By Steve Ranger, 29 November 2005 11:55
NEWS
Seven local authorities are sharing £7m to explore ways to tackle local congestion and help develop government plans on road pricing.
Last year the government's road pricing feasibility study recommended that schemes should be piloted to test approaches as road pricing is developed.
The authorities will now work on assessing the feasibility of schemes combining demand management - such as road pricing - with better public transport, in order to tackle congestion and improve local travelling conditions. They will also contribute to technical standards for road pricing.
Transport Secretary Alistair Darling said in a statement: "I'm convinced that without more radical measures, including more effective demand management and actively managing traffic flows, road congestion will get worse. That is why I've been very clear about the need to look at road pricing."
In a speech last month Darling said that new road pricing systems could be based on technology such as satellite positioning. He also said that road pricing could piggyback on systems already being offered by the market.
He said at the time: "We need to move away from the idea that government is going to define and specify all this modern technology and that we will simply build a big computer to sort it out. It will not work that way."
Some drivers already use a satellite positioning device as the platform for pay-as-you-go insurance. More and more will do so, and he said the same device could be used to calculate the road price for the same journey.
The seven areas sharing the £7m are:
- Bristol City Council, Bath and North East Council, North Somerset Council and South Gloucestershire Council
- Cambridgeshire
- Durham County Council (for Durham City)
- Greater Manchester
- Shropshire County Council (for Shrewsbury)
- Tyne and Wear
- West Midlands conurbation
Comments
There are 7 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
Great, more stealth tax. I bet we end up having to pay higher than would be costs to implement GPS tracking systems in our cars too.
Whatever this hairbrained government does will not reduce congestion on the roads. Do they really think we enjoy sitting in traffic? I put up with chronic traffic every day because there is no alternative to using my car. If I were to use public transport my daily commute would take over 3 hours for a 49 mile trip.
Lets have a little common sense and impove public transport before driving drivers into more debt.
A good example of how we could reduce congestion would be to move back to the railways for goods distribution. The government have themselves to blame for driving distribution onto the roads. We have an underused railway infrastructure that could be used for national and international distribution.
I know its probably a lot to ask, but lets have some sense from the government.
2. Paul
And we need to charge more for big vehicles too so here's a unique idea for those who can't see the wood for the trees...
Put the tax on Fuel and scrap the other costly ideas.
Then perhaps we can all get back to work on more sensible uses for new technology.
3. anonymous
So.... The govt has decided not to make a big issue of road charging by decentralising it.
The cost to the motorist should not change - statement made by the govt.
How will this work when your journey goes in and out of charging and non-charging zones?
Ludicrous. It's either central or it's not feasible.
I would also like to know how the roads are going to get more saturated when the vast majority of road users are already on them?
4. Mike
Fuel Tax can be unfair to country districts. Most country roads are not badly congested, but the public transport provision is also usually poor. Not only that; the banks, postoffices and shops have closed down, so they need to travel further to access basic services. ie. they need their cars.
In addition, much urban congestion is compounded by parked vehicles, which are not using fuel, but occupy road space.
Sometimes the simple approach is not the best! We need fuel tax to discourage large vehicles, and long journeys. We need road fund tax to pay for the (necessary) vehicle registration, and to get the old bangers off the road. We need congestion charging / road pricing to encourage people to alter their journey times to less busy times. We need the whole mixture to encourage the use of public transport, where it exists!
The road pricing technology isn't there yet - I don't expect it can tell the difference between my car on the drive or on the street outside; but that doesn't mean, we shouldn't experiment.
5. anonymous
A lot of congestion is down to local authorities, who come up with hairbrained ideas.
In Bolton we have cycle lanes on either side of what used to be a duel carriage way but these cycle lanes are never used.
Also near the reebok stadium, they have changed the road layout 3 times in 2 years. The main problem is approaching Junction 6 on the M61 where at peak times, there is a car park on the motorway for 2 miles in either direction and a further mile on each of the A-roads because there is not enough filter lanes.
6. Charles
Reverse the charging principle
1. Transport is essential for modern society, both for goods and people.
2. The UK is already one of the most expensive countries in the world for transport costs.
3. Money is currently taken out of the transport system by central government (road taxes, fuel duty, VAT) local councils (parking charges, fines) and not reinvested in transport but used as general income.
4. High transport costs hurt many in society (the poorer in particular) but makes the country less competitive, puts up prices on nearly everything.
The lack of investment in infrastructure seems the main reason for the congestion we now experience but the incentives are not present to improve this. So, reverse the charging principle. Instead of charging a motorist for using a congested road network instead charge the local council for the congestion with payment to the motorist who has been penalised by the poor conditions.
Making a Council and government pay for providing a poor service would very quickly see that put right. It could be a complete mix of solutions from better public transport to more and smoother running roads. Road pricing this way would actually force an improvement in the most cost effective way.
7. anonymous
It’s stated that at anytime 20% of London traffic is lost. Better road signs would not cost the earth (pun intended) and have an immediate benefit. But then we would not need the congestion charge would we? Having driven around much of the UK I expect this 20% also applies elsewhere.
Public Transport. If I use public transport for my journey into London it would cost treble and take twice as long as using a car at peak times. Outside peak times it is a complete no brainer and I use one of better rail providers.
I recently flew into Stansted from an on time 3 hour flight. Because of train driver shortages and a roundabout route, 3 freezing hours later we are passing.... Stansted! Total journey time to get to a town 12 miles from Stansted was almost 4 hours. The final indignation was a ticket inspector issuing £20 fines to anyone who may not have had exactly the right ticket and we still had to use a taxi for the final leg.
How do Government Ministers travel I wonder. I expect they only use cars because of security issues. Not for the convenience, warmth and comfort and being able to avoid tinkling headphones, sniffers, grime, cancelled unheated trains and broken seats. Yer right.