Invited Submission to the Leeds City Council Scrutiny Board (City Development)

This document has been prepared for the Board’s meeting on 23rd November 2016 in response to its invitation to me to give my views on (1) the lessons to be learned and applied following the failure of the Supertram and NGT projects, (2) on local community engagement in the development of future transport schemes and projects and (3) on what solutions and options should be considered.

So what are the lessons?

I. The decision to pursue a particular approach or scheme should be made only after serious consideration of alternatives.

II. Politicians should not commit themselves too firmly to any particular scheme before it has been subject to rigorous analysis.

III. Attempts to influence opinion (of the public, of the business community or of the Government) in favour of a particular scheme should not begin until it is clear that it is actually the best option.

IV. Consultants engaged to provide technical advice and assistance should be required to provide an honest and unbiased assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of each option rather than simply to provide analysis which supports a favourite scheme. This will become increasingly necessary as DfT’s role in vetting proposals is reduced;

V. Independent experts should be brought in to check the robustness of the analyses and, again, this will become increasingly necessary as DfT’s role in vetting proposals is reduced;

VI. The high level of local opposition to the trolleybus scheme resulted from the fact that the scheme did not address the needs and aspirations of the local communities and businesses and was exacerbated by the belief that the consultation had been inadequate (see below).

VII. Undue concentration on a single major project diverts attention from the development of alternative strategies and from the implementation of less glamourous but potentially much more cost effective projects.