Tackling Gridlock

Written by Graham Tope on Tue 2nd Jul 2002

The London Assembly Liberal Democrats have, unlike others, always welcomed the idea of introducing tough measures to tackle traffic congestion in London.

The facts must be faced. Central London faces continual gridlock and congestion will worsen. Average traffic speeds are below 10mph, which is slower than at the turn of the last century.

London's business community is crying out for congestion to be tackled as it is costing £2 billion a year in wasted time and increased vehicle operating costs. Traffic chaos is harming the competitive edge of London business.

The Mayor and Transport for London believe the congestion charging scheme should reduce traffic in central London by 15 per cent. Traffic will move more freely, more bus services can be introduced and services should follow their timetables more reliably.

The scheme will make £130 million each year and all of this money has to be spent on public transport improvements for London for at least 10 years.

But scaremongers continue to wish to derail the scheme, even at this late stage. This week Westminster City council is seeking a judicial review of the scheme. The Tories on the London Assembly have accused Transport for London of deliberately making traffic lights stay at red longer to cause gridlock - their theory is that when the congestion charge comes in the light sequences will be changed back to normal and the jams will vanish.

That's not to say that the Lib Dems have had no concerns about the Mayor's scheme. Possible teething problems like rat-running and parking in the areas just outside the Central Zone (such as Paddington), must be ironed out before the scheme goes 'live' in February.

We seem to have persuaded the Mayor and Transport for London to set up pilot schemes in outer London town centres, not for congestion charging but to copy successful schemes in Australia and elsewhere that have persuaded motorists to leave the car at home. The Lib Dems are also investigating innovative options such as an M25 park and train scheme - there are many places where train lines cross the M25, and some could be sites for such a facility.

Even if the attempts to derail the scheme fail, the Mayor cannot rest on his laurels. Londoners won't accept congestion charging unless they see first that public transport has improved. Buses, trains and the Tube need to be safe, cheap, clean and efficient before car owners will switch to them. He has just seven months to get public transport improvements in place before the scheme goes live. If not, the transport network will struggle to cope.

It takes a brave Mayor to implement a policy of this nature. Get it right and cities across the world will look at the capital with envy. Get it wrong and Londoners will suffer. It is a big gamble for the Mayor - if he fails his time as Mayor will be remembered for good intentions poorly implemented.