No more jams to dodge? After a year of congestion charging in London Natalie Wallis asks if this is the solution to the UK's traffic problems - congestion

It's always good to find something that Britain does better than the rest of Europe. We can't compete with the French for wine, the Germans for making cars or the Italians for sheer style but, according to the AA Motoring Trust, we are the champions of traffic congestion, with various parts of the UK's national road network being more congested than anywhere else in Western Europe.

This is borne out by research from LeasePlan which found that, on average, UK drivers take two hours longer to commute each week than their European counterparts, spending more than 11 hours behind the wheel. This means

that UK businesses are losing an average of nearly six million working hours a year because of increased congestion. This is equivalent to each company car driver losing two working weeks a year.

It's thanks to these increasing traffic problems that the UK has become the pioneer of the congestion-charging scheme. London was the first capital city in Europe to implement a congestion-charging scheme and now attention has been focused across the Continent on the success of the system.

A recent survey conducted by Deloitte Consulting on European government offices showed that 58% were interested in adopting a similar congestion-charging scheme for their cities, with an additional 14% already in the process of establishing one. Within the UK, the issue is also being regarded with keen interest, with Edinburgh planning to implement a system in 2006, and Bristol looking likely to follow suit. There has even been talk of a 5 [pounds sterling] charge for going into Heathrow. But is congestion charging the way forward?

The London Congestion Charge, which celebrated its first anniversary last month, has been hailed as a success in some quarters. The scheme uses a network of 203 cameras on roads around the centre of London to enforce a 5 [pounds sterling] daily charge--Monday to Friday--by reading number plates. According to Transport for London (TfL), it has reduced traffic entering the zone during charging hours by 18%.

Mayor of London Ken Livingstone says: "Fewer vehicles in the zone, coupled with improved bus services and faster, more reliable, vehicle journeys, make London a far better place to work, live and visit."

Yet is congestion charging the universal panacea it's been held up to be? Certainly the system has not been without its hitches, particularly for fleets.

Within the system's first few months, many fleets suffered problems with advance payment schemes due to administrative errors by TfL. A number of fleets also received letters from TfL warning them that their account was to be closed following their failure to abide by terms and conditions.

The congestion charge also impacted many businesses such as garages, fast fit and contract hire companies based in the zone, including ING Car Lease. Out of a fleet of 12,000 vehicles, ING received 1543 congestion-charging fines during 2003, of which 70% are currently awaiting refunds due to mistakes by TfL or from drivers incorrectly entering registration details. The company has drawn attention to the amount of red tape involved in getting such claims processed.

Greg Taylor, ING's commercial director, says: "From an individual's point of view, the system has worked in reducing congestion. However, from our point of view, it has been a complete nightmare in terms of the administration involved. We believe that it was not conceived or tested properly from the perspective of large corporations. With talk of similar systems being implemented in other cities such as Edinburgh and Bristol, we wonder how they are going to manage. They need to learn by the mistakes made by TfL and must take on board the comments made by businesses."

Incorrect fines

Drivers themselves have also suffered problems with the scheme, with many being hit by incorrect fines, The RAC Foundation has drawn attention to the fact that out of 15,499 appeals heard, three-quarters (11,500) have been won by the drivers, leading the motoring organisation to voice its concern that "thousands of motorists have to go to great lengths to prove their innocence, which causes apprehension, worry and resentment".

Edmund King, executive director of the RAC Foundation, says: After 12 months the Mayor should be congratulated that the scheme has exceeded expectations on traffic reduction but more needs to be done to measure the adverse effects on the economy of London and to improve administration so that innocent motorists are not penalised."

The amount of revenue generated by the London congestion charge has also been called into question. The AA Motoring Trust has highlighted the fact that net revenue is predicted to be just 18m [pounds sterling] less than 10% of the original target of 200m [pounds sterling]. The reason for this shortfall has been put down to increased operational costs as well as overestimates of the amount of traffic that actually travels into the charging zone.

The AA Motoring Trust says that less profit will mean less money to spend on the transport improvements promised by the Mayor. Paul Watters, head of roads and transport policy and the AA's congestion-charging expert, says: "TfL promised motorists that congestion would ease with this scheme and that public transport would be improved to give drivers better alternatives, but now they are beginning to realise that they will not make the money they thought they would. And if they don't make the money, the scheme cannot deliver what was promised and there will be a temptation to increase the charge in a desperate effort to increase revenue."

More charges ahead

It your fleet has managed to bypass the issue of congestion charging so far, you may not be so lucky in the future. Three months ago we saw the launch of the UK's first toll motorway on the M6, now a nationwide road-charging scheme could be on the cards.

The Government has already commented that such a system is an "increasingly realistic" option and Transport Secretary Alistair Darling has said that a study has already been ordered to assess the feasibility of nationwide road tolls, This will explore the issue of using flexible charging methods to charge motorists for the number of miles driven of for using roads during peak periods.

A leading think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), believes national congestion charging would not only help reduce pollution but could also help generate revenue for road funding and public transport. The IPPR commissioned the Imperial College in London to undertake research on the effects such a scheme could have if introduced throughout England in 2010. The report proposes that adding congestion charges on top of fuel charges could help reduce traffic by 7%, reduce C[O.sub.2] emissions by 8% and increase bus patronage by 11%. This would raise a potential 16bn [pounds sterling] per year, paving the way for the Government to introduce concessions to the motorist such as abolishing vehicle excise duty to make the scheme more acceptable.

Calls for a nationwide congestion charge have been echoed by Transport 2000, an independent national body concerned with sustainable transport. Steve Hounsham, spokesperson for Transport 2000, says: "Using global satellite positioning equipment to make drivers pay for how many journeys they make, how far and the condition of traffic at the time would be a fair way to introduce such a system. However, charges must be set high enough to discourage people from driving. And in order to provide such a system, we need better public transport systems with increased tram services, an extension of the rail network and improved bus services."

Yet not everybody views road charging in such a favourable light. Research released from FleetLine, LeasePlan's specialist brand for small to medium-sized Enterprises, looked at the wider issue of road charging in general and found that only 25% of respondents backed road tolls as the solution to Britain's overcrowded roads.

And it's not just businesses that are against the idea. According to the AA Motoring Trust, drivers say that tracking their journeys by satellite is the least favoured way to pay for roads, with nearly 40% strongly opposed to the idea. John Dawson, director of the AA Motoring Trust, says: "We already have road pricing in the UK: our system has a round-the-clock tariff equivalent to 10p a mile in fuel tax and 15 [pounds sterling] per month in road tax, which buys access to all roads except those in central London and toll bridges.

"Motorists believe that the current system of paying through a charge at the fuel pump is fair, cheap to collect, convenient and secure Road pricing is not a soft option. It could turn lives upside down, affecting where we live and where we work. People could simply not afford 50p a mile--the figure suggested by some studies--to get to work."

Over the next few months you can be sure that all eyes in Europe will be on the UK especially if Edinburgh's plans to introduce a congestion-charging system go ahead. While the benefits of reduced traffic are clear, the real success of congestion charging has yet to be truly recognised.

It will be some time yet before we can honestly say whether charging motorists more money tot using our roads will pay off.

10 BEST EXCUSES USED TO AVOID PAYING THE CONGESTION CHARGE

A year on from the introduction of the congestion charge and still payment is causing confusion for drivers in London city. With figures of penalty charge notices standing at a staggering average rate of 106,200 per month, drivers are finding they have to dig deep into their imaginations to concoct excuses for not paying these charges.

Drivers of company cars are particularly creative, as LeasePlan, a leading provider of fleet and vehicle management solutions to large corporates, has discovered. Here are 10 of the best excuses that have been given over the last year by company car drivers:

1. "What congestion charge?"

2. "I didn't know what the big 'C' signs meant."

3. "I thought it was being paid by my wife/ personal assistant."

4. "Living in the country I had no idea what the congestion charge was."

5. "I was in Russia on the day that you are referring to."

6. "I thought it only applied to specific vehicles."

7. "I didn't pay as I was under the impression it was covered by council tax payments."

8. "I do not live in the congestion charging zone so I thought I did not have to pay it."

9. "I drive a company car so I was under the impression my employer had taken care of the necessary charge."

10. "I thought it only applied to tourists."

COPYRIGHT 2004 DMG World Media Ltd.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group