Congestion tolling etc.

[ozbob]

From the ABC News click here!

Oakeshott wants congestion tax in cities

Oakeshott wants congestion tax in cities

Posted 1 hour 48 minutes ago

Federal independent MP Rob Oakeshott says he is going to push for a congestion tax in cities, and more tolls on major roads.

The charges were recommended in the Henry Tax Review as a way of making transport taxes more efficient.

But Mr Oakeshott says neither of the major parties will make the changes because they will be politically unpopular.

"Both sides know that this is something that at some point has to happen," he said.

Yesterday, Mr Oakeshott voted against an increase in diesel and truck charges.

He says country motorists, truck drivers and transport companies get ripped off by the current system because they pay more in levies.

"I'm going to start to push on a full list of transport-user charges, including tolling, including congestion charging," he said.

He says a tax system overhaul will make the country more productive.

[somebody]

Re: Sydney Bus congestion: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9060.0

Seems something is being done about this.  Enough?  We'll have to wait and see.

[Jonno]

Just added this.

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9082.msg109369;topicseen#msg109369

[SurfRail]

A congestion tax is fine, but people need alternatives. Currently if teh Rail network is closing in on capacity and bus system is clogging the streets, what would be achieved?

I actually agree with this.  There needs to be loss-leading - if you model the congestion tax to fund PT improvements, you need to have done very sound modelling so you can actually recoup initial outlays.

[johnnigh]

At last even politicians are talking about congestion charging! 

But, could we start getting used to calling it a charge or price instead of a tax.

As I said on another topic, we don't call the price of milk a milk drinking tax, because we're paying a price for consuming it. We should be paying a price for using the roads - they're a scarce and expensive resource that we have to pay for, and what better way than directly, instead of via a plethora of taxes, mainly our income tax and GST, that govt imposes on us because they can't be bothered with a direct price.

The cost of GPS-based pricing is barely higher than the cost of eTagging on tolled roads. No infrastructure is required on the roads, only knowledge of where traffic is when. The price can vary with vehicle weight (wear and tear on roads) and traffic density measured instantaneously (congestion). The congestion part of it is zero for roadspace below capacity to very high the higher is usage above that capacity as measured by flow. Sounds fanciful? Not really, just difficult for the pollies.

The more money raised by the congestion part of the charge, the more funds are available for PT! 

[SurfRail]

I don't think we should play with semantics.  Going down that path is no different to treating income tax , payroll tax, land tax, rates, GST, stamp duty or any other revenue collection method as a "citizen price" or a "price" on any number of government services.

A tax is very clearly something levied on something by government to pay for something provided by government, in its broadest sense (ignoring constitutional issues about who can put what kinds of taxes on what).  The net effect is the same, and I think people appreciate plain speech more than legalisms (this is coming from the lawyer here...)

[Jonno]

Politicians are talking about congestion charges, tax, levy or costs mechanism to be applied to the citizens of this great country (Do I pass Legal Muster? :-) ). 

They are not discussing that their transport planning for the last 40 years has created this god-almighty mess, that they got is "oh so wrong" and that it will take us all to understand what needs to change and work together to fix the mess. 

Introdcung a Congestion congestion charges, tax, levy or costs mechanism to be applied to the citizens of this great country will only alienate the masses who believe they have a Human Right to uncongested roads, free of pedestrians, traffic lights, buses and preferrably other vehicles.  It will also have opposition politicians promising to "fix congestion" by building more roads so there is no congestion to charge for". 

This is my fear from a Congestion Charge.

[somebody]

I doubt very much that roads pay their own way.  I thought federal fuel excise had a 3 in front of it.

You also need to include health care costs.

[Jonno]

There is no don't that roads are not covered by charges directly associated with roads. I belive there is a 16b dollar shortfall each and every year!

[ozbob]

There is no don't that roads are not covered by charges directly associated with roads. I belive there is a 16b dollar shortfall each and every year!

Yes, indeed.  Probably more now --> http://www.ptua.org.au/myths/petroltax.shtml

[somebody]

That link counts "insurance premiums" of $12bn as part of road transport paying its way!  I do not think that is fair.

[somebody]

So in spite of contrary data being provided, you are choosing to believe what you would like to?  Wish I could say I was surprised.

[somebody]

Current excise rate = 38.143c/L

http://www.aip.com.au/pdf/fuel_excise_reform.pdf
http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?Docid=PAC/BL030002/1&PiT=99991231235958

[Jonno]

So in spite of contrary data being provided, you are choosing to believe what you would like to?  Wish I could say I was surprised.

I call then Congestion Denialst!!  Their war cry is "Buildd More Roads We are Almost There!"

[somebody]

Land use cost                                  6,000 (I would challenge this one easily)

Probably understates it.  The land use cost of cars is astounding.

Noise                                                 700 (where does this money go, yes I hate road noise as much as next person)
Urban air pollution                           4,300 (so if they become electric?)
Climate change                                2,900 (questionable and subjective)

So you would put a $0 price on Noise and Air Polution?  Full electric isn't going mainstream any time soon.

I'm not inclined to comment on Climate Change.

Tax concessions for car use               7,400 (so if I use a vehicle for work I get a tax conession, how is this a subsidy?) Same could be applied for PT)

I imagine you are referring to the idea that if you spend money e.g. running a courier van, that money is a deduction against the income of the courier. 

Reading the detail in the link, I don't see that at all.  It is referring to FBT, which would mean personal use.

So even if you only count the tax concessions, Road construction & trauma+damage, it still exceeds the income, even after very generously counting insurance premiums as a credit.

-
p38 has a table of the Federal fuel excise, dating back to before the 1997 High Court decision re: excise: http://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/rb/2005-06/06rb15.pdf

[ozbob]

Twitter

10h Taras Grescoe Taras Grescoe ‏@grescoe

London Transport did the math about cars and transit...in 1969. (And with gorgeous graphics.) pic.twitter.com/eY1tofTi

[ozbob]

Sydney Morning Herald --> Toll roads operator seeks new pricing

AUSTRALIA'S largest toll-road operator, Transurban, has stepped up its push for the state government to consider peak-hour pricing on future projects to prevent further congestion.

A day after Infrastructure NSW released its project wish-list, the operator of Sydney's M2, M5, M7 and Lane Cove Tunnel has urged state governments to act upon their long-term transport plans.

The chairman of Transurban, Lindsay Maxsted, said the states could not ''build our way out of congestion forever'' and needed to look at different pricing models for roadways ....

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/toll-roads-operator-seeks-new-pricing-20121004-272bj.html#ixzz28MwM14nu

[ozbob]

Sydney Morning Herald --> Peak tolls offer to make every day like a holiday

[ozbob]

Interesting story ...

The New York Times --> Toll Unsettles Los Angeles Motorists Used to 'Free' in Freeways

[ozbob]

Atlantic Cities --> DC's Massive New Transportation Experiment Starts Tomorrow

[ozbob]

Twitter

American Planning ‏@APA_Planning 38m

San Francisco exploring controversial congestion-pricing scheme to reduce automobile traffic to help combat gridlock: http://tinyurl.com/ljed3qw

[frereOP]

The original funding model for the Clem 7 tunnel was toll-free but to be paid for by a congestion tax on Brisbane CBD.  That was too politically difficult for the then Labor Governemnt (politicians are so sensitive when it comes to their own survival!). Given that recent research (despite the lower than predicted patronage of the tunnel) shows that the Clem 7 has created significant benefits and time savings for surface travellers, they should share the costs of the tunnel.

It is now (way beyond!) time to bite the bullet and make the Clem 7 free (or significantly lower the toll) and toll entry into the Brisbane CBD. 

Come on Mr Seeny (Qld Minister for State Develeopment, Infrastructure and Planning), Mr Emerson (Qld Minister for Transport and Main Roads) and Mr Quirk (Brisbane Lord Mayor), show us that you have got some balls because I haven't seen any yet!.

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail 5th July 2013 page 9

Tax seen as traffic solution

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Infrastructure Partnerships Australia urges Prime Minister Tony Abbott to introduce congestion taxes or more tolls in capital cities

[#Metro]

It is not the role of the Federal Govt to introduce DEcongestion pricing. More a role for state govs

[ozbob]

Sydney Morning Herald --> Motor groups support push for user-pays road charges

Motorists who drive less and stay off the road in peak hour would pay less in fuel taxes and registration fees, under proposals put forward by motoring groups.

But people who drive on busy city roads in the morning and afternoon peaks would pay more, according to the proposal, designed to increase the amount of money spent on road infrastructure.

In a paper to be released in Canberra on Tuesday, the motoring groups back a push by the private transport industry for a new model of paying for roads in Australia.

The groups – including the NRMA, Victoria's RACV and Queensland's RACQ – say the Productivity Commission should be put in charge of developing a user-pays model for road pricing ...

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/motor-groups-support-push-for-userpays-road-charges-20140324-35eiv.html

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Federal Government considers charging drivers per kilometre to pay for roads

[ozbob]

World Economic Forum --> Seven ways cities around the world are tackling traffic

[ozbob]

Daily Life --> ACCC's Rod Sims calls for 'congestion pricing'

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Every road in Australia should have tolls, says report

[pandmaster]

There is a fat chance of this happening in Queensland! I hope it does though, but I agree with other posters that it needs to start at a modest level so that PT is given a chance and funding to improve to cater for increased demand.

The CLEM7 toll should be removed and excluded from the congestion price (once the "carbon price" became a "carbon tax" that was the beginning of the end). People should be incentivised to use it, unlike the current system where drivers are encouraged to take the M3 for free.

This feels like yet another report that the government will ignore 95% of because they think they know better than an expert at arguably the nation's top university.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Motorists being asked to consider user-pays model

CONGESTION impacts all drivers so why are some motorists paying more than others when it comes to funding new roads?

Experts highlighted the "unfair" system that is currently used to help fund new roads in Australia at the National Infrastructure Summit in Sydney this week.

The current system benefits those who drive fuel efficient cars, and improved technology is reducing the money that governments collect from fuel excise and can use to build essential infrastructure. The introduction of driverless cars could see the government's funding base slashed even further.

Motorists are now being asked to consider contributing more towards the cost of the roads that they use.

Countries such as Singapore and the United States are already trialling new technology including satellite tracking, to raise more money.

It's an idea that federal Assistant Infrastructure Minister Jamie Briggs thinks that Australia should be considering, to help get new road projects off the ground and improve gridlock ...

[#Metro]

^This could be the beginning of the end for roads.    Charging for PT usage is entrenched, charging for roads are not. ESPECIALLY roads that have already been paid for by tax money and were free since opening.

Motorists hate up-front obvious tolls, just like they hate ATM fees, even if the fee is $2 and they have $2000 in the bank. Hence it has been sneaked in through the pump. Except we may not need the pump in the future. Double problems!

Most of these congestion buster-schemes are 'light touch' and the fee is not much. I don't think there is much revenue to be had charging pittance 5 days per week for 2 hours in the am and 2 in the pm.

NB: Decongestion charging (i.e. Paying NOT to be in traffic congestion) and road user charges are related but separate things. The purpose of decongestion charging is to get free flow at peak hours, the aim of road user charges is to make revenue to pay for road maintainence etc.

[ozbob]

The Conversation --> Road users must pay, sooner rather than later

[ozbob]

The Conversation --> Don't panic! Traffic congestion is not coming for our cities

[ozbob]

Sydney Morning Herald --> Congestion tax debate looms on horizon for Sydney

[ozbob]

Traffic and congestion cost trends for Australian capital cities

>> http://bitre.gov.au/publications/2015/is_074.aspx

The avoidable cost of congestion for the Australian capital cities is estimated to be around $16.5 billion for the 2015 financial year, having grown from about $12.8 billion for 2010. BITRE 'business-as-usual' projections of these costs of metropolitan congestion rise to around $30 billion by 2030—with the various modelling scenarios conducted giving aggregate 2030 results of between $27.7 and $37.3 billion, depending upon the chosen assumptions.

[ozbob]

Beautiful movie this ..  :conf

1965 !

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Brisbane congestion charge back on agenda as gridlock set to spiral

BRISBANE'S traffic volume will soar by 50 per cent over the next 15 years, faster than any state capital except Perth.

Traffic gridlock will cost the city's economy up to $5.9 billion a year by 2030, a new federal report warns.

The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics forecasts the current impact of "avoidable" road congestion of $2.3 billion will more than double over the next 15 years.

Infrastructure Partnerships Australia chief executive Brendan Lyon said congestion charging must be considered.

"We hope that the release of today's statistics will signal to political leaders that we are up for a discussion about real reform, and that a process to properly consider pricing reform will be actively supported by motorists," he said.

"Charging drivers dependent on when, where and how they use their vehicles can change demand patterns.

"If implemented effectively, it can cause reduced congestion in peak periods allowing city to function effectively in turn reducing the avoidable costs of congestion."

The report predicts Brisbane traffic levels will hit between 29 billion and 32.1 billion vehicle kilometres a year by 2030. That will create enormous demand for additional roads, bridges and other infrastructure.

By comparison, the past 15 years — which brought billions of dollars of investment in toll roads and tunnels and other network improvements — saw a 33 per cent increase in vehicles on the city's roads to 21.6 billion this year.

RACQ public policy executive manager Michael Roth said gridlock costs would rise from $1000 per person to $1500, overtaking Melbourne.

The motoring organisation was happy to discuss pricing reform, including congestion charging – but only if cuts to fuel excise, vehicle registration and tolls were also on the table.

Mr Roth said use of toll roads and tunnels would inevitably increase due to rising frustration at delays but the State Government and city council would need to make big investments in infrastructure, starting with Cross River rail, to lift public transport use.

Infrastructure Minister Jackie Trad said: "If we do nothing the cost of congestion in south east Queensland will continue to grow.

"That's why this year alone the Queensland Government is investing almost $4 billion in new roads and transport infrastructure for our state, supporting around 10,500 jobs.

"We now need the Commonwealth to come on board and help fund Cross River Rail, our No.1 public transport project. Cross River Rail will have the capacity to move up to 120,000 people into the inner city in the two-hour morning peak period – equivalent of a 30-lane motorway.''

Rail Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow said: "We've got a problem and we can't build our way out of congestion with more and more roads. There has to be more investment in public transport."

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk said he did not support a congestion tax and continued to lobby the Federal Government to ensure a new cross-river crossing catered for buses as well as trains.

There was ''no denying'' that key toll infrastructure such as the Clem7 tunnel, Go Between Bridge, Airport Link and, most recently, Legacy Way tunnel were delivering travel time savings by taking 120,000 vehicles a day off other roads.

A separate report by the agency showed the average Brisbane commute was 14.9km — just 0.1km less than Sydney which had the longest average journey.

People in Townsville and Cairns travel between 9km and 12km on average, while those on the Sunshine Coast have an average 17.1km trip and Gold Coast residents travel 16.9km. However, one in seven Gold Coasters commutes more than 50km.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th November 2015

Lord Mayor Quirk lives in the past ...

Good Morning,

We note that Lord Mayor Quirk is still living the past.

Brisbane congestion charge back on agenda as gridlock set to spiral
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/brisbane-congestion-charge-back-on-agenda-as-gridlock-set-to-spiral/story-fnihsrf2-1227603953645

Lord Mayor Quirk is still babbling on about the BaT -  the BaT is dead, again confirmed in parliament yesterday. In case Lord Mayor Quirk missed this, the BaT was never going to happen

Senior LNP figures say BaT Tunnel was former premier Campbell Newman's impossible dream
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/senior-lnp-figures-say-bat-tunnel-was-former-premier-campbell-newmans-impossible-dream/story-fnn8dlfs-1227373555703

What is needed is bus network reform for Brisbane.  This will deliver more buses more often to where they are needed and reduce the number of near empty buses running into the Brisbane CBD both peak and off peak.

BCC needs to find the courage to convert Victoria Bridge to a green bridge.  That coupled with bus network reform is all that is needed from BCC's perspective.

Cross River Rail is the project that needs acceleration.

We have shown how bus reform for Brisbane can proceed.

We detail our proposals here:

Bus reform - our proposal media releases grouped - http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11099.0
New Bus Network Proposal - http://tiny.cc/newnetwork
Current BCC Bus Network - http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus

The sooner the Lord Mayor and Brisbane City Council is stripped of public transport functions, the sooner genuine reform of rail and bus networks can go ahead, and the sooner we can look forward to abundant and low-cost public transport for all.

The biggest problem with the looming massive congestion problem for Brisbane is Brisbane City Council.

Enjoy the gridlock!

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Reference:

Reform Brisbane Bus Network > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11047.msg163937#msg163937