By Josh Kenworthy | Monash University, Melbourne

Experts are encouraging the implementation of a congestion charge in Melbourne. Image: Scotticus

A charge on traffic congestion is recommended by leading transport experts as the best solution to Melbourne’s growing $3 billion-a-year congestion problem and the recently released Henry Review also recommends it.

Public transport experts from Monash and Sydney universities told Reportage Enviro that a congestion charge should replace Australia’s current hidden fuel excise and vehicle registration fees and that revenue from congestion charging should be channelled back into transport sustainability.

“One great opportunity with something called the congestion charge is it’s a way of taxing the problem to create a revenue source to solve the problem,” said Professor Graham Currie of Monash University.

Professor David Hensher of Sydney University said that if the public were to accept a road pricing scheme it would be essential that the revenue from the charge be dedicated to improving public transport, roads and emissions reduction.

According to the International Association of Public Transport (UITP), Australia’s current fuel excise and car registration regime generates over $9 billion in federal government revenue per annum, but this is not specifically dedicated to solving congestion and traffic related problems.

Victorian federal MP, Kelvin Thomson, believes that a congestion charge cannot even be considered until “underlying” issues such as population growth are solved.

“Until we get on a stable path I think that’s just likely to be a recipe for a divisive debate and another tax,” he said.

However, Professor John Stanley of Sydney University said that population size and traffic congestion are connected and should be dealt with simultaneously.

“It’s not either or, the $3 billion [congestion] costs are there now, they’re not future costs… they’re going to get worse as the population grows,” he said.

VicRoads current plan for managing Melbourne’s traffic congestion, SmartRoads, is a road hierarchy system where certain modes of transport are given priority on certain routes depending on the time of day.

Professor Currie said that SmartRoads was a progressive step but that ultimately it would not solve the problem.

“There is no such thing as managing congestion [to] make it go away… Population is expected to grow. We’re going to get another million people here,” he said.

Congestion charging has been applied successfully in Hong Kong, Stockholm, Singapore and also London, where peak traffic volume was reduced by 20 percent and revenue from the charge was used to pay for more buses resulting in a six per cent increase in usage.

While London’s system sees drivers paying a flat fee for entering a cordoned area around the CBD, Australian experts favour a more sophisticated and fair GPS-operated charging scheme, similar to one being developed in the Netherlands, which would track exactly where and when driving occurred to more accurately charge drivers for their road usage.

UITP Executive Director Australia/New Zealand, Peter Moore, said that early indications from the Netherlands suggest that 80 per cent of road users would actually save money under such a scheme.

“My gut feeling is they’re right. I think the vast majority of people would in fact pay less [than they do under the current tax regime],” Mr Moore said.

VicRoads and the Minister for Roads and Ports, Tim Pallas, were contacted for comment but did not return calls or emails before time of publication.