Comment: Ken's modest transport plan

But there is no prospect that the congestion charge may be fine-tuned: it will remain the blunt instrument that it is now. Much of Mr Livingstone's energies are focused on his chief opponent, Boris Johnson, and the costing of his plan to introduce a modern Routemaster bus with conductors - although the public may decide that a new Routemaster is well worth the cost.

Mr Livingstone's record on transport is solid - but his best ideas came early on. He was right to fight Gordon Brown on his disastrous PPP plans for the Tube, and his plan for Transport for London to take over the work of the failed Metronet consortium is probably now the least-bad solution. He has greatly enlarged the bus fleet, though at considerable cost. The original congestion charge was a brave initiative - although its westward extension is quite another matter, while traffic speeds are now at pre-charge levels again, and likely to get worse as a result of Mr Livingstone scrapping the charge for some small cars. Meanwhile, there has also been an inordinate increase in cash fares on both Tube and buses.

But what is remarkable is the degree of consensus on transport between the main mayoral candidates - on the C-charge, for instance. Indeed, as Andrew Gilligan points out, the consensus includes one proposal which should never have seen the light of day - the pedestrianisation of Oxford Street and the replacement of buses with a tram line. This would be a disaster, given that Oxford Street is the great eastwest axis of London.

Mr Livingstone's manifesto is thus a promise of more of the same. With London's traffic slowly seizing up, and little visible improvement to the Tube and suburban rail, that may not be a thrilling prospect. But to date, none of his main rivals have offered any serious alternative.