By Francesca Davis
Governments have been talking about reduced car use and better public transport for years. The NSW government is now working on its 13th transport plan for Sydney — none of which have been implemented. Meanwhile, construction of the M5 tollway and the Eastern Distributor continues, and the M2 tollway was completed last year. The pattern across the country is similar: roads get priority over public transport.
Despite its obstructive behaviour at the Kyoto Climate Change Summit last year, the Australian government is a signatory to an international agreement to reduce greenhouse gases. This commits it to developing long-term strategies for reducing air pollution. Public transport should be central to such a strategy, because car exhausts are the second greatest contributor to Australia's greenhouse emissions.
Road transport currently accounts for 21% of Australia's carbon dioxide emissions. 1994 studies found that new roads planned by the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) would, if built, cause an increase in fuel consumption and greenhouse gases by 23% by 2011 and a decline in air quality of 36%.
The effects are being felt already. In late 1997 Sydney had its worst ozone pollution day for five years. This is not to mention gridlock, road rage and the expense of private car use.
Public transport is cleaner, cheaper, more efficient (each passenger takes up 30 times less space than a car passenger), less noisy and more conducive to coherent community living. Yet public transport use continues to decline.
A NSW study shows that from 1991 to 1996 the number of people using public transport to get to work fell from 25% to 22%, while car users increased from 60% to 66%. Total public transport use has fallen from around 30% of all trips in Australian capital cities in 1970 to less than 10% today.
This is the direct result of government policies. Studies show that where money is invested to create efficient, reliable public transport, people switch from cars to public transport.
A comparison between demographically similar Toronto and Melbourne shows this. Between 1965 and 1990, Toronto's public transport services per capita increased by 75% while Melbourne's decreased 30%. Public transport usage increased in Toronto by 20% while Melbourne's decreased by 50%. Public transport in Toronto now accounts for 22% of all travel but in Melbourne only 8%. This is despite Melbourne's originally superior transport network.
More recently, when a new northern suburbs railway line was built in Perth, 25% of travellers happily switched from their cars, and rail patronage grew by 40%.
The link between declining quality, extent and reliability of public transport and declining patronage has been firmly established. Tackling the public transport problem means investing money in better services; higher patronage will follow.
A Public Transport Users Association report points out that high quality public transport requires less of a subsidy than low quality, poorly patronised services. Toronto recovers 60-70% of its public transport costs through fares, and its inner suburban fares are lower than Melbourne's. San Diego recovers 95% of its costs and even makes a surplus in summer.
The NRMA Clean Air Taskforce says surveys show that the main reason people are reluctant to use public transport is that travel time is so much longer than car travel. Obviously, service frequency and punctuality must be improved if there is to be increased use of public transport. However, government actions are leading in the opposite direction.
In the 1920s, the Victorian railways achieved 100% reliability. According to the railway union, train cancellations and delays today are the consequence of understaffing.
From 1989 to 1995, the Goss Labor government cut more than 4000 jobs from Queensland Rail; more cuts are planned by National Premier Rob Borbidge.
Privatisation of security on trains and the closure of rail maintenance in 1996 led to job losses in NSW. In WA and Victoria, "restructuring" of public transport has also caused large job losses.
Frequent, reliable bus services are also under threat as bus services are privatised. In Brisbane, bus services are restricted to peak hour in country or outer suburban areas or slashed completely because they're unprofitable. Maintenance is performed irregularly to save costs, which causes technical failures and more delays.
As the frequency and reliability of buses decline, so too does patronage. This means public transport will run at a loss, or privatised services will stop servicing those areas.
In Melbourne, the elimination of tram conductors has led to more delays in ticket purchasing and more danger to alighting passengers.
Besides more staff and services, strategies to increase reliability would include eliminating delays caused by road traffic. Options include dedicated bus lanes and traffic lights that respond to the arrival of trams.
After travel time, the NRMA survey shows that safety, flexibility and price are concerns for people. All of these are easily dealt with. Adequate staffing, well-serviced and well-lit stations and shelters would reduce safety fears.
Expanding services into under-serviced areas would provide the flexibility people want. Keeping fares low — or, in the light of ecological and social considerations, eliminating them — would increase patronage, as would integrated ticketing.
But all of these measures would entail decisions about how the government should be spending revenue. Governments claim they cannot afford to maintain staffing levels, let alone put on more staff, extra buses, trains or trams or expand into new areas.
However, in the same year that Kennett phased out Melbourne tram conductors, another $140 million was promised for freeways, on top of the $500 million already contributed by the previous government. The CityLink ring road will cost $1.7 billion.
In Sydney, government contributions to the private tollway projects Eastern Distributor and the M5 East are nearly $1 billion (for only 12 km of road), and a new tunnel road under the city is being planned for $100 million.
In Brisbane they're planning a new City Valley Bypass. This is despite light rail alternatives that exist to most of these freeways.
This is not to mention the tax money which goes to subsidising the car industry through road maintenance, car parks and direct subsidies. The NSW RTA spends $1 per km of car travel, and more for heavy trucks.
Freeways drain the public and public transport purse indirectly. The M2 in Sydney is a classic example. The Liberal state government of the time signed a contract pledging that if any new public transport was built in the area surrounding the new tollway in the next 45 years, the taxpayers would compensate the private tollway company for loss of revenue. Banning of public transport from the tollways has also been discussed.
The deal with the contractor of Melbourne's CityLink, Transurban, was even more incredible. It was promised compensation for the next 34 years if traffic volume decreases at all!
New roads create more traffic. The $750 million Sydney Harbour tunnel caused an increase of 16,000 vehicles across the harbour daily.
A reinvestment of funds currently going to road transport would more than cover the structural changes our public transport system needs. For example, if the new light rail in Sydney was extended to 12 km, the cost would be less than one-tenth that of the M5 East and the Eastern Distributor for the same length of route.
In the meantime, whole areas go unserviced or poorly serviced by public transport, and those who cannot afford a private car suffer for it. The poor, the old, the unemployed and young are the victims of lack of provision in outer suburbs or rural areas.
Privatisation has been shown to be devastating to public transport use. In Birmingham and Manchester, when public transport was privatised, fares went up 49% and patronage dropped 36% in 10 years. In London, where transport remains public, fares went up only 29% and patronage dropped by 3%.
Despite such evidence, state governments here are openly privatising.
In 1997 parts of Queensland Rail were privatised, and there are now plans to contract out the bus system. In WA the ferry services and outer suburban bus routes have been sold to private contractors. In Sydney there are 2000 private buses and only 1400 publicly owned. Security, cleaning and maintenance services have been contracted out in most of the states.
Meanwhile, state governments tinker with the overall problem, cutting car parking spaces or dedicating bus lanes on freeways. In NSW the government has yet again postponed releasing its public transport overhaul plans (urgent because of the extra 1.2 million passengers expected daily during the Olympics) — this time until September.
Shortage of plans is not the problem, however. Even the NRMA has a plan for a $3.5-5 billion investment in eight major light and heavy rail and bus links in Sydney. The real problem remains governments' commitment to private transport.
Groups such as Critical Mass and Smogbusters and the recent Reclaim the Streets festivals put forward alternatives to car travel such as combinations of light and heavy rail and buses, bike paths and walking. Conferences on public transport and how to beat the car industry are being held in Sydney and Brisbane in mid-April.
Such movements indicate a growing public awareness of the need for a comprehensive public transport system, and an understanding that fixing public transport is a political choice.