Morning:
6°c
The question is: what is Plan B? Boris Johnson took office committed to consult about the future of the western extension of the congestion charge.
His own view appeared to suggest modifying it to remove the charge in the middle of the day. But the result of the consultation has led to the abandonment of the extension.
In truth, London's roads are badly congested and the problem is spreading outwards from the centre. The recession will only provide a temporary relief. Ken Livingstone's original decision to introduce congestion was brave and well executed.
Road pricing is not necessarily a Left-wing or Green policy. But political reality means most politicians are petrified of new charging schemes. A referendum in Manchester recently voted by almost four to one against charging. The public appears to like charging even less than congestion.
Most people still believe something needs to be done about the pollution, economic inefficiency and city-wrecking ugliness of congested roads. Increasing cycling, rephasing traffic lights and letting motor-bikes use bus lanes may make a marginal difference, but they will not stop the growth in jams.
A significant increase in car-free streets would be part of the answer. Kenneth Clarke as chancellor introduced a fuel price "escalator" to push petrol taxation up faster than inflation. If applied over a long period, this measure would curtail traffic everywhere. Would any government now dare to be so radical?
One way or another there needs to be a reduction in the numbers of vehicles in central London. This will be a major test for the Mayor. It seems there is currently no Plan B.
Reader views (8)
Keith Peat: If you abolish the bus lanes, buses will be more delayed, so people will use buses less and cars more, making congestion worse. In any case, why should private motorists have so much more than their fare share of the road space? Urban road space is a scarce public resource for which demand exceeds supply. Filling it with private motorcars is a very inefficient way of using it, and a very unfair way of allocating it; this unfairness is only slightly mitigated by charging them for using it.
- Peezedtee, London UK, 23/02/2009 19:26
Report abuse
What a pity Tony did not produce this article 1 year ago when it would have made sense. Now London is stuck with a weak Mayor who panders to minorities and then does not know what to do when he has caved in. (e.g where will funds to remove extension come from?)
As for those who oppose the C-Charge well remember the daily gridlock London sufferred before its introduction and the interesting thing will be what happens when the Western extension is removed!
Far from killing C-Charge schemes Boris could end up demonstrating how good they are as once the traffic returns and noise,dirt and inability to get anywhere in a reasonable time returns and deaths and injuries in RTA's rise it will be a case of "Can we have our charge back?"
The irony is when new roads like Westway were built they moaned about noise and pollution now they want to bring it on!
As for bus lanes we need more of them but not just a white line along a street but proper bus ways which allow buses to move free from other traffic.
We also need more Light Railways like the DLR which carries millions of passengers but takes up NO ROADSPACE it is DLR schemes that need to be built together with Trams and Trolly-Buses. I recently visited Bluewater and used the FASTTRACK bus network where buses have their own bus ways London needs schemes like this.
Anyway once demand for oil exceeds supply cars will become unaffordable as for electric cars where will the electric come from?
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 22/02/2009 16:47
Report abuse
This article seems to be based on the premise that congestion is getting worse but if you ignore the artificially induced congestion from poor traffic schemes and reallocation of road space, that simply is not true. In many London boroughs, traffic volumes have been falling not rising.
- Roger Lawson, London, UK, 21/02/2009 09:49
Report abuse
Of course Boris has an alternative. Just reverse all those crazy local schemes installed over the last 30 years or so. Any fool could predict that if you halve road space with bus lanes or turn only lanes, or close legitimate alternative routes by calling them a silly name, 'rat runs' thus forcing traffic to the same place at the same time, you get.......wait for it....congestion!! Doh!!
- Keith Peat, Sutton UK., 20/02/2009 17:03
Report abuse
"There is a Plan B and yet no-one dares to mention it for fear of the green lobby"
What, like the Ringways of the 1960s? Yes, great idea, blighted chunks of London for years and led to one of the biggest mass movements in London history, uniting people across the capital. It would have meant my house sitting between three motorways and, in the end, *wouldn't actually have worked*. For one thing, it would have ruined public transport. It was a fantasy of US-obsessed urban planners, and about a good idea as cramming the poor into high rise concrete blocks (which was, ironically, done at least partly to free space for road-building).
Anyone who thinks building roads is the answer to urban road congestion is living in the past or really hasn't got much of a clue about the link between land use, public health, social cohesion and transport policy. Do you seriously want to live in US style gridlock and smog, or European style clean air and green living? I know what I prefer and I know which one is a sustainable pattern for the future.
Congestion charging has led to much better public transport, which I use a lot, and a far nicer city centre. It's notable that its opponents cling to outrageous lies and wilful misreading in much the same manner as climate change denialists and creationists. Same mindset, sadly worthless as a way of improving the worlld.
- Tom, London, UK, 20/02/2009 15:00
Report abuse
God help us if we end up with a solution that Peter is promoting. Don't think you need to be part of a "green lobby" to see that it won't work.
The answer lies in discouraging car use to the point that it becomes so inconvenient to use, people will be forced to use more efficient modes of transport. You can keep accommodating car use but all your going to end up with is congestion.
The voting public won't like this type of solution as their too greedy and no politician will have the courage to propose something along these lines.
- Adam, London, 20/02/2009 14:17
Report abuse
Transport for London have admitted that the congestion zone extension has not had any discernible effect on air quality. Come to think of it, it didn't particularly improve congestion, simply displacing it out to areas like Hammersmith.
Well meaning but poorly designed schemes like bus lanes and box junctions have led to increased pressure on road space and traffic bunching up. One of my friends joked that officialdom doesn't mind congestion increasing, because it will improve their chances of charging us to drive in it.
As part of the commission advising Reading on going for charging and an assistant to the panel studying it for Cambridge, I'm hardly surprised that Mr Travers supports road pricing, though.
- Jools, :London, 20/02/2009 13:11
Report abuse
There is a Plan B and yet no-one dares to mention it for fear of the green lobby. Build more roads, get rid of buses and make smaller, faster cars. London should have a periphique similar to Paris, I'd suggest building it above the Circle line in Central London above the streets, like they do in LA.
- Peter, London, 20/02/2009 11:32
Report abuse
