TFL to extend Congestion Charge Zone...?!
Discussion
Timberwolf said:
The biggest problem I find with London bus routes is the distance between stops is short and then you have a tragedy of the commons type effect where everybody is too lazy to go, "here is close enough, I'll get off now to save the bus stopping again". This means any long straight road where the bus could get a bit of a zip on you instead have every 100m *ding* one person gets off *ding* another single person leaves *ding* a couple exit the bus *ding* nobody gets off, maybe with a distant "sorry drive, thought that was my stop" from somewhere down the back if you're lucky. Each time is a full cycle of stop, doors open, wait for the one person to get clear of the bus, doors close, wait for someone to let the bus out... resulting in an average velocity somewhere around a smart walking pace. If you're fit and healthy the only purpose of the bus is as a sort of communal umbrella.
Of course the stops have to be close because you have a decent proportion of people with impaired mobility use the bus. Wheelchair users or elderly actually need the stop to be right outside the shop/church/community centre. So I'm not sure there's an easy solution unless you spend several generations training the kind of general populace who go, "this is close enough and the bus is already stopping, I'll step off now so everyone else's journey can be faster" - which we're currently heading in the opposite direction of so not much hope there. Maybe some kind of special mobility pass to use certain stops, like the old toilet keys?
It's exactly this with buses, and the answer is make 1 service in 3 an express stopping once per town and at special locations.Of course the stops have to be close because you have a decent proportion of people with impaired mobility use the bus. Wheelchair users or elderly actually need the stop to be right outside the shop/church/community centre. So I'm not sure there's an easy solution unless you spend several generations training the kind of general populace who go, "this is close enough and the bus is already stopping, I'll step off now so everyone else's journey can be faster" - which we're currently heading in the opposite direction of so not much hope there. Maybe some kind of special mobility pass to use certain stops, like the old toilet keys?
Ian Geary said:
Interesting to read today that the Welsh government is renationalised Welsh rail from Feb 2021.
The private operator seemingly can't cope with lack of revenue.
I wonder who will pay for that? I can't think where the Welsh government can conjure up that sort of cash, or whether the Welsh will be happy that only Welsh tax payers find it?
Although the Welsh population is less than half on London, there are parallels about how to run public transport when it's not commercially viable.
I don't think it's fair car drivers inside the circulars should be expected to pay more than any other user of tfl services to prop them up. But given tfl do roads too, a scenario where all users of "transport" pay more is fairer. He'll, why not just stick it into the GLA precept? (Though that would cause the council tax payers alliances types to have a complete meltdown, and wouldn't cover those travelling into London from outside of it). Perhaps a home counties levy then? Or do we go full circle back to charging on a usage basis?
I also continue to believe trying to pin tfl financial problems on khan is just political opportunism at its worse, matched only by the Tory govt trying to make khan the fall guy for this CC extension.
It clearly seems to have been swallowed by some though
Plus, anecdotally, I heard the earlier increase in vehicle charges by tfl over summer was a requirement of the previous government bail out. But if it was, it didn't seem to get much exposure.
Which is a shame, as I think transparency and accountability have to go together.
Transport for Wales was the name that the private operators were using for the railway anyway (they are giving them repurposed District Line underground trains in red and white rather than new stuff)... most of the private operators saw profits drop after everyone started working from home, so it may be more a case of private firms throwing in the towel rather than the ignominious end that TfL is facing...The private operator seemingly can't cope with lack of revenue.
I wonder who will pay for that? I can't think where the Welsh government can conjure up that sort of cash, or whether the Welsh will be happy that only Welsh tax payers find it?
Although the Welsh population is less than half on London, there are parallels about how to run public transport when it's not commercially viable.
I don't think it's fair car drivers inside the circulars should be expected to pay more than any other user of tfl services to prop them up. But given tfl do roads too, a scenario where all users of "transport" pay more is fairer. He'll, why not just stick it into the GLA precept? (Though that would cause the council tax payers alliances types to have a complete meltdown, and wouldn't cover those travelling into London from outside of it). Perhaps a home counties levy then? Or do we go full circle back to charging on a usage basis?
I also continue to believe trying to pin tfl financial problems on khan is just political opportunism at its worse, matched only by the Tory govt trying to make khan the fall guy for this CC extension.
It clearly seems to have been swallowed by some though
Plus, anecdotally, I heard the earlier increase in vehicle charges by tfl over summer was a requirement of the previous government bail out. But if it was, it didn't seem to get much exposure.
Which is a shame, as I think transparency and accountability have to go together.
I wonder where all this money is coming from to buy back all these train franchises... Are they trying to bring back British Rail?
It seems the Congestion Charge extension will happen in 12 months if at all, as they still have to set up infrastructure on each road coming into the zone. Khan, like Bailey has said no to it, but by which time if Khan is still Mayor, it likely would have all blown over (or they would have gone through a few more bailouts by then). Most likely TfL will come under direct government control rather than City Hall. Probably a similar setup with the same fares amongst bus operators, but a little higher than £1.50. They can lose the nonsense job roles, and a regional bus commissioner can take care of anything within London & South East if need be. London bus operators will breathe a sigh of relief not having to rent the Boris Buses from TfL (1000 in total, each with LTZ private plates) or spend so much more on "London spec" vehicles, and hopefully the stupid cycle lanes will be gone...
With the new normal, London won't be as congested if more work from home. A Mayor who knows what he's doing would be a benefit
This is £15 every time one of 6m people wants to go to the shops or take the kids to school (avoidable maybe) or visit relatives, or to go on holiday, or to go to hospital etc.
Far from some green vision it sounds more like a dystopia where everything on the road is a van, Uber, cab or pizza moped.
Far from some green vision it sounds more like a dystopia where everything on the road is a van, Uber, cab or pizza moped.
R Mutt said:
This is £15 every time one of 6m people wants to go to the shops or take the kids to school (avoidable maybe) or visit relatives, or to go on holiday, or to go to hospital etc.
Far from some green vision it sounds more like a dystopia where everything on the road is a van, Uber, cab or pizza moped.
The government's bark is worse than its bite... this won't happen that soon, and bus enthusiast Boris Johnson won't let the system go to the wall. He knows this will drive away custom, but it's just a make Sadiq and TfL realise what a mess finances are...Far from some green vision it sounds more like a dystopia where everything on the road is a van, Uber, cab or pizza moped.
Ian Geary said:
Interesting to read today that the Welsh government is renationalised Welsh rail from Feb 2021.
The private operator seemingly can't cope with lack of revenue.
The whole system leaves operators paying too much at too low a margin to operate in less than perfect conditions, such that only a government can 'afford' to do it.The private operator seemingly can't cope with lack of revenue.
So what’s the latest with this? Has this idea been binned or are London roads simply being toll charged for the rich and wealthy?
I mean that’s one way of making it better / easier for your mates to get around London Boris.
If Sadiq doesn’t push back and stop this he’s out. No matter what - he needs to squarely pin this on the government and not sign anything to agree to such terms. We already have this sodding extended hours / days congestion charge.
I mean that’s one way of making it better / easier for your mates to get around London Boris.
If Sadiq doesn’t push back and stop this he’s out. No matter what - he needs to squarely pin this on the government and not sign anything to agree to such terms. We already have this sodding extended hours / days congestion charge.
Podie said:
I suspect we'll find out in the next day or two.
New bailout granted until march 2021.Khan saying he averted worst demands by the Government.
Government saying TfL was already bankrupt, and need to fund some of this themselves.
The fact Londoners get some benefits non Londoners get (free travel for young etc) has truth to it, but that discussion pre dated the need for covid support. Eg the Scottish get benefits over and above England... should that now be reconsidered as part of Scottish furlough? I can think of a handful of million who might disagree.
The government is also unhappy khan leaked details, whilst busy trying to find who they can blame for leaking lockdown details the same day. Oh, the irony.
Indeed, a (short term) deal has been done, as we all suspected.
Deal covers 6 months to March 2021.
Whitehall is giving
- £905m core grant
- Another £100m in core loans
- Further grants and loans linked to passenger revenue, expected to be £800m if passenger numbers stay where they are
TfL commits to
- Fare rise of Inflation + 1%
- £160m of in-year cost savings
- Existing changes to congestion charge (extended hours, 7 days per week, £15) to become permanent
Expect Round 3 next March to be punchy, in the middle of the Mayoral election.
Deal covers 6 months to March 2021.
Whitehall is giving
- £905m core grant
- Another £100m in core loans
- Further grants and loans linked to passenger revenue, expected to be £800m if passenger numbers stay where they are
TfL commits to
- Fare rise of Inflation + 1%
- £160m of in-year cost savings
- Existing changes to congestion charge (extended hours, 7 days per week, £15) to become permanent
Expect Round 3 next March to be punchy, in the middle of the Mayoral election.
brickwall said:
Indeed, a (short term) deal has been done, as we all suspected.
Deal covers 6 months to March 2021.
Whitehall is giving
- £905m core grant
- Another £100m in core loans
- Further grants and loans linked to passenger revenue, expected to be £800m if passenger numbers stay where they are
TfL commits to
- Fare rise of Inflation + 1%
- £160m of in-year cost savings
- Existing changes to congestion charge (extended hours, 7 days per week, £15) to become permanent
Expect Round 3 next March to be punchy, in the middle of the Mayoral election.
Instead of the CC Extension, there will now be extra Council Tax of £50 added on to every Band D home to claw in extra funds. This is all a sticking plaster if TfL face another 3 months of Lockdown (it will be extended past December) and passenger numbers which barely revived, slump again as people stay off the network. Many may still take the bus, but expect the tube drivers still to get their 60 bags a year Deal covers 6 months to March 2021.
Whitehall is giving
- £905m core grant
- Another £100m in core loans
- Further grants and loans linked to passenger revenue, expected to be £800m if passenger numbers stay where they are
TfL commits to
- Fare rise of Inflation + 1%
- £160m of in-year cost savings
- Existing changes to congestion charge (extended hours, 7 days per week, £15) to become permanent
Expect Round 3 next March to be punchy, in the middle of the Mayoral election.
The frequent top ups cannot continue, they will have to cut something. There's no need for them to run red routes, deal with gang crime (knife Czars)... they should just do trains, tube and bus. I would suggest automated trains, but on a 155 year old tube network that's heavily congested (still using listed equipment from the 1940s in Earl's Court for destination boards, hopefully not signalling too), it would tip drivers over the edge. Something drastic has to happen, though
“ Drivers could face a £3.50 daily charge to enter Greater London under proposals from the mayor of London to address the capital’s funding crisis.
Sadiq Khan has asked Transport for London to start feasibility studies for the plan to raise £500m a year.
The boundary charge would be levied on vehicles registered outside the capital crossing into the whole of London – an area almost 80 times larger than the central congestion zone.
An independent review into TfL’s finances, which have been badly hit by the loss of tube fares after the pandemic, suggested that road charging would be the best source of new revenue.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/11/kh...
Sadiq Khan has asked Transport for London to start feasibility studies for the plan to raise £500m a year.
The boundary charge would be levied on vehicles registered outside the capital crossing into the whole of London – an area almost 80 times larger than the central congestion zone.
An independent review into TfL’s finances, which have been badly hit by the loss of tube fares after the pandemic, suggested that road charging would be the best source of new revenue.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/11/kh...
This is a less insane idea than the congestion charge expansion idea from October, but still falls victim to many of the same problems.
1. He’d have to give an exemption to everyone living in Greater London already. No way in March next year would the voters of London re-elect a mayor who charges them £3.50 a day to drive their car anywhere.
2. The principal people who live outside and drive into Greater London with any regularity are a) school-run parents, and b) trade/delivery vehicles and c) outer-London workers (who are disproportionately either low paid retail, or front line public sector e.g. teachers, healthcare workers)
Social/domestic trips (e.g. trips to go shopping) would just divert to remain outside the Greater London zone.
The groups in (2) are fairly inelastic (can’t easily switch to public transport) so makes for good revenue raising. But also terrible politics - a tax on business, school runs, and NHS workers.
The reality is TfL needs a major reconstruction in a new era for London. The commuter was the cash cow - not just in fares, but in the secondary business they created in central London (and the implications that had for jobs, business rates, etc.). Now people are working from home (a lot) more, that income stream is gone.
TfL needs to restructure to operate with a much lower income. And also, to provide a much reduced service - it doesn’t need to provide the same level of capacity as it once did.
Lower income. Lower expenditure. Smaller organisation. Reduced service provision.
1. He’d have to give an exemption to everyone living in Greater London already. No way in March next year would the voters of London re-elect a mayor who charges them £3.50 a day to drive their car anywhere.
2. The principal people who live outside and drive into Greater London with any regularity are a) school-run parents, and b) trade/delivery vehicles and c) outer-London workers (who are disproportionately either low paid retail, or front line public sector e.g. teachers, healthcare workers)
Social/domestic trips (e.g. trips to go shopping) would just divert to remain outside the Greater London zone.
The groups in (2) are fairly inelastic (can’t easily switch to public transport) so makes for good revenue raising. But also terrible politics - a tax on business, school runs, and NHS workers.
The reality is TfL needs a major reconstruction in a new era for London. The commuter was the cash cow - not just in fares, but in the secondary business they created in central London (and the implications that had for jobs, business rates, etc.). Now people are working from home (a lot) more, that income stream is gone.
TfL needs to restructure to operate with a much lower income. And also, to provide a much reduced service - it doesn’t need to provide the same level of capacity as it once did.
Lower income. Lower expenditure. Smaller organisation. Reduced service provision.
brickwall said:
This is a less insane idea than the congestion charge expansion idea from October, but still falls victim to many of the same problems.
1. He’d have to give an exemption to everyone living in Greater London already. No way in March next year would the voters of London re-elect a mayor who charges them £3.50 a day to drive their car anywhere.
2. The principal people who live outside and drive into Greater London with any regularity are a) school-run parents, and b) trade/delivery vehicles and c) outer-London workers (who are disproportionately either low paid retail, or front line public sector e.g. teachers, healthcare workers)
Social/domestic trips (e.g. trips to go shopping) would just divert to remain outside the Greater London zone.
The groups in (2) are fairly inelastic (can’t easily switch to public transport) so makes for good revenue raising. But also terrible politics - a tax on business, school runs, and NHS workers.
The reality is TfL needs a major reconstruction in a new era for London. The commuter was the cash cow - not just in fares, but in the secondary business they created in central London (and the implications that had for jobs, business rates, etc.). Now people are working from home (a lot) more, that income stream is gone.
TfL needs to restructure to operate with a much lower income. And also, to provide a much reduced service - it doesn’t need to provide the same level of capacity as it once did.
Lower income. Lower expenditure. Smaller organisation. Reduced service provision.
The 2nd part of your post is the key 1. He’d have to give an exemption to everyone living in Greater London already. No way in March next year would the voters of London re-elect a mayor who charges them £3.50 a day to drive their car anywhere.
2. The principal people who live outside and drive into Greater London with any regularity are a) school-run parents, and b) trade/delivery vehicles and c) outer-London workers (who are disproportionately either low paid retail, or front line public sector e.g. teachers, healthcare workers)
Social/domestic trips (e.g. trips to go shopping) would just divert to remain outside the Greater London zone.
The groups in (2) are fairly inelastic (can’t easily switch to public transport) so makes for good revenue raising. But also terrible politics - a tax on business, school runs, and NHS workers.
The reality is TfL needs a major reconstruction in a new era for London. The commuter was the cash cow - not just in fares, but in the secondary business they created in central London (and the implications that had for jobs, business rates, etc.). Now people are working from home (a lot) more, that income stream is gone.
TfL needs to restructure to operate with a much lower income. And also, to provide a much reduced service - it doesn’t need to provide the same level of capacity as it once did.
Lower income. Lower expenditure. Smaller organisation. Reduced service provision.
Rather than penalise people to maintain a level of service that exceeds demand, they should be reducing the service so it fits the demand
It seems madness to be putting up taxation to keep empty tubes, buses and trains running at high frequencies
Do tubes need to be running every minute ?
Do buses need to be running every 7 minutes ?
We are are going through a massive change and reduction in commuting and movement of people generally a lot of which will likely be permanent
For key workers, the low paid, shift workers etc adding nearly £1k a year to their unavoidable costs where public transport doesn’t provide a viable alternative just seems very wrong
The millionaire in his Home Counties pile is not going to be bothered but someone earning minimum wage could be crippled by it
Earthdweller said:
The 2nd part of your post is the key
Rather than penalise people to maintain a level of service that exceeds demand, they should be reducing the service so it fits the demand
It seems madness to be putting up taxation to keep empty tubes, buses and trains running at high frequencies
Do tubes need to be running every minute ?
Do buses need to be running every 7 minutes ?
We are are going through a massive change and reduction in commuting and movement of people generally a lot of which will likely be permanent
For key workers, the low paid, shift workers etc adding nearly £1k a year to their unavoidable costs where public transport doesn’t provide a viable alternative just seems very wrong
The millionaire in his Home Counties pile is not going to be bothered but someone earning minimum wage could be crippled by it
Exactly. It’s grossly unfair to tax everyone (especially the low-paid) to maintain over-capacity in a system...over capacity as a result of maintaining historic supply in the face of (permanent) reduced demand.Rather than penalise people to maintain a level of service that exceeds demand, they should be reducing the service so it fits the demand
It seems madness to be putting up taxation to keep empty tubes, buses and trains running at high frequencies
Do tubes need to be running every minute ?
Do buses need to be running every 7 minutes ?
We are are going through a massive change and reduction in commuting and movement of people generally a lot of which will likely be permanent
For key workers, the low paid, shift workers etc adding nearly £1k a year to their unavoidable costs where public transport doesn’t provide a viable alternative just seems very wrong
The millionaire in his Home Counties pile is not going to be bothered but someone earning minimum wage could be crippled by it
Let’s say commuter traffic (and fare income) is half what it used to be.
Switching the tube from trains every 2 mins @ peak to every 4 mins doesn’t present a meaningful reduction in convenience for the user - average wait times go from 1 min to 2 mins...boo hoo. But it would halve peak capacity, and mean needing a lot fewer trains and drivers. Similarly buses.
Not saying half capacity = half costs; clearly there’s a lot of fixed cost in maintaining the basic infrastructure, stations, etc. But no denying it’d have an impact.
Clearly the negotiations and arguments in City Hall (and with HMT) will be much more nuanced:
- Just how much of TfL’s cost base is fixed (required to run any service) vs. variable (that can be scaled back with capacity)? How elastic are the variable costs, and are there ‘step changes’ in the cost/capacity curve where it’s optimal to run just below or above?
- How much capacity should TfL take out, and when, in the face of an uncertain recovery in passenger numbers? It’s clear that passenger numbers will grow from their current level in the coming 12+ months as CV19 dies away (vaccine etc.), but do they recover to 60, 80, or 95% of historic levels? Does that recovery take 1 year, or 3? The ‘right’ capacity decision clearly is different for those alternative scenarios.
- To what extent can, or should, TfL act to shift the funding burden towards or away from users? TfL is not a fiscal “tax and spend” body...but the nature of its service provision means it theoretically could walk and quack exactly like that sort of duck. If it genuinely cannot survive without some sort of taxation income, then who should be levying that tax?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff