Pilot schemes to test the market for partly privatising England's main roads could pave the way for motorway tolls, the chairman of the Commons' transport committee predicted yesterday.
Gwyneth Dunwoody warned that handing over design, building and maintenance to private companies for 30 years, with the carrot of earning extra money by reducing congestion and improving safety, could further undermine the ideal of an integrated transport policy.
The plans put forward by the highways agency, the government body operating 5,840 miles of motorways and trunk roads in England, involve companies being given long franchises with added responsibilities such as video surveillance, emergency rescue, and other essential services.
They are likely to be tested in a pilot scheme in 2004 and, if successful, extended to the whole network which is already partly managed, as well as repaired, by private contractors on behalf of the agency in 14 maintenance areas.
The agency denied that the plans amounted to privatisation, although an official said the idea was to "transfer the risk to private companies". A spokesperson said the pilot scheme was simply an extension of the "design, build, finance and operate" programme. "We like to work in partnership with the private sector, and build up a long-term relationship, but it is not something we would call privatisation," she added. "This is good news for the motorist and for the transport operator."
She said the agency could not comment on the likelihood of road tolls because the Department of Transport had overall responsibility. The transport secretary, Stephen Byers, who has just pushed through the part-privatisation of the London Underground against strong opposition, is said to be backing the plans.
But the transport department denied that plans for motorway tolls were being considered in this particular project.
Ms Dunwoody, Labour MP for Crewe and Nantwich, who chairs the transport committee, insisted that charging appeared to be on the agenda. She would not necessarily op pose the concept if the proceeds went into improving public transport.
"They will probably go for charging and the whole purpose of that should be to put it back into transport," she added. "If you are going to hand over more and more franchises on longer and longer terms one does begin to wonder what kind of integrated policy there is. I would want specifically to see the terms of the franchises and the clear movement of risk to the private sector - underwritten guarantees for the whole of the franchise - but I must say this seems an extremely fashionable and mistaken idea."
The agency insists it has learned from the mistakes in other public projects built and managed by the private sector. While companies would be paid for basic work in the new "partnership" franchises, they could earn bonuses if they reduced congestion and improved safety, with targets and costs reviewed each year.
The move is likely to be resisted by unions and others campaigning against the increased use of the private sector in delivering public services. They will argue that the taxpayer could be lumbered with the costs of failed schemes.
