Transport Operator’s general election roundup

With just over two weeks remaining before the UK takes to the ballot boxes, Transport Operator examines what the political parties are promising, and what the road transport industry is demanding from the next government.

As 7 May ebbs ever closer, general election coverage has reached saturation point – with frenzied talk of the budget deficit, the NHS and the plight of ‘hard-working families’ raging in every newspaper and on every news broadcaster across the land. And for many jaded observers, there are few sentences more likely to prompt a panicked leap for the remote control than: ‘And now, a party election broadcast…’

Nonetheless, the decision made by voters in a fortnight has the potential to impact on the road transport sector in a huge variety of ways. For example: will the next government raise, freeze or lower corporation tax, or fuel duty? Will it increase regulation in a bid to improve road safety or emissions standards, or limit it to reduce the cost burden on operators – and which is the right path?

Will it hold a referendum to leave the European Union? Would a vote to do so disincentivise cross-border trade and thereby damage the fleets that deliver it, or reinvigorate them by doing away with the perceived red tape and bureaucracy of Brussels in areas such as driver training and tachograph law?

Even within the industry, opinion on such matters can differ considerably. But if a poll conducted by the Road Haulage Association (RHA) at the recent Commercial Vehicle Show at Birmingham’s NEC is any indication, more than half of those working in road haulage and logistics believe David Cameron’s Conservative Party best represents the sector’s interests.

Of the 244 industry visitors polled on exiting the CV Show on 14 April, 57.7 per cent of respondents to the question “Which political party do you consider best represents the interests of the road haulage and logistics industry?” answered “the Conservatives”.

8.2 per cent gave Ed Miliband’s Labour Party as their response, while the Scottish National Party and the Greens shared two per cent of the poll.

Reflecting the party’s downward trend in polls more generally, Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats were the stated choice for just 0.8 per cent of those questioned.

Meanwhile, 13 per cent said none of the principal parties represented the industry’s interests, a further 13 per cent didn’t know, and five per cent refused to comment on the subject.

According to the RHA, several visitors leaving the CV Show expressed fears that a Labour-controlled government would increase fuel duty “at the earliest opportunity, to help fund its manifesto pledges” – and the association’s chief executive Richard Burnett said the results were “no revelation”.

“Under the last government our industry and the UK’s consumers benefitted from a sustained fuel duty freeze,” he said.

“This has helped to keep distribution costs down, helped the cash flow of haulage firms, has put pounds in the public’s pockets and has directly contributed to the economic recovery.

“Other political parties have a track record on fuel duty, treating it as a cash cow.”

He continued: “An investment in roads is vitally important to us and the economy as a whole. The promised £100bn of infrastructure spending, pledged by the Tories in their manifesto, is good news, providing a sizeable chunk is spent on the roads, reducing the £14bn per year that congestion costs the UK economy.”

He added that the political parties should “make clear where they stand” on fuel duty and roads investment.

On the same day as the RHA survey, the BBC’s Poll of Polls, a rolling average of the voting intentions of the general public collated from figures released by several polling outlets, showed that the two main parties remained neck-and-neck, each on 34 per cent.

Nigel Farage’s UK Independence Party (UKIP) was in third place in terms of projected vote share, on 14 per cent – with the Liberal Democrats on nine, Greens on six and other parties on three per cent.

The figures suggest that, unless either party enjoys a significant breakthrough, a second hung parliament is now almost certain – with neither the Conservatives nor Labour enjoying sufficient support to return an outright majority.

This means that any future government is likely to require support from smaller parties – including the SNP, Liberal Democrats, UKIP, the Welsh nationalists Plaid Cymru, and the Northern Irish parties – in order to enact its policies.

But what will those policies be, and how will they impact on the sector?

It’s not necessarily easy to tell from those beloved election broadcasts – or indeed from the parties’ manifestos, which are intended for consumption by wider society, and are therefore thin on the ground in terms of industry-specific pledges. In addition, individual parties are notoriously coy about changes to the tax regime prior to elections, for obvious reasons. But there are some indicators nonetheless.

For example, Conservative manifesto pledges include a £15 billion investment in roads, incorporating “over £6 billion in the northern road network, with the dualling and widening of the A1 north of Newcastle and the first new trans-Pennine road capacity in over 40 years.”

The party also promises to improve the A303, A47 and A27, and add 1,300 extra lane miles to the road network – as well as fixing “around 18 million potholes.”

The document also highlights the party’s record on freezing fuel duty, whilst not explicitly pledging to continue the policy.

Meanwhile, Labour’s manifesto said the party would: “support long-term investment in strategic roads [and] address the neglect of local roads.”

In passages of particular relevance to PSV operators, it also highlighted the issue of rising bus fares (27 per cent since 2010) and the cancellation of 2,000 bus routes.

“City and county regions will be given more power over the way buses are operated in their area,” said Labour.

“They will be able to decide routes, bear down on fares, drive improvements in services, and bring together trains, buses and trams into a single network with smart ticketing.”

In the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto, the party said it would: “Support ambitious EU vehicle emission standards, and reform vehicle excise duty to drive continuous reductions in greenhouse gas and other pollutants” – although a reference to car fleets regarding the latter policy made it unclear whether this would apply to heavier vehicles.

The Lib Dems would also: “Encourage the market for electric vehicles, including with targeted support for buses, taxis and light freight, and early requirements to use low emission vehicles in the public sector”; as well as planning “to accelerate the commercial introduction of zero-emission fuel cell electric vehicles, and facilitate the UK-wide introduction of hydrogen fuelling infrastructure.”

But interestingly, the most specific references to the road transport sector in all the manifestos come from two of the parties likely only to have small numbers of parliamentary seats after the election.

UKIP’s, for instance, contains pledges to scrap the Driver CPC scheme, “because of the added administration and expense to hauliers.”

The party also laid out proposals to adjust vehicle excise duty (VED) following the enactment of its main policy pledge, to leave the European Union – in order to make the HGV road user levy “revenue neutral for both UK haulier and the government.”

It said it would then double the current levy tariff to a maximum of £2,000 per year, and legislate so that it would only apply to foreign-registered HGVs.

“This change will help UK hauliers to compete with European hauliers entering the UK, loaded with cheaper fuel bought on the continent,” said the party.

UKIP additionally pledged “to abolish green taxes and levies and withdraw from the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme, reducing fuel bills and enhancing industrial competitiveness at a stroke.”

At the other end of the political spectrum, Natalie Bennett’s Green Party of England and Wales strongly emphasised its road safety credentials in its manifesto.

It highlighted the work of Green London Assembly member Jenny Jones, who it says: “fought the closure of the Metropolitan Police Commercial Vehicle Education Unit, which instructs HGV drivers on road sharing and awareness of vulnerable road users.

“This unit has now been reinstated within the traffic police section,” the party added.

The Greens said they would require newly-manufactured HGVs to be equipped with “best-practice technology” to help increase awareness of pedestrians and cyclists around the vehicle, implying an expansion to the nation as a whole of policies currently being introduced in the capital.

“Pedestrian and cyclist fatalities and serious injuries when involved in collisions with lorries are predictable, preventable and unacceptable,” the party said.

“The technology already exists and is in use in several countries and consists of a mixture of in-cab screens linked to cameras, multiple wing mirrors and physical modification to prevent people being dragged under the vehicle.

“Lorries already in use must be retrofitted with the same equipment and lorries not so equipped will not be allowed into our towns and cities.”

The Greens also pledged to reintroduce the fuel duty escalator, and: “reduce lorry activity and road freight volume by improving rail freight services, reducing the number of empty or partially loaded trips, and using cargo bikes for last-mile deliveries to replace some white van trips.”

But what exactly is the industry asking for from the UK’s next government? Both the RHA and the Freight Transport Association (FTA) spelled it out in their own manifestos, launched at the CV Show.

The RHA urged the sector’s 2.1 million voters to seek out prospective parliamentary candidates (PPCs) who would “support a three pence per litre cut in fuel duty, and specific recommendations to save the economy £14 billion in congestion-related costs.”

Richard Burnett added: “The UK’s economic recovery will rely on maintaining consumer confidence and boosting business output, keeping pounds in pockets. Today we are proposing 17 measures the next government should act upon to help achieve these aims.”

Among the association’s wish-list for the next government were the continuation of fuel duty freezes, investment in the road network, and assistance for the industry in recruiting and training sufficient drivers to address the current shortfall. The manifesto also included security, safety and environmental policies.

“Everything we eat, drink and wear depends on haulage services. We would have no homes to live in, heat to warm them or jobs to go to without trucks, and the companies and drivers that operate them. The vehicles are seen every day – but less often understood,” continued Burnett.

“Our manifesto aims to inform, educate and persuade all political candidates and relevant stakeholders about the critical decisions the next government must make to ensure this industry and the public can deliver the recovery.”

On the same day, the Freight Transport Association (FTA) launched its Logistics Manifesto, calling for “greater understanding by government of the way [the logistics sector] operates” and assistance to help make the industry safer, more efficient and more environmentally friendly.

FTA’s manifesto, which the association says has been sent to PPCs for their consideration, included measures such as reducing fuel duty, providing support for skills development, infrastructure investment, improvement of regulatory systems, and environmental policies.

Karen Dee, FTA director of policy, said: “Logistics underpins every aspect of modern life.  It is utterly indispensable to the working our home lives, our businesses, our schools and hospitals – everything.

“We can make logistics more efficient, but we need better support from the government.  This doesn’t need to come with a huge price tag, but it does need greater understanding of the way we really operate and how government can work with us to achieve its own aims.”

Perhaps the most pressing challenge faced by the road transport industry is to secure its supply of drivers in the long-term – and with that in mind, it is increasingly focusing on a new generation of jobseekers, and how it can attract them to the industry.

As we reported in our April edition, a recent survey carried out by pollster ComRes for the RHA suggested that 60 per cent of MPs would support a policy proposal to offer government grants towards the training of UK residents as truck drivers. This broke down into 71 per cent of Labour MPs, as compared to 47 per cent of Conservatives.

The RHA’s Richard Burnett recently responded to Labour’s election pledge to guarantee individual face-to-face careers advice in schools, by pointing out that employment in the haulage and logistics industry offered: “many opportunities for responsible young people that are not well understood.”

He said: “Careers advice at school should allow young people to be inspired beyond what they currently know about. The industry is an essential enabler of economic growth, employment and wealth creation…

“In 2014, government research identified that the industry needs to recruit 1.2 million people by 2020 and is currently in dire need of drivers. Careers advisors must understand the excellent career path logistics can offer.

“It is a global, IT-driven industry with many opportunities which allow apprentices to work their way up into positions of seniority including board directors and chief executives. Others can spread their entrepreneurial wings and set up their own businesses, creating jobs and generating wealth.

“The devil is in the detail – careers advice is a great idea. Targeted careers advice is an even better one.”