Defying the congestion doomsayers

According to the office of the mayor of London, the introduction of a traffic congestion charge in the UK capital has been a triumph, judged both in terms of practicalities and of publicity.

Before 17 February 2003, when a £5 (€7.40) charge was first levied on drivers who entered a central London zone of eight miles radius, media pundits and other doomsayers predicted catastrophe.

The charge was unfair on low-income drivers, who would have to pay as much as wealthy city bankers, said the critics. London shops, restaurants, bars and theatres would see trade plummet if day-trippers felt discouraged from entering the city. And the camera technology chosen was accused of being out of date.

But, says Peter Hendy, the Transport for London (TFL) commissioner, the scheme proved its worth as soon as it was introduced.

"We saw the same effect when the congestion charge was extended to parts of west London in February this year," he says. "There were street protests and negative press reports before the charge started, but absolutely no media coverage from the day after it was introduced."

Contrary to all expectations, he says, "the congestion charge is not controversial. It has an immediate and so far permanent effect [on traffic emissions, noise and congestion levels]".

TFL estimates that traffic entering the charging zone was 21% lower in 2006 than in 2002, with congestion levels reduced on average by 30% over the years since charging started - despite some increases in congestion thanks to roadworks last year. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from cars in London have fallen 16%, according to TFL, with nitrogen oxides down 8% and particulates 7%.

Hendy admits that the technology used to monitor payments is "basic, but it is not crude…your chances of entering the city and not being picked up are so small, as people who tried to dodge the charge when it was introduced quickly found out".

Cameras, at the entry to the charging zone and scattered throughout the city, register number plates of vehicles. If the driver has already paid, the number is deleted. If he or she does not pay within the next 24 hours, a fine of £100 (€148) is sent to the driver’s home address.

Hendy says that the "basic" technology has not struggled with foreign number plates as much as many feared, although identification cannot be done through technology alone. "We have world number plates experts at our congestion charging centre in Coventry," he says.

"Enforcement is more of a problem though," he adds. "There is an EU issue about enforcing traffic offences outside the country where they were committed."

Businesses are divided over the effect of the charging zone, with some saying it has brought customers in by making London a more attractive place to visit and others reporting lost sales. According to this year’s annual report on the congestion charge’s impact: "There have been no significant overall impacts from the original scheme on the central London economy."

The issue of charging everyone the same price, regardless of their income, remains controversial, particularly since the charge has already risen to £8 and is set to hit £10 next year. But Hendy denies that there is any evidence the charge has hit poor people hardest. "All our research says people on low incomes do not drive into central London," he says.

The London congestion charge has also been hailed as a success by many conservation groups, with Friends of the Earth calling it "spectacularly successful".

Hendy says there is interest in London’s experience all around the world. And he admits that "we steal ideas from everywhere". London is the only EU city using a congestion charge, but Singapore, Melbourne and Toronto had similar systems in place before 2003. Stockholm is considering introducing its own charge, after a successful trial last year.

Hendy expects many more to follow, both in Europe and beyond. "Even cities that do not need to reduce congestion are certainly now interested in reducing CO2," he says.

London will also begin to introduce a low emissions zone in February next year. The zone will set a second fine for the most polluting diesel vehicles, other than cars and motorcycles, entering London.

Here again London is not alone and in this case it could soon be outstripped by another EU country: 12 cities in Germany are discussing the possibility of creating ‘clean air zones’ by preventing the most polluting diesel vehicles from entering from next year.

According to the office of the mayor of London, the introduction of a traffic congestion charge in the UK capital has been a triumph, judged both in terms of practicalities and of publicity.