A decade of disruption on rail and road was forecast last night as the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, unveiled his £180bn plan to revitalise Britain's creaking and underfunded public transport system.

The forecast was made by the shadow strategic rail authority, which has the job of re-claiming parts of the railway scrapped almost 30 years ago by Lord Beeching. "Passengers will have to expect more pain than gain. Miracles cannot be achieved overnight," said the SSRA.

Mr Prescott was careful not to overegg the fact that he has just won the largest amount of money ever put into public transport by government. He gave no promises of a "rosy traffic free future", but said that his plan addressed the issues in a "realistic and business like way".

The main criticism of the plan was that it was a "smoke and mirrors" job, relying heavily on grand figures and targets, but short on detail, particularly on what the government will do in the next few years.

It particularly upset Ken Livingstone, London's new mayor, who claimed that he had been "stitched up" by Mr Prescott.

Mr Livingstone thought that he had been given £3.2bn without any strings, but then he was informed about what he called the "unpleasant sting in the tail".

Within the past 24 hours, he was told that £104m would be needed from his allowance to pay for the mounting costs of the Jubilee line extension to the London Underground, which are now expected to total almost £4bn, more than double the original cost.

The spiralling cost of the Jubilee line extension contains hidden dangers for the government. Plans for the next 10 years are predicated on capital projects which often turn out to be far more expensive than budgeted.

Many of Mr Prescott's projects will be on road development, where budgeting is more accurate. But projects like the west coast main line and the Channel Tunnel rail link are expected to cost considerably more.

Mr Prescott told the Commons that decades of under-investment and the lack of strategic planning had left Britain with a transport system in crisis. It had been dogged by stop-go funding and a short term approach, but the government had now decided on "a step change".

Bernard Jenkin, the shadow transport minister, accused Mr Prescott of "promises, promises and promises". He said the only guarantee with the announcement was that people would still be "ripped off at the pumps and congestion on the roads would get worse".

Mr Jenkin said that the £180bn was a "fantasy land spending increase". He suggested that at the next election the government would have nothing to show for its labours. The figures were designed to mislead, he said. "How much is double counted or reannounced? How much is just pious hope, empty promises and post-dated cheques?"

Of the £180bn, some two-thirds will come from the public sector and the rest from private business organisations. It includes £60bn for railways, £59bn for roads and almost £26bn for local transport schemes. It was described by Mr Prescott as delivering "a radical improvement for passengers, motorists, business and for all of us citizens".

He conceded that the £180bn was not all new money. Projects like the Channel Tunnel rail link and some light rail and road schemes have already been budgeted for.

The plan is short on information about what the government will do to speed up public transport over the next three years.

But a senior aide to Mr Prescott said afterwards that the SSRA would be laying out its strategy for rail in the autumn, together with the cost of new capital projects.

Within the next few months, local authorities will also be presenting their plans to reduce congestion, including workplace charging, although this will not cost the government much money.

The plan was enthusiastically received across a wide section of the transport industry. Sir Christopher Foster, chairman of the RAC Foundation described it as a "tonic for all travellers" which would cut congestion and provide a "massive boost for the environment".

John Dawson, policy director of the AA, said: "It's the sort of balanced package they've been used to in Europe for decades. The challenge now is to deliver the programme quickly enough for people to notice that the record motoring taxes they pay are finally being used to improve things."

The Association of Train Operating Companies said that the money would provide the industry with a launch pad. "It will allow us to remove bottlenecks in London, Manchester and Birmingham, and help us run longer and more comfortable trains."

Railtrack said the government's targets for growth in the industry matched their own expansion projects, and they were delighted by the clarity the plans provided.

One of the country's largest bus operators, FirstGroup, hailed the plan as "the best news public transport has had for many years".

The CBI's director general, Digby Jones, hailed the plan as a "monumental victory for the business community". Coincidentally, the CBI had been pressing for exactly the same budget as Mr Prescott produced.

He said businesses throughout the UK had been crying out for an efficient transport infrastructure. It would contribute "hugely to our global competitiveness".

The British Chambers of Commerce warned that the money should not be spent on quick fixes. "The government must overcome delays in capital investment and enable local authorities to borrow now against future income from road user charging," said the deputy director general, Ian Peters.

While welcoming the plan, Friends of the Earth said that Britain's transport problems could not be solved by throwing money at every possible option. There had to be a fall in the number of cars on the roads. But that would not happen and there would be "environmentally damaging road schemes".'