The government is to spend �145m to reduce traffic jams and accidents on England's roads.

New roundabouts and lane markings will be put in place to improve conditions on trunk roads and motorways.

But some of the government's critics have accused it of tinkering while the country grinds to a halt.

And BBC transport correspondent Tom Symonds says the big decisions have not been made - in particular whether to build a string of new roads and bypasses, and whether to widen a number of A roads.

What do you think of the government's plans? How will the changes affect you?

Steve Hounsham from Transport 2000 answered your questions in a forum for the BBC's Six O'Clock News, presented by Manisha Tank.

Transcript

Manisha Tank:
Steve Hounsham from Transport 200 is here to answer your questions. Steve, thanks for being with us. A lot of people have something to say about traffic congestion - it's a real problem, certainly in London and the hotspots around the country, Birmingham is just another one of them.

We start with an e-mail from Dave Spencer, Leicester: What's the timescale for these improvements? But is it just a fleabite when real action is needed?

There's a real feeling that the Government is fudging this issue.

Steve Hounsham:
Well, that's absolutely true in a way because these are short-term changes and to be honest they're little more than first aid measures.

In the long-term if we really want to affect congestion, we're going to have to tackle the root, fundamental cause - which is that there is simply too much traffic on our roads. Until we actually start to reduce traffic, we not going to see those traffic jams get any shorter.

Manisha Tank:
Andrew McPherson, Inverness, Scotland: In the short-term road works will cause delays themselves. By the time they're finished, they'll be more cars on the road and the improvements will be redundant. Is there a better way to reduce congestion?

Steve Hounsham:
Certainly, I think there is, yes. The Government is signalling that it wants to do something about congestion but it's missing the main point which is you can only really tackle congestion by improving public transport - improving choices for people so that they don't feel they have to get in their car for every single journey.

There's a lot of work also that needs to be done to improve the environment for pedestrians and cyclists. What we've got to do is to improve choice and that way more motorists would decide to use their cars less of the time and the traffic jams can actually get shorter.

Manisha Tank:
Paul Madley, Manchester, UK: Isn't it true that these are old ideas, repackaged and stuck together with a higher price tag.

Guy Chapman, Reading, UK: How are these new proposals different from the attempts to build our way out of congestion which failed so consistently in the 1980s and the early 1990s? Surely the evidence shows that building new roads creates more traffic rather than reducing congestion.

Steve Hounsham:
Absolutely. Time and time again, where more road space has been provided - either in the form of new roads or widened roads - it simply filled up with traffic and congestion had gone right back to where it was to start with. So it's not a long-term solution and it does simply put more cars on our roads. So road building is not the answer.

These short-term, fairly small scale measures might have an impact on congestion and safety in the short-term and I believe the Government wants to be seen to be doing something - and what's wrong with that. But in the long-term it can't get away from the main point that it must reduce traffic.

Manisha Tank:
Text message from Ann Keen, UK: The M25 is a fairly new motorway in comparison to the others. Why was it not constructed originally with four lanes? Within months of opening, new lanes were being added.

There seems to be a massive gap in research and development in trying to figure out what it is we need on our roads.

Steve Hounsham:
The basic problem is that throughout the '80s and '90s in particular, successive governments tried to build their way out of congestion simply by providing more road space without really realising it wouldn't actually make much difference.

However, as soon as the extra road space was provided, it simply filled up with traffic and in that way they found that three lanes on the M25 was not enough and they needed to put another one on. Of course now they realise that four lanes on the south western section is not enough either. But we can't go on in that direction. It is not the way to achieve a real solution.

Manisha Tank:
Howard Toon, UK: Much of the overcrowding on our motorway network is caused by drivers who hog the centre lane thus rendering the nearside lane unusable. It needs a campaign to hammer home the message - keep to the nearside lane, except when overtaking.

I think also what Mr Toon is trying to point out is perhaps we should be going back sometimes to the basics of our Highway Code - they are there for a reason, these rules.

Steve Hounsham:
Absolutely. We can all remember examples of bad driving on the motorways or other main roads that cause unnecessary problems for traffic. I think there's scope there for improvement in terms of congestion relief - it's probably fairly small.

I agree drivers should be careful drivers, they should drive as near to the left as possible and only use the faster lanes when overtaking - that seems commonsense. But I don't think - even if all drivers did follow those rules - it will lead to a very great improvement in terms of congestion.

Manisha Tank:
Ray Ross, Dundee, UK: Why do the Government not introduce a higher standard to reach when getting a driving licence? More in keeping with the Advanced Driver test. This would result in a vast reduction in drivers in say three years, creating a new profession and reducing road problems.

Steve Hounsham:
Certainly better training for drivers would pay dividends I'm sure. But the underlying point is that effectively there are too many drivers wanting to use their cars too much of the time out there. That's a fundamental issue that we must address. Obviously it's better if those drivers are better trained from safety points of view. But if we really want to tackle congestion, then we've really got to look at providing more choices to more motorists.

Manisha Tank:
Mark Hughes, Chester: What strategic plans do the Government have, if any, to reduce car use?

Steve Hounsham:
That's a very good question. I'm afraid the answer to that is that it probably doesn't really have any strategic long-term plan. It did try, when it first came into office in '97, to send out a message to car drivers - get out of your car, get on the bus, get on the train. But it rather attracted the backlash from the motoring organisations and tabloid newspapers and that, I think, put the Government off course and it's rather running scared of the motoring lobby now and it's very reluctant to take on curbing traffic head on.

However, it's difficult to see how else they can reduce the amount of traffic on our roads but certainly they have indicated they want to improve public transport but they really do need to take on the motorist head on as well and try to get them to use their cars less.

Manisha Tank:
Alastair Gilmour, Aachen, Germany: Would using the railway system for freight transport reduce lorry traffic, and therefore congestion?

A number of people have written in about this point that more of that freight traffic needs to go onto the railway system as opposed to being on these trucks.

Steve Hounsham:
Absolutely. Transport 200 would very much like to see more freight going by rail, there's no doubt about that. At the moment only a small proportion of our freight goes by rail compared with other countries and the vast majority goes by road and of course that causes all sorts of problems in terms of pollution, congestion, safety concerns and so on.

What we need to do is to encourage more companies to look at rail freight and we need to encourage more local authorities to set up the infrastructure and the conditions under which that form of freight carriage could thrive.

Manisha Tank:
Text message: Would it help if HGV drivers were to use motorways only during the night?

Steve Hounsham:
Yes, I've heard a number of ideas along these lines. It's difficult to think whether or not moving more freight around at night would actually be a better situation. Obviously on motorways it's not actually going to disturb many people. But if we are carrying more freight by roadway at night, then there could well be more disturbance when those lorries get to their final destinations.

So it is rather swings and roundabouts - in some cases it would be good to reduce the daytime congestion on our roads. But there's no point in solving that problem by creating another one of great disturbance at night to local residents.

Manisha Tank:
We've been running a online poll our online views talking about toll roads. The question has been: would you be willing to pay tolls to drive down Britain's highways and byways?

The number of 63% of you have said you would not be willing to pay those tolls. Steve, is that the kind of result you would expect?

Steve Hounsham:
A lot of polls have in fact shown figures that motorist are prepared to accept some form of road charging but only provided the money is used usefully in terms of improving public transport.

I think there is a growing consensus that we are coming round to the idea of fairly broad based area charging in all parts of the country. Obviously in London, congestion charging will start next February and I think a lot of councils around the country will be watching closely to see whether that is successful. Assuming it is successful - and I hope it is - then I think a lot more local councils will be bringing congestion charging in their own areas.

No motorist likes to dig into their pocket if they don't have to. But I think provided the message goes out that really there is no alternative if we want to reduce congestion. And so long as people understand that their concerns that the money should go towards public transport are being met, then I think that people will be broadly in favour in the long term.

Manisha Tank:
Mike C, Liverpool: Why does the Government only spend a fraction of the revenue it raises from motorists on transport?

Steve Hounsham:
This is a common complaint. We would certainly like to see the Government spend more of motoring taxation on improving public transport and also improving the street environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

But a lot of people think that all money raised by motoring taxes should therefore be spent on road building for example. But this is like suggesting that all money raised on beer should go towards building new breweries. Of course it doesn't happen.

This is general taxation raised by the Government for a whole range of purposes. But I think more of it should go on improving public transport and the street environment.

Manisha Tank:
Leo, Kiddiminster: Police seem to take no notice of road obstruction from parked cars now whereas years ago people were frequently fined for it. Now parked cars obstruct roads to such a degree that fire engines and ambulances often have problems of access. Also they obstruct vision and cause many accidents let alone the fact that they hold some cars up and can cause traffic congestion. Things like that need to be spotted.

Steve Hounsham:
Absolutely. In a way this has been inevitable because the number of cars in the country is growing from year to year. At the moment there are 22 million private cars in the country and there simply isn't enough roadside space to park them all conveniently.

This is a problem that has been a long time in the growing. There is no obvious way of combating it other than to try to reduce the amount of cars that people feel compelled to use. If more people were satisfied with public transport and found that it met their needs then I think that fewer people would be rushing out and buying a car when they're 17 or 18.

Manisha Tank:
Gary Dowsett, London: Why is school traffic not looked at as a congestion problem? Twelve weeks a year the roads are clear - so tackling school traffic would help both congestion and safety for children.

I think also the point being made here is again measures that can reduce the number of cars on the road, for example, car pooling is a very good way to reduce traffic.

Steve Hounsham:
Absolutely yes. Certainly I would agree that the school run is a major form of congestion. In fact at ten-to-nine in term time around 20% of traffic on our town centre or city roads is actually on the school run and this causes enormous problems - not only in congestion but also in terms of safety around the school gates. And because there is so much traffic converging on the school gates, other parents feel that they can't let their children walk or cycle because it's too dangerous.

So clearly here is a problem that's snowballing and getting bigger and bigger. But lots of schools are tackling the school run. In many parts of the country, schools, local authorities and parents are working together to set up safe routes to school - routes where children can walk in greater safety and don't actually need to be driven to school by their parents.

But there's a long way to go. A key part of making the road safer for children is of course reducing the danger from traffic and I think we need to look at lower speed limits in more places - especially around schools.

Manisha Tank:
Mike York, Oxford: The problem is that too many people use the roads at the same time. Wouldn't staggered start and finish times for factories, schools and other large places of work make a huge difference?

Steve Hounsham:
Well, certainly yes. We all want to use the roads between eight and nine in the morning and between five and six in the afternoon. That's obviously a major cause of congestion. Yes, I am sure there are ample opportunities for spreading out the traffic throughout the day in a more even fashion so that we don't have these massive jams at certain times of the day.

There are other things as well - such as working from home and telephone conferencing - things that mean you don't have to get in your car and drive to a work place or on a business trip and that you can do it in other means that don't involve generating traffic.

There are a lot of ways that we could organise working life better I think and the transport options that are available in terms of going to work and travelling around during work time. I think they could make a real contribution to sorting out congestion problems.

Manisha Tank:
Steve Hounsham of Transport 2000, thanks so much for being with us.

Just to let you know, the online viewers, the vote that has been ongoing has now swung the other way. We're now reporting that 58% of you would pay for toll roads. Maybe you've been listening to the forum and have changed your minds.