Article: Free transport idea doubt

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail 8th December 2008

Free transport idea doubt

Free transport idea doubt

The Courier Mail
December 8, 2008

Chris Hale

Queensland needs a long-term overhaul of public transport, with higher ticket prices for better service, writes Chris Hale

Our political leadership should look beyond the headlines and return to hard work as the foundation for an effective transit network

Let's be clear on one thing: there is nothing free in this world

WHILE pressure on public transport networks has increased, political leadership so far has been unable to step up to the challenge.

Transport economists around the nation have developed nervous twitches after the failed experiment in "free" public transport in Melbourne was followed by a threat from the Queensland Opposition to do the same in Brisbane.
Let's be clear on one thing about the delicate relationship between supply and demand in the provision of essential services -- there is nothing "free" in this world.

Many discerning voters perhaps would even be upset at the suggestion that ad-hoc giveaways are now seemingly a part of the potential policy mix. Australia's public transport networks have suffered for decades under a wrong-headed business model.

The Europeans and Japanese charge reasonably robust prices for public transport -- but this is coupled with quality service provision that takes the sting out of a travel option that is still far cheaper than car transport.
Stronger revenue streams for public transport mean the ability to reinvest in service and infrastructure. Better service and infrastructure attracts more passengers, generating greater revenue.

This is a virtuous cycle. It makes sense. It works. But ``free public transport'' should be off the policy menu -- for the simple reason that it doesn't create a better network.

In Lawrence Springborg's favour, he needs to be commended for making public transport a state-level election issue. He also needs support for the commonsense suggestion that an up-to-date rail safety system is needed, although taking the issue one step further might mean replacing the entire train control system with a 21st-century version.

A modern control system might allow greater speeds, frequencies and capacity. But we digress now into the realm of logical transport strategy and medium-term investment -- when stunts and capers are possibly the main game.
In case we need reassurance that it is not only Queensland in which half-baked transport policies are part of the political mix, let's return to Melbourne, original home of the "free transit" stunt. A new Lord Mayor has been elected with a tiny primary vote, and has promptly promised to "re-open Swanston St to cars" as his highest policy priority. The reasonably narrow Swanston St axis also is Melbourne's busiest tram corridor, its busiest cycling access and one of its heaviest pedestrian arteries.

Transport experts are in shock. The RACV has also recommended against it -- pointing out that there are already many thousands of streets in Melbourne which cater to cars. One more is no improvement, it says.

But the new Mayor says public transport is out. Walking is out (we no longer need walking). And riding a bicycle in safety is out. The whole issue of energy scarcity and global warming is out, too. Cars are back in. More cars are the answer -- we don't have enough of them apparently.

Back to Brisbane. Are we closer to a viable transport system now than we were, say, five years ago? The theory goes that a week is a long time in politics, but five years is much longer if you are a bus or train commuter daily braving a run-down network -- with no noticeable improvement and none in sight. On balance, it's probably time that a new paradigm was demanded on transport and other important policy issues. Let's demand that our leadership embraces enlightened decision-making and a sophisticated, long-term focus.

Let's start by insisting that they seek advice from the best transport advisers. Let's be adamant that new appointments to key positions in transport (or health, education and social services, for that matter) are drawn from a list of the top candidates. We are paying compensation to our top bureaucrats in line with other locations, so let's demand the levels of competence, qualifications and performance that are required elsewhere.

And then let's look seriously at our industry capability -- and what is required to lift it towards world's best practice.

A shortlist of essential industry-based initiatives for better transport outcomes might include: more training and career development for Queensland's transport planners (most of whom have transferred from other fields without formal training in public transport); higher standards of professionalism; a stronger focus on research-driven solutions; and the best technology.

Firmly deciding that we want world-best rather than second-best will unleash a transformative era.
How about discussing higher fares (for example) -- in return for better service and stronger investment levels?

It's only when the medium-term and long-term view is taken that progress can be made. Brisbane and southeast Queensland can't afford another lost decade in transit infrastructure and service development -- but that's what we seem to be facing.

Our political leadership and society need to look beyond tomorrow's headlines and return to hard work, analysis and mature discussion as the foundations of better policy and an effective transit network.
The potential benefits of a more strategic approach to this essential service are enormous.

Chris Hale is an urban economist with the University of Queensland Centre for Transport Strategy.

[brismike]

I'd rather have free "second best" than expensive "world best" thanks . . I live in the real world which involves a daily grind to and from the suburbs to the city, not some ivory tower "Centre for Transport Strategy". I just want a clean train that runs on time to where I need to go without having to look at masses of grafitti while in riding on it. I'm not asking for much am I?

[Mozz]

A bit simplistic I know, but it's alright to expect govt to provide "free" black tarmac for cars but if we want public transport we should expect to pay a premium 

[ozbob]

Incentive ticketing, with some 'free' concessions as well is achievable in a world best public transport system IMHO.

Western Australia is seeing fit to give pensioners some free travel.  Victoria does that on Sundays for pensioners as well, that is free public transport. 

RAIL BoT has called for free travel on Sundays for pensioners before.  It makes sense and is a great initiative for our seniors.

It is good to see these issues being raised in the popular media.  Discussion leads to change and improvements.

[mufreight]

To be realistic it would be possible to grant pensioners free off peak travel using the Go Card system with them touching on and off with their cards, but free travel is a furffy someone pays somewhere as for the proposed fare systems again using the Go Card system it could be configured to give off peak fares for all transport other than trips made during designated peak periods.

[Emmie]

Two comments on Chris Hale's article:

First - what proof does he have that the free tickets before 7am in Melbourne are 'a failure'?  The scheme hasn't been operating for very long, so it's hard to judge its success yet.  Besides - there are different ways of measuring success - if free travel encourages more people to leave their cars at home, then it's a success, regardless of economics, if it reduces pollution and congestion.

Second - he says that public transport in Europe and Japan is 'world class' but not cheap.  I can't speak for Japan, but it's hard to generalise about 'Europe'.  Italy is cheap (but not world class), France is world class (but not cheap for long distance travel, though it's pretty good value for Parisian commuters), Germany is world class AND cheap (but only if you know the ins and outs of their incredibly complicated ticketing system - e.g. dirt cheap fares for groups of 5 travelling on local trains on weekends - I kid you not!), the UK is neither cheap nor world class - and so on.

What none of these countries try to do is to fund improvements in public transport purely through the 'profits' they make from the people who use it, which seems to be what Chris Hale is advocating.

[Mozz]

Two comments on Chris Hale's article:

First - what proof does he have that the free tickets before 7am in Melbourne are 'a failure'?  The scheme hasn't been operating for very long, so it's hard to judge its success yet.  Besides - there are different ways of measuring success - if free travel encourages more people to leave their cars at home, then it's a success, regardless of economics, if it reduces pollution and congestion.

Second - he says that public transport in Europe and Japan is 'world class' but not cheap.  I can't speak for Japan, but it's hard to generalise about 'Europe'.  Italy is cheap (but not world class), France is world class (but not cheap for long distance travel, though it's pretty good value for Parisian commuters), Germany is world class AND cheap (but only if you know the ins and outs of their incredibly complicated ticketing system - e.g. dirt cheap fares for groups of 5 travelling on local trains on weekends - I kid you not!), the UK is neither cheap nor world class - and so on.

What none of these countries try to do is to fund improvements in public transport purely through the 'profits' they make from the people who use it, which seems to be what Chris Hale is advocating.

Fully support the comments above