Thames Estuary motorway must not devour UK’s green transport budget

SPONSORED

It’s more important than ever that the Labour Government makes sure every pound it spends really counts for everyone across the UK.

That’s why the enthusiasm of Ministers from Sir Keir Starmer down for the Lower Thames Crossing (LTC) makes little sense.

This gigantic, 14-mile, six lane, ‘smart’ motorway under the Thames Estuary between Gravesham in Kent and Thurrock in Essex has a likely price tag of £16bn. 

Train drivers’ union ASLEF and campaigning group Transport Action Network (TAN) believe it’s the wrong choice.

You can’t build your way out of road congestion

It may sound like a good idea to create a bypass of the congested M25 Dartford Crossing for cars and lorries travelling to and from the Channel ports.  That’s until you remember what’s been known for decades: you can’t build your way out of road congestion, especially so close to a large city.

So it’s no surprise that the scheme would bring less than five years of relief at Dartford after seven years of construction chaos.  International consultants Stantec, working for Thurrock’s Labour Council, have demonstrated that the LTC is doomed to fail. 

The LTC will leave worse off the quarter of a million local households without access to a car due to the ‘opportunity cost’ of paying for such an expensive road.  Money that could have made a difference to their life chances if invested in public transport and active travel will have been gambled away on the LTC instead. This is the result of shady forces lobbying for any sort of construction on the basis that it might just deliver the Government’s elusive ‘Growth’ Mission.

While the Government has given planning consent for the LTC, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has so far not pledged public funding with which to build it and is hoping private cash will somehow appear. Yet, finding private finance for the whole £16bn would mean crippling taxpayer repayments and/or tolls for users.  As with all PFIs, the ultimate price will inevitably land with citizens across the UK when cherished transport projects throughout the nations and regions are abandoned to pay for the LTC.

For all these reasons, TAN commissioned transport policy consultant Jonathan Roberts to investigate greener alternatives to the LTC.  Looking at changes in travel behaviour with the numerous cross-river crossings built by Transport for London along with local population densities, Roberts realised there was a good case for a passenger rail crossing in the Dartford area along with measures to boost rail freight.

Up to 100 million new passenger journeys could be generated annually

TAN set out the alternative vision earlier this year in the summary report ‘Essex-Kent Superlinks’.  Up to 100 million new passenger journeys could be generated annually on rail and up to 1,100,000 HGVs taken off our roads annually – all for £2-£2.5bn, just a fraction of the cost of the LTC.  The package includes key investments to the rail freight network to improve access for trains to east coast seaports and the Channel Tunnel.

TAN’s recommendations were unveiled with the support of ASLEF at Labour’s Eastern Region conference in January before we launched them publicly together at the Local Government Association’s head office in February backed by Labour MPs representing both sides of the Thames Estuary.

While our joint agenda features the economic and environmental benefits of boosting rail freight, the LTC will have the opposite effect. It will make it cheaper for continental HGVs racing from the Channel ports to the Midlands and the North.  While progress is being made with the electrification of cars, with HGVs it is much slower, so increased air pollution and carbon emissions are inevitable.

In contrast, one freight train produces 76% less CO2, 90% less PM10 particulates and 15x less Nitrogen Dioxide than the equivalent road journey.  This is just one reason why ASLEF has recently launched our ‘Rail Freight Future’ campaign which calls upon the Labour Government to seize the opportunity presented by the creation of Great British Railways for moving a greater proportion of goods by train.

As well as harming the Government’s Net Zero Mission, the LTC hits the NHS Mission too. The increased traffic will generate a significant increase in deaths and serious injuries, making this new ‘smart’ motorway a strange priority for the British state.

Savings from the LTC could repair large swathes of our road network

Speak to anyone across the UK about their top issues and the poor condition of our roads and pavements will be right up there. For years, voters have heard Prime Ministers trumpeting another few hundred million pounds to tackle potholes, yet still things seem to get worse.  That’s because the maintenance backlog now totals a staggering £17 billion for England and Wales – a number that rises to £24 billion when local bridge maintenance is included.

The savings from the LTC could repair large swathes of our road network.  ASLEF members are just as keen on road maintenance as anyone else because many train drivers need to get to and from rail depots by car outside the hours of public transport.  

The Government’s current approach of fobbing people off about road repairs is undoubtedly breeding discontent and distrust in politics, as we saw in the recent local and mayoral elections.  Ironically, not only did Reform sweep the board on the south side of the Thames Estuary in Kent County Council elections but it was victorious in two by-elections in Thurrock on the north bank.  These are the areas precisely where the LTC is supposed to bring benefits.  Hardly an endorsement for Labour’s electoral strategy in backing the new motorway.

With the Treasury’s Spending Review in full swing, it’s not too late to persuade the Labour Government to step back from making the generational mistake of funding the LTC.  Faced with a similar choice in 2019, the Welsh Labour Government cancelled the massive M4 Relief Road in favour of better management of existing roads along with investment in public transport and active travel.  

Capital investment diverted from the LTC should fund public transport improvements between Essex and Kent as suggested by the Roberts Report, transform the competitiveness of rail freight and support many other vital transport schemes across the UK.  Let’s urge Ministers to make the choices that are truly consistent with Labour’s values and Missions.

To find out more about ASLEF see its website here, and more information on the Transport Action Network is available on its website here.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of all things Labour – and follow us on  Bluesky, WhatsApp, Threads, X or Facebook.

• SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected].
• SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
• DONATE: If you value our work, please chip in a few pounds a week and become one of our supporters, helping sustain and expand our coverage.
• PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
• ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].