Brian Buckley (The Age, Business, 7/6) chooses to misunderstand my points on transport. He claimed 55 per cent of New Yorkers were regular transit system users.
The overall public transport share in the New York conurbation of some 13 million people is 9.6 per cent. For journeys to work it is 29 per cent. This share is much higher (55 per cent) if New York is defined as the city itself.
Public transport is essential for high-density cities. Even in lower-density ones such as Melbourne it provides an irreplaceable service on radial routes. But it is increasingly deficient where journey patterns are shifting from the radial CBD routes to dispersed cross-town trips. Few routes, other than those radiating from the centre, can be served by public transport at an acceptable cost.
Mr Buckley says transit's case is strengthened if we consider road injuries, car pollution and alleged tax concessions to the car. Victoria's road fatalities per million kilometres travelled are less than a quarter of the 1976 level and air pollution has been falling for decades.
The fact is public transport pays -- at best -- 30 per cent of its costs and inner-city dwellers such as Mr Buckley and me are being subsidised to use it by Victorians in general.
By contrast, the tax on the cars is more than twice what is spent on roads and similar facilities.
For Melbourne, about 80 per cent of the transport budget is allocated to public transport, which provides only 10 per cent of trips. The danger is that in seeking to force higher use of public transport, the Government will reduce spending on roads. This will start eroding the city's commercial viability and consumer-friendly nature.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment