Morning:
13°c
Rush-hour is slower than before C-charge
Pippa Crerar, Political Correspondent06.11.07
Traffic in the morning rush hour is now slower than before Ken Livingstone brought in the congestion charge.
Transport for London figures also show that journey times during the day and evening peak in central London have increased, after initially falling.
Motorists across the capital will be concerned by the revelation, as the Mayor pledged that congestion charging would increase traffic speeds.
Until now, Mr Livingstone has been able to claim that the £8 levy had cut the jams and made journeys quicker.
But the latest figures show the average speed for driving to work in 2006-7 was 9.3mph, down from 9.9mph before the scheme began in 2003.
A dedicated TfL vehicle, fitted with equipment to measure distances and journey times, travelled along 7,000 routes in Greater London to work out the average speed at different times of day, including the morning rush hour. The slowdown is thought to be caused in part by extra traffic entering the central zone since the west London extension in February. More drivers are now entitled to claim the 90 per cent residents' discount to drive inside the zone and many are making the most of the 80p rate.
Meanwhile, new bus lanes and schemes such as pavement widening have squeezed available road space and there has been a rise in the number of green vehicles exempt from the charge. Motoring experts have warned that the congestion could worsen if Mr Livingstone brings in exemptions for band A and B vehicles including Ford Fiestas, Nissan Micras and Volkswagen Polos.
A spokesman for London First, which represents big business in the capital, said: "The original congestion charge was a bold move by the Mayor. Although it was never universally popular, the Mayor could always point to its main achievement - it reduced congestion and increased traffic speeds.
"These latest figures show that TfL's failure to co-ordinate roadworks and the negative impact of the western extension 'buy-one-zone-get-one-free' incentives have set speeds back to 2002 levels."
TfL claimed that congestion charging had reduced traffic in the original charging zone by 21 per cent - some 70,000 cars every day - but did not deny the average traffic speed figures, blaming the fall on roadworks. " Without the congestion charge, London would have ground to a halt by now," a spokesman said.
"However, last year we saw a near doubling of streetworks taking up the road space. Much of this work is urgently required - such as replacing leaking, Victorian water pipes. Transport for London has very limited powers to ensure that roadworks are co-ordinated so as to minimise their impact on traffic flow.
"Other major world cities invested heavily in public transport for decades, while London was starved. That is why strong measures such as congestion charging have been necessary. There are no short cuts as massive investment is required, but we have made real progress, and the benefits of congestion charging in London remain clear."
Geoff Pope, Lib-Dem transport spokesman on the London Assembly, said: "Congestion charging is a clunky system based on old technology. What we need is a modern solution using tag and beacon technology, which can vary the charge to reduce congestion at peak times.
"Local action on traffic hot spots is the way forward, not hiking up the charge, which will only hit public sector workers and small businesses."
Reader views (24)
Sadly, our New York City Council just voted Yes on a congestion tax similar to London's. Many proponents of this driving tax, including Mayor Bloomberg, used London as a model that congestion taxing works. I can see now that the model is not working, and I am convinced that politicians have pulled the wool over NYC's eyes to rush this money grabbing scheme through.
I would presume that small businesses and middle to lower income drivers in London that have to pay this congestion charge feel the burden the most.
In addition, London cannot be used as a model for congestion taxing and then compared to NYC. Why? Because NYC has an added huge burden that London does not - 142,000 government sector commuter vehicles with parking placards, all parking for "free" (albeit illegally). The government sector, which includes the Police and Fire Department unions, is now screaming for exemptions to congestion taxing - and, if these exemptions occur, the purported benefits of congestion taxing are then cancelled.
- Geoff Lee, New York City, NY, USA
This article focuses solely on drivers. Have the commute times changed for commuters using other methods of transport (buses, walking, bicycles, etc.)?
I'd be interested to see what has happened to the average commute time for ALL people who are commuting into the congestion zone.
I'd rather suspect, based on the fact that average MPH has stayed about the same (around 9), that because of improvements in the other modes that the effect has been overwhelmingly in favor of faster commutes.
- Steven O., Brooklyn, NY, USA
Why is anybody surprised? The real reason for the charge was always to punish the private motorist. The money was just a bonus.
- Chris, Greenford, Middx
I agree that CC is not working. If people want to drive, they will, irrespective of the cost. My only way of getting into London is car or train, I have no access to tubes or buses. TFL have no jurisdiction of the rail companies and any investment TFL has made into public transport has gone to the buses and tubes, not to the railways. My rail journey is still hugely expensive, overcrowded, never runs on a time and makes my life a misery. As a result, I choose to drive in a couple of days a week to ease my daily stress. The obvious, but always denied, rephasing of traffic lights (in favour of pedestrians) is still having an impact on traffic flow, as is what seems to be the permanent closure of the contraflow system in the Blackwall Tunnel in the mornings. This deliberate slowing down of traffic flow, to add credibility to the CC system, is doing nothing for our environment with thousands of near stationery cars pumping out CO2, when all they are trying to do is find a convenient way to work each day. The commuter is being hit from all directions as I believe plans are still being considered to encourage flexible working hours to ease the burden on our public transport system by increasing peak travel fares even more! Sitting at home on benefits is becoming a very attractive thought.
- Lyn Appleton, London, England
I do not use buses anymore in central London as they do not show up too often and when they do it is 3 or 4 together, packed to the tilt with freeticket-riders shouting and spitting and trying to steal from my bags. Then the buses proceed slower than I would walk. I now use the tubes but they breakdown constantly. Things have definitely not improved over the last years!
- Billy, London
This is a real shame. The "mayor" seems clueless. I was always against this scheme and so was everyone else I know living in London. But Red Ken pushed it through anyhow, with the support of Crash Gordon etc.
Taxes, taxes, taxes on anything that (still) moves.
- Howie, London NW1
Why did we ever give power to Red Ken? He has made a fine mess of London: tourists are staying away or are stuck forever on our buses and tubes and taxis going nowhere. The first thing the new mayor has to do next year is to get rid of this CC system! It does not work and is just another taxation system on Londoners.
- Chantel, London
Bryan you are not going very often on a central London bus or tube! They have definitely got worse - that is if they show up!
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London
So that's it: By greedily extending the C-zone to Kensington and Chelsea in hopes of more revenue, Livingstone has undone the good he said he would achieve. He got the revenue but spoiled his strategy. This shows what his true mind-set is: short-term advantage, ignoring the longer-term implications.
- Alexs, London
Blimey Phil, if you can claim £14 million is "pretty much nothing", you're a richer man than I.
- Stan Marsh, UK
During the ten years leading up to 2001 vehicle numbers entering the central area had remained static. Prior to Livingstone's extensive road engineering took place causing increased congestion. The DAY the charge was introduced, all road works had been swept away. Since then, more tarmac has been pedestrianised, road space narrowed, turned into dead ends, traffic signals have increased, chicanes and humps have been introduced, and buses stopping at pavement build-outs often stop all traffic. The congestion charge is despised by both business and residents alike, the cost of administrating it is barely covered from income, and only through fines for non-compliance is any profit realised. As blood flow relies on clear capillaries, so too does London's streets - they need these congestion creating obstacles removed - the biggest with them - Livingstone.
- D Reynolds, St Albans, England
As usual, a story like this feeds uninformed comment.
The amount of traffic coming into central London was increasing year on year prior to the introduction of congestion charging. But as soon as congestion charging was introduced, the number of cars on Central London's roads declined dramatically. Unfortunately, when the western extension was introduced, Ken allowed those living in Kensington and Chelsea to drive around Central London for nothing.
London has not reverted to chaos, and of course Ken should not resign. As anyone who has travelled on a bus will know the speed of bus journeys is significantly quicker than it was before the congestion charge was introduced. Whole areas of London are not glorified car parks any more, and the majority of those travelling around Central London - who use public transport and not their car - are better off.
- Bryan, London
The congestion charge was an experiment. The experiment failed. Therefore the congestion charge should be abolished.
- Ian, London
Not only is the CC not working but it has consumed all of its income with its own costs. £930 million collected to the end of the last financial year. £265 million spent on set up costs and Western Extension. Running costs £651 million. Net profit £14 million. Or pretty much nothing in layman's language.
- Phil Taylor, Ealing
Is this the same Transport for London that issued warnings of complete chaos just before the congestion charge was first introduced, so as to make things look good when the capital didn't grind to a halt?
- Gill, Southall, Middx
Surprise, surprise. Ken Livingston should resign!. He should never have been let loose on London in the first place and who ever voted him in, I hope they are now ashamed of themselves.
- Mrs J Meehan, Plymouth, England
Nonsense from TFL that London would have ground to a halt without the Kengestion charge. People would have stopped driving long before that point. Surveys show that cost is only a relatively small factor in choosing to travel by car, practicality and convenience are far more important.
- Carrie, Greater London
It just shows what a lunatic scheme this is and it's cost London residents an enormous amount of money that could have been spent on something worthwhile instead of creating non-jobs in Coventry and elsewhere - total cost £600 million and rising - that's about £60 each for every Londoner.
- Roger Lawson, London, UK
Come on, Lee - traffic numbers in the peak morning rush hour have been practically constant since well before the charge. Overall London traffic levels have been about the same, as the C-charge has basically displaced drivers.
Our anti-motorist Mayor has meddled with traffic light timings, bus lanes and the Trafalgar Square lunacy to help bring road speeds down.
- Brian, London
Why don't they just ban private vehicles in the centre of London. Mega parking lots should be built around London with direct transport links to the centre. Think of the amount of fuel saved and the decrease in polution. Why are we so obsessed with our cars?
- Jon Vickers, State College, USA
This silly scheme should never have been introduced. Red Ken just wanted his private London tax-scheme. "Who has cars in London: the rich" he said!? If he wanted taxes he should have earned them - he did not...
In fact he has done very little.
- Billy, London
No surprises there then!
- Jay, London, UK
Just think how low the average speeds would be if Ken hadn't of introduced the Congestion charge then. There would be thousands more cars on the streets of the capital every day without it.
- Lee, London
"Pavement widening..."
Londoners may be obese but there's no need to widen the pavements yet!
- Adam, Harrow, UK
