-humanise them, cheered along by a rabid, right-wing press. 

Those who are calling for end to freedom of movement fail to realise that it’s people, rather than land and borders that makes the world we live in. Division works only in the interest of those that want to hold power, control, influence and wealth. Unfortunately, despite a rich history in terms of where division leads us, a good chunk of the UK population still falls for it. We believe that those who live and work here or in other countries should have their skills recognised and enjoy the same rights as those born in that country, including the democratic right to vote. 

Workers born outside of the UK contribute more than £328 million to the UK economy every day. Our NHS depends on their labour in order to keep it running; the leisure and hospitality industries depend on them in order to function; the food industry (including farming to a degree) is often propped up by their work.

The real architects of our misery and hardship reside in Westminster. It is they who introduced legislation designed to allow bosses to act with impunity and pay poverty wages. The only way we can really improve our lives is not as some would have you believe, by blaming other poor workers from other countries, it is through standing together in solidarity. By organising and combining that we become stronger as our fabulous members are showing through their decision to ballot for strike action in McDonalds.

Our members in McDonalds are both born in the UK and outside the UK, and where the bosses have separated groups of workers by pitting certain nationalities against each other, the workers organised have stood together and fought to win change for all, even organising themed social events to welcome each other in the face of the bosses ‘attempts to create divisions in the workplace.

Our union has held the long term view that we should have a planned economy with an ability to own and control the means of production. Our members saw the EU as a gravy train, working in the interests of wealthy elites and industrial scale tax avoidance. They felt that leaving the EU would give the UK the best opportunity to renationalise our key industries and begin a programme of manufacturing on a scale that would allow us to be self-sufficient and independent while enjoying solid trading relationships with other countries. Obviously, a key component in terms of facilitating this is continued freedom of movement.

Many of our members come from communities that voted to leave the EU. They are a reflection of real life that the movers and shakers in both the Leave and Remain campaigns took for granted. We weren’t surprised by the outcome of the EU referendum; after decades of politicians heaping blame on the EU for everything from the shape of fruit to personal hardship, what else could we possibly expect? However, we cannot allow migrant labour to remain as a political football to give succour to the prejudices of the uninformed. Given the same rights and freedoms as UK citizens, foreign workers have the ability to ensure that the UK actually makes a success of Brexit, one that benefits the many, rather than the few.

Ian Hodon is President of the Bakers and Allied Food Workers Union and founding signatory of the Labour Campaign for Free Movement.