Congestion Charges

[Wolverine]

Well considering that London has one I was wondering what people think about having one here.

For myself, I would be in favour of a blanket charge only if planning regulations were tightened up so that a congestion charge wouldn't lead to big car dependant developments just outside any proposed zone.

It also couldn't happen until there were some big improvements, such as the port tunnel, and the metro completed.

But there is also the case that until something like the charge comes in, public debate regarding transport will centre around road-building and not about the real solutions that are needed.

So no blanket charge - yet - but there should be a move towards more developments that provide both carrot and stick for commuters to switch to public transport. Quality Bus Corridors are an example. They make it harder to drive whereas at the same time make it easier to take the bus.

[Dubliner]

I think the fairest method would be a formula that discourages wasting of valuable road-space.

[zuton]

why do so many green taxes amount to poll taxes. let the rich pay more!

[alonso]

the above poll is not broad enough. No one in transport is advocating an immediate congestion charge. However in 15-20 years time when all elements of the DTO strategy is complete, including the building of all LUAS lines, all Metro lines, the upgrading to DART of all suburban lines, the all important interconnector and finally, the total roll-out of the QBC network will it be considered.

In other words, when everyone has a choice of how to get around the Dublin region

[ibis]

why do so many green taxes amount to poll taxes. let the rich pay more!

Possibly because we pollute per head?

[FutureTaoiseach]

The Socialists wanting to tax ppl again. No thank you. Congestion is a problem and can be addressed through building more roads, bridges, spaghetti junctions and by encouraging public-transport, as well as by immigration-controls to allow the infrastructure to keep pace with population-growth. Taxes should be cut not increased.

[Wolverine]

Well it has been effective in London, and John Henry of the DTO is of the opinion that it is inevitable for Dublin too - at some point.

We have been building roads at a unprecedented level in Ireland for the past decade and traffic has never been worse. Clearly, at some stage we will have to make use of some kind of congestion charging if we are to prevent congestion getting even worse.

[Eddiepops]

The Socialists wanting to tax ppl again. No thank you. Congestion is a problem and can be addressed through building more roads, bridges, spaghetti junctions and by encouraging public-transport, as well as by immigration-controls to allow the infrastructure to keep pace with population-growth. Taxes should be cut not increased.

I laughed so much at this I just peed a little. Classic stuff, keep it up

As for the congestion charge and people needing alternatives, buses would be a lot more efficient and reliable if they were not stuck in traffic created by the majority of people sitting in single occupant vehicles. Most Dublin buses run very well in my experience, except in rush hour, which is when we need them the most. It's a bit of a chicken and an egg scenario, but perhaps the stick needs to be used in order for the carrot to manifest itself?

[Sidewinder]

Aren't options B and C the same?

:wink:

[Pidge]

Aren't options B and C the same?

:wink:

This sort of discussion depends on what you see as the purpose of taxation. You could just see it as simply being a way for the state to raise funds (most people would believe this, along with some other reasons).

You could see it as a way of redistributing wealth (probably not that relevant to this tax, aside from the tax being regressive).

You could see it as a way of correcting the cost of externalities, which would make this discussion hinge on the cost of having cars in the city.

Or, you could see it as a way of discouraging something - the notion that we tax the bad, promote the good etc. This is probably the most relevant point to this discussion. This isn't, as FT claims, "socialism".

I think that most people would accept that there are too many cars in the city. We've seen, I think, that merely raising standards of public transport and appealing to people's "green" nature doesn't have a huge impact. What could, however, potentially have a huge impact on people would be a charge. If by entering the city in a car, you have to pay an extra charge, then that's a immediate, concrete financial incentive to take public transport or not travel to the city unnecessarily.