Satellite tracking is back on the agenda for road pricing. Steve Banner considers the
Page 48
Page 49
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
possibilities anpl looks at the EC transport
-White Paper that commenclf Different European countries have long had different approaches to road pricing: now the Brussels bureaucrats are getting their two-euros worth with a White Paper that proposes harmonisation using... satellite tracking.
The method may be an old chestnut, but it is one that has fallen into the laps of the European Commission's transport experts who have planted it in "Fair Payment for Infrastructure Use: a phased approach to transport infrastructure charging in the European Union".
The White Paper is proposing that satellites would collect data on the distance every truck in Europe travels each day so that owners can be billed per kilometre For use of the roads.
The idea has been kicked around for some years
but, although it appears sound in prin
ciple, there are few enthusiasts in the truck trade. Worries over reliability and cost seem the biggest drawbacks to a system that the White Paper suggests could be introduced by 2004. Undoubtedly, the use of satellites to determine flow much to charge would provide an answer to the harmonisation question, by eliminating competitive distortions between EU member states and ending the current patchwork of arrangements. As the White Paper's authors say, "five states, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Austria, levy road tolls on a large scale; Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg use the Eurovignette scheme; Austria applies a different form of user charge; and the others (including the UK) do not directly charge for road use at all".
Eurovignette Although Austria is not part of the Eurovignette scheme, it levies road user charges in line with it, and uses an Ecopoint system to control the number of trucks crossing the country (see CM Return Loads Guide August 1998). "All member states charge annual vehicle taxes, but these currently vary by up to ECU 3,000," the authors continue.
"If goods and people are to circulate properly there needs to be an integrated transport system that offers a wide choice of routeing, modes, timetables and so on. "But it has proved difficult to promote efficient use when charges differ widely and are not related to the underlying cost." What the commission aims to do is lay down common ground rules. "The idea is not to set the actual charging levels, but to establish a framework that member states would implement," it states. It suggests that these charges should be worked out according to what it terms "marginal social costs". They are variable, and reflect the cost of an extra vehicle using the road network.
Factors taken into account include a growth in congestion, more pollution, the increased risk of an accident, and a rise in the damage done to the road's surface. Rail, air, and water infrastructure charges differ widely across the EU too, says the report—there are nine rail charging systems —and the commission will use the same approach in dealing with the distortions they cause.
The approach could favour rail against road. The commission admits that, while the marginal cost of putting an extra truck on to an already-crowded motorway may be very high, the cost of adding an extra wagon to a freight train may be almost zero. Over the next 15 months the commission and transport experts appointed by EU member states will work out what the marginal costs are in each case. At the same time they will categorise trucks according to their environmental impact; the less impact they have, the less per kilometre their owners will pay. The principles they draw up should start coming into effect between 2000 and 2004, says the White Paper—when a satellitebased charging system might come in. From be 2004 the common charging scheme w mandatory throughout the EU. Industry bodies have reacted to the proposals with caution. The Road Haulage Association is pleased that the commission is addressing the problem of distorted infrastructure charges. But it points out that making its ideas work would involve member countries being told how to raise their tax revenue, and exactly what they should charge. "Governments of all per suasions are loath to hand over powers of domestic tax setting," says an RHA spokesman. In principle, the Freight Transport Association is glad that the issue is being tackled. UK hauliers are at an enormous com petitive disadvantage, given the tax and duty burden they shoulder compared with their continental counterparts, it points out, and rail freight operators are frustrated in their attempts to secure competitive track access arrangements across Europe. "The prospects for quick and easy agreement between the 15 member states and the new members that will join during the timespan of the proposals are remote," says James Hookham, the FTA's executive director for transport policy. 'What is more„ the means of imposing and collecting the LGV kilometre tax relies on novel and unproven and technically-complex systems.
Expensive
"Tracking and charging some 6.5m HGVs in Europe through a satellite system and collecting the money, would be a hugely expensive undertaking. The scope for evasion, and vulnerability to system failure, would appear to be vast." There is something more fundamental that worries Hookham, however.
'There are no firm guarantees that these new charges would be offset by corresponding reductions in existing taxes and charges,' he says. "The prospects are that they would be additions rather than substitutions, with freight transport paying more for little or no return.
"There is little evidence to suggest that these proposals will reduce the environmental impact of vehicles, or protect the competitiveness of European industry. "It is still assumed that by making transport more expensive, the commission will automatically reduce demand, and thus environmental damage. There is no evidence that this is valid for road freight." A spokesman for the British Road Federation says: "Differences in charging structures have been an anomaly for some time within the EU, and have put UK hauliers at a major disadvantage. But although we welcome the principles of harmonisation, there are a lot of practical problems to be addressed before road pricing can go ahead."
The Commission says that there will be an attempt to encourage member states to harmonise charging arrangements already in place, such as vehicle excise duty. This could work to Britain's advantage given the high VED charges levied here. It is unlikely that harmonisation would lead to higher UK VED rates, and more likely that they would come down; although, at present, nothing is certain.
Communications specialist Simac Techniq says that while a satellite-based per-kilometre toll collection system is feasible, it would not come cheap. The hardware required by each truck would cost from 2500 to £600, although the price could fall if it were a universal requirement. In addition, advanced software would be needed by the operation receiving the incoming data to analyse it, store it, and generate invoices. The White Paper contends that this approach would lead to an overall annual transport cost saving of at least ECU5Obn a year, which would be passed on to users. Some users would, end up paying more, it agrees, but only because they make greater use of the infrastructure than others.
Cohn McKay, managing director of Fast Forward International, of Sittingbourne, Kent, is one of many British hauliers unimpressed with the White Paper. Rather than installing a complicated Europe-wide tolling system he would prefer VED to be abolished and the tax on diesel to be raised. The latter measure would ensure that the number of kilomeh-es a truck cover is taxed, he says. "My immediate reaction is that it's a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It sounds to me like a horribly complicated system involving an army of bureaucrats," he says. "As for the technology, we have trialled satellite communication systems and found them to be less than reliable.
Distance logged
"And what willhappen if the communications equipment packs up, and no distance is logged? Will you have to take your truck off the road until it is fixed?"
Some sort of Eurovignette system would presumably have to remain in place to ensure operators of trucks from Norway, Switzerland, and Turkey—all of which are outside the EU—made their infrastructure contribution, not to mention trucks from eastern Europe. "I'm convinced there is a hidden agenda behind all of this," says McKay. "I believe the plan is to ensure that long-distance hauliers are extinct in 20 years. "They will have been priced off the roads, and their loads will be going by rail."
John Holt, transport manager at Laser Transport International, another Kent corn'Deny, points out that satellites suffer from Dlind spots which could make the system difficult to implement, "And if they don't reduce VED, British hauliers still won't be on a level playing field. "It sounds like the usual load of European nonsense."