Opinion

How smarter congestion charging can keep London moving

Jo Valentine, chief executive, London First

New technology can create a "something for something" deal that London's next Mayor can embrace, says Jo Valentine, chief executive of business lobby group London First.

To the list of life’s traditional certainties — death and taxes — Londoners would surely be willing to add another: traffic jams. London has around 20 per cent of the whole of the UK’s road congestion, estimated to cost our economy £4 billion a year.

For all the attention rightly given to London’s Tube and rail systems, it is London’s roads that carry the bulk of journeys — some 80 per cent of passenger journeys and 90 per cent of freight. With the capital’s population growing by more than 100,000 a year, greater delays and more unpredictable journeys are a certainty. London risks being brought to a standstill without radical intervention.

So there is a political hill to climb. But instead of throwing up our hands in despair, we must see what can be done to build support for smarter charging.

The capital needs to embrace smarter congestion charging, through a reformed scheme covering a wider area, with charges varying more according to those roads and times of day where congestion is worst. This would mark a big change from the current blunderbuss approach.

Now that we know there will be no third term for Boris Johnson, the race to become London’s next Mayor is wide open. This gives London an opportunity to engage with new ideas — or even to look at old ones afresh.

New polling commissioned for our study, Jams Today, Jams Tomorrow, shows that Londoners are well aware of the problem — nearly four out of five of those asked by YouGov thought congestion on the capital’s roads would increase in the next five years.

There is presently no consensus, though, on how to solve the problem. When presented with a list of options, fewer than one in 10 said they were flat-out against new measures designed to cut congestion. But the most popular solution — introducing a higher congestion charge during rush hour — garnered support from less than a third of respondents.

So there is a political hill to climb. But instead of throwing up our hands in despair, we must see what can be done to build support for smarter charging.

Motorists and passengers must enjoy swifter and more reliable journey times, while freight users must see extra costs offset by increased efficiency in deliveries.

Looking at other cities that have introduced congestion charging could help. Singapore has improved its traffic speeds thanks to a system that is highly responsive to demand, with charges changing every half-hour in peak times. In Stockholm, traffic remains 20 per cent below previous levels since the introduction of a charge which varies depending on the time of day, up to a maximum daily charge of £5. In 2006, before a pilot scheme was introduced, 70 per cent of people opposed charging: now 70 per cent support it. This shows that a sceptical public can be won round.

What these examples share is that those who pay get something in return. Yet in London this deal has weakened since 2003, when the newly introduced congestion charge brought a fall in traffic and an increase in speeds. Over time these benefits have evaporated as freed-up road space was given over to more buses and cycling, and to better-quality public spaces.

Those decisions have brought big benefits to the capital but other road users must see gains too. Motorists and passengers must enjoy swifter and more reliable journey times, while freight users must see extra costs offset by increased efficiency in deliveries.

We believe that a “something for something” deal is there to be done — and encourage aspirant mayoral candidates to be imaginative and bold in developing solutions to the congestion challenge London faces.

Baroness Jo Valentine is chief executive of London First.