§ 10. Mr. Stephen Rossasked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is satisfied that the methods of traffic forecasting adopted by the Transport and Road Research Laboratory accurately reflect future trends of traffic density.
§ Mr. CroslandNo forecasts can claim complete accuracy, but the present methods and the forecasts which they produce appear to be the best currently available. However, I greatly welcome any constructive criticism of our methods.
§ Mr. RossNo doubt the Secretary of State will be aware that the vehicle registration figures published for January this year show a drop on those published in January 1975. Does not that indicate that it is time to reconsider the position of traffic forecasting? Does the right hon. Gentleman still hold the view that traffic is liable to double in the next 35 years? That is a forecast of the Transport and Road Research Laboratory. When can this subject be debated, because it is not possible to debate it at highway inquiries? Will it be mentioned in the consultative document?
§ Mr. CroslandI am aware that recently many criticisms have been made of the TRRL forecasts. Therefore, I propose to publish a thorough annex to the consultative document which will set out in the greatest possible detail the basis on which forecasts are made. I hope that that will be the subject of intense public discussion. If I can be convinced that our forecasts are wrongly based, I shall be only too happy to change them.
§ Mr. CorbettCan my right hon. Friend confirm that recent forecasts of likely traffic have shown that they are likely to be substantially under those made two or three years ago? Will he comment on the implications of that on the current motorway building programme?
§ Mr. CroslandThe forecasts have not been greatly adjusted as compared with three years ago, partly because the view is taken that the rise in petrol prices will have less effect on car ownership and car traffic than many commentators suppose, and partly because we assume that economic growth will be resumed by 1990 or 2000—[Laughter.] We hope that economic growth will be resumed substantially before then and at a pace which I do not doubt will make the rate of growth under the Conservatives look utterly contemptible.
§ Mr. FryEven if the lowest forecasts of the Laboratory are true, the recently announced cuts in public expenditure, especially on new road building and maintenance, will only mean much increased congestion and much increased use and waste of energy. If the fore-casts happen to be wrong, why is the right hon. Gentleman a Member of a Cabinet which has agreed to pour millions of pounds into the British motor industry?
§ Mr. CroslandI do not conceal that the cuts in road expenditure which were announced in the White Paper last week will be severe. Comparing 1973–74 with 1978–79, the cuts in total road expenditure will amount to about 24 per cent. in real terms. There will be an environmental cost involved in these cuts because a number of places badly need bypasses which they will not get. Nevertheless, we believe that this is the right balance of transport spending.
§ Mr. RaisonWill the right hon. Gentleman give a firm pledge that in the course of his transport review any attempt to cut back on the road programme and to transfer traffic from road to rail will not be at the expense of the economic efficiency of British industry?
§ Mr. CroslandWe shall make it clear in the consultation document that the economic efficiency of British industry is an objective of the first importance, but not the sole objective of transport policy. We must also take into account the social effects of transport policy, for example, on those who do not own cars, and the environmental effects. The consultation document will discuss all these separate and not always easily reconcilable objectives.