Comments Welcome

To add a comment to any post on this blog, select the post by clicking on the title either in the post itself or in the list of posts on the left of the page. Then scroll down to the foot of the post and type your comment in the box.

Wednesday 24 December 2014

No-Fault Accident Insurance

The WA Government has released a Green Paper (https://www.icwa.wa.gov.au/mvpi/greenpaper/mvpi_ctp_green_paper_intro.shtml) seeking comment on the possible introduction of no-fault catastrophic Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurance for people catastrophically injured in motor vehicle accidents in WA.

Currently, CTP provides cover for drivers/owners of registered motor vehicles for personal injuries they may cause to other people as a result of a motor vehicle accident. This is an 'at-fault' scheme where you must assert fault against a driver of a WA registered vehicle in order to make a successful insurance claim. Vehicle passengers, pedestrians and cyclists can also claim against an at-fault driver to obtain compensation for their injuries from motor vehicle accidents.

In the CTP scheme, if you are at fault, no claim can be made and if you are partly at fault, the compensation you are entitled to may be reduced. There are also problems in the event that the vehicle is unregistered and uninsured.

The Commonwealth Government has proposed that existing State and Territory CTP schemes be expanded to provide care and support to all people catastrophically injured as a result of a motor vehicle accident irrespective of fault. Catastrophic injures are defined as spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, multiple amputations, severe burns or permanent traumatic blindness.

The STC has made a submission, the text of which is below, arguing that the scope of the proposed scheme is too limited and should be expanded, at least in the longer term, to cover a wider range of injuries and any type of accidental injury in a public place.

The STC supports the intent of the green paper on no-fault insurance but submits that it has important limitations that should be addressed either from the start or as part of a longer-term strategy to reduce uncertainty and costly litigation over accidental injuries sustained in public places.

The STC submits that the scheme as outlined in the green paper is a good starting point, but is too restrictive as a long-term strategy. In particular, the proposed scheme should be seen as an initial step towards:
a) a lower threshold for injury severity than envisaged in the green paper;
b) a no-fault transport insurance scheme; and, ultimately,
c) a comprehensive personal insurance scheme covering all accidental injuries, as is the case in New Zealand.

With respect to (a), the injury severity of a crash is often an idiosynchratic outcome (a specific type of crash will have a range of injury outcomes) and a too-high threshold will increase the likelihood of either misrepresentation of or argument about severity simply in order to get access to the no-fault compensation.

With respect to (b), there are important equity issues - for example, that a pedestrian injured while crossing a public street should not be disadvantaged if hit by a bicycle rather than a motor vehicle. Whilst it is true that injuries caused by motor vehicles are likely to be more severe than those caused by a bicycle, this is by no means always the case. We note that it is also possible for the actions of a pedestrian (eg on a shared path) to result in severe injury to a cyclist.

In addition, if injuries caused by vehicles other than motor vehicles are excluded from the scope this potentially opens up a complex area of litigation where there is a chain of events that result in a bicycle (or other non-motor vehicle, such as a gopher) causing injury to a pedestrian - in which there might or  might not have been involvement of a motor vehicle (eg by causing a cyclist to swerve towards pedestrians.

With respect to (c), this would be a more limited version of the scheme that already exists in New Zealand. It avoids some of the problematic issues that arise from the New Zealand coverage of accidental injuries in private places (including, for example, workplaces) which would continue to be covered by existing private insurance arrangements such as workers compensation and public liability insurance.

Within the currently-proposed motor-vehicle injury insurance, the method of payment should reflect the exposure (as both cause and effect) to injury, the most obvious determinant of which is distance travelled. A second element is the size and mass of the vehicle. For both these factors, there is a high correlation with fuel consumption and, therefore, a logical (and economically-efficient) way of funding such a scheme would be through a levy on motor vehicle fuel - as is the case in New Zealand for the motor  vehicle component of its scheme.

Whilst, since the High Court decision of 1997 on business franchise fees (including petroleum franchise fees), it appears that the States have no power to impose charges or taxes on motor vehicle fuel, the States and Commonwealth can collectively do so by a differential rate of GST on fuel. Since the Productivity Commission has recommended that no-fault CTP insurance schemes should be introduced by all States and Territories, this is a clear opportunity for Western Australia to show leadership at the national level. GST on motor vehicle fuel is returned directly to the States, so any such proposal can be kept separate from the issues of redistribution of GST revenues that are so disadvantageous to Western Australia.

We would be happy to provide further information or to discuss the matters raised in this submission. Please contact me by phone or email should you wish to do so.

Written and Posted by Ian Ker, Convenor, STCWA on behalf of the STC Committee

Tuesday 23 December 2014

More On Congestion-Charging

We have recently devoted a substantial amount of space on this blog to the issue of congestion pricing (Flat Fee Is Not A Congestion ChargeThe Good Oil on Congestion Pricing; Kite-Flying or Desensitising), but make no apology for now including the piece from Stephen King, Chairman of the Economic Regulation Authority, that was published in today's (23rd December, 2014) West Australian newspaper. This piece provides a valuable and coherent statement of how congestion pricing should work.

Click to enlarge

Thursday 11 December 2014

'Planning' As A Substitute For Action?

Thirty years ago, Liz Ampt published a paper entitled "Planning as a substitute for action". This was a critique of bicycle programs in Australia but the epithet could well be applied to public transport in Perth today.

While the STC strongly supports long-term planning for public transport, it is critical that this planning is actually implemented.

We currently have plans for two major rail projects (MAX and the Airport Link) neither of which seems likely, in the current economic climate, to be funded, as well as a number of smaller rail extensions - and the contentious Ellenbrook rail link.

Rather than calling back-of-the-envelope doodles 'plans' and using them to distract attention from other transport issues (such as Tier 3 rail line closures, the misbegotten 'congestion tax' and ministerial conflicts of interest), let's get on with enhancing the system we have (more trains and more buses).

Does anyone have any idea where the latest heavy rail line might be intended for, given Reece Waldock's reported statements that "the underground line would not compete with the MAX project, because it would go along another route and extend far further to the north" and that "the promised rail line to Ellenbrook would not compete with it either because it was further to the east and north"?

The only possible location appears to be west of Mirrabooka - or it hits Whiteman Park - and far enough west to say it doesn't compete with MAX means it has to be close to Wanneroo Road - and thus competes with existing Northern Suburbs Rail.

Still, while we're on the subject of 'flying kites', if the Airport Rail Link is to be built (and the STC is on record as questioning the justification for it - http://sustainabletransportcoalitionofwa.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/lack-of-transparency-in-transport.html), why not extend it through to Morley as well as linking it into the Perth-Midland line and encourage redevelopment of the Ashfield light industrial area with a focus on a very high level of rail accessibility.
West Australian, 11th December 2014
Written and Posted by Ian Ker, Convenor, STCWA

Friday 5 December 2014

Kite-Flying or Desensitising

If Colin Barnett intended the leaking of an increase in motor vehicle registration fees to be a kite-flying exercise, the response is clear and unequivocal - the kite has crashed and burned.

Interestingly, the negative response is not solely (or even largely) on the basis of 'fleecing the motorist' but reflects concerns about:
- affordability for those on low incomes, many of whom live in areas not well served by public transport
- equity issues between those who drive a lot and those who drive little
- equity between city and country
- the need for revenue to be returned to improving alternatives to the private car so that there can be a real improvement in congestion.

These are issues raised in this blog yesterday (http://sustainabletransportcoalitionofwa.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/flat-fee-is-not-congestion-charge.html) and in the STC letter published in the West Australian today (below right, albeit with some editorial trimming).

Unfortunately, the whole episode might be not so much kite-flying as an exercise in desensitising - hoping that, when the additional charge is imposed in the 2015-16 Budget, we will all say we knew it was coming, shrug our shoulders and move on.
Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge


















Written and Posted by Ian Ker, Convenor, STCWA

Thursday 4 December 2014

The Good Oil on Congestion Pricing

A good resource on principles and practice of congestion pricing. As the makers of the video state:

In London, which successfully implemented congestion pricing in 2003, drivers now get to their jobs faster, transit users have improved service, cyclists have better infrastructure, and pedestrians have more public space. More people have access to the central city, and when they get there, the streets are safer and more enjoyable. While the politics of implementing congestion pricing are difficult, cities looking to tame traffic and compete in the 21st century can't afford to ignore a transportation solution that addresses so many problems at once.

The video, produced by 'Streetfilms', can be downloaded from http://www.streetfilms.org/mba-congestion-pricing

Posted by Ian Ker, Convenor, STCWA

Wednesday 3 December 2014

Flat Fee Is Not A Congestion Charge

There is no doubt that car use at times of peak demand and, hence, heavy congestion is underpriced. At peak times, every additional kilometre we drive adds more to the costs of other road users than it costs us directly in car running costs - but others pay for it. And then there are the environmental and social costs of air pollution, traffic noise and community severance.

So, appropriate congestion charging is a sensible component of travel demand management.

But a flat annual fee, as proposed by the WA Government, is not a congestion charge as it is not related to to the time, place or amount of car use.

People who drive little will pay the same as those who drive a lot.

People who live in the outer suburbs and rarely drive into congested areas will pay the same as those who frequently drive in the inner city at peak times.

People on low incomes will pay the same as people on high incomes, but the surcharge will be a much larger proportion of their incomes - it will be a classic regressive charge.

One hopes that country people will not be asked to pay this surcharge, but it needs to be borne in mind that cars are not necessarily used where they are registered - especially in the case of cars leased by non-metropolitan businesses.

A congestion charge, to be effective, must reflect the time and place of use. If it does not, it will justifiably be dismissed as no more than a piece of revenue-raising opportunism.

UPDATE 4th December 2014

According to the West Australian, the WA Treasurer, Mike Nahan, has ruled out a 'congestion tax' or any increase in 'household fees'.

Apparently, however, that assurance might only apply to the mid-year Budget review. Premier Colin Barnett has said that 'how to fund road and public transport' would be part of next year's budget.

Interestingly, at a seniors' function in the City of Vincent yesterday, Minister for Seniors, Tony Simpson, ruled out any reduction in seniors concessions on council rates, utility charges and public transport fares (including free public transport in the middle of the day, weekends and public holidays).

We'll wait and see what actually happens.

SECOND UPDATE 4th December 2014

Well - that didn't take long!
WA Premier Colin Barnett said a plan for a charge was being considered for next year's budget but the details would not be finalised until April or May next year.
It is not being considered for the mid-year review [later this month], it may be considered as part of next year's budget."
Mr Barnett said the cost would be "about a tank of petrol".
Barnett's (Government) car must have a very large tank.
"What we are looking at is the user pays more," Mr Barnett said.
But this isn't what a flat fee does - anyone with a car pays the same amount more, whether they use it or not.

Posted by Ian Ker, Convenor, STCWA

Thursday 16 October 2014

Free Public Transport for STC Forum and AGM

The STC is holding a forum on 'Transparency in Infrastructure Decision-Making on Monday 3rd November at City West Lotteries House in West Perth (http://sustainabletransportcoalitionofwa.blogspot.com.au/2014/10/forum-on-transparency-in-infrastructure.html)

As well as the venue being in the Free Transit Zone and very accessible by the free Green and Yellow CAT buses, the WA Government has announced that you will be able to travel free on public transport to and from the Forum, wherever you live in Perth.

We strongly encourage you to take advantage of this 'once-in-a-lifetime' opportunity if you live too far away to walk or cycle.


























Posted by Ian Ker, Deputy Convenor, STCWA

Monday 13 October 2014

Forum on Transparency in Infrastructure Decision-Making.

Please pass this on to anyone you think might be interested - and encourage them to come along.

Friday 3 October 2014

Transparency and Objectivity Needed in Transport Appraisal

http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2014/overview-project-appraisal.aspx
On Friday 5 September 2014, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, the Hon Jamie Briggs MP, released for public comment, a proposed project appraisal framework, developed by the The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics, in consultation with state and territory governments.
This paper is described as the outcome of Australian, state and territory governments agreeing to consult to develop a more sophisticated and consistent framework to assess and evaluate major infrastructure projects.
Unfortunately, the consultation period has only been four weeks (closes 3rd October) and there appears to have been little real attempt to engage transport professionals, practitioners and other stakeholders - we only became aware of it, indirectly, a few days before the closing date.
The STCWA has made a submission addressing key issues in the appraisal framework (see below), but our primary concern is that all projects should be subject to objective appraisal and that there should be transparency (ie appraisals should be made public) - see http://sustainabletransportcoalitionofwa.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/lack-of-transparency-in-transport.html. 












Posted by Ian Ker, Deputy Convener, STCWA

Wednesday 3 September 2014

WA Bicycle Network Plan Needs More Oomph

This review of the WA Bicycle Network Plan is presented here as a contribution to better-informed decision-making in public policy.

The WA Bicycle Network Plan is a useful updating of previous bicycle network plans, but it fails to consider:
- complementary behavioural and encouragement initiatives, to maximise the additional cycling activity created by the bicycle network;
- higher population forecasts than those on which the 2012 draft Plan was based; or
- how the plan is to be effectively implemented over a reasonable period of time.

Education and encouragement, directly linked to infrastructure investment, needs to be added to the Plan. Targeted funding in these areas, especially in conjunction with infrastructure improvements, can increase cycling dramatically.

The Plan should ‘fight its own cause’ by providing evidence of the significant economic benefits of cycling – see the previous post on the STC Blog: ‘Cycle and Walking ARE Economic Activities’ (http://sustainabletransportcoalitionofwa.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/cycling-and-walking-are-economic.html).

Beyond the planning, there are insufficient funds in the WA State Budget to implement this Plan within 10 years. The identified funds for 2015 are about half what is needed, and the following three years are less than a fifth of those needed. There is no indication of, nor commitment to, funding beyond 2017/18.
Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge


Click to enlarge























Click to enlarge





















Written and posted by Ian Ker, Deputy Convenor, STCWA

Cycling and Walking ARE Economic Activities

This piece is derived from a paper presented to the VeloCity Global Conference, Adelaide, South Australia, 27-30 May, 2014. The full paper can be read at http://www.slideshare.net/Catalystian/140528-ik-paper-v20. It is presented here as a contribution to better-informed decision-making in public policy.

Walking and cycling are too often thought of as primarily having social and environmental benefits, but the economic benefits are even greater and are sufficient in their own right to justify funding of infrastructure and supporting programs.

While they do have useful social and environmental benefits, walking and cycling programs deliver economic benefits that are greater than most people realise, with BCRs of around 3 to 5. This is typically more than most transport BCRs.

The financial benefits of walking and cycling, that is the direct dollar benefits to individuals, are also substantial. Public investment in walking and cycling has the same effect as a tax cut for those who choose to change from car driving for some of their travel.

Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge














Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge
































Written and posted by Ian Ker, Deputy Convenor, STCWA

Sunday 24 August 2014

Lack of Transparency in Transport Priorities

The STC has been concerned for some time about the lack of transparency in the selection and prioritisation of transport investments - particularly when the choice is between two very costly projects (MAX light rail and the Perth Airport Link) that have entirely different contributions to make to the future of travel in Perth.

This concern has been echoed by the Productivity Commission in its report on Public Infrastructure that was released last month. The Commission called for "subjecting all public infrastructure investment proposals above $50 million to rigorous cost-benefit analyses that are publicly released … prior to projects being announced". 
The West Australian, 23rd August 2014. Click to enlarge
We'd suggest that the threshold trigger should be much lower than this, although the detail of the assessment could vary, but this recommendation clearly catches MAX and the Airport Rail Link - as well as many other potential rail projects, as Gareth Parker also pointed out.
The West Australian, 23rd August 2014. Click to enlarge
Even without rigorous analysis, the widely differing relativities between cost and passengers for these projects requires investigation before committing to any of them. It is not good enough for Transport Minister Dean Nalder to say, with respect to benefit-cost studies, that "some had not been done, while others had been done but would not be released". It's public money being spent (or not spent) here, and we have a right to reassurance that it is being spent wisely.

Mr Nalder is wrong when he says that "public transport projects typically struggled to exceed BCRs of 1". The Government's own public transport plan (Public Transport for Perth in 2031) was assessed as having an overall BCR of between 1.8:1 and 2.2:1 (reported on page 34 of that plan). The Airport Rail Link, on Mr Nalder's own figures (BCR of 1.5:1) performs less well than most of the rest of the public transport plan, which is presumably why it was put into Stage 2 projects not into Stage 1.

This raises yet another question raised on Saturday - why has the Government chosen different priorities from those identified in it's own plan? And it isn't good enough for Mr Nalder to say that it reflects higher population growth forecasts since the Plan was developed - his BCR of 1.5:1 for the Airport Rail Link presumably includes that faster growth and such growth would also increase the returns from other public transport investments.
The West Australian, 23rd August 2014. Click to enlarge
No one disputes that we need to invest more in public transport, but this is not an encouraging assessment of the way in which decisions are made on how our taxpayer dollars are being spent. 

Posted by Ian Ker, Deputy Convenor, STCWA

Tuesday 29 July 2014

STC Support for Fuel Excise Indexation

The Sustainable Transport Coalition of WA made a submission to the Senate Economics Committee Inquiry into the Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Bill 2014. This submission (below) supported indexation, as a 'small but useful' contribution addressing transport energy issues, but with the proviso that the additional revenues be hypothecated to 'walking, cycling and public transport as well as for roads in general'.
 






















The Committee recommended that the Bill as presented be supported (ie with revenue hypothecation to roads but the Senate as a whole did not vote to pass the Bill. The report is downloadable from  http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Fuel_Indexation_2014/Report/index

The ALP and Greens voted against the Bill for reasons set out in their dissenting reports (http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Fuel_Indexation_2014/Report/d01 and http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Fuel_Indexation_2014/Report/d02). These reasons, largely to do with the revenues being hypothecated to roads, are supported by the STC, but the STC is concerned that simple rejection in this way carries its own risks. 

Roads are not only for cars.  Buses run on roads, cyclists use roads and pedestrians use the footpaths on roads. Also freight for delivering goods to shops and businesses rely on roads, as do emergency services and tradesmen for whom there are no reasonable alternatives. 

Roads per se are not the problem. The problem is the out of balance expenditure on conventional roads compared to public transport and walking/cycling facilities. 

Monday 14 July 2014

The Human Scale

For those interested in cities for people, here is the official trailer for the Jan Ghel-inspired film, 'The Human Scale'. The movie itself is available on ABC iView (http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/human-scale-in-five-chapters/ZX9994A001S00) until 27th July.
The film has its own website - http://thehumanscale.dk/the-film.

Monday 24 February 2014

People Are Always Important - Not Just In The Arts Season

Letter to the Editor, The West Australian

Pedestrians are the lifeblood of the city

Your editorial, “Summer arts season helps clean up streets” (24 February), makes the valid point that the large number of people has transformed Northbridge into a safe place.
The Sustainable Transport Coalition has long been advocating the importance of pedestrians to city life. Pedestrians add vitality and interest, they are the eyes on the street that reduce crime, they are the shop and business customers, and there is evidence that the active transport modes (walking and cycling) help reduce obesity, improve health, reduce congestion and CO2 emissions.
So why is it that our transport and land use planners give so little attention to pedestrians? Sure, car and truck transport are important, and so is public transport. A similar level of recognition given to the pedestrians could make big improvements in many parts of Perth.

David Rice
Convener, Sustainable Transport Coalition of WA

Friday 7 February 2014

Transport Energy Vulnerability: Submission to Federal Government Energy White Paper

The STCWA has made the following submission to the Federal Government's Energy White Paper.

In summary, the STC submits that the Australian Government has a duty of care to seriously consider the vulnerability of Australian society to a cut in overseas supplies of transport fuel. This risk is clearly predictable and while some argue that the likelihood of this happening is small, the consequences are extreme.







Wednesday 5 February 2014

Senate Inquiry into Public Transport: STC Submission

STCWA SUBMISSION TO SENATE INQUIRY INTO PUBLIC TRANSPORT

The Senate Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport is undertaking an Inquiry into  role of public transport in delivering productivity outcomes:
a) The need for an integrated approach across road and rail in addressing congestion in cities including Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth;
b) The social and environmental benefits of public transport projects compared to road infrastructure projects such as Westconnex and the East-West Link;
c) The national significance of public transport;
d) The relationship between public transport and building well-functioning cities;
e) The decision of the Federal Government to refuse to fund public transport projects; 
f) The impact on user charges arising from requiring states to fund public transport projects; and,
g) Any related matter.

The Sustainable Transport Coalition of Western Australia (STCWA) has made the following as a submission to the Inquiry.

a)      Need for integrated approach across road and rail in addressing congestion
1)    There is also a need for integration with land use, especially employment and parking
2)    In Perth there is a significant concentration of employment is in the CBD and peak travel demand is radial
3)    Radial routes, both road and passenger rail, are getting increasingly congested
4)    Perth already has freeways along the edges of the CBD so cannot reasonably build more road capacity together with parking capacity to overcome this congestion
5)    Efforts to increase employment in areas other than the CBD have had only limited success
6)    So the only transport solution to cater for an increasing population is public transport plus better bicycle facilities, especially on the radial routes, including completing the bike paths along the railways and into the CBD
7)    But it is not just any public transport. It needs to be focused on where the un-met demand is. For Perth this is in the North East corridor. The planned MAX light rail is to cater for this, which is really a road/rail project because the space needed for the light rail has to be taken from certain roads and this needs to be replaced in some areas. But the present State Government has put this back to an unknown time, because of funding restrictions.
8)    Un-met demand also exists on the existing public transport routes in peak periods
9)    Additional buses and train carriages are needed in Perth. Some have been ordered but, again, funding restrictions have meant delays
10)  Any integrated approach requires careful selection between forms of public transport: heavy rail, medium rail, light rail, bus rapid transit, and conventional buses – see Ref 1.
11)  The recent availability of smart phone technology has enabled real time information about, and ordering of, mini-buses at less cost than conventional taxis, mainly due to cost sharing between passengers. This new form of public transport needs to be added to the public transport mix. It could be especially useful in Perth for transporting people from home to rail stations where we are currently experiencing an ever increasing demand for parking at rail stations, with its attendant costs and inappropriate land use problems.
12)  Any integrated approach across road and rail in addressing congestion needs to map congestion on roads compared to congestion (crowding) on public transport.  Where overcrowding leads to passengers having to wait for successive buses or trains because the first one is full is equivalent to car drivers being delayed by road congestion.

b)     social and environmental benefits of public transport compared to road projects
1)    In areas of high travel demand, public transport is a more efficient user of travel space than private cars. Increased use of public transport reduces traffic congestion - see c) below - and improves operating conditions for commercial and freight vehicles.
2)    Public transport reduces road traffic deaths and injuries
3)    It produces less CO2 emissions, as long as buses and trains are reasonably well patronized. A bus with less than 5 passengers is typically less fuel efficient than a car with 1.2 passengers (a typical car occupancy rate in Perth)
4)    It provides better social equity for those without driver’s licenses including the young and some elderly people, and for those who cannot afford a car with its attendant running and parking costs.
5)    Obesity can be reduced. A study in USA showed that car drivers who switch to public transport dropped an average of five pounds. Another showed that 60% of residents iIn a “low-walkable” neighborhood were overweight, compared to 35% in a “high-walkable” neighborhood (Ref 2, page 41). The key point is that walkability is best for health and public transport encourages walking.
6)    There is also a need to recognize we need good major roads, especially in low density areas that cannot reasonably support frequent public transport, and for efficient freight distribution.
7)    The bottom line is that it is not a question of public transport vs roads. It is a question of balance between good public transport, walking and cycling facilities in higher density areas vs good major road systems elsewhere.

c)      national significance of public transport
1)    The majority of Australians live in large urban areas. If you believe that their overall accessibility to work, health, education and recreation are, collectively, of national significance, then you have to believe that public transport plays an important part. This is especially so for people in congested areas, for those without driver’s licenses including the young and some elderly people, and for those who cannot afford a car with its attendant running and parking costs. This is the conventional view.
2)    A more strategic view is that, in the event of a fuel emergency then public transport, plus walking and cycling, could be the only ways people will continue productive lives during the period of such an emergency.
An emergency is still likely given recent tensions in significant Middle East oil-producing nations such as Iran, Iraq and Libya- see www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10274958/Worldwide-loss-of-oil-supply-heightens-Syria-attack-risk.html.)
Lessons from the first and second oil shocks indicate that communities take significant time to adjust to limited supplies of very expensive oil products.
Even in the absence of such an emergency, growth in the demand for oil continues to outstrip supply, leading to price increases and potential scarcity that, progressively, will increase the cost and vulnerability of transport. Public transport provides and effective alternative for much personal travel, reducing the fuel-related pressures on business.
3)    While most Australian cities’ train and tram networks are fuelled by gas and coal, they will still be swamped given any oil-based fuel emergency. For example, if just 10% of Perth’s motorists who currently drive to the CBD every morning tried to migrate to public transport, this will would double the current demand for the city’s public transport. A recent survey showed that 28% of Australian motorists would consider other modes of transport once petrol reached $1.80 per litre and another 20% if it reached $2 per litre (www.budgetdirect.com.au/about-us/media-releases/2014/petrol-prices.html). The price of unleaded petrol in Perth went over $1.60/litre, for the first time, in the first week of January 2014.
4)    Congestion is an economic and productivity issue in its own right. The Federal Government’s own Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics estimated the annual avoidable cost of congestion in Australian capital cities to be $9.4 billion in 2005, consisting of:
·       $3.4 billion in private time costs;
·       $3.6 billion in business time costs;
·       $1.2 billion in extra vehicle operating costs; and
·       $1.1 billion in extra air pollution damage costs (Reference 3, page 11)
The BTRE expected this cost to more than double to $20.4 billion by 2020.
Assuming the extra vehicle operating costs are split between private and business travel in the same proportions as the time costs, Australian business bears 45% of the cost of congestion in Australian capital cities.
5)    The nature of congestion is such that additional traffic contributes much more to its cost than traffic already using the roads, especially at peak periods. The BTRE research indicates that peak period marginal cost of congestion for Perth in 2010 was 20-30 cents per car-kilometre in Perth: more than the direct operating cost of the marginal car (less than 20 cents per kilometre).
          Marginal congestion costs for Perth (2010 prices)
Source: Derived from data for Perth in Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics (Reference 3) and Victorian data in Australian Transport Council (Reference 4)
Public transport is at its most effective at times and places of peak travel demand. Its contribution to reducing the cost of congestion (including the cost to business) is substantially greater than passenger numbers alone might indicate.
6)    For most Australians living in urban areas, the price of petrol is an important determinant of their public transport use. The recent draft Department of Transport’s Public Transport for Perth in 2031 (www.transport.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/about-us/ABOUT_P_PT_Plan2031.pdf) highlights the growth in use of public transport in Perth. It said (p14) that “Public transport patronage in Perth grew 67% from 1999 to 2009, at a time when the population grew by 22%.” During that decade, the global oil price for west Texas Intermediate crude went from approximately USD$20 per barrel to about $100 per barrel, having peaked at nearly $150 per barrel in July 2008 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7501939.stm). Perth petrol prices for unleaded petrol doubled from about 80cents per litre to $1.60 during the same period.
7)    The STCWA has gathered significant information on the global production of oil, rising prices and the impact on people migrating from cars to public transport. STC’s policy paper Oil: Living with Even Less outlines the implications of the peaking of global conventional crude oil production (www.stcwa.org.au/images/living_with_ev_less_policy.pdf).After having doubled every decade from the 1930s to the 1980s, global oil production has grown less than 10% between 1999-2009, and only about 1% in the eight years since 2005 (see image below).

8)    A Scientific American article (www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=peak-oil-may-keep-catastrophic-climate-change-in-check) described this development:  As production of conventional oil, which is far easier to get out of the ground, decreases, companies have turned to unconventional [and more expensive] sources, such as those in deep water, tar sands or tight oil reserves, which have to be released by hydraulic fracturing.
9)    Most general-cargo and container ports in Australia are in urban areas, especially the capital cities. A large proportion of the land-side movement of this freight, both within the cities and from ports to regional areas, has no alternative to road transport. Road freight in urban areas is as affected by traffic congestion as passenger movement is. The cost to business of this congestion is increased by the effect of stop-start travel on heavy vehicle operating costs and the inventory cost of goods in transit.
10) Inter-city and trains and buses provide an essential low cost means for Australian and overseas tourists. Capacity to carry bicycles, and pedestrian connectivity with city public transport, are important features. Termini at the Perth Busport, Central and East Perth stations are well designed in this regard. Another feature is affordability and there is scope for WA’s bus services to be made more affordable. In particular, maintaining fares set for direct routes where longer routes sometimes have to be taken.
d)     relation between public transport and well-functioning cities
1)    By well-functioning cities we understand cities that are highly desirable places to live, work and recreate. The classic models are the European cities such as Paris, Barcelona and Amsterdam. The key to such cities is walkability, including human scale buildings. While walkability benefits from good public transport, good public transport relies absolutely on walkability (Ref 2, page 140).
2)    Practically all public transport trips require walk trips at each end. Walkers and cyclists provide many of the ingredients of a great city; such as vitality, interest, eyes on the street, increased personal security, health benefits, and customers for shops.
3)    Walkable cities require comprehensive parking policies that include on-street parking, off-street parking, payments by developers in-lieu of on-site parking to be used for collective parking, and residential parking permits. This will also benefit public transport.
4)    Simply providing more public transport will not, of itself, lead to a well-functioning city. It is the design of the neighborhood, so that it supports walking, cycling and public transport that is the key. This design has to include density (around 5 to 6 stories), building frontages that are human scale and address the street, plus mixed land use.
5)    In summary, the issue is not the relation between public transport and well-functioning cities per se. The issue is locality design that supports walking and cycling, that will also support public transport that leads to well-functioning cities.
6)    The priority is not Transit Oriented Development, rather Pedestrian Oriented Development that will naturally help public transport.

e)     Federal Government not funding public transport
1)    Our submission on Issue c), the national significance of public transport, illustrates the importance of public transport. Clearly Federal funding of public transport should be provided, but with conditions. Those conditions should be that the applicants should show they have, or will implement, good neighborhood design – as described in our submission on issue d).
2)    Funding the right kind of public transport can have big economic advantages. For example, in Portland, Oregon, they prepared both a streetcar plan and a neighborhood plan that included affordable housing and the removal of a freeway ramp. The streetcar opened in 2001 at a cost of about $US55 million. Since then over $US3.5 billion has sprung up around the trolley line: sixty-four times the initial investment (Ref 2, page 152)
3)    The Federal and State Government funding of roads needs to be seen against the background of possible overestimating of future traffic demand.
A number of recent Australian and international case studies underscore the dangers of over-relying on transport models to decide road investment.  The case studies in attachment 1 provide evidence of shortcomings of traffic modeling that resulted in significant overestimation of projected demand for toll roads.  This has resulted in a resultant loss to private sector investors and misallocation of society’s scarce capital.  Recent cultural changes impacting on the travel habits of the younger generation and growing concerns over the cost and availability of oil-based fuels reinforce these concerns.

f)       Impact on road user charges from requiring states to fund public transport
1)    Road user charges need to include parking charges to be most effective
2)    Road user charges need to be seen as a whole of city strategy because this will be a key to effective congestion management. So road user charges in the form of a tolls to help pay for individual road projects are short sighted in that they distort the potential for a whole of city approach.
3)    Location- and time-specific road user charges should be planned for all major cities by State Governments (because Federal Government does not have the legal means to cover all the aspects) as a means of congestion management. Their actual introduction will necessarily be dependent on timing of political and public opinion, and may be introduced in stages. For example, Perth has a central area parking charge that has been used for many years to meet the costs of ‘free’ CAT (Central Area Transit) buses. This has been successful in reducing central area traffic congestion, and is now being considered for other parts of the Perth Metropolitan Region.

g)     Other
1)    Fuel efficiency and low CO2 emissions are increasingly important requirements of transport. There is considerable scope to improve this by:
·       Funding improvements to public transport through increasing fuel taxes (or at least indexing them), levying accident insurance, and adding a carbon price on all transport fuels to make the polluters (drivers) pay for the health and congestion costs of car and truck use.
·       Fitting trains and buses with energy recovery (regenerative) braking systems
·       Using smaller buses where appropriate, particularly on ‘feeder services’ to railway stations. For example 4 cylinder 4 tonne buses seating 24 passengers cost half as much in depreciation, fuel and maintenance as the 9 tonne 48 passenger units currently used. See also point a) 11) – minibuses using smart phone technology.

Summary
a)    The STCWA submits that, not only is there a need for integrated approach across road and rail in addressing congestion, there is also a need for integration with land use, especially employment and parking.
b)    The main question is not the social and environmental benefits of public transport compared to road projects, rather is a question of balance between good public transport, walking and cycling facilities in higher density areas vs good major road systems elsewhere.
c)    The majority of Australians live in large urban areas. If you believe that their overall accessibility to work, health, education and recreation are, collectively, of national significance, then you have to accept the national significance of public transport.
d)    While there is a relation between public transport and well-functioning cities, the key is locality design that supports walking and cycling, that will also support public transport that leads to well-functioning cities.
e)    The Federal Government not funding public transport is a problem. Federal funding of public transport should be provided, but with conditions. Those conditions should be that the applicants show they have, or will implement, good neighborhood design.
f)     The impact on road user charges from requiring states to fund public transport is not clear. Location and time specific road user charges should be planned for all major cities by State Governments (because Federal Government does not have the legal means to cover all the aspects) as a means of congestion management. The Federal Government might develop guidelines to support this, possibly tied to the conditions mentioned in e) above.
g)    Other: fuel efficiency and reduced CO2 emissions should be a key aim of the Federal Government.

References

1.     Sustainable Transport Coalition of Western Australia, Statement on Light Rail, 2009, http://www.stcwa.org.au/images/stc-lght-rail-v2-2009.pdf
2.     Jeff Speck; Walkable City: how downtown can save America, one step at a time; Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2012
3.     Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics (2007), Estimating urban traffic and congestion cost trends for Australian cities.  Working Paper No 71, http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2007/wp_071.aspx
4.     Australian Transport Council of Ministers (2006). National Guidelines for Transport System Management in Australia: 4 – Urban Transport, Canberra, Australia. http://www.atcouncil.gov.au/documents/NGTSM.aspx#4



We are happy to provide more information on any of these points if you wish.




David Rice
Convener STCWA
18 January 2014


Attachment: Case studies in traffic estimating errors

A 2011 report prepared by the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and Transport cites the work undertaken by Bain et al (2005) for Standard and Poor’s credit rating agency. The work analyzed the results of modeling on 104 toll roads, bridges and tunnels. On average, traffic was 23% below estimates for the first year of operation, with negligible improvement in predictive performance following the first year of operation.  The report also cites the work of Flyvberg et al (2005 and 2006) based on analysis of 183 road projects around the world. This research concluded that for half the projects assessed the estimating error was at least +/- 20% and for quarter of projects the errors were at least +/- 40%. 

In Australia the estimating errors have been more pronounced. The 2011 Commonwealth report cites the work of Li and Hensher (2010).  The authors found that, of the 14 Australian toll roads included in their study, on average actual traffic volumes were found to be 45% below estimates. Although estimating errors declined over time, in some cases there was still a 19% forecasting error after six years.

Why the forecasts erred

The Department of Transport’s reports notes that estimates can be inaccurate for a number of reasons including the following:
1.     Inadequate model structure;
2.     Data limitations;
3.     Uncertainties in input assumptions;
4.     Ramp up risks;
5.     Optimism bias/strategic misrepresentation

Other trends that can amplify these problems

Generational cultural trends have recently been cited to the effect that younger people are less inclined to purchase a vehicle than previous generations.  In the U.S there has been a 7.7% decline in the share of miles driven by people aged between twenty and thirty according to research prepared by the US Federal Highway Administration (see graph below). According to Davies (2010) there are probably a number of facts at work to account for this phenomena including declining discretionary income, the greater difficulty of obtaining a license, higher car insurance premiums for the young, preference for inner city living and a tendency to defer to family formation. More importantly, Davies contends that early habits are likely to be engrained in this generation as they age. This has obvious implications for road space demand.


Rising fuel costs are also likely to cancel out the effect of improved vehicle mileage. A number of credible projections suggest steeper fuel price hikes due to the peaking of lower cost conventional crude oil supplies.

These types of trends are likely to increase the risk of over-estimates of traffic culminating in over allocation of capital to road infrastructure at the expense of more timely and efficient alternatives.

References

Bain, R. and Polakovic, L. 2005, Traffic Forecasting Risk Study Update 2005: Through Ramp-Up and Beyond, Standard & Poor’s, London.

Davies, Alan (2010) “Why is Gen Y Driving Less?” The Urbanist Website cited 8th January 2014 http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2010/06/28/why-is-gen-y-driving-less/

Department of Infrastructure and Transport (2011) “Review of Traffic Forecasting Performance Toll Roads”. Article downloaded from Internet on 8th January 2014 at:

Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. K. S. and Buhl, S. L. 2005, How (In)accurate Are Demand Forecasts in Public Works Projects, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 71, No. 2, Spring.

Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. K. S. and Buhl, S. L. 2006, Inaccuracy in Traffic Forecasts, Transport Review, Vol. 26, No. 1, January.

Li, Z. and D. A. Hensher 2010, Toll Roads in Australia: An Overview of Characteristics and Accuracy of Demand Forecasts, Transport Reviews, 30: 5.