Protect transport spending, warn trade groups

Transport trade associations have raised concerns following suggestions that government capital spending could be cut across departments in order to fund additional defence spending.

It has been reported by news outlets that ministers have been told to slash departmental budgets to enable a £15 billion boost to defence, with the Department for Transport among those suggested to be facing the most severe reductions.

But the Road Haulage Association (RHA) managing director, Richard Smith, has warned that cutting spending on transport and infrastructure would be a serious mistake, and that – while an increase in defence spending is an inevitability – the government must also support the road freight sector in order to secure economic growth.

“We are clear: transport cannot be treated as an easy saving,” said Mr Smith.

“If you target transport for an easy saving, you are hampering a key industry that the supply chain and every household and business relies upon.

“Spending money on roads is an investment in the economic health of the country. The Strategic Road Network carries 66 per cent of all freight traffic, so investing in it supports the government’s stated aim of economic growth.

“Congestion costs the country more than £30bn every year in delays and lost productivity. We need more, not less investment in repairing and improving both local roads and nationally significant roads.”

He added: “Clearly, increasing defence spending, economic growth, and road freight, which accounts for 85 per cent of movement in the country, are all intrinsically linked and vital. We call on the government to ensure there is a balanced approach when reviewing spending and resilience.

“If policymakers are serious about long-term growth, drastically cutting transport and infrastructure would be a serious mistake.”

Ben Fletcher, chief executive of Logistics UK, said the suggestion capital spending on transport could be cut to fund defence fails to recognise the strategic role infrastructure fulfils in times of conflict.

“Both defence and transport infrastructure are fundamental to the UK’s security and economic strength, and it would be a mistake to frame budget allocation decisions as a simple choice between the two,” he warned.

“Efficient logistics depends on reliable transport networks, enabling goods to move quickly and reliably across the country and through our international gateways. The transport networks that underpin businesses, communities and public services, are the same networks that are critical for the defence industries to be able to increase production, and the country will need for moving resources during any future mobilisation.

“It is vital that the UK invests in defence to enhance its ability to respond to an increasingly uncertain world.  As government finalises its spending plans, we urge it to remain committed to infrastructure investment and to the findings of the 2025 Strategic Defence Review, which rightly highlights the importance of building national resilience in partnership with industry.

“Improving the performance of the UK’s transport network supports the logistics industry, strengthens the economy and helps ensure people, equipment and supplies can move effectively during times of both peace and conflict.”

However, the RHA’s Richard Smith also expressed caution about the use of tax rises to cover additional defence spending.

“Ministers must be clear-eyed about the impact on people, businesses and the wider economy,” he said.

“For haulage, coach and van operators the pressures are already significant as they contend with fuel price shocks, rising employment costs, inflationary pressures, investment requirements and the day-to-day challenge of keeping people and goods moving efficiently.

“Additional tax burdens would add to the strain by increasing the cost of doing business, limiting investment, placing further pressure on wages and ultimately pushing costs through supply chains to consumers.

“National security is vital but so too is the economic resilience that underpins it. We’re clear that if the government is asking businesses and working people to shoulder more of that burden, it must provide clarity, certainty and a credible long-term plan.

“Our industry needs the confidence that the decisions being made today will not undermine the businesses that keep the economy moving tomorrow.”