Tougher rules needed for utility firms digging up roads, MPs say
Transport Committee chairwoman Ruth Cadbury said a pattern of repeated works can feel like a 'recurring nightmare' for road users.
The Transport Committee set out a series of recommendations to reduce disruption from streetworks (Martin Keene/PA)
Under current rules, utility firms are responsible for the quality of the road surfaces they have reinstated for two years after works have completed, or three years in the case of deeper excavations.
The committee called for that period to be extended to five years so council tax payers do not have to pick up the bill for repairing potholes caused by shoddy remediation work.
Other recommendations from the committee included:
– Tighter use of immediate permits enabling companies to dig up roads with little or no notice given to the local authority.
– A new streetworks commissioner, similar to the Scottish roadworks tsar, to monitor performance and resolve disputes.
– The wider use of lane rental schemes, charging firms up to £2,500 a day to incentivise quicker completion of works.
– Better co-operation so utility firms and housing developers can work on the same bit of road at the same time rather than have repeated closures.
Labour MP Ms Cadbury acknowledged that ageing infrastructure under the roads needed to be maintained and upgraded and extra cables and pipes were required for new homes.
'But as every road user knows, street works can feel like a recurring nightmare,' she said.
The committee's recommendations would make a huge difference if they were implemented, she said.
'Upping the quality of reinstatement works will help stem the never-ending plague of potholes on local roads.
'Lane rental schemes should provide a financial incentive to complete works on time.
'And longer-term planning and earlier notification should help councils prevent the infuriating occurrence of multiple roads being closed in one locality, or the same road being dug up multiple times in one year.'
A Department for Transport spokesman said: 'We wholeheartedly agree that streetworks are far too disruptive for drivers and that is why we have taken action to prevent the impact on drivers.
'We've cracked down on streetwork companies overrunning or leaving roads poorly repaired by ramping up fines and giving local authorities new powers to coordinate roadworks more efficiently and will put measures in place so 50% of surplus lane rental funds must be invested into highway maintenance.
'We are determined to end the pothole plague, which is why we are already investing £1.6 billion this year to help local authorities resurface local roads and fix the equivalent of up to seven million extra potholes this year.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Telegraph
There will be no second chance for Labour
The ANC were the first to coin the slogan 'make the country ungovernable' as they sought to depose the apartheid government in South Africa. An unruly people would weaken the centre, extract concessions and push tensions until they became contradictions. From there, you get the real prospect of regime change. Britain remains a relatively prosperous and secure nation. But it is becoming palpably less governable by the day. This is not confined to one party or leader. The lifespan of prime ministers and their cabinets are getting shorter. Parliament is sovereign once again, but it does not feel that way. Successive governments have failed to grip the centre and act decisively to overcome Britain's malaise. This is the task that falls to Labour. These are not easy times in which to govern. The Government has little room for manoeuvre. The bond markets are tetchy, gilt yields are higher than they have been for decades, pushing up the cost of borrowing. The failure of the leadership to shave £5 billion off welfare spending only increases the nervousness. Scleroticism has taken hold in seemingly every institution. How have we got here? And how can Labour get us out of it? From the 1990s through to 2016, the political class on both Left and Right was characterised above all by complacency. These were the fat years. Growth was good, largely because of a booming services economy centred on London and the south east in general and the City of London in particular. This growth enabled New Labour's economics of redistribution that supported the country's heartlands. After years of hardship, Blair's model seemed to finally bring the warring factions of the country back together again. The 2008 crash should have shaken the political class out of its complacency, exposing the precarity of our heavily financialised economy and the malaise that lurked beneath the surface of our now fragile economic model. While services had grown, our productive capacity had been denuded. Strategic industries had been closed down, outsourced or sold off to foreign investors. Regions once massaged by public sector employment opportunities and welfare found these tools were no longer powerful enough to smooth the cracks left by deindustrialisation. The recession marked the juncture at which Britain began to decline relative to the US and most other European nations, yet it prompted little critical reflection. Austerity was the coalition government's answer – and it was an expensive one. Huge structural weaknesses in our economy were reduced to a matter of simple accounting. Investment dried up and infrastructure could not keep pace with maddeningly high levels of immigration. Growth, productivity and real wages flatlined. Complacency was still the order of the day for a political class who had grown decadent and far-removed from the real conditions of the country. Whatever else it may have done, the vote to leave the European Union punctured this complacency. Blue Labour had been warning since 2009 that all was not well in the body politic, that lurking beneath the glitzy New Labour veneer social disaffection was growing. Blue represented melancholia as much as conservatism. Now all was out in the open: the disconnect between the political class and the country it sought to govern; the towns that had been left behind, their economic purpose in a global economy obscure; and the dysfunction of government, parliament and our public institutions. The Conservatives proved incapable of exiting this quagmire. The 2019 government began with an 80-seat majority and ended in ignominy and an announcement of a new fund for chess players. Lacking the will or confidence to take on Treasury orthodoxy, immigration trebled and levelling up was abandoned. The civil service was left unreformed. Growth continued to stagnate as judicial overreach and regulatory constraints made building impossible. A few brief spasms aside, inertia replaced complacency as the defining feature of our political class. As little as a year ago, you could still find echoes of complacency in the political and media class when they spoke of Labour's election win as a victory for the 'grown-ups'. But fixing a broken political system, a dysfunctional state and a stagnant economy requires more than a clean suit and tie. It has taken Labour one year to discover what took the Conservatives 14 years: that Britain, its economy and its institutions, are barely functioning. Too many in Labour defined themselves solely in opposition to the Conservatives and thought a new Government need only focus on 'delivery', with a few technical fixes here and there. Others wanted to reduce the task of governance to a form of altruism for those in need. Their vibes-based politics has no resonance in the country, no acknowledgment of the hard reality of trade-offs in a low growth economy, and no solutions for Britain's malaise. If there is a divide in Labour it is not between Left and Right, New Labour or Blue Labour, but between those who understand the severity of the country's situation and those who do not. The future success of this Government depends on this understanding. It must be an insurgent on behalf of the people, willing to grip the centre and take on its own party and the scleroticism of our institutions as it rebuilds a shattered country, shifting resources to the productive economy, to build, make and grow, driving social and economic development, radically reducing immigration and speaking for the whole country as one people united in a shared national identity and purpose. This is the choice facing Labour, the fork in the road in this inauspicious moment – a retreat into the comfort zone of liberal progressivism confined to the prosperous areas of the country, doing things for a client electorate, promising the impossible, or a striving for a radical rebuilding of the national economy, renewing our sovereign democracy and building our national revival on a broad, cross-class coalition. This way lies a second term and a new political settlement. The first year has not gone well, but there will be no second chance for Labour.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
What have they done? We'll all rue the cost of Labour rebels' actions
Perhaps these two ministers should just have resigned, explained why, precipitated the increasingly inevitable Greece 2009-type collapse facing this country and triggered the brutal policies that entails. The world has moved on from the draconian undertones of the 1834 Poor Law's "deserving and undeserving poor", but surely few could disagree with the argument put forward by former Labour MP Tom Harris this week that the objectives of reform should be aimed "squarely at those who have given up trying to get a job and have decided they would prefer to rely on benefits long-term". Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven. A Phyrric victory Keir Starmer's concessions on his welfare bill resulted in little more than a Pyrrhic victory which has left him wounded and extremely vulnerable. Who will ever believe him again when he tries to portray himself as the man who will take difficult decisions when he fails to stand by them? From the outset of his premiership, he has tied himself to the apron strings of his Chancellor who is to him the one to make Britain's economy grow again, a faith he has but very few others now share. His future is inextricably bound up with hers. So, if she fails, he fails. If she offers her resignation as a result of the effects of the pressure put upon her by the adverse criticisms of her role as Chancellor, it would be natural to assume that he would also jump ship not long after. Read more letters It is rumoured that there is the sound of sharpening knives being heard in the Labour ranks to find replacements for both of them. Should such a double whammy occur, the only course of action open to the Government would be to call an immediate election, which would send a shiver down the spines of what were formerly considered our two main parties. It is so hard for any politician to relinquish power that it would be unsurprising to see him soldier on while at the same time making it virtually unlikely that Labour would be a viable political force again. In this Government came with mighty promises of creating a dynamic economy where investment and growth would lift us out of the despond of a flatlining economy and create a country where prosperity and sound public services would march hand in hand. The febrility of our electorate with the 24/7 insensitivity of non-stop social media has left us with a country unwilling to make sacrifices to secure a stable future where everyone benefits. Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs. Scotland ahead in poverty fight Recent analysis shows that levels of relative poverty in Scotland have been lower than in the UK as a whole for the last two decades. This is surely a vindication of the policies pursued and adopted by successive Scottish governments over that time and strongly suggests that Holyrood administrations have been far more effective in looking after the needs of the people they represent than those in Westminster and the Senedd. To give some examples, in 2024 the level of relative poverty in the UK was 21% while Scotland stood at 20% (England and Wales were slightly above the UK figure). In terms of child poverty Scotland's percentage fell from 25% in 2021 to 23% last year. In both England and Wales rates in 2024 were 31%, exactly the same as in 2021. (Steve Witherden, Labour MP for Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr has indicated he would be in favour of the Welsh Government introducing something similar to the Scottish Child Payment.) The relative poverty rate for people of pension age in Scotland was 15% in 2024 compared with 16% for the UK as a whole. If the Scottish Government can outperform the UK and Welsh administrations in such a key measure of quality of life with one hand tied behind its back, as at present, we can only imagine how far ahead an independent Scotland would be. Our country simply cannot afford to be held back any longer. Alan Woodcock, Dundee. Indy in EU is a viable option Ewen Peters (Letters, July 2) argues that Scotland is doing less well than recent figures on foreign direct investment suggest. He seemed concerned that Scots might be encouraged towards independence. Mr Peters wrote: "In the Trumpian era of unpredictable tariffs, the experience of our Irish neighbours flags the dangers and risks of placing your most important economic eggs in the inward investment basket." Yet however fierce international trade wars become, Ireland can rest secure in the knowledge that as a member of the EU it has tariff-free access to the 27 member countries. Scotland does not have that and the Brexit damage over time gets worse and not better. Scots might well conclude that independence back in the EU is indeed a viable option and perhaps one that offers greater prosperity than remaining in the UK. Jackie Kemp, Edinburgh. Nothing special Malcolm Parkin (Letters, July 3) tells us that 'one goodish aspect of Britain is that one can spout nonsense on one day and still be at the same address the next day'. The same can be said of any country in Europe and of most countries in the world including the many independent states. There is nothing special about Britain in this regard. David Clark, Tarbolton. Stop the grandstanding I read your front page headline ("Minister's pledge in new bid to beat homes shortage", The Herald, July 3) with a sense of déjà vu. The "pledge" not to roll back on a target of 110,000 affordable homes by 2032 put me in mind of similar "pledges" to complete the dualling of the A9 where the Government continued to maintain that the time schedule was still achievable long past the time when it was glaringly obvious that it could not be done. The Housing Secretary talks of the need to have a "challenging" target. I feel that a large part of the current lack of confidence in/disillusion with governments and politicians stems from too many headline-grabbing so-called challenging pledges issued with no detailed plan or schedule or realistic funding provision to ensure delivery of the pledge. Past experience also tells us that without measurable milestones to monitor ongoing progress, the author of the pledge is generally safely ensconced in another government role before the chickens of failed achievement come home to roost. The Government would have far more credibility if it delivered against realistic targets rather than grandstanding with targets and programmes grabbed out of thin air. John Reid, Dunblane. • Màiri McAllan, when questioned as to the credibility of the target "to deliver 110,000 affordable homes by 2032" states: "I think it is. I think that it will require us to step up." Indeed. It seems that someone failed to inform Ms McAllan that delivering upon promises is an essential part of the job. Merely stating a target doesn't cut the mustard. Yes, Ms McAllan, you will to need to step up. Maureen McGarry-O'Hanlon, Jamestown. Housing Secretary Màiri McAllan (Image: PA) Swinney is no leader I read the article by John Swinney (''There is nothing wrong in Scotland that cannot be fixed'', The Herald, July 1) with growing despair. He asserts that most people are realistic about the challenges facing Scotland, conveniently omitting that the "challenges" are mainly as a result of his and his Government's inept handling and lack of honesty in accepting this. The article demonstrates clearly that he lacks leadership, and that he and the Government do not have any idea what the key priorities are for the Scottish people. I have never read a more wishy-washy article containing nothing of substance but "motherhood and apple pie". One saving grace was that he did not invoke the old chestnut that the answer to all our challenges is independence, God help the people of Scotland with this man as leader. Douglas Eadie, Bonhill.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Derby City Council's finances in 'better position than expected'
Derby City Council is in a better financial position than expected, finance bosses said.A report, which will be presented to cabinet members next week, said the start of the 2024/2025 financial year was "very challenging" with significant demand increases in social care and homelessness, inflation and the cost of living bosses said "unfunded pressures" amounted to £29m but the council managed to reduce its expected overspend from £9.6m to just under £4m due to "controlled spending mechanisms" and government Conservative group leader, councillor Steve Hassell, said the shortfall was masked by last-minute government bailouts, not through sound finances. The council said they also reduced their reliance on reserves has also reduced, down to just under £500,000 from a quarter one forecast of £5.8m. The report added a large proportion of the final overspend was funded by contingencies held by the Labour-run bosses added this majority of the overspend was funded from a contingency allocation of £2.9m, which was additional government funding received from the final financial settlement in January. But the Conservative group of the council said authority was too reliant on one-off contingency funding and using reserves while the £29m in unfunded pressures "highlights poor forecasting" and a "failure to plan" for well-known cost drivers such as social care and Tory group leader, councillor Steve Hassell, added an "eye-watering £85m slippage" in capital spend "indicates key projects, including regeneration and infrastructure schemes, have either stalled or been reprofiled"."[This report] paints a picture of stability, but scratch beneath the surface and the reality is far more troubling," he said."Labour's outturn report reveals a council balancing precariously between crisis and complacency," he said."Behind the polished presentation lies a fragile financial position kept afloat by temporary solutions. "The Conservative group will continue to hold this administration to account and demand responsible, transparent and deliverable financial planning that genuinely serves the people of Derby." Councillor Kathy Kozlowski, cabinet member for finance, said the city was reporting a "much better position" than other councils and the chancellor's recent three-year deal spending review and funding reforms were Kozlowski added the council was "not out of the woods yet". "We've had to work hard as a council to get to this position, and I'm grateful to all our staff who have helped us find new ways of working," she said."I'm very pleased to see our accounts moving to a place of greater financial stability because it puts us on a firmer footing for delivering the services our citizens need."The continued financial sustainability of the council continues to be a priority for us, allowing us to invest more into essential services that support some of our most vulnerable residents whilst also creating resilience for the future."
