Post by rebeltc130 on Jun 1, 2020 13:18:19 GMT
Whatever one's thoughts of David Lloyd George, found the following in the London Passenger Transport section (from pages 18-20) of his We Can Conquer Unemployment pledge for the 1929 UK general election rather interesting in terms of proposals and how they compare to the New Works Programme a few years later. - britainforward.org/Unemployment%20Lloyd%20George.pdf
LONDON PASSENGER TRANSPORT
Since the war there have been some remarkable developments in the Greater London area. The trend of
industry to the South has produced a marked effect in many of the districts round London, where
unemployment has latterly been much less severe than in the country as a whole. Building has been rapid,
but greatly hampered by lack of adequate road and transport facilities. The question of London's roads and
bridges has already been dealt with in the Roads Section.
As regards transport, very limited progress has been reside, but a valuable (if expensive) lesson may be
learned from that which has taken place. The Hampstead and City and South London lines have been
joined up and extended north-west from Golders Green to Edgware, and south-west from Clapham to
Morden. This involved a heavy capital cost, which was provided by means of guarantees under the Trade
Facilities Acts, without which the company concerned would probably have been unable to raise the
necessary capital. Fares (not particularly cheap in themselves) did not provide sufficient security, and today it is doubtful how far the expenditure is profitable to the company. But as to the profit of another
section of the community there can be no doubt at all. Before ever the extensions were commenced their
mere announcement led to transactions in land along the proposed routes at enormously enhanced values,
and although in the absence of a systematic valuation no definite figure can be given, there can be little
doubt that already the increase in land values directly due to these extensions is far more than sufficient to
meet the whole capital cost. But not one penny of it has been devoted to that end – all has gone as an
unmerited present to landowners and speculators. We have dealt with this matter previously under the
heading of Betterment. As we mention there, Lord Ashfield, at the annual meeting of the Underground
Group on February 24th, 1927, expressed the view which we hold, viz., that this increment should have
contributed to the cost of the railway. Not unnaturally, no more extensions have been undertaken.
The only other development has been the London Traffic Act of I924, passed by Labour and Conservatives
in alliance against Liberal opposition.
The Traffic Advisory Committee appointed under the Act of 1924 has published several reports, after
public inquiries into the needs of North-East, East, and South-East London, from which it appears that the
over-crowding, delay, and expense to which the unfortunate residents of those areas are exposed in their
daily journeys between their work and their homes constitute a serious scandal, and go far to nullify the
benefits of improved housing in the outer districts. In each case large extensions of railway and other
facilities are declared by the Committee to be desirable, but in the main are not definitely recommended
on the ground of expense. Those which were recommended (in 1925 and I126) are still, with a few trifling
exceptions, in abeyance.
In our opinion it is of urgent importance that not only those schemes endorsed by the Committee, but
some others with which they did not definitely deal, should be put in hand with the least possible delay.
The urgency arises from the situation with regard to Transport and Housing, in addition to our present
subject: Unemployment. To secure this end, the co-operation of the State IS necessary. There are several
quite practicable methods (supported by experience) by which this can properly be done. One worthy of
the fullest consideration in the case of such a matter as Tube extension is that the State should own the
railway and lease the line to an undertaking which can work it in conjunction with an existing system. In
such cases, control would be retained over the fares to be charged; and the increase in land values would
be drawn upon by means of betterment and site value taxes in reduction of the cost and of the fares. This
method of leasing has been used very successfully in the U.S.A.
There is undoubted need for reducing the cost of London transport, especially between some of the outer
suburbs and the centre. Moreover, the lower the fares on the new railways, the greater will be the
betterment to be taken by the State, and the higher the site value to be rated by the Local Authority.
The following is a list of a number of highly desirable extensions and Improvements, not all of which, of
course, could be carried through in two years. In some cases steps should be taken to commence work at
once. In others, work of survey and preparation should be immediately initiated and energetically pursued.
PARTICULARS OF SCHEMES
A – NORTH LONDON
(1) Extension of the Piccadilly Railway to Manor House and Southgate.
(2) Extension of the Highgate tube to East Finchley.
(3) Electrification of L.N.E.R. from Finsbury Park to High Barnet and Edgware, with connections to
provide
through running on the G.N. & City and between the latter and the Metropolitan at Moorgate.
(4) Provisions of Interchange Stations at Manor House and Golders Green for Tubes, Buses, and Trams.
B – EAST LONDON
(1) New electric railway from Liverpool Street via Bethnal Green, Victoria Park (in tube), Leyton, and
West Walthamstow to Waltham Cross (on surface).
(2) Electrification of L.N.E.R. from Liverpool Street to Romford and to Loughton, with new fly-over
junction at Stratford.
(3) New fly-over junction at Aldgate East.
(4) Aldgate Interchange Station.
(5) Electrification of existing L.M.S. (L.T. & S.) line and extension of District Railway service from
Barking to Upminster.
(6) New connection between existing lines from Fenchurch Street to B1acl~wal1, and Canning Town to
Beckton (connecting all the docks); electrification of the whole, and extension by new surface line to
Dagenham, Becontree and Romford.
(7) A new electric line branching from (1) near Victoria Park then via Wanstead and North Ilford to
Hainault Forest, and ultimately beyond (this might be connected with (6) at Romford).20
C – SOUTH-EAST LONDON
(1) New connection between Metropolitan (East London) and Southern Railways at New Cross providing,
in conjunction with A(3) and B(3), direct connection between the G.C. and G.N. systems of the
L.N.E.R. and the Southern Railway.
D – WEST LONDON
(1) Surface electric line from Hammersmith to Hounslow West, picking up from Chiswick old trains of
Southern Railway.
The total cost of the above proposals may be estimated very roughly at £17,000,000, and the employment
directly on construction at an average of 16,000 men for the first two years and 6,500 men for two years
more. A very large part of the remaining expenditure, however, would be upon such things as rails, girders,
electrical plant, and cement, all of which would involve employment in the trades concerned, especially the
steel trade. Half as many men again can be added on this account, bringing up the total additional
employment to, say, 24,000 and 10,000 respectively.
In addition to the railway developments we have mentioned, a number of linkings-up and minor extensions
of the tramway system are required, some of which would enhance the value of the system in a degree
altogether out of proportion to their cost. Moreover, if our proposals for new roads in the London area are
carried out, and if some of the more unreasonable restrictions imposed by the Minister of Transport are
removed, there will be an appreciable addition to the number of motor omnibuses, without additional
congestion. We have taken no account of the employment thus caused.
Some of the developments above-mentioned seem to have been delayed by the failure of the local
authorities and companies concerned to agree among themselves, and by the attitude of some who were
unwilling either to do the work themselves or to leave others a free hand. The national emergency requires a
Government with power and determination to over-ride such difficulties, to decide upon a policy, and to
carry it out.
Since the war there have been some remarkable developments in the Greater London area. The trend of
industry to the South has produced a marked effect in many of the districts round London, where
unemployment has latterly been much less severe than in the country as a whole. Building has been rapid,
but greatly hampered by lack of adequate road and transport facilities. The question of London's roads and
bridges has already been dealt with in the Roads Section.
As regards transport, very limited progress has been reside, but a valuable (if expensive) lesson may be
learned from that which has taken place. The Hampstead and City and South London lines have been
joined up and extended north-west from Golders Green to Edgware, and south-west from Clapham to
Morden. This involved a heavy capital cost, which was provided by means of guarantees under the Trade
Facilities Acts, without which the company concerned would probably have been unable to raise the
necessary capital. Fares (not particularly cheap in themselves) did not provide sufficient security, and today it is doubtful how far the expenditure is profitable to the company. But as to the profit of another
section of the community there can be no doubt at all. Before ever the extensions were commenced their
mere announcement led to transactions in land along the proposed routes at enormously enhanced values,
and although in the absence of a systematic valuation no definite figure can be given, there can be little
doubt that already the increase in land values directly due to these extensions is far more than sufficient to
meet the whole capital cost. But not one penny of it has been devoted to that end – all has gone as an
unmerited present to landowners and speculators. We have dealt with this matter previously under the
heading of Betterment. As we mention there, Lord Ashfield, at the annual meeting of the Underground
Group on February 24th, 1927, expressed the view which we hold, viz., that this increment should have
contributed to the cost of the railway. Not unnaturally, no more extensions have been undertaken.
The only other development has been the London Traffic Act of I924, passed by Labour and Conservatives
in alliance against Liberal opposition.
The Traffic Advisory Committee appointed under the Act of 1924 has published several reports, after
public inquiries into the needs of North-East, East, and South-East London, from which it appears that the
over-crowding, delay, and expense to which the unfortunate residents of those areas are exposed in their
daily journeys between their work and their homes constitute a serious scandal, and go far to nullify the
benefits of improved housing in the outer districts. In each case large extensions of railway and other
facilities are declared by the Committee to be desirable, but in the main are not definitely recommended
on the ground of expense. Those which were recommended (in 1925 and I126) are still, with a few trifling
exceptions, in abeyance.
In our opinion it is of urgent importance that not only those schemes endorsed by the Committee, but
some others with which they did not definitely deal, should be put in hand with the least possible delay.
The urgency arises from the situation with regard to Transport and Housing, in addition to our present
subject: Unemployment. To secure this end, the co-operation of the State IS necessary. There are several
quite practicable methods (supported by experience) by which this can properly be done. One worthy of
the fullest consideration in the case of such a matter as Tube extension is that the State should own the
railway and lease the line to an undertaking which can work it in conjunction with an existing system. In
such cases, control would be retained over the fares to be charged; and the increase in land values would
be drawn upon by means of betterment and site value taxes in reduction of the cost and of the fares. This
method of leasing has been used very successfully in the U.S.A.
There is undoubted need for reducing the cost of London transport, especially between some of the outer
suburbs and the centre. Moreover, the lower the fares on the new railways, the greater will be the
betterment to be taken by the State, and the higher the site value to be rated by the Local Authority.
The following is a list of a number of highly desirable extensions and Improvements, not all of which, of
course, could be carried through in two years. In some cases steps should be taken to commence work at
once. In others, work of survey and preparation should be immediately initiated and energetically pursued.
PARTICULARS OF SCHEMES
A – NORTH LONDON
(1) Extension of the Piccadilly Railway to Manor House and Southgate.
(2) Extension of the Highgate tube to East Finchley.
(3) Electrification of L.N.E.R. from Finsbury Park to High Barnet and Edgware, with connections to
provide
through running on the G.N. & City and between the latter and the Metropolitan at Moorgate.
(4) Provisions of Interchange Stations at Manor House and Golders Green for Tubes, Buses, and Trams.
B – EAST LONDON
(1) New electric railway from Liverpool Street via Bethnal Green, Victoria Park (in tube), Leyton, and
West Walthamstow to Waltham Cross (on surface).
(2) Electrification of L.N.E.R. from Liverpool Street to Romford and to Loughton, with new fly-over
junction at Stratford.
(3) New fly-over junction at Aldgate East.
(4) Aldgate Interchange Station.
(5) Electrification of existing L.M.S. (L.T. & S.) line and extension of District Railway service from
Barking to Upminster.
(6) New connection between existing lines from Fenchurch Street to B1acl~wal1, and Canning Town to
Beckton (connecting all the docks); electrification of the whole, and extension by new surface line to
Dagenham, Becontree and Romford.
(7) A new electric line branching from (1) near Victoria Park then via Wanstead and North Ilford to
Hainault Forest, and ultimately beyond (this might be connected with (6) at Romford).20
C – SOUTH-EAST LONDON
(1) New connection between Metropolitan (East London) and Southern Railways at New Cross providing,
in conjunction with A(3) and B(3), direct connection between the G.C. and G.N. systems of the
L.N.E.R. and the Southern Railway.
D – WEST LONDON
(1) Surface electric line from Hammersmith to Hounslow West, picking up from Chiswick old trains of
Southern Railway.
The total cost of the above proposals may be estimated very roughly at £17,000,000, and the employment
directly on construction at an average of 16,000 men for the first two years and 6,500 men for two years
more. A very large part of the remaining expenditure, however, would be upon such things as rails, girders,
electrical plant, and cement, all of which would involve employment in the trades concerned, especially the
steel trade. Half as many men again can be added on this account, bringing up the total additional
employment to, say, 24,000 and 10,000 respectively.
In addition to the railway developments we have mentioned, a number of linkings-up and minor extensions
of the tramway system are required, some of which would enhance the value of the system in a degree
altogether out of proportion to their cost. Moreover, if our proposals for new roads in the London area are
carried out, and if some of the more unreasonable restrictions imposed by the Minister of Transport are
removed, there will be an appreciable addition to the number of motor omnibuses, without additional
congestion. We have taken no account of the employment thus caused.
Some of the developments above-mentioned seem to have been delayed by the failure of the local
authorities and companies concerned to agree among themselves, and by the attitude of some who were
unwilling either to do the work themselves or to leave others a free hand. The national emergency requires a
Government with power and determination to over-ride such difficulties, to decide upon a policy, and to
carry it out.
