New roads 'offer poor value for money'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE pounds 2bn per year spent by the Government on building roads gives poor value in economic and employment terms, according to a report published yesterday.
The study was compiled for Alarm UK, a federation of pressure groups campaigning against road developments, in response to the Autumn Statement, which preserved investment on roads while cutting support for British Rail and London Transport.
It argues that road building does little to improve industry's efficiency because transport of goods makes up only 2 per cent of costs. And, often, increased congestion nullifies the reduction in journey times. More jobs are created by investment in rail than in road schemes, it suggests. For example, one job per year on London's Jubilee Line Tube extension costs pounds 50,000 to create compared with pounds 67,000 for widening the M1.
Jeremy Bray, the report's author, also quotes a European conference of ministers of transport which concluded: 'Connecting an economically strong region to a weak one does not necessarily help the latter . . .'
Dr Bray said that in Britain during the 1960s and 1970s major road construction in the North-east grew much faster but did nothing to help local unemployment, which went from third worst in the country to worst.
The Department of Transport justifies road schemes with a form of cost-benefit analysis which calculates marginal savings in journey times and puts a value on them in terms of labour time wasted. But Dr Bray questions this methodology and says the department 'does not use this analysis to prioritise the most important schemes', nor cost benefit analysis for other forms of transport.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments