Transport, Eddington and Transformative Change

Transport will be, after economic management, the key policy issue at the next State election.

Why is transport so important? It seems so prosaic to our individual lives. But if you expand your gaze you will see transport policy is all about how we organise our society. How fairly our society is ordered? How far, and by which mode, do we travel to work, to education and to participate in community life?

Indeed, how wealth and power is distributed in cities is intrinsically linked with transport policy. Over the past three decades the poor, disadvantaged and marginalised have been pushed out of the “public” transport rich suburbs of Melbourne, to the edges. And inner Melbourne – once seen as part of the rust belt – with negative population and jobs growth has bucked the trend.

Since the 1990s government policy has sought to revitalise inner Melbourne and it has been a success. In the last five years inner Melbourne has experienced high population growth and high employment growth, The five inner Melbourne LGAs now account for 34 percent of all jobs in Melbourne. And Melbourne is now the second highest growth area in Victoria – just behind Melton – with growth of just over 7 percent per year.

So population is growing, jobs are growing but something else is happening as well. Car use is down, public transport, walking and cycling are booming. Despite the jobs growth there are now almost 5000 less commuter car trips per day in the Melbourne LGA, while there are almost 12,000 more public transport trips, 3000 more cyclists and almost 7000 more walkers.

An increase of 22,000 more sustainable transport trips a day. No wonder our public transport system is congested, and our cycling paths are full.

At the same time Melbournians are reporting a perceived increase in road congestion. Why? Well for the past two decades local governments and more recently the state government has made a conscious effort to reduce easy accessibility to parking and road space in inner Melbourne. From increasing pedestrian spaces, to parking meters, taking away car parking spots, and to building super tram stops, the amount of road space available in inner Melbourne has decreased substantially.

It has been this, along with petrol prices, improved public transport and increased attractiveness of cycling and walking that has brought about modal shift.

So why then are key opinion leaders advocating for a road tunnel?

Firstly, economic activity. There is a perception that infrastructure construction drives economic growth and key business and indeed union leaders are looking for the next big project.

Secondly, opportunity. Merchant bankers in particular are keen to take advantage of the last real potential toll road market in Melbourne.

Thirdly, logistics. The logistics industry is concerned about road congestion in inner Melbourne effecting freight movements and are looking for solutions, though of late they have backed away from the road tunnel solution.

What does this mean for inner Melbourne? In one word – gridlock. A road tunnel condemns the policy success in inner Melbourne of modal shift to failure. A road tunnel will act to induce traffic as “triple convergence” takes effect. The Brookings Institute economist Anthony Downs describes triple convergence…

Visualize a major commuting expressway so heavily congested each morning that traffic just crawls for at least 30 minutes. If that expressway were magically doubled in capacity overnight, the next day traffic there would flow rapidly because the same number of drivers would have twice as much road space.

But soon the word would get around that this road was now uncongested. Many drivers who had formerly travelled on that road before and after the peak hour to avoid congestion would shift back into that peak period. Other drivers who had been using alternative routes would shift onto this more convenient expressway. Even some commuters who used public transit would start driving on this road.

Within a short time, this triple convergence upon the expanded road during peak hours would make the road as congested as before its expansion.

So a road tunnel does not, contrary to the propaganda of its adherents, relieve congestion in the inner north – it is in fact a recipe for more.

Back in 2006 we can very, very close to the government agreeing to build this tunnel. It was only defeated by a political compromise – the Eddington review. But the proponents of a road tunnel have badly miscalculated. They failed to do their homework – they failed to understand who Eddington is (an economist), they failed to manage the submission process and they failed to understand how much our world has changed in these last few years.

Out there in “voterland” while congestion is still a key issue it is not the only one. Climate change, transport emissions and social disadvantage are equally important factors.

So Eddington will deliver tomorrow a politically inconvenient report. It will not deliver the road tunnel that the merchant bankers want. Eddington has accepting the argument that a road tunnel with CBD/inner north interchanges will add to congestion, so he is proposing a tunnel that does not have any CBD interchanges. This is a road tunnel which will not make money for the merchant bankers and investors.

Eddington will also propose huge public transport projects which will be greeted by some with enthusiasm, others will deride them as “green wash” and others yet (including I suspect many of our backbench) will ask “wither South Morang (or Doncaster, or Rowville, or my electorate)”.

So, the road tunnel will be terminal on arrival. If we can just kill it off we can effect, possibly a transformative change in transport policy in our city. A change that will see expanding public transport service coverage, span and frequencies as they key to managing population growth and addressing climate change and social disadvantage.

Once the road tunnel dies then the government will have no choice but to turn to public transport and make it central in any strategy to manage congestion. Given that road pricing remains a political hot potato, the only way is to re-commit to a new package of measures, say a MOTC 2.

Meeting Our Transport Challenges – announced in 2006 – now looks in 2008 as rather tired and worn out. It is a very valuable package, but is largely catch up for a couple of decades of neglect. Yet despite this MOTC is working – we are actually on target to meet our 20/2020 goal.

Nevertheless a new package – MOTC 2 - is needed. Some possible big ticket items to put forward include:

• New bus service standards: expanding the span of hours and frequencies of all bus services to equivalent of that of trains.
• Accelerate the rollout of Smart Bus and plan for new SmartBus routes (CBD to Latrobe Uni, Hampton to Pakenham, extend 900 to Ferntree Gully, Caroline Springs to City etc)
• Accelerate rail capacity and expansion in key growth corridors (ie South Morang, Tarneit etc.)
• Develop plans for rail capacity in inner Melbourne (ie. A North South or East West tunnel)
• Improve tram priority and seize powers over parking etc on tram routes from local government
• Complete and then expand the bicycle network
• And maybe, commit to look again at congestion pricing in five years time (maybe with an offset on the petrol excise)

If this is the outcome of Eddington then Melbourne will be a better city for it. The cost of failure however is unbearable – economically, socially and environmentally.