Free Public Transport - An idea whose time has come : Melbourne Indymedia

The idea of free public transport is a great one. It would do away with the need to maintain or develop expensive enforcement procedures on public transport which have been ineffective and created a climate of intimidation on public transport. Its also an obvious way to attract people out of their cars which is a necessity in the Age of Climte Change.
Of course the ALP opposes the idea and is instead about to waste half a billion dollars on a "smart card" system in their obsession to be more conservative than the Liberal Party. Even Public Transport advocates such as Paul Mees has inexplicably spoken out against this idea as one which would do nothing for people living in the outer suburbs but would favour the wealthier inner city. Was as someone who yesterday paid $12.60 to get to the city and back on the train from Zone 3 I couldnt disagree more. Its a simple and great idea and the fact a mainstream paper has brought up the idea is fantastic.
It would be good if the State Greens pulled their fingers out of their butts and started to try and support and promote policies such as this - they may even win a few votes.

Visit the Sunday Age website today and take part in the online poll on the issue. At 12.00 oclock the poll was running at 88% in favour of the idea with over 1300 people voting.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/a-radical-idea/2006/03/04/1141191889553.html

A radical idea
By William Birnbauer
March 5, 2006
Making transport free would cost about $340 million a year. Public transport use would increase by 30 percent; congestion, pollution and road toll would decrease, and make thousands of people very happy. The government doesn't like the idea. What do you think?
WITH thousands of Commonwealth Games ticketholders set to enjoy free public transport, the question arises: Why not make it free all the time?
Free train, tram and bus rides would boost the number of trips by up to 30 per cent, ease traffic congestion, cut pollution and greenhouse gases, reduce road accidents, transform railway stations into activity and business hubs and generally make Melbourne a happier place to live, experts say.
It would cost the State Government about $400 million a year in lost revenue, but about $60 million would be saved each year by getting rid of ticketing machines. State subsidies already contribute about 60 per cent to the price of a ticket.
Former Liberal government minister Robert Maclellan pressed for the introduction of free public transport on two occasions.
He proposed that households pay between $100 and $200 a year and receive free travel for the whole family. Payments would be based on reduced council rates for people living in areas where services were minimal. Pensioners and concession cardholders would get a rate rebate and business payments would be tax deductible.
"The benefit would be that the person driving the car in front of you would be on public transport," Mr Maclellan said.
Mr Maclellan made a detailed submission to cabinet's budget expenditure review committee when he was planning minister under Jeff Kennett, and an earlier proposal to Treasury officials in the Hamer government.
He said the proposals were shot down by arguments that more people would use the system and additional rolling stock would have to be provided.
Former premier Jeff Kennett recalls he liked the simplicity of the idea but felt passengers should pay something for transport services.
"I argued for a single coin ($1 or $2) system at the time of the new ticketing system," he said. "My biggest regret in public life is I didn't stick to that gut feeling of what was good for the system."
But Victoria's Transport Minister Peter Batchelor doesn't like the idea, saying that increased subsidies to public transport would have to be borne by taxpayers who did not use the system.
The Opposition's spokesman, Terry Mulder said: "We haven't had that discussion and are still in the process of developing our policy."
Associate professor Frank Fisher, however, backs free travel and wants a national Medicare-style levy introduced to pay for it. He believes more people would use public transport if they knew they were paying a levy for it.
Professor Fisher, who taught environmental science for three decades and is now director of The Understandascope at the Monash Science Centre, said cars alienated people, while public transport led to "people bumping into each other". Railway stations could be "disarmed" and converted into community and commercial use instead of being targets for vandals.
Transport planner and former policy adviser to the state Opposition, Lawrence Seyers supports a congestion charge for inner Melbourne with the proceeds going to public transport.
He said in a recent submission: "Those who suggest a free or heavily subsidised fare is financially unsustainable — well, so is operating buses with only four passengers on them."
The Bus Association of Victoria, which represents 26 companies, believes free transport would attract more passengers and says it would consider such a scheme. Serious money would be needed to pay for new buses, but "we would support anything that led to providing more bus services to Melburnians," the association's marketing manager, Russell Coffey, said.
Connex carries 50 per cent of all public transport users and receives an average subsidy of $345 million a year, but declined to comment.
Yarra Trams receives $112 million a year, but a spokesman said it did not have a view on the debate.
Critics of free public transport say it would have minimal impact on congestion and would lead to severe overcrowding unless more money was spent on rolling stock. Public transport advocates say the priority should be to expand services to areas such as Rowville and Doncaster and improve the reliability and frequency of services.
The State Government is committed to having 20 per cent of trips on public transport by 2020 — equal to between double and three times the current number.
with Jason Dowling
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/a-radical-idea/2006/03/04/1141191889553.html?page=2

SUNDAY AGE EDITORIAL
Just what our ailing public transport needs
March 5, 2006
It'S A rare issue that can unite transport bureaucrats and public transport advocates, but a call for free travel on Melbourne's rail, tram and bus systems has done it. The idea is not new - Robert Maclellan, a minister in the Hamer and Kennett governments, has twice floated the idea - but it has been raised again by a Monash University academic, Frank Fisher. Associate Professor Fisher argues that making public transport free would be the best way of encouraging more people to use it, and therefore of reducing congestion on Melbourne's increasingly car-clogged roads, too.
His colleague at Monash, Professor Graham Currie, concedes that free travel could boost patronage on public transport by up to 30 per cent, but doubts that this would greatly reduce traffic congestion because public transport's share of all travel would still only rise by 1 per cent. Bernie Carolan, chief executive of the Metlink ticketing system, believes that the key to making public transport more attractive is making services more frequent and reliable, not making them free. And, long-time public transport advocate Paul Mees objects that a free system would be inequitable. According to Professor Mees, it would chiefly benefit residents of areas that are already well-serviced by public transport, whereas people who live in the poorly serviced, less affluent outer suburbs would gain little.
All three men make reasonable points, based on the existing defects in Melbourne's transport system. The outer suburbs are badly serviced by trains and connecting buses, making people dependent on cars and the ever-expanding freeway network. The privatisation of rail and tram services has been a costly mistake, with a single rail operator and a single tram operator each dependent on substantial public subsidies. Rail services, in particular, are still subject to too many delays and cancellations, and a reluctance to replenish rolling stock. The Sunday Age believes that until rail and tram services are restored to public ownership, these problems are unlikely to be resolved.
But what such considerations show is not that a free public transport system is unfeasible or irresponsible. Instead they are a reminder that any solution to Melbourne's transport woes must be based on an integral strategy for the metropolitan region, one that extends access to public transport and makes it attractive to use. Under such a strategy, abolition of passenger charges need not have the consequences that its critics fear. On the contrary, it would create the context in which Associate Professor Fisher's predictions could be fulfilled.
Would a free system be affordable? The $380 million required could be raised in several ways: by a London-type congestion tax on cars entering the CBD; by a Medicare-style national levy, as proposed by Associate Professor Fisher; or by a rate levied on households and businesses, as Mr Maclellan suggested, with rebates for concession-card holders and tax deductibility for businesses. Or some combination of these measures. The introduction of free public transport would be a bold move, requiring careful planning. Boldness will be required, however, if Melburnians are to be given real incentives to leave their cars at home, and travel by train, tram or bus instead.