THE impartiality of the Transport Research Laboratory could be jeopardised by the governmentâs privatisation plans, warns former transport minister Peter Bottomley.
The two groups in the running to take over the 66-year-old government research organisation made their final proposals to the Department of Transport late last month. The existing management is proposing a buyout and would set up a foundation to carry on the work of the lab much as it is now. The other group is a controversial consortium consisting of consultants and two bastions of the road lobby â the AA and the RAC.
Many critics argue that the independence of the laboratory will be compromised if the commercial consortium wins. âWe are at risk of losing parts that matter â confidence and continuity,â Bottomley told 51¶ŻÂț. A commercial laboratory will not command the trust of government and the public in the same way, he says.
Advertisement
The big fear is that the vested interests of the two pro-road organisations could skew research priorities. âWhy be an owner if you canât have any impact on what goes on?â asks Hugh Davies, a retired TRL researcher. âThere are better ways of making a profit than buying a research lab.â
The TRL has traditionally carried out a wide range of research, including devising ways of traffic calming, evaluating toddlersâ car seats, monitoring vehicle emissions and working on pedestrian safety. Its results have been âvitalâ in shaping transport policy, says Bottomley, who was junior transport minister from 1986 to 1989.
Robert Gifford, executive director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, agrees that a key part of the labâs work is to provide knowledge and expertise to government. âIf the RAC and the AA were the successful bid then it is possible that they could influence government policy,â he says.
Lynn Sloman of the pressure group Transport 2000 agrees that under the consortium research which could influence government policy on road safety or environmental issues could be abandoned. The RAC and the AA âconsistently argue for more and bigger roadsâ, she says. Their ideas of road safety, she says, revolve around technologies such as airbags and rollover bars -âanything you can do to keep people in cars safe, even if it encourages them to drive faster and more dangerouslyâ.
The TRLâs top-rate research on pedestrian safety could be downgraded, says Davies, whose work at the lab focused on pedestrian welfare. âThey seem to regard pedestrians as a nuisance best kept off the road.â Bottomley told 51¶ŻÂț that he knows of no commercial interest committed to the safety of pedestrians.
Critics also argue that results of research could be distorted. In November, for instance, the RAC released details of a study it commissioned on car dependency, reporting that people are dependent on their cars for 80 per cent of their journeys. âBut this was a distortion,â says Sloman. Only 20 per cent fell clearly into the âdependentâ category. The remainder said that they could imagine alternatives but it was easier for them to travel by car. Jeremy Vanke, a spokesman for the RAC, later admitted âthereâs a lot of grey in the findingsâ.
Vanke dismisses concerns about impartiality. âThereâs no way we would interfere with the work,â he says. âWe will have no control over the results of the research and weâll be run by an independent advisory board, drawn from academia.â
The management buyout has gained widespread support. More than a hundred private companies, professional societies and universities support the proposal. âItâs the best way of trying to maintain and enhance the traditions of the lab,â says Peter Jones of the Transport Studies Group at the University of Westminster, which has worked with the TRL. âIt has a good reputation for independence.â
