Congestion tolling - discussion etc.

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

Secret toll plan to charge motorists for every kilometre analysed by Bligh Government

Secret toll plan to charge motorists for every kilometre analysed by Bligh Government

    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * June 02, 2010 11:00PM

A SECRET plan to charge motorists for every kilometre they travel on southeast Queensland's existing and planned motorways has been developed by the Bligh Government.

Ahead of Tuesday's State Budget, The Courier-Mail can reveal the Government has made a detailed analysis of how to squeeze more money out of existing road infrastructure.

Documents obtained under Right to Information laws show the Department of Transport and Main Roads has developed a "distance-based tolling" model for the Gateway and Logan motorways.

A proposal dubbed "Connecting Motorways" also extends to a Brisbane "ring road" system which would include untolled roads such as the Darra to Springfield section of the Ipswich Motorway and the Centenary Highway, as well as the yet-to-be constructed Northern Link tunnel.

Drivers travelling the length of existing tolled motorways, such as the Gateway, would save money under a favoured model to charge 12¢ per kilometre travelled. But thousands of trips which now avoid toll points would draw charges.

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace yesterday confirmed the plan for distance-based tolls was taken to Cabinet this year.

"Cabinet was of the opinion that our (current) single point tolling was correct," he said.

Opposition transport spokeswoman Fiona Simpson said the Government had promised before not to do things, such as assets sales, only to proceed when it was politically convenient.

The RTI search identified more than 800 pages of documents in which distance-based tolling was discussed, most produced in the past 18 months.

But 564 pages were not released because of Cabinet secrecy and the potential economic impact on the sale of the Queensland Motorways franchise. Many of these relate to modelling likely to show how much money distance-based tolls would raise compared with the fixed toll regime.

"Further work on DBT (distance-based tolling) for the existing motorway network will be driven by the need to inform the QML asset divestment process and this is being scoped now," one internal email read. But one document shows distance tolls of 10¢ to 20¢, as well as a 12¢ model combined with exiting toll points, could raise up to an additional $80 million a year.

So serious was the Government about distance tolls last year that teams of consultants were hired to develop detailed options and traffic modelling.

In one brief for consultancy services, distance-based tolls were considered all but a foregone conclusion and the role involved developing "political and public acceptance".

The consultant's report was not released.

Mr Wallace said it was investigated along with congestion charging after being promoted by the RACQ but rejected because of the region's "geography". He could not recall when.

"The advice from my department is it wouldn't have had an impact on congestion throughout the network," he said.

RACQ spokeswoman Lynda Schekoske said the motoring body had never advocated distance tolling.

"In fact, we were very concerned that they may use the sale of Queensland Motorways as an excuse to impose distance-based tolls on other parts of the network," she said.

Ahead of the Queensland Motorways sale, the Government will significantly increase Gateway and Logan tolls from July 1, raising a similar amount to the distance model.

[Jon Bryant]

Well done Courier Mail for going the extra yard to obtain opinions from leading transport planners or investigate the benefits London has gained from the cordon charge ....NOT!!!!!  Lazy journalism. 

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

'Pay per click' toll plan ruled out

'Pay per click' toll plan ruled out
DANIEL HURST
June 3, 2010 - 8:14AM

The Bligh government has guaranteed voters it will never charge motorists a fee for every kilometre travelled on the Gateway and Logan motorways.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads this year conducted extensive studies into distance-based tolling methods and congestion charges.

Under one proposal, the system of charging motorists at existing motorway toll locations would be scrapped and replaced with a concept where drivers would pay 12 cents per kilometre travelled on those motorways.

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace today hit back at reports of the government's "secret" plans by promising voters the government would not change the existing tolling system.

"Absolutely, unequivocally, we have ruled it out, the Premier has ruled it out in parliament, we have said no," he told brisbanetimes.com.au.

Mr Wallace said groups like the RACQ had called on the government to consider congestion charges and it was "prudent planning" to look at all options, but Cabinet rejected the proposals in February.

"We didn't believe that distance-based tolling would reduce congestion and therefore it was rejected," he said.

"We'll continue our single-point tolling on the Logan and Gateway motorways.

The government was pursuing other methods to deal with congestion including clearing crash sites quickly and building infrastructure such as the new Gateway river crossing, the Sir Leo Hielscher Bridge, he said.

Queensland Motorways, which is responsible for tolling on the Gateway and Logan motorways, is to be sold as part of the state government's privatisation agenda.

A detailed 20-year transport plan is due to be released later this year.

[ozbob]

Minister for Main Roads
The Honourable Craig Wallace
03/06/2010

Bligh Government rules out congestion tax and distance-based tolling

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace has today again ruled out introducing a congestion tax on major roads in South East Queensland.

Mr Wallace said the Bligh Government had already unequivocally rejected the suggestion of congestion charging and distance-based tolling on Queensland roads.

"We have made our position on this crystal clear. The Bligh Government will not introduce a congestion tax in this state," Mr Wallace said.

"The issue was brought to Cabinet in February and was ruled out," he said.

"Back in February, the Premier clearly stated in Parliament that there would be no congestion charging by the State Government for as long as we are on this side of the House."

"We did this only after all strategies to tackle congestion were evaluated - a practice that responsible governments around the world have a duty to do when considering future growth.

"Good transport planners do the modelling work and look at all the options whi ch is what they have done.

"When we make a decision, we make an informed decision."

"The Opposition will continue to try and make this an issue. Indeed, they said they would look at congestion charging in their last transport plan.

"They have not, unlike this government, ruled out distance or congestion based tolling.

"The Bligh Government is committed to single-point tolling and has a comprehensive plan to tackle congestion.

"Our approach to tackle congestion is not only to encourage people out of their cars and to use our public transport system, but also to invest in congestion busting infrastructure like the second Gateway Bridge and the numerous other projects contained in our $18 billion five year roads program."

==============================================================

[Jon Bryant]

The article is missing the following statement though.

"The Government has however not ruled out spending billions of taxes trying to reduce traffic congestion By building more roads despite it being recognized that this actually creates more congestion.  The Minster was quoted saying "We have spent 40 years trying to build enough roads so we have to be close surely".  Opposition spokesperson said "We have no idea how to fix the problem either but we can do more of the same better than the Government". I thought about getting a different perspective on this story but just seemed like hard work"  

[#Metro]

What does that media release say to me?
Car votes, car votes, gimme gimmie gimmie!!!

"Our approach to tackle congestion is not only to encourage people out of their cars and to use our public transport system, but also to invest in congestion busting infrastructure like the second Gateway Bridge and the numerous other projects contained in our $18 billion five year roads program."

The second gateway bridge is NOT congestion busting! It is bridge busting congestion! So much so that a mere 20 or so years on at a cost of a phenomenal $1.8 billion a brand new bridge - taking it to 12 lanes- had to be built. Not only that, but now there a mad mad ideas about double deck submerged tunnels next to the Brisbane river on Kingsford Smith Drive. And I haven't even got to Airport Link which might kill off the Airtrain's patronage.

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

Transit lane toll considered by Government after Bligh impressed by US traffic solution

Transit lane toll considered by Government after Bligh impressed by US traffic solution

    * by Steven Wardill
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * June 03, 2010 11:00PM

EXPRESS transit lanes where motorists are charged a price based on their vehicle's occupancy and time of travel were considered for Queensland's toll-free motorways.

Documents obtained under Right to Information laws reveal the Government assessed so-called HOT (High Occupancy Toll) lanes on the Pacific Motorway.

The proposal came after Premier Anna Bligh drove on California's HOT lanes during a 2008 trade trip and suggested they could be used in Queensland's congested southeast.

The documents show the Department of Main Roads had proposed a trial of HOT lanes on the Pacific Motorway's existing transit lanes between the Gold Coast and Brisbane.

While the Queensland proposal contained no specific details, the California model allows vehicles with three or more occupants to travel for free while the charge for others rises to as high as $0.92 per mile.

It comes after The Courier-Mail revealed yesterday that the Bligh Government had developed a detailed plan to charge motorists for every kilometre they travel on new and planned toll roads.

Both toll models have been shelved by the Bligh Government despite the massive gap between the infrastructure required for the southeast and the Government's ability to find funding. But given the Government's record on issues such as electricity deregulation, privatisation, water and the axed fuel subsidy we may yet see tolls introduced.

Local Government Association of Queensland executive director Greg Hallam yesterday said any move to consider alternative road-user pricing methods was welcomed.

He said the region needed an open debate with all options on the table, not politicians "sticking their heads in the sand".

"It's clear that either new taxes, user charges or demand management, or a combination of these measures, is needed if the wonderful SEQ lifestyle isn't to be eroded further," he said. "Unless more money is channelled into roads and public transport, congestion, pollution and productivity will get progressively worse."

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace said other proposals discussed in the RTI documents included one where tollway operators would be able to identify and call drivers stopped on the roadside and ring their mobile to check if they needed help.

[#Metro]

Their hands are pretty much tied.
If they do nothing, the freeway will crawl to a halt.
This is already the case in the morning and afternoons.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Congestion charge could fund rail project: engineers

Congestion charge could fund rail project: engineers
Tony Moore
November 23, 2010 - 5:52AM

Queensland must consider new funding models to get transport infrastructure back on track, a new lobby group staging a national conference in Brisbane will hear today.

Consult Australia, formerly the Association of Consulting Engineers, will this morning suggest a range of new funding ideas including congestion pricing in areas of Brisbane.

One pilot project they suggest is a "cordon pricing scheme" based around Brisbane's futuristic underground rail project, the Cross River Rail project.

Under a cordon pricing system, commuters would pay extra to drive in some inner-city zones - encouraging them to take the train.

Many of the alternative funding ideas were raised in Professor Ken Henry's tax review earlier in 2010, but were not considered by the Federal Government.

Transport Minister Rachel Nolan is the keynote speaker at the conference.

The paper to be delivered this morning, "Transporting Australia's Future" says a trial cordon pricing scheme should be considered in Brisbane if the Cross River Rail project starts.

It suggests:

- trialling cordon pricing in Brisbane to support the Cross River Rail;

- tax increment financing in New South Wales (Penrith and Parramatta Rd);

- trialling managed motorways in Adelaide;

- trialling road pricing in Melbourne; and

- reform of parking policy in Perth.

No decisions have been taken to adopt any trials.

Consult Australia acting CEO Jonathan Cartledge said existing models of financing would not provide sufficient funds for the transport infrastructure needed in the future.

"We would like to see the states pilot some of these and they should pursue them and then see how they can be rolled out at projects in other states," Mr Cartledge said.

"Cross River Rail is a perfect example of where this type of reform is going to bring benefit," he said.

"We would suggest that you need various models for public private partnership and the model by which that is delivered, needs to be reviewed obviously."

Consult Australia believes the existing funding model, where federal government funding is tied to excise duties and state governments rely on federal government funding, vehicle fees, parking fees, tolls and GST payments will having a diminishing return.

"We would like to see road pricing very high on the agenda for the 2011 tax summit," he said.

"We think it is disappointing that the government did not embrace more fully the recommendation for a review of road user pricing."

Similar schemes have been trialled in London, Singapore, The Netherlands and tried and rejected in Manchester, Stockholm and New York.

Mr Cartledge said public private partnerships remained a means of raising private sector involvement in projects, but felt they needed to be re-cast.

"We think that they do, but we think they need to be appropriate to the project given the context and the risks associated with the project."

Consult Australia proposes a mix of funding models for individual projects, he said.

Last week Infrastructure Australia highlighted the advantages of a Very Fast Train proposal linking the Sunshine Coast to Brisbane and the Gold Coast on the way to Sydney and Melbourne.

That project needs a massive injection of private sector funding to match government funds.

[ozbob]

With the ailing position of the present State Government does anyone really think they could bite the bullet and move forward with congestion charging no matter how desirable that might be because of fear of upsetting the populist car centric followers?

They might be surprised though if they did, right is might!!

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Flexible tolling plan for Brisbane

Flexible tolling plan for Brisbane
Tony Moore
November 30, 2010

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman will push ahead with a futuristic plan to develop a single organisation, which would direct road traffic through flexible tolling on a Brisbane-wide network of toll roads.

As part of the scheme, tolls on individual roads could be raised and lowered to encourage traffic to shift from one tollway to another to guide it around the city.

Both the state government and Brisbane City Council would be stakeholders in the new entity.

Cr Newman outlined his plan to brisbanetimes.com.au last week after Brisbane City Council passed a motion setting up the Brisbane Tolling Company.

The motion allowed council to set up its own tolling company to "own and run a proposed tolling business".

"It gives Brisbane residents what they really need, what they deserve," Cr Newman said.

"They should get it anyway through the fuel taxes and rego and the things they are paying, but they aren't coming back.

"So we can sit here and pretend that it will solve itself - and it won't - but we are determined to find a solution."

The company was part of a council plan to bid for the $3 billion Queensland Motorways, which runs the Gateway, Logan and Port of Brisbane tollways.

"This should be the orbital road network company that manages on behalf of the state and council all these major pieces of infrastructure and finds ways, using the private sector funds and at times government contributions, to deliver these major projects," Cr Newman said last week.

"[These are] the missing links in our road network."

However, last Thursday Premier Anna Bligh and Treasurer Andrew Fraser suddenly announced Queensland Motorways would not be privately sold, but instead be transferred to the government-owned Queensland Investment Corporation.

The transfer would move $2.9 million in Queensland Motorways debt from government balance sheets to the Queensland Investment Corporation.

Last night, Cr Newman said he had no problem with the Premier's actions.

"We are going to talk to [the QIC] about it now, because we still have a vision for an integrated motorway network across the greater Brisbane area," he said.

"We think it is in the public's interest. We think it is in the interests of motorists. We think there are many things that can come together to provide synergies and efficiencies that will ultimately provide better solutions on our roads."

Last week, Cr Newman said council would not put forward cash, but was interested in transferring it's existing tollways - the Go Between Bridge, the Legacy Way tunnel and possibly the proposed East-West Link tunnel - to a private consortium.

brisbanetimes.com.au understands consortia, including firms managing Australian and Canadian superannuation funds and Asian infrastructure funds companies, had expressed interest in investing in the new entity.

Mr Fraser last night reserved comment until he had received further information about the proposal, but a spokesman said he was aware of Cr Newman's plans.

As it currently stands, the Clem7 and the under-construction Airport Link tunnels, run by separate private consortiums, could not form part of the new entity.

However, Cr Newman said both companies could possibly see merit in joining the integrated system in the future.

[#Metro]

OMG!

Will it reduce congestion? Perhaps? Will it fund more roads and freeways? Almost certainly
PT?

[#Metro]

I think this might be a topic for chat discussion. A series of tollways approaches something like a congestion charge.
On the other hand, why not just improve PT?

Is this a solution, or is this CRT

(For those who do not know what CRT is, think BRT means bus rapid transit, LRT means light rail transit,  which means CRT is....)

[ozbob]

 CRT ? Congestion Rapid Transit   .......  only joking, oxymoronic term I know ... 

[Stillwater]

In the cold, hard world of public sector bean-counting, a toll road is an asset that can be sold off.  It has an income stream that is attractive to investors and which, ultimately, will pay off the asset cost over time.  On the other hand, PT is a sinkhole of debt in the economist's eye.  It costs millions to build and the ongoing operational cost represents a drain on the public purse.

[#Metro]

Close  

CAR RAPID TRANSIT

[Jonno]

That is an oxymoron.  I prefer Campbell's Ridiculous Transport.

[Jonno]

In the cold, hard world of public sector bean-counting, a toll road is an asset that can be sold off.  It has an income stream that is attractive to investors and which, ultimately, will pay off the asset cost over time.  On the other hand, PT is a sinkhole of debt in the economist's eye.  It costs millions to build and the ongoing operational cost represents a drain on the public purse.

Not sure toll roads are the cash cows we think.  They are only cash flow positive when the initial capital is paid by the Govt.

[#Metro]

I know it is an oxymoron Jonno, but that hasn't stopped people trying to build CRT!!!

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Call for capitals to follow Brisbane's council lead

Call for capitals to follow Brisbane's council lead
Tony Moore
December 2, 2010 - 6:08AM

Other capital cities should follow Brisbane's local government model and merge smaller councils, a federal study has found.

The National Urban Policy discussion paper, launched by federal infrastructure and planning minister Anthony Albanese yesterday, argued other capital cities should follow Queensland's lead in reducing the number of councils.

The Sydney metropolitan region is made up of 43 local councils, Melbourne 31, Perth 30 and Adelaide 19 councils.

"The exception is Brisbane, which has only five local government areas," the paper says.

"Managing cities and facilitating change strategically within cities is at times made more difficult by the fragmentation of local government in some of our largest cities."

Brisbane City Council is Australia's largest local government area. The city's metropolitan footprint also takes in Moreton Bay, Ipswich, Logan and Redland City councils.

The NUP report argues a smaller number of councils best facilitates improvement in services in capital cities by creating larger entities that could "plan, finance and co-ordinate over larger population areas, and achieve greater economies of scale in service delivery and asset management".

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman, a member of the Council of Capital City Lord Mayors, said the set-up gave  Brisbane planning advantages over other cities.

"You can have a meeting where you have the mayors of 11 councils around a table with the state government and you are basically covering the whole [southeast] region," he said.

Cr Newman said councils would be pleased the discussion paper had ruled out setting up "undemocratic" metropolitan planning commissions.

"That would have put all these planning decisions into the hands of organisations like the [Urban Land Development Authority]," he said.

The Queensland government set up the ULDA to accelerate housing development, but it has irritated many councils by taking over residential developments that the state believed needed to be fast-tracked.

Cr Newman said he was also pleased the report identified the need to "improve the operation of motorway networks in major cities".

He yesterday opened debate on flexible tolling in Brisbane, run by an over-arching toll company that could adjust tolls to encourage or discourage motorists on set routes.

Cr Newman said Brisbane City Council would make a submission to the NUP and he believed Southeast Queensland Council of Mayors would also contribute.

Meanwhile, Infrastructure Partnerships Australia chief executive Brendan Lyon said tackling traffic congestion should be the priority for the new policy.

"Australia's capital cities already face congestion costs of over $9.4 billion every year – and this is set to more than double to $20.4 billion in the next ten years if no action is taken," he said.

"Congestion charging in cities and road pricing more broadly is obviously a very contentious issue, but it is an important issue that deserves real debate."

The new policy will influence transport, infrastructure and climate change decision-making, Mr Albanese said.

"While Australian cities are currently amongst the most liveable in the world, the long term challenges we face such as climate change and population growth leave no room for complacency," he said.

"For instance, in the absence of a new approach, traffic congestion is set to cost Australian businesses and families more than $20 billion a year by the end of this decade."

The NUP discussion paper will be open for public submissions until March 2011.

[Jonno]

Our lord mayor has the worst case of "road transport vision" ever seen.  It is all he talks about and focus on.  He is going trip over public and active transport pretty badly soon his blindness is so bad.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Flexible road tolling plan gains momentum

Flexible road tolling plan gains momentum
Tony Moore
December 7, 2010 - 6:33AM

Plans for flexible tolling, described as a 'National Broadband Network for roads', will step up another gear with high level meetings planned between Lord Mayor Campbell Newman and the Queensland Investment Corporation.

Cr Newman said yesterday he would meet with QIC bosses before Christmas to discuss his concept of a single organisation managing Brisbane motorways.

It was revealed last week Cr Newman had plans for a flexible tolling system for Brisbane's roads, in which toll costs for existing tollroads could be adjusted to encourage motorists to shift from busy roads to other parts of the network.

Cr Newman yesterday said his concept was based on a 2009 pitch by transport specialists Evans and Peak for a similar scheme in Sydney.

He confirmed council officers had met with QIC staff to discuss the idea.

"I think you should take it as a positive that council officers have met with them and I will now be meeting with the senior staff myself," Cr Newman said.

QIC chief executive officer Doug McTaggart declined to comment specifically on the Brisbane City Council approach.

However, he confirmed QIC was undertaking "scoping studies" of Queensland Motorways, which operates the Gateway and Logan motorways.

Treasurer Andrew Fraser's announced last week that the $3 billion asset would be transferred to the state government-owned corporation and not sold to the private sector.

"With all our current and prospective infrastructure investments, we are constantly investigating opportunities to improve the performance of these assets," Mr McTaggart said.

Last week, Cr Newman said he would push ahead with talks with the state-owned QIC despite the transfer of ownership.

"This should be the orbital road network company that manages on behalf of the state and council all these major pieces of infrastructure and finds ways, using the private sector funds and at times government contributions, to deliver these major projects," he said last week.

"[These are] the missing links in our road network."

Evans and Peck pitched its case study to the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority in September 2009 in their Delivering the Missing Links to Sydney's Motorway Network paper.

They described it as a similar concept to the company which is now running the federal government's National Broadband Network.

The report highlights it would be far easier to implement variable and distance tolling, which could be used to encourage and discourage motorists from using roads at certain times of the day.

"With the shift to fully electronic tolling, the use of variable toll charges or 'congestion tolling' to discourage use of the [motorway] network at capacity, but also to encourage use of the network with capacity, will be relatively easy to achieve," the report said.

It highlighted several issues found in Sydney's network of tollways that were becoming apparent in Brisbane.

It found tolls were "set to refinance the investment and to provide a return to equity, rather than as a demand management tool to control the efficient use of the infrastructure".

QIC is already an investor in Sydney's Westlink M7 Motorway, which connects three other motorways in Sydney's Orbital Road Network.

[#Metro]

Evans and Peck pitched its case study to the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority in September 2009 in their Delivering the Missing Links to Sydney's Motorway Network paper.

http://www.evanspeck.com/Working%20Files/Publications/EPMotorwaysPaper.pdf

IMHO this is virtually equivalent to road pricing. Maybe this is not so bad after all???
The idea that "motorists will be "encouraged" (read:Forced) to use alternative roads" by price signals is probably not the whole truth, unless they were planning on having two tunnels side-by-side which you could pick, going to the same destinations.

There will still be a need for PT, perhaps even more so, because the people who can afford to use tolls and not care about the price are those with incomes sufficient to do that. Remembering that the demographic which is apparently the most car dependent are those on low incomes out in the fringes with bad or no PT who drive to work- these people will probably still use the free roads into the city, which will still congest in time.

There are a few things:
1. Will the private operators pay for the maintainence of the road
2. Will it be sustainable longer term (will the privateers make enough $$$ to cover their costs). The sensitivities here are of course petrol prices and mortgage rates...
3. Are there hidden cost shifts to the public- driving generates externialities in terms of pollution, accidents etc. Will the plan offset the emissions of the motorists using the service, or will that fall into the public sector?

[#Metro]

Slowly, but surely, its going to be harder and harder to afford driving. Simple petrol and other prices rising will see to that...
Courier Mail is running one of its routine petrol price "aren't you OUTRAGED?!" pieces today.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/brisbane-motorists-paying-the-most-for-petrol-thanks-to-price-gouging-by-service-stations/story-e6freon6-1225966656035



This is why I cannot afford a horseless carriage!
More BUZ routes please...

[#Metro]

Guess what the first comment in the line is ?:

p davis  Posted at 11:10 PM December 06, 2010

    Give us back our petorl subsidy Anna.

Comment 1 of 12

[Stillwater]

When it operated, the fuel companies never passed the full petrol subsidy onto motorists.  The government will be crazy to bring it back.  But, hey, you might find some crazies in the LNP who would promise it in the heat of an election campaign to appease 'country' voters.

Better that the government put an additional 'levy' on petrol under arrangement with the federal government, through the fuel excise arrangements.  Say 3 cents a litre for three years -- with all the extra money going to public transport.

One of the criticisms people outside SEQ have is that they don't benefit from public transport expenditure by the state.  Well, a 3x3 levy could be used to build those light rail idea in Cairns and Rockhampton, be applied to public transport in other provincial areas (supplemented by a local government transport levy), as well as projects in SEQ.

That would be a better election winner than a fuel subsidy that just subsidised fuel companies.

We can look forward to every car having a transponder installed at the point of manufacture, so congestion pricing would become the norm.  There is no such thing as a 'free' road.

[O_128]

Things like petrol shouldn't be subsidized, if you cant afford the petrol for your V8 commodore then that's your problem not mine and im not subsidizing you

[Gazza]

I never understood the fuel subsidy either...To fund it, taxes/charges need to be higher than they otherwise would've have, so it's just giving with one hand and taking with the other.

[Golliwog]

My understanding of the issue about Newmans plan for encouraging motorists to use certain routes rather than others through changing the tolls as congestion changes is that its still only going to be the current toll roads that are part of it. Its hardly going to do anything if you can still just drive through the CBD 'free' of charge.

[#Metro]

My understanding of the issue about Newmans plan for encouraging motorists to use certain routes rather than others through changing the tolls as congestion changes is that its still only going to be the current toll roads that are part of it. Its hardly going to do anything if you can still just drive through the CBD 'free' of charge.

I would like to see examples of how Newman's system would actually work.
If i, for example, live out at Garden City and I am going to work in Fortitude Valley, what do I do?

I jump on the SE Freeway and then I hit congestion. What happens next? Will the Clem 7 toll lower in price to let me through and to "relieve congestion", or will the opposite happen- the price will go up because I am now stuck on the motorway, I can't reverse off it and I need to escape congestion and will pay anything to get out of it...

[Golliwog]

I jump on the SE Freeway and then I hit congestion. What happens next? Will the Clem 7 toll lower in price to let me through and to "relieve congestion", or will the opposite happen- the price will go up because I am now stuck on the motorway, I can't reverse off it and I need to escape congestion and will pay anything to get out of it...

Well no, not really. Thats the whole reason Clem 7's owners are going broke. It doesn't matter how low the toll went, most people aren't willing to pay even $2 to get out of the congestion. Unless they impose a toll on the Captain Cook and Story bridges that can also be raised or lowered to encourage alternate routes people will just wait it out, as they do now.

[#Metro]

Well no, not really. Thats the whole reason Clem 7's owners are going broke. It doesn't matter how low the toll went, most people aren't willing to pay even $2 to get out of the congestion. Unless they impose a toll on the Captain Cook and Story bridges that can also be raised or lowered to encourage alternate routes people will just wait it out, as they do now.

IMHO one of the reasons might be because the Clem 7 and Captain Cook Bridge aren't serving the same trip ends. People want to go to work in the CBD and in Milton/Toowong. On the other hand, when the toll was zero, the tunnel had no problem inducing traffic to fill it. Now that has all disappeared. What is going on??

Then there is that other toll road- the Gateway motorway.

[#Metro]

Hello, what is this?

Mr Newman suggested the state government pay or subsidise motorists' tolls, to divert them from free roads and reduce

the cost of upgrades and maintenance. The council will double capital works spending to $4bn over the next four years, despite warnings from the Queensland Treasury Corporation it was "diverging from core activities and exposing itself to increased risk".

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/brisbanes-toll-pooling-plan-may-double-debt/story-fn59niix-1225965404265

Negative tolling? The toll is set below zero???

[somebody]

I never understood the fuel subsidy either...To fund it, taxes/charges need to be higher than they otherwise would've have, so it's just giving with one hand and taking with the other.

No, but it was very popular.

[johnnigh]

Newman was,  perhaps unwittingly, arguing for a shadow toll to finance the operators while allowing full use of the facility by stingy motorists who refuse to pay themselves. This is actually very sensible. The more efficient facility is fully utilised while the crappy old facilities have the load removed. Now this is all very well for road users but may not be so good for PT. The state subsidy has to be paid for, failing force majeure against the toll road owners, so less left over for PT etc. And car users are again subsidized, unless a general congestion charge is introduced, which is the only really sensible option. But because it is sensible it will be automatically rejected by pusillanimous politicians, which is what they all are.

[mufreight]

Governments (and councils) are elected to and are obliged to provide services and infrastructure, the abmismal failures in these areas are compounded by over the top consultencies, reports and an overpaid bureaucracy who procrastinate rather than make the decisions that they are employed to make in case someone might disagree with the soutions.
Thin out the deadwood at the top and redirect the money and effort to resolving the problems then there would be no need for a congestion TAX   

[longboi]

I never understood the fuel subsidy either...To fund it, taxes/charges need to be higher than they otherwise would've have, so it's just giving with one hand and taking with the other.

No, but it was very popular.

Same psychology as "save 4c per litre". They make the discounted amount back through the groceries but sucker people in with a big "discount".

[somebody]

Same psychology as "save 4c per litre". They make the discounted amount back through the groceries but sucker people in with a big "discount".

I don't think that is really comparable.  The fuel subsidy was giving back some our own money through the petrol bowser rather than putting it in bank or building anything with it.

[Stillwater]

From memory, it was a hefty eight cents a litre, but eight cents off what price?  The best deal motorists ever got was 3-4 cents off per litre than the Sydney fuel price, and even Sydney was cheaper at times at points during the price war cycle.  The discount varied across standard unleaded, premium etc.  Above all, it distorted the market.

Did the taxpayer get the full benefit of the eight cents?  Never.  Even today, 'Colwool' offer gimmicks like eight cents a litre off if you buy a bit of overpriced stuff from their servos.  They don't sell the fuel at a loss.

Better that the state government put the eight cents 'saving' (even that is a misnomer) towards something worthwhile, like PT.  How else is the state governmen going to raise its share of the cost of the CRR project?  The feds are not going to be that generous as to pick up the entire tab.

[#Metro]

Would people support charges in exchange for abolition of the license fees and registration fees?