NEWS RELEASE - Friday 18th May 2001

SNP roads and petrol addiction gets worse

TRANSform Scotland, Scotland's campaign for sustainable transport (1), today condemned the SNP manifesto commitments on transport as bad for the environment and bad for Scotland's towns and cities. SNP policies on road-building and on fuel will condemn Scotland to more toxic air pollution, higher traffic levels and worsened traffic congestion, and would leave public transport underfunded and inadequate.

TRANSform Scotland is particularly critical of SNP policy to reduce fuel duty by 10p per gallon (3). Colin Howden, TRANSform Scotland Campaign Manager, said:

"The SNP claims to be concerned at the cost of rural motoring yet the benefits of its blanket fuel tax cuts would fall equally for car users in urban areas where transport alternatives are available and where traffic congestion must be tackled. The policies outlined give no priority to more marginal car-using groups such as those on low income or those in very remote areas. If the SNP genuinely want to reduce motoring costs for those that are most dependent on their cars they could do so by promoting differential fuel duties or by transferring Vehicle Excise Duty - a tax on car ownership - on to fuel duty - a tax on fuel use. Instead, the SNP call for blanket cuts in fuel tax cuts benefits already affluent car users disproportionately."

"The SNP's fascination with road-building and cheap motoring makes their policies irrelevant for the 35% of Scottish households that have no access to a car. The SNP instead give the green light to Scotland's car users to drive as much as they want, with no regard for the environment or the quality of life of those who have to put up with ever-increasing traffic levels. Their policies conveniently choose to forget the fact that public transport prices have risen significantly ahead of motoring prices for several decades. Why are they then not calling for reductions in the price of public transport?"

TRANSform Scotland are critical of the long list of road-building projects which the SNP aspire to (2). Colin Howden said:

"The SNP transport policy fails to make clear what their priorities are: more road-building or public transport investment. Their transport policy seems to be: more of everything please. With yet more transport investment squandered on new roads, there is little chance that public transport in Scotland would be improved. If the SNP are really interested in seeing the Borders regain its rail link or the main line railway to Aberdeen upgraded then they should give up their futile attachment to tarmacking over the countryside." (2)

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

(1) TRANSform Scotland is the national sustainable transport campaign, bringing together 68 organisations - including transport operators, local authorities, national environment and conservation groups, chambers of commerce and local transport groups - interested in transport, the environment and a sustainable Scotland. We can be contacted at 72 Newhaven Road, Edinburgh, EH6 5QG. Tel.: 0131-467-7714; Fax: 0131-554-8656; e-mail: campaigns@transformscotland.org.uk; web: http://www.transformscotland.org.uk

(2) The Strategic Roads Review of November 1999 listed the cost of the SNP roads programme as follows: A8/M8 (£100-108 million), A8000 (£15 million). The M74 Northern Extension is now estimated at over £240 million while an Aberdeen western bypass is put at over £80 million. Totalling these figures gives a range of £435 - 443 million.

This does not however include SNP spending commitments made in the manifesto towards the A75 and A9. Indeed, none of the projects listed in the manifesto are costed.

(3) Background: detailed commentary on fuel duty.

The recent cuts in fuel duty announced in the 2001 Budget have been criticised by numerous official studies.

The Budget announcement of 08/03/01 confirmed the considerable tax cuts for car users and the road haulage industry announced in November's Pre-Budget Statement. Duty on ultra low sulphur petrol and diesel was cut by 2p and 3p per litre respectively. In addition, the small engine size band for reduced Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) was increased from 1200cc to 1549cc cars. However, the largest cuts were reserved for the road haulage industry which saw its industry-wide VED cut by £300 million. The Government estimates the measures as the equivalent of cuts of 4p per litre of petrol for car users and 7p per litre of diesel for road hauliers. See http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/budget2001/index.html

While being condemned by environmental groups, the cuts have also been challenged by a range of official bodies. The House of Commons Environment Audit Committee in its report 'Pre-budget 2000: fuelling the debate' attacked the Pre-Budget Statement cuts as being "politically-motivated" and lacking in environmental impact assessment (Local Transport Today 310). See http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmenvaud/71/7102.htm

Meanwhile, the House of Commons Select Committee on Trade and Industry report 'The impact on trade and industry of motor fuel taxation' argued that "We remain to be convinced that that any decline in UK competitiveness in recent times can be attributed to any significant degree to high fuel taxation levels" (Local Transport Today 311). See http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmtrdind/268/26802.htm

Indeed, the Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT) has argued that the 8% increase in vehicle fuel last year led to road traffic growth to fall to only 0.3%. CfIT argues that 3.8% road traffic growth would normally have been expected and that this was evidence of a break in the link between economic growth and traffic growth (Local Transport Today 310).