The more roads a government builds, it seems, the more cars are bought to fill them. In response, one nation has announced plans to trial a system that many urbanization and transport experts believe could be the future -- road pricing.

The British government has announced it will test out a range of possible new charges for drivers around England, for example charging them a set fee per mile driven on particularly busy roads or at peak times.

As well as national road tolls, nine local authorities around the country will be given the powers, and the finance, to test out experimental schemes.

Almost 33 million vehicles are registered to use Britain's heavily congested road system, and the government has acknowledged that it can no longer "build its way" out of traffic gridlock by simply constructing new roads.

If nothing is done, according to ministers, traffic jams could be 25% worse by 2015, with big towns and cities suffering the most.

Proponents of road pricing in Britain received a boost at the end of November when a government-commissioned report said such schemes could benefit the country's economy by more than $50 billion a year.

Sir Rod Eddington, the former British Airways chief executive asked to look into the future of the country's transport network, described road pricing as "an economic no-brainer," despite potential issues with the necessary technology.

Britain already possesses one pioneering example of urban road pricing in action: the London Congestion Charge.

Introduced in 2003, it aims to reduce the numbers of cars and vans clogging the city's often narrow streets by charging drivers a daily fee to enter central London, now increased to $15.

The first regional trials of wider road pricing will start in five years, and the British government aims to have a national scheme in place by the middle of the next decade, with drivers paying up to $2.50 per mile to drive on the busiest roads in rush hour.

Some experts believe the system could eventually see most cars fitted with devices allowing their movements to be tracked and recorded by global positioning satellites, with drivers charged according to a series of factors such as miles traveled, roads used and the time of the journey.

Prices could be considerably higher for the drivers of the most polluting personal cars, such as SUVs. London's mayor, Ken Livingstone, recently pledged to increase the Congestion Charge to almost $50 a day for such vehicles.

While many drivers have accepted pricing in London as a necessary evil given the pressures on the city, motoring organizations have expressed worry that national road pricing could simply end up being yet another tax, on top of existing levels of vehicle excise duty and taxes on fuel sales.

However, proponents of such schemes say road pricing must be severe enough for motorists to feel the impact, while the revenue must be invested in alternative means of travel.

"The risk is that clearer roads may simply encourage rich drivers to use them more, while forcing poorer ones onto already overcrowded trains and buses," Britain's Guardian newspaper said of the plans.

"That is why it matters how the revenue raised from charges is spent. Some will be used to cut other road taxes and some may go into road improvement, but even if the road lobby resents it, cash must also be spent on alternatives such as expanded rail capacity. The aim should be to reduce road use, not make it more attractive."

What do you think?

Name
E-mail address
Your location
Comment
	Comment Policy All fields are required

Traffic jams are due to world's population explosion. Busy and congested road signify growth and development. Low income groups like drivers should not be taxed for traffic jams. To make transport taxation just and fair we should think who are the major beneficiaries growing transportation.

In my view they are the manufacturers of vehicles, travel agencies, cement manufacturing companies and road construction companies. As they make the maximum profit from increase in roads and transportation they should be taxed.

Why are we paying for inefficiencies in government and town planning? Malaysia is planning a similar move but we are nowhere as near as Britain. Already we have toll roads around Kuala Lumpur.

Well, I don't think that it's good for our economy. Well, it can be good, but I think we need to think about busy people who need to travel a lot -- I think they must need to pay a lot of money.

Watching the traffic jams in a cities like Guadalajara, and analyzing this proposal, it seems to me that charging the motorist is the immediate answer to re-teaching people in how to use public transportation as well cars.

It's a good thing I do not live in that area because that has to be the dumbest idea I have ever heard. How are you going to monitor these 33 million cars' average miles driving in rush hour on busy roads? It is just absolutely impossible.

This is nothing new; one nation has already been implementing the system -- Singapore has had had a 'Central Zone' pricing system for decades and has had an Electronic Road Pricing system in place for about eight years now. Go to http://www.lta.gov.sg/motoring_matters/index_motoring_erp.htm for more info.

These plans overlook the fact that all existing roads were paid for (and therefore are owned) by motorists who have paid extra dues (petrol tax) for them.

I would not object to road pricing plans if I got a refund (and interest) on all the gasoline taxes (around 80% of the price) I have paid during the last 55 years.

This suggestion appears to be equitable on the surface, but is not. It punishes families with children and the elderly for whom moving around in their private car is the only practical way to stay mobile.