Return to Agenda

ITEM EX11

EXECUTIVE – 18 MARCH 2003

FREIGHT QUALITY PARTNERSHIPS

Report by Assistant Director of Environmental Services (Transport Development)

Introduction

  1. In the guidance for Local Transport Plans the government required local authorities to "seek to develop integrated freight distribution plans, promoting the efficient and effective use of all modes of transport, while recognising that road will continue to be the dominant mode of freight distribution for the foreseeable future" as part of its Sustainable Distribution Strategy. They promoted the idea of Freight Quality Partnerships (FQPs) as a means of formalising the consultation and development work needed for a sustainable distribution strategy. "Evidence of progress in establishing freight quality partnerships" was one of the criteria set out by which a good LTP would be judged. The idea of FQPs had been developed by the Freight Transport Association, which represents companies moving goods by all modes, including almost half the UK lorry fleet as part of their "Delivering the Goods" partnership with Local Government Association and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.

  2. In the Oxfordshire LTP it is stated that the County Council will set up a countywide FQP and also consider setting up local FQPs in conjunction with the implementation of Integrated Transport Strategies in the urban areas.

  3. Our transport planning term consultants, Halcrow, were commissioned to prepare a short report to identify the issues involved with setting up FQPs in the county. A copy of the report prepared by them and a specialist sub-consultant, Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) has been placed in the Members’ Resource Centre.

    4. Purpose of Freight Quality Partnerships

  4. It is generally acknowledged that freight and distribution is an area where there is limited understanding within local authorities. This is unsurprising given that local authorities have had little direct responsibility in this area in the past. The impact of freight traffic on the quality of environment and local communities, together with the need to provide for deliveries to maintain and develop the local community, mean that a more pro-active approach is needed in the future. The main purpose of an FQP is to allow transport planners, politicians, freight operators and other stakeholders to come together to discuss freight issues.

  5. Despite the similarity in name Freight Quality Partnerships are different in kind to the better known Bus Quality Partnerships. This reflects the difference in organisation of the two industries. With buses there are usually relatively few players involved in any area and so it is possible to make formal commitments between Council and operators. With the freight industry there are many more companies involved, and many companies who would be affected by any decisions on an irregular basis, so Freight Partnerships of necessity are more informal arrangements between Councils and the freight industry which attempt to develop mutually beneficial solutions.

  6. The issues which an FQP could deal with fall broadly into two types. First, it should look at existing distribution problems and conflicts and seek to develop possible solutions for these. Secondly, it can be used to develop initiatives that attempt to meet other objectives, such as transferring freight from road to rail. An FQP could typically tackle issues such as:

    • Congestion

    • Inappropriate use of towns or routes by through traffic

    • Freight routeing issues in rural areas

    • Inefficient or ineffective use of networks by vehicles collecting and delivering goods.

  1. As well as dealing with these formal issues it is hoped that FQPs will develop a "life of their own" – that is problems are identified and solutions are implemented to many issues solely within the membership without having to involve the County Council. Examples of areas where this may occur is in the spreading of best practice amongst operators. This would enhance the value that operators feel they get from membership of the FQP, although care would need to be exercised to retain control of the FQP "brand."

  2. The question of whether it would be more appropriate to have a single countywide Partnership or to have separate ones for different parts of the county was raised during the development of the LTP. There are examples of both of these around the country, probably related to which of the issues mentioned above are the dominant ones in the area concerned. Local FQPs are better suited to addressing detailed issues of balancing freight access with other local objectives while countywide partnerships would be better for looking at wider routeing issues. In Oxfordshire both of these types of issue would need to be considered. It is, however, considered impractical to try to run more than one FQP within the County. A more flexible approach is needed to find a suitable arrangement for Oxfordshire.

  3. Another area where the existing FQPs vary is over the membership. In some areas the Partnership is in the form of an open forum, in others it is a much more limited group. A compromise, which would also allow for a single organisation to deal with both local and countywide issues, would be that a wide forum is created but one in which subjects are investigated in smaller, more focused working groups which in turn report back their conclusions to the wider group for debate and endorsement.

  4. Until we actually start to canvass interest in setting up a FQP with local organisations it is impossible to say whether this is a practical approach. If there is not sufficient interest to allow this approach to proceed, however, there must be questions raised about the appropriateness of the FQP approach to the Oxfordshire business environment and the long term viability of any Partnership. While it is difficult to be precise, a nucleus of at least 30 committed members from the freight industry, including some or all of the key local organisations, would probably be needed to make the FQP approach viable.

    5. Benefits and Risks

  5. For an FQP to succeed there need to be benefits both for the County Council and for the freight industry participants. The benefits to the Council are identified by Halcrow/SKM as:

    • Operators are more likely to co-operate with policies if they had input into their formation

    • Consultation will be easier with this key stakeholder group

    • Should reduce criticism and bad publicity concerning policies

    • OCC should develop better understanding of freight issues

  1. The benefits to the operators should be that:

    • They could put forward opinions on ideas and offer alternative solutions

    • They will have the opportunity to influence opinion and get a better understanding of the reasons for Council decisions

    • It will give them the opportunity to discuss, both with the Council and amongst themselves, freight issues and share best practice ideas.

  1. There is a risk, as with any new initiative of this kind, that the FQP will fail and that operators will become even less enthusiastic about County Council proposals and more ready to openly criticise initiatives. Halcrow/SKM identify the main possible causes of failure as being either:

    • that the ideas which are put forward are not put into practice; or

    • that the group gets bogged down in discussing small or minority issues.

  1. To ensure that interest is sustained there needs to be a slate of subjects which the Partnership are delegated to investigate and which can be readily seen to have direct relevance to them. The standing of the Partnership, and the confidence of participants that actions will follow from their work, would also be enhanced if the Executive were represented on the Partnership.

  2. Halcrow/SKM suggest three areas which could be addressed in the first instance (subsequent issues could be developed from within the Partnership):

    1. Urban deliveries in Oxford

    2. Motorway access and distribution issues in Bicester and Banbury

    3. Lorry routeing, particularly heavy goods vehicles using unsuitable roads in rural areas.

An important matter with all these issues is that there is an established channel through which the ideas generated can be brought into County Council policies and programmes. The first two issues could be put into practice through OTS and the ITSs respectively while the third issue could feed into the Transport Networks Review (TNR). Indeed if the third of these issues is not dealt with through a FQP it is likely that some other form of consultation would be needed to gather this information for the TNR.

  1. The success of an FQP is critically dependent upon first attracting the right participants and, possibly more importantly, then keeping them sufficiently interested that they continue to be part of the process. The assistance of trade bodies such as the Freight Transport Association and Road Haulage Association would be important in developing an initial membership. Consideration should also be given to how to integrate wider stakeholders into the process – a representative from Friends of the Earth, for example, is included within the Reading FQP group, while the Council for the Protection of Rural England is represented on Wiltshire’s Partnership.

    2. Financial and Staff Implications

  2. As stated above, County Council officers are not experienced with freight issues. If an FQP is to be proceeded with then it would be administered through the Transport Planning Term Consultancy. It would be expected that the work would actually be carried out by Halcrow/SKM. The greatest costs would be incurred during the formation of Partnership – in developing Terms of Reference, finding and inviting appropriate organisations and encouraging participation. Halcrow/SKM estimate that it would cost about £10,000 to set up the Partnership, with on-going costs of an estimated £5,000 per subsequent meeting. Assuming two meetings per year this would mean that £15,000 is needed in the first year and £10,000 in subsequent years. This could be funded from within the existing Transport Planning Consultancy Fees budget. Costs for sub-group meetings would be additional to this but could be minimised by using County Council staff and facilities for these meetings.

    3. Conclusions

  3. An FQP offers the County Council the chance to deal with a number of issues that are difficult to address as successfully in other ways. However the success or otherwise of such an initiative depends upon the willing and enthusiastic volunteering of time and effort from participants from the freight and distribution sector. It would be advisable, therefore to create a body with, initially, a very limited mandate: e.g. to investigate the issues set out in paragraph 15 above and produce recommendations within a year.

    4. Recommendations

  4. The Executive is RECOMMENDED to:

          1. approve the establishment of a Freight Quality Partnership for Oxfordshire, on the basis outlined in the report, with a review of its operation and progress to be carried out after 12 months;

          2. agree that the constitution of the Partnership should comprise the Executive Member for Transport or his nominee together with representatives of other interests as determined by the Director for Environment & Economy in consultation with the Executive Members for Transport and Strategic Planning & Waste Management; and

          3. authorise the Director for Environment & Economy to develop terms of reference and a programme of activities for the 12 month period in consultation with the Executive Members for Transport, Strategic Planning and Waste Management.

EDDIE LUCK
Assistant Director of Environmental Services (Transport Development)

Background Papers: Halcrow Group Limited: Report on Freight Quality Partnerships,

February 2003

Contact Officer: Roger O’Neill – Tel 01865 815659

March 2003

Return to TOP