London 2012: changing delivery patterns in response to the impact of the Games on traffic flows

The paper addresses road freight transport operations during the London Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. It presents work carried out prior to the Games to understand pre-Games patterns of freight deliveries in London (for both light and heavy goods vehicles) and the results of modelling work carried out to assess the likely impacts of the Games road restrictions on freight operations. The modelling results indicated that increases in total hours travelled carrying out collection and delivery work would range from 1.4% to 11.4% in the six sectors considered. The results suggested increases in hours travelled in excess of 3.5% in four of the six sectors modelled. The possible actions that could be taken by organizations to reduce these negative impacts were also modelled and the results indicated that such actions would help to mitigate the impact of the road restrictions imposed on operators during the Games. The actual impacts of the 2012 Games on transport both in general terms and specifically in terms of freight transport are also discussed, together with the success of the actions taken by Transport for London (TfL) to help the road freight industry. The potential freight transport legacy of the London 2012 Games in terms of achieving more sustainable urban freight transport is considered and the steps being taken by TfL to help ensure that such a legacy can be realized are discussed. Such steps include policy-makers continuing to collaborate closely with the freight industry through the ‘London Freight Forum’, and TfL's efforts to encourage and support companies revising their delivery and collection times to the off-peak; improving freight planning in the design and management of TfL-funded road schemes; electronic provision of traffic information by TfL to the freight industry, and the further development of freight journey planning tools.

The Art of the State

When we talk of culture we are talking about a source of enormous historical social power. Why did the GLC commitment to Popular Culture upset the rules of the unelected arts and sports quangos? How did the now abolished GLC get politics into arts policy?

Improving energy efficiency in the road freight transport sector: the application of a vehicle approach

Several approaches can be used to analyse performance, energy consumption and CO2 emissions in freight transport. In this paper we define and apply a vehicle-oriented, bottom up survey approach, the so called ‘vehicle approach’, in contrast to a ‘supply chain approach’. The main objective of the approach is to assess the impacts of various freight transport operations on efficiency and energy use. We apply the approach, comparing official statistics on freight transport and energy efficiency in Britain and France. Results on freight intensity, vehicle utilisation, fuel use, fuel efficiency and CO2 intensity are compared for the two countries. The results indicate comparable levels of operational and fuel efficiency in road freight transport operations in the two countries. Issues that can be addressed with the vehicle approach include: the impacts of technology innovations and logistics decisions implemented in freight companies, and the quantification of the effect of policy measures on fuel use at the national level.

Handling the transfer of power: a note on the 1964 origins of the Douglas‐Home rules

Opposition is rarely a good preparation for government. The only post‐war government to enter office confident, well‐acquainted with the Civil Service and with a fund of administrative experience to draw on was the Attlee administration formed in 1945. The longer a party spends in opposition the more these assets disappear. Labour, by the end of the long period of Conservative rule in 1951–64, was largely unfamiliar with the burdens of office. This formed the background to the formulation of the Douglas‐Home rules, whereby informal contact is permitted between the Civil Service and the Opposition in advance of a general election. Since 1964 this arrangement has gradually become more extensive (especially after Neil Kinnock complained that the period for contact was too brief during the run‐up to the 1992 election) and more formalised. In late 1993 John Major agreed that contacts could be made from early 1996 in advance of the next election, rather than only during the last six months of a parliament, as had by then become the convention.’ The object of this short paper is, however, to explain how these rules originated.