Editorial: Unspoken cure for traffic pain

Opinion

In the frustrations of Auckland's traffic it is easy to imagine nothing is being done about it. In fact, as our series this week has shown, dozens of improvements are programmed and some are well under way.

They range from widenings and realignments of existing pressure points, to a few major extensions, such as the Avondale link that will take SH20 as motorway all the way from Manukau to the existing Northwestern Motorway. When it is completed - not until 2020 on present reckoning - the region's motorway grid will look something like it was intended to be long before now.

But already, the traffic looks too much for the limited network we might have in another 15 years at this rate. By then we should also have an integrated public transport system of bus and rail, but that, too, will not cure the city's congestion. Indeed, one of the longest advocates of light rail, Dr Graham Bush, has criticised our series for using words such as "cure" and "solve" in connection with Auckland's transport congestion. "There are no solutions or cures," he writes. "The only honest approach is to focus on the reduction of transport congestion ... "

Dr Bush is a member of the Auckland regional land transport committee. We fear his view is shared by the rest of the committee. It is true that the integrated public transport plan will not reduce congestion very much, and it is equally true, as Dr Bush points out, that simply building more roads and motorways will not cure the problem. Even a combination of more public transport and more roads, which is officially favoured, is unlikely to be enough. Auckland's population is increasing at such a rate - and the number of cars increasing even faster - that use will probably continue to exceed additional road capacity. But that does not mean there is no cure.

If simply increasing the supply of roading and public transport will not solve the problem, steps can be taken to reduce demand. The possibilities range from gentle encouragement of walking or cycling, particularly for school pupils, to charging for the roads. When traffic planners talk of "travel-demand management", as nowadays they always do, they have these possibilities in mind. And though they prefer to talk about gentle incentives to walk, bus or cycle, they know that the only lasting way to change behaviour is to put a price on it.

Congestion charges - whether they are triggered by entering a zone, as in London, or by entering certain roads or lanes at certain times - are probably inevitable. They will be politically unpopular because motorists know they already pay most of the cost of their road use through fuel taxes that are partly put to other government purposes. But fuel taxes do not convey road congestion signals the way direct charges can.

The fairest and most effective form of congestion charge in Auckland would be a variable electronic toll on the inside lanes of motorways. It would enable people to pay for a faster trip if it is worthwhile to them. And everyone who pays will reduce the congestion in free lanes. Electronic tolls would enable the price to reflect the demand for the lane at any time of day on any section of the network. Sensors in the road could monitor the speed of vehicles in the lane and increase the price of entry, posted overhead, whenever congestion in the lane causes the speed to drop.

When motorists discover the convenience of a toll option they will probably welcome it. But its introduction will require political courage. People never welcome the idea of paying for something they have been accustomed to getting for free. But when they see the queue for free hospital services, many are prepared to pay for surgery, and since demand exceeds the supply of places in prestigious state schools, many also pay handsomely for children's education. Roading is no different. Until the day we can pay for priority, we will all remain stuck in the traffic.