AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A question of road use

28th July 1984, Page 66
28th July 1984
Page 66
Page 66, 28th July 1984 — A question of road use
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

TRANSPORTATION is the nervous system of our civilisation. Without it, we are paralysed. So say the authors of the Wheels Within Cities (Adam Smith Institute; £2.65) report on private alternatives to public transport.

Since our urban road systems are congested by cars at rush hours, have the propogandists of private enterprise any potential solutions to throw into the debate? Their answer would be yes the sensitive integration of informal and conventional transport systems in a deregulated environment. It's a point of view likely to appeal to the present government one at the least likely to precede any ideas of appointing transport supremos.

As with GLC reports, one has to get used to a new term, OPO, since the council will not hear of one-man operation, so an Adam Smith abbreviation to get used to is IPT informal public transport. Objectors say that IPT would cause more congestion from larger numbers of public transport vehicles.

Authors Gabriel Roth, of the World Bank, and Anthony Shephard, former Traffic Corn missioners of Hong Kong, say that curiously the opposite is probably true. In that city, for instance, its transport and traffic study unit demonstrated that each private enterprise minibus, in terms of road use, amounted to the equivalent of 1.33 standard passenger cars.

Since in 1980 some 211,000 people arrived between 7am and 10am in private cars each day in central London in 137,600 private cars, there is no statistical case, they say, for selecting this type of informal public transport as the bogeyman.

Not that they claim that IPT is an instantly effective panacea for the linked problems of inadequate public transport and traffic congestion. However, it could help the situation, they argue.

Practical steps towards this goal would be the removal of regulatory obstacles, with the Traffic Commissioners' powers confined to the quality and sofety aspects of licensed services. Control over fares should be abolished and agreed fares brought in for shared taxis.

These measures would bring in small firms and the reasons for the financial viability of small transport firms are well known, they say. In passenger transport, the basic operating unit is the vehicle and the owner of one vehicle can operate it profitably, but without undesirably creaming off the most profitable services.

Consider, they say, the provision of services at peak hours. A city bus company is obliged to provide extra buses and these vehicles and their drivers may be idle for the rest of the day. In such circumstances competition can be expected to reduce the costs of an orthodox public transport system.

And where a community feels that certain groups should travel without paying the full costs, the authors suggest the provision of special tickets or vouchers at reduced rates. For the general public, they say arguing the case with examples in cities from Argentina to Zaire with talk of Jitneys or Jeepneys in Manila, the Turkish Dolmus, the Los Angeles Maxi-Taxi and so on IPT does not mean a cost pent alty. They say it has a higher utilisation rate and mass-produced smaller vehicles can be significantly cheaper per seat than larger buses.

Tags

Locations: Manila, London

comments powered by Disqus