It made clear that congestion is a major problem
to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study
was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution
to these problems and that advances in technology put these
plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or
more before any national scheme was technologically, never
mind politically, feasible.
That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes
clear, this is not about imposing "stealth taxes" or
introducing "Big Brother" surveillance. This is
a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough
investigation of all the options, combined with a full and
frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national
level. That's why I hope this detailed response will address
your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue
forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of
the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for
you to take it further.
But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any
decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply
not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working
with some local authorities that are interested in establishing
local schemes to help address local congestion problems.
Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes
would teach us more about how road pricing would work and
inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from
these local schemes will be used to improve transport in
those areas.
One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion
is bad. It's bad for business because it disrupts the delivery
of goods and services. It affects people's quality of life.
And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion
is a key priority for any Government.
Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This
is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million
more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions
are that this trend will continue.
Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and
to make the most of the existing road network. We have more
than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion
this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains -
helping to explain why more people are using them than for
decades. And we're committed to sustaining this investment,
with over £140 billion of investment planned between
now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort into
improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways
Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic
moving.
But all the evidence shows that improving public transport
and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent
congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to
make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion.
This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face
up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing
schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore,
and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes.
Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing
as a means of addressing congestion.
One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked.
Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would
mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer,
and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses,
individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all
will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion
in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12
billion would be the direct cost on businesses.
A second option would be to try to build our way out of
congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways,
widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new
routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new
capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening
the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot
simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence
suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity.
Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely
costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other
services such as education and health, or increases in taxes.
If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much
as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this approach
would entail.
That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the
contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion.
It would not be in anyone's interests, especially those of
motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without
exploring it further.
It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part
of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly
through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But
any technology used would have to give definite guarantees
about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing
technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive
insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here,
by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold information
about where vehicles have been. But there may also be opportunities
presented by developments in new technology. Just as new
medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be
changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic
jams, not create a "Big Brother" society.
I know many people's biggest worry about road pricing is
that it will be a "stealth tax" on motorists. It
won't. Road pricing is about tackling congestion.
Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national
road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from
the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean
that those who use their car less, or can travel at less
congested times, in less congested areas, for example in
rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall.
Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more
congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for
the future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been
taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme,
stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since
they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated,
never mind decided.
Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme,
we know that we have to have a system that works. A system
that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is
fair. I fully accept that we don't have all the answers yet.
That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road
pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would
be further consultations. The public will, of course, have
their say, as will Parliament.
We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a
consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect
the environment and support our businesses. If you want to
find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed
information, and which also give opportunities to engage
in further debate.
Yours sincerely, Tony Blair |
