Tonight:
5°c
Manchester's overwhelming rejection this month of a congestion charge hammers home what we already knew: by making road pricing its main transport policy, the Government has wasted five years up a blind alley.
You cannot force people from their cars without an adequate public- transport alternative. And though Mancunians were promised big new subsidies and improved services, there was no attempt to tackle Britain's greatest barrier to adequate public transport: the fact that almost all our buses and trains are operated by private companies with no real interest in providing a public service.
The system in Manchester, and in most other provincial cities, is simply not a serious rival to the car: a chaotic mess of deregulated private operators, high fares, routes impossible for a casual user to fathom; little co-ordination or through ticketing, massive overprovision on a few profitable services and virtually no buses at all on many other routes. Away from the Metrolink tram, which reaches only a small part of the conurbation, Manchester's privatised railways are almost equally hopeless.
Ministers wanted to copy the success of London's congestion charge. But they learned the wrong lesson. London's comparative public transport success is not mainly due to the C-charge, which worked well at first but much less well now, and in any case covers only a small area. Nor, fundamentally, is it due to the extravagance of TfL, the Croesus of public subsidy junkies.
It's because we have a regulated transport system, and always have had; we were spared the disaster of bus deregulation. TfL sets routes, fares and common ticketing. Services are properly planned and marketed. The profitable routes bail out the unprofitable ones (under such an arrangement, the need for actual tax subsidy is usually quite low, which makes the size of TfL's call on the public purse even more shocking). In London, public transport is a serious alternative.
Even our most important railway, the Underground, is still nationalised. It's no coincidence that the only privatised part, the suburban rail network, is also the worst part, with most of its disgraceful operators still blocking full integration through the Oyster card, five years after its launch.
So Manchester's lessons are clear: Britain needs bus re-regulation and rail renationalisation, not road pricing. Carrots for transport users, sticks for operators — not the other way round, as the Government proposed. (A classic New Labour mistake in so many policy areas.)
Londoners, too, now need more carrot than stick. Coercive traffic management, road narrowing, endless red lights and pinch-points, have been applied too enthusiastically, increasing congestion and pollution even as traffic has dropped. They should largely be removed. The C-charge itself has clearly reached the end of the road — it was accepted in central London only because almost no one drives there, and it has no future anywhere else.
On balance, I don't think the central-London charge should go. When Boris told a Tory assembly member last week that he would “brood on” scrapping it, he was probably just stringing her along.
But in a recession, when traffic is anyway sure to be down, there may be a short-term case for copying all the shops — with a money-off sale. A month-long C-charge holiday, or a 50 per cent discount after 10am, might tempt more people to our needy retailers once the Christmas rush is over.
And in the longer term, the charge must be subtler and smarter. Someone popping in briefly to a hospital appointment should pay less than a 40-ton lorry delivering to all the Tescos in Westminster. Otherwise the charge could join the bendy bus, the western extension and pretty much all Ken's other monuments on the scrapheap of history.
Quick, quick ... very slow
What is wrong with some of our senior police officers? It was Bob Quick, Britain's top anti-terrorist commander, who ordered the arrest of the Tory frontbencher Damian Green for something not generally regarded as a crime. It was Assistant Commissioner Quick who has allowed his wife to run a car-hire business from the family home, renting out, among others, one of his own cars. And it was Assistant Commissioner Quick whose response, when this was reported yesterday, was to accuse the “corrupt” Tories of leaking the story to sabotage both his Green inquiry and his personal security. The Tories insist they had nothing to do with it; and by his conduct the Assistant Commissioner shows himself more than capable of sabotaging his own investigations without any help from the Conservative Party. We need some new top brass at the Met — quick.
I know your game, Mr Hendy
Ominous, little-noticed words from the head of TfL, Peter Hendy, amid the euphoria of the new Routemaster designs last week. “The Routemaster is so good because it was developed over two decades,” he said. “What we should aim to create now is not just a Routemaster replacement, but a whole new generation of London buses that could affect the future of the entire industry. You can't rush that … What we might end up with is something more radical than anyone has yet proposed.” Translation: “I'm going to try to string this process along until long after Boris has left office, run out of money or lost interest, and it's going to be gradually watered down over that time until it looks like what I and my fellow bureaucrats want. You know what, how about a long, single-decker bus with a concertina-type bit in the middle?” I know what your game is, Peter — in fact, the development of the Routemaster took nothing like “two decades” — and I'll be watching.
Reader views (15)
It looks like Boris does not know whether he is coming or going as only a few weeks after announcing the scrapping of the East London Transit the TFL website announces work will start on Monday 5th January in Barking Town on this scheme. And Boris welcolms the extra funding the government has made available for this project.
Following the decision in Manchester to reject a c-charge the government has announced that the £1.5 billion TIF (Transport Improvement? Funds) will be available for councils to bid for.
Question is will London be able to get access to these funds if Western C-Charge zone is abolished?
The above could fill funding gap for Tramlink and East Thames Crossing projects.
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 02/01/2009 19:40
Report abuse
The main lesson of Manchester is that you have to first build up the public transport alternative, then implement C-Charge, not that C-Charge is a flawed concept outside London. I do agree that better regulation is required of public services, and that those Nationalised services generally work better.
However, "Otherwise the charge could join the bendy bus, the western extension and pretty much all Ken's other monuments on the scrapheap of history." is utter poppycock.. Who introduced the C-Charge? Oyster Cards? Established the office of Mayor in the first place? How selectively we remember..
The "scrapping" activity so far including the increased C-Charge for mega-poluters are regressive steps aimed at apeasing Londons polluters, rich and those who prefer looking at buses rather than having to actually ride them.
- Nick, Islington, London, 30/12/2008 16:00
Report abuse
What we DON'T(!!!!!)need is a holiday from the C-Charge.I am a big supporter of environmentalists and eco-campaigners.I agree that workers in the building trade should have their vans let off during working hours,as well as the emergency services.Everybody else:get on the tube or bus,or pay the charge.
- H.J.Jones, London UK, 29/12/2008 16:10
Report abuse
every day c charge, 1 business will close. scrap it now.
- Malcolm, chingford, 29/12/2008 12:07
Report abuse
Let's get practical. No-one really knows what would happen if the central c-charge was lifted for a specific period. So why not find out? An experimental c-charge holiday of, say, 4-5 weeks would be worth trying. No doubt there would be a mad rush in the first week or so, but I suspect then it would level off. If it does, the proof would be there to show that the c-charge is unnecessary, at least in its present form. If it doesn't, those who support the central c-charge will have their argument. Meanwhile, Boris, speed up abolition of the western extension C-charge which is obviously not worth the candle and never has been.
- Alex, London, 29/12/2008 11:43
Report abuse
Well said and I agree totally about transport. I should like ALL public services re-nationalised so the public can benefit. As regards the routemaster, I do hope you are wrong but I fear you are not and we shall never get our beloved routemasters back. What was wrong with the old one. Surely the technology is still there and would be cheaper to resurrect that than design a new one?
- Vanessa, London, 24/12/2008 11:17
Report abuse
Scrap the Looney Lefties Con-gestion charge!!!!!
- Mark A, london england, 23/12/2008 21:32
Report abuse
The problem with the 'subtler and smarter' approach is that it would almost certainly involve spy-in-the-dash tag and beacon technology. I don't want all my journeys to be systematically monitored on what is the ultimate EU blueprint.
London contributes about 16% to Britain's GDP, but gets too little back. That is where change is most needed, and not piddling around with secondary issues.
Boris should do a deal with the government next year to scrap the Kengestion Charge that has failed on virtually every measure. IBM, who were due to take it over, should be given another public sector project of equal value.
By the way, the level of traffic in London has been static or declining since well before the K-Charge. We need little persuasion not to drive in the capital and we only do so if it's the least worst option.
- Jools, London, 23/12/2008 17:12
Report abuse
Almost no one drives in central London? What planet is Andrew Gilligan living on? A city with massive public transport provision remains choked with selfish individuals in their one-ton metal bubbles, who remain the privileged elite around which the entire transport system is built. Cyclists are treated like dirt, with minimal facilities, and pedestrians are marginalised and forced to wait for car drivers. Regent Street is a joke, where the 4X4 driver is king. Mr Gilligan should get on a bicycle and try pedalling across the West End on a weekday. He would soon change his blinkered views.
- Rider, London, 23/12/2008 14:05
Report abuse
Edwins, whilst there might be a minor increase in the health of retailers, what about the health of the populace (air quality - we face unlimited EU fines on this in the coming years) and the actual congestion in Central London.
Non-London Edwin - thanks for your contribution to London's transport issues.
Andrew Gilligan - I can imagine it must be shocking that a transport professional wants to take time over a completely new bus design to make sure it comes out right. Obviously he should rush it out instead. Good idea.
- Chris N, Tower Hamlets, London, 23/12/2008 05:58
Report abuse
The decision by Manchester no to adopt a C-Charge will now mean they will not get they money which came with the charge. Therefore Manchester will continue to suffer poor public transport and gridlock.
Ken's mistake was to put the £25 charge on the c-charge when it should have been a band under the LEZ.
As for your comments re Peter Hendy well the original routemaster was announced in the early 50's when the decision to scrap trolley-buses was announced. A prototype was made in about 1954 but it was'nt until 1960-61 when these buses started to enter full service.
If fact the first Trolley-bus conversions used RT buses which became surplus following the disastourous bus strike in 1958.
The present reality is that in those days buses were made with engines in the front and the RM was a development of this tradition, which was already out-dated (like the slam doors on class 312 trains were in the 80's). Buses are no longer made with engines in the front and given the mess London was subjected to when RM's were replaced by modern buses I cant see any sense in repeating errors of the past.
I also fail to see how an open platform is not an invitation to free loading as it used to be!! Anyway, how will PAYG users validate their Oysters on these buses?
All will become clear next May!!
Rm's were built for a time when everyone paid cash and fares were based on distance travelled.While the disabled were excluded and mothers were children were expected to walk
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 23/12/2008 00:29
Report abuse
I agree with Adam the congestion charge is a pain for any company wishing to service congestion area customers.
I hope Boris speeds up the western extension scrapping, you will see an almost improvement in the health of London retailers.
- Edwin Sheppard, Pinner UK, 22/12/2008 18:38
Report abuse
Andrew, the motorist is grossly overtaxed. Time for some reduction.
- Edwin Underhill, beaconsfield buckinghamshire, 22/12/2008 18:03
Report abuse
ive delivered parcels in london last 15 years to scrap the original c charge zone would be crazy we would be back to gridlock and foul smelly air like it was pre charge most of our drivers admit its better since c charge.
- C May, bromley, 22/12/2008 17:56
Report abuse
Andrew, I think the people of Manchester rejected the C-Tax for one simple reason. They are already paying petrol duty, VED and a host of other car-related taxes. Why should the vote to pay for another tax on a promise of improved public transport that will never be delivered. As for the London C-Tax, it will be removed from the Western Extension and hopefully Boris will bite the bullet and remove the rest of the zone. It worked for about a year then when the improvements to bus and tube failed to materialize commuters returned to their cars.
The Govt. take around £50bn a year in motor related taxation. Less that 10% is re-invested each year in the road network. That is poor value for money.
- Adam, Harrow, UK, 22/12/2008 11:11
Report abuse
