Who are buses really for?

The North East combined councils are applying to regulate bus services and introduce an oyster-style travel card for the region.

 http://www.thejournal.co.uk/north-east-analysis/analysis-news/north-east-councils-one-step-7974365

What a brilliant idea. We all know from our own experience that buses are too expensive. The East Coast train line has demonstrated that the public sector can run public transport better and cheaper than the private sector

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/11085643/State-owned-train-company-returns-217m-to-taxpayers.html

The North East Green Party has welcomed the move and fully supports it
http://neengland.greenparty.org.uk/news.html/2014/10/22/green-dreams-for-better-buses-move-a-step-closer/

Long-standing Green Party policy states, "public transport [should be] designed and planned to create a user-friendly service, that is reliable, affordable, accessible, integrated with all other
sustainable modes and environmentally friendly. Public service, not private profit, must be the primary function of public transport."

http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/tr.html

So hooray for the North East Councils for not bowing to commercial pressure and actually doing something for the public good and please when can we have a similar scheme in the South East or South Central England?

Why is this government afraid of judicial review?

A Bill currently going through parliament is designed by the government to allow them to block judicial review cases.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/criminaljusticeandcourts.html

Why should we be interested? And why is the government so concerned to get control over judicial review cases?

Judicial review is one way that ordinary people can challenge decisions by government through the courts. It has come to be used as campaigning tool. In Canterbury a group opposed to an out of town college campus used judicial review to slow down the development. Eventually the College gave up and did what the campaigners had asked for from the start – they redeveloped their existing town centre site preserving one of East Kent’s last orchards and keeping the college close to public transport links.

http://www.kecn.org.uk/blog/2014/03/06/addressing-climate-change-in-canterbury-and-elsewhere/

Judicial review was used by the Save Port Meadow Campaign in Oxford to challenge the City Council’s appalling planning decision to allow over sized blocks of flats at Roger Dudman Way to block the famous views of the dreaming spires from the River Cherwell.

http://saveportmeadow.wordpress.com/

However, the House of Lords has opposed the government and amended the Bill to keep the discretion of the courts.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/27/house-of-lords-defeat-chris-grayling-judicial-review-plan

Ironic that we have to rely on this unelected, undemocratic institution to prevent the government form bypassing democratic accountability.

How can we improve air quality in Oxford?

Oxford is in the top ten most polluting cities in the UK when it comes to car emissions with the 9^th highest emission in the UK http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2769975/London-cars-worst-polluters-Vehicles-emit-quarter-carbon-dioxide-kilometre-Peterborough.html

This confirms that, as long as cars are not included in the Low Emission Zone in the City Centre, it will be ineffective in reducing air pollution. Air pollution kills many more people than road traffic accidents. Air pollution caused an estimated 28,416 deaths in Great Britain in 2010. This compares with 1,713 road deaths in 2013.  It’s about time we took reducing car use seriously.

A new report shows how we could achieve carless cities and cut air pollution within the next 20 years.

"There's no town in Denmark which a main road goes through. No town. Zero. … They’d actually think it was slightly mad to have a main road going through a centre of town. … Consequently, their culture is much happier than ours.” Andrew Davies CEO, Environmental Transport Association

http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/reports/carless-cities

Oxford is considering introducing congestion charging. The report criticises London Congestion charging for being a blunt instrument. It argues for variable charging for certain types of vehicle and road user and according to the level of congestion in real time. However, ite warns that congestion charging will only reduce traffic if there are viable public transport and cycling alternatives.

http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/reports/carless-cities

One example of good public transport is Vienna where if costs only 1 Euro to go anywhere in the City – a City much bigger than Oxford.

A transport researcher argues for “ a magnificent network of cycle routes”:  an area where Oxford used to lead but which now seems to have stalled with a cycle improvement budget from central government remaining largely unspent by the City and disputes with local cycle groups over ‘improvements’ to Frideswide Square and The Plain roundabout.

The report advocates joined up transport so car-sharing becomes part of a package that also includes train travel, bus travel, cycling and so on. With a travel card you could swipe and take a car when it suited, but swipe onto a bus where that made more sense.

A more radical suggestion is that the green man should be the default at pedestrian crossings and cars should have to stop and get permission to cross.

http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/reports/carless-cities

If we make it easy, normal and safe to travel on foot or by bike people will chose to do so. I know of someone who would love to cycle in Oxford but doesn’t dare because she finds the traffic too intimidating. If it was easy normal and safe to cycle in Oxford much more people would do so.