Agenda item

The Committee received an update on the current status of public and stakeholder engagement on the West Yorkshire Connectivity Infrastructure Plan, WY Mass Transit Vision 2040 and associated documents following their publication in January 2021.

The Chair thanked Members for all their support in producing the Connectivity Infrastructure Plan (CIP). The plan sought to address the challenges of both the climate emergency and inclusive growth, and positive feedback had been received from MPs at a briefing session. The importance of gathering as much feedback as possible was emphasised, and Members were advised that the upcoming District Consultation Sub-Committee meetings had been opened to a wider audience of district councillors for the purposes of soliciting their feedback on the plan. Discussions were also underway with the LEP Business Communications Group in hopes of potentially working together to engage with businesses directly.

It was noted that there were a number of unanswered questions within the plan, particularly surrounding the required funding. Members were advised that the presented pipeline of schemes would increase the Combined Authority’s ability to access Government support, and that becoming a Mayoral Combined Authority would give access to the £4.2 billion Intra-city Transport Fund. Ultimately it was hoped that the Government would view this as an ongoing priority rather than a one-off investment, particularly in the light of historic under-investment in transport in the West Yorkshire region.

Members questioned how well passenger demand could be predicted as the region began to move on from the pandemic. A number of scenarios were being developed following industry assumptions and would be continually tested against new data, with more modelling due to take place in the next stages of work. It was highlighted that the plans were aspirational, as it was vital to encourage people to move away from private car use and toward public transport or active travel in order to meet our net-zero carbon emission targets, and this modal shift was at the heart of the work being done.

Committee members raised the following other issues regarding the CIP and engagement:

·       Concerns were raised of who would own a potential mass transit system, how infrastructure would be shared, and how modal integration could be achieved whilst maintaining competition. This would be explored later in the development process, but it would be ensured that the model chosen fitted with the priorities of the region as a whole.

·       Members were advised that a key facet of the CIP would be trying to provide the public with a simple, seamless, integrated experience, with public transportation working together rather than as competitors. The enhanced partnership was a step in this direction. However, Members questioned what effect a lack of competition could have on prices.

·       Members questioned how wide-reaching the consultation was, how seldom-heard groups were being reached, and whether contacts within each individual district were being fully used, particularly in terms of accessibility and usability groups. It was noted that unfortunately the pandemic had prevented much offline consultation work, but every effort had been taken to make digital engagement as accessible as possible, with different methods of feedback available, from a detailed survey, to polls, to an interactive map.

·       It was highlighted that the overriding message that had been received from members of the public was that they wanted transport to be clean, local, easy, accessible, and reliable.

Resolved: That the report be noted.