December 10, 2002. Copyright, 2002, Graphic News. All rights reserved

Preparing for LondonÕs congestion charge
By Joanna Griffin

LONDON, December 10, Graphic News:  ItÕs February 18, 2003 and you decide to pop into town to do some shopping. Lately, there have been Tube strikes and so you go by car. Then you remember the new congestion charge for entering Central London. You queue for ages at a petrol station to pay, step back into your car and grind through the traffic, £5 worse off and still moving at Victorian speeds.

This kind of scenario will be all too common in London after Mayor Ken LivingstoneÕs new congestion charge is introduced on February 17, say critics of the first major attempt to tackle congestion in the capital, and the most complex transport experiment of its kind.

So, how will it work? All drivers entering the cordoned zone must pay £5 for the day, but there are no toll gates. The charge can be paid at petrol stations, newsagents, convenience stores or online with a credit card. A network of 230 video cameras will film cars entering the cordoned area and match their number plates with those on a central computer. Drivers have until the end of the day to pay, or can pay in advance. Toll dodgers will face a fine of up to £80, payable in two months, or £40 if they pay up right away.

Groups exempted from the congestion charge have multiplied since Ken Livingstone first vaunted the idea that, if it fails, could spell his downfall when he comes up for reelection in 2004. They include disabled blue badge holders, emergency services, motorcycles, cyclists, buses, coaches, NHS staff, patients too sick to use public transportation and others. There are discounts for vehicles using alternative fuel and for local residents but they must register.

Will it be successful? It is hard to imagine any scheme smoothing a passage through the cityÕs streets, but this one starts off with several disadvantages. Firstly, it faces stiff opposition from many quarters, including local authorities, who say their communities will face the strain of overspill traffic, and small businesses, such as the traders in Petticoat Lane, for whom criss-crossing the city is essential. Secondly, the technology it uses is not in line with that being used in similar schemes elsewhere in Europe and might not be up to the job. Video cameras will not be of much use if number plates are obstructed by bad weather, or even deliberately.

It also seems feasible that Londoners, used to being overcharged for almost everything, will moan about paying but will still go by car if it means they donÕt have to set a foot on the creaking public transport system. And that is the crux of the issue: the scheme is expected to bring in around £100 million a year to invest in public transport but has already cost £600 million to set up, including feasibility studies. Might the money not have been better spent right away on the Tube?

To work, the scheme requires a mass behavioural change that seems unlikely. Drivers already face clogged streets, high parking fees, polluted air and untold hassle each time they drive into Central London, but this does not stop them. Ken is putting on a fleet of new buses to lure drivers onto public transport once the scheme is up and running, but it might take more than this. A main criticism is that the project has been rushed through for political reasons. 

But letÕs pretend, for a minute, that you have paid the charge and you step back into your car for a whizz around the West End. Taking in the sights as you go, you reach your destination refreshed and in record time. All for a fiver. It could be great, couldnÕt it?
/ENDS