Criticism from KPMG for Chancellor’s summer budget

KPMG has criticised the UK Chancellor for lack of investment in regional transport infrastructure in his Summer Budget 2015. Chris Hearld, chairman for KPMG in the North, said: “Once again we have seen the Northern Powerhouse being a key plank to the Chancellor’s Budget announcement. We have always maintained that for the Northern Powerhouse to succeed, all parts of the region need to be brought on board, so it was encouraging to hear that following the lead set by Manchester, devolution deals are in the
July 9, 2015 Read time: 2 mins
1981 KPMG has criticised the UK Chancellor for lack of investment in regional transport infrastructure in his Summer Budget 2015.

Chris Hearld, chairman for KPMG in the North, said: “Once again we have seen the Northern Powerhouse being a key plank to the Chancellor’s Budget announcement. We have always maintained that for the Northern Powerhouse to succeed, all parts of the region need to be brought on board, so it was encouraging to hear that following the lead set by Manchester, devolution deals are in the pipeline for the likes of Leeds, Liverpool and Sheffield.”
 
However, he said it was disappointing that no further announcements were made regarding investments in regional transport infrastructure. While the introduction of an Oyster card system across the North is a nice gesture in principal, he believes it will do nothing to alleviate the lack of capacity and very little to improve the connectivity on the region’s ever-crumbling rail network.
 
James Stamp, head of transport at KPMG UK also commented on the Chancellor’s commitment to invest in UK roads. He noted that in his last budget, the Chancellor announced a major road investment program worth US$23 billion. The Summer Budget included a promise to ‘ring fence’ the vehicle excise duty, or road tax, providing some clarity about where funding for the ambitious road projects will be found.

However, Stamp said, “We note that while road tax raises around US$9 billion per year, this is dwarfed by income collected from fuel duty which is around US$41.5 billion. We believe that more of this income should be reinvested in roads and transport infrastructure in line with the Chancellor’s statement that money raised from drivers should be spent on the roads they drive on.”

Urban Traffic Control

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Banning new petrol and diesel cars a ‘smokescreen’ for lacklustre air quality plan, says CILT
    August 2, 2017
    Following publication of the Government’s Air Quality Plan, the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT) believes that government could do better than the “weak and timid” plans, particularly given the urgency and the health risks. The Institute recently criticised the draft plan, saying the proposed measures to reduce NO2 concentrations were likely to be ineffective. Many towns and cities in England suffer excessive – and illegal – levels of NO2 concentrations on their busiest roads and these
    Read More
  • Moody’s: Burden of infrastructure spending increasingly falling on US states
    January 24, 2017
    Repairing or replacing aging transportation infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, will require US states to shoulder additional cost burdens since federal funding has stagnated over the last 20 years, Moody’s Investors Service says in a new report. States with large maintenance burdens and backlogs will face budgetary challenges in meeting these needs. US federal highway aid has seen little growth from fiscal 2009-15 and is projected to remain flat when adjusted for inflation through fiscal 2020. Th
    Read More
  • Why Netflix could overcome road pricing resistance
    October 28, 2019
    As the US moves towards a national road usage charging trial, education is paramount – and subscription services like Netflix might help people understand why the money is needed, writes Bill Cramer
    Read More
  • Study highlights levels of car dependency
    December 15, 2014
    New research by the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) has revealed Peterborough, Colchester and Milton Keynes as the hardest places in England to live if you don't have access to a car. Meanwhile, London, Manchester and Liverpool have emerged as the easiest. The new research compares how different towns and cities measure up in areas including public transport provision, facilities for cycling and walking, and land use planning policies that support sustainable transport. Stephen Joseph, chief execu
    Read More

Highlighted Content