The UK and Electronic Road Pricing (ERP)
Transport consultant John Walker did a substantial report on ERP for the RAC in 2011. This provided a positive case for ERP. In February 2022 MPs stated that the move to Electric Vehicles (EVs) could create a £35bn deficit in road funding, making ERP a necessity. The Institute for Fiscal Studies concurred that this “… would cost the government £28 billion in lost fuel duty”.
The 2010 Department of Transport “Feasibility study of road pricing in the UK” stated that “… National road pricing could meet the Government’s objectives”.
Oxford as a UK trial of ERP
Oxford has high levels of employment and two universities that have expanded significantly recently as well as substantial areas of well used green spaces. This has given rise to extreme traffic congestion in the rush hour and school-run periods, which causes serious air and noise pollution. The easy availability of car parking spaces within the City attracts substantial traffic movements. About two hundred buses each hour pass each other on the High Street, meaning 17 every minute on average on weekdays. The concentration of public and private enterprises in the City centre creates a high volume of traffic. An economically successful City inevitably means more delivery vehicles for homes, public institutions and businesses, and a lot of taxis. Measures taken to date which might have reduced the negative effects of expanding traffic such as new cycle routes, bus service provision, controlled parking zones, low traffic neighbourhoods and train services have yet to have the levels of investment necessary to reduce the overall burden of traffic in Oxford.
ERP would offer a means of dealing with traffic levels and generate funds for investment in sustainable travel options. Given the levels of use of the trunk roads which serve Oxford (A34/A40), these roads should be within an ERP scheme for the City. Oxford could be considered as a UK trial project. Since ERP is intended to reduce traffic on busy routes and create income for the road system, it is highly compatible with improving infrastructure for cycling and walking, and funding more electric buses. It therefore should be considered alongside the report advocating £150 million of spending to assist cycling in the Oxford area, prepared by Andrew Gilligan for the National Infrastructure Commission.
Is there a mature, working model of ERP?
Singapore was the first country to adopt a complete country wide electronic road pricing system, back in September 1998. Extensive documentation about the scheme is available in English, on line. It includes:
“…Based on a pay-as-you-use principle, motorists are charged when they use priced roads during peak hours. ERP rates vary for different roads and time periods depending on local traffic conditions. This encourages motorists to change their mode of transport, travel route or time of travel. What are its benefits?
- Minimises traffic volume in heavily used roads in the CBD and Orchard areas, as well as major expressways.
- Optimises usage of the road network by encouraging motorists to consider alternatives.
- Provides a fair price for motorists. Charges are based on usage—those who use the roads pay more; while those who use the roads less frequently or who travel during non-ERP hours pay less or don’t need to pay at all.
- No more monthly/daily licences. Motorists no longer need to buy paper licences to drive through high traffic areas in the CBD.
- No human error. ERP’s reliable and fully automated system operates 24 hours. Its central computer system ensures gantries are always working properly.”
A 2010 report explains how it operates:
“The ERP system starts with the installation of an in-vehicle unit (IU) in each of the 900,000 vehicles in Singapore. The IU is about the size of a small pocket diary … and is powered by the vehicle battery. It is fixed permanently to the right bottom corner of the vehicle’s windscreen by a bracket glued on by very high bond tape. The motorcycle IU that has a protective covering to prevent rainwater seeping in is fixed permanently to the front of the machine (e.g. on handlebar). The IU needs a direct line of sight to the radio antennae on the two gantries for effective communication.’
Advantages of ERP for the UK
Since transport, including aviation and shipping, remains the major contributor to UK greenhouse gas emissions, ERP may be considered as a means of cutting these emissions. This would also protect the public against the health impacts of air pollution including some 40,000 premature deaths in the UK each year. The publication of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on the 1.5°C thresholds on 8 October 2018 stresses the importance of reducing greenhouse gases as quickly as possible. KPMG has provided a useful summary of the state of charging for road use in the UK, and of arguments for ERP as a replacement for fuel duties. In 2022, fuel duties were contributing only about £6bn to the Treasury, in itself making a case for ERP to bring in more resources. James Dixon has provided a brief introduction to the physical practicalities of making ERP work in the UK.
ERP has an advantage over congestion charging in that it is possible to set a wide variety of charging bands, since charging is automatic and is achieved electronically. This means charges for low impact transport can be very low, with a wide variety of bands up to the most polluting vehicles seeking to occupy space in urban centres, where the charges would be at the highest levels. Traffic congestion, air pollution, accident black spots and the creation of more space for cyclists and pedestrians can all be addressed if traffic management by ERP is used to achieve traffic reduction. Traffic reduction of about 10-20% can be expected from ERP. This illustrates it is not a panacea, and that projected increases in traffic levels will need a variety of other corrective measures.
It is clear neither of the two major political parties want to proceed with ERP. There have been ever-increasing subsidies from general taxation to private motoring with freezing fuel duty since 2011. Labour looked at road pricing 1997-2010 but edged away from it, despite the advantages of the Singapore experience as a model and the costs of inaction. Essentially, they left the issue of funding to the next Party in Government. The current Government, despite the losses of revenue from fuel duties, is loath to contemplate ERP. Its current plans, to tax electric vehicles more, will not provide enough revenue for the overall road system, will not repair pavements, or support Active Travel or help increase buses.
The projected 7 million more cars UK roads by 2040 needs action.
And for Oxford …
In the case of Oxford, peak traffic levels are already very high and problematic throughout the whole City, with Controlled Parking Zones established already as a counter to concentrations of car parking, such as near hospitals. Domestic and international tourists are more likely to be attracted to Oxford if ERP, along with additional pedestrianisation, helps to reduce traffic. About a third of households in Oxford do not have access to a car. ERP may stimulate lower levels of car ownership and use. It may also increase use of bicycles, as congestion charging did in London. More cycling, and more walking, is essential to the promotion of public health in a society plagued by obesity.
Oxford’s historic buildings suffer from deposition of dust from transport. This results in immense clean-up costs. Both ERP and more electric vehicles can help to radically reduce these impacts and associated costs. As a historic City, Oxford has multiple ‘pinch-points’ which contribute to traffic congestion. Reducing traffic by using ERP will help with traffic flow through these locations. This would also be compatible with extending pedestrianisation.
Downward pressure on school-run traffic may be achieved through the introduction of ERP, and ‘school streets’.The extra costs, although marginal, may well discourage some parents from adding to traffic congestion. Clearly, actual traffic reductions in Oxford could make it easier to release car parks for housing. Dual use of car parks for housing around or above surface level is already possible and could be introduced for public and private car parks.
A carefully located ‘cordon’ for the Oxford ERP Area in the ‘Oxford City Region’ should include the major roads serving or proximate to Oxford. This would help reduce traffic. The cordon should be capable of being extended during an initial review, with a 10 year trial, in order to address any issues with vehicle parking at the fringes of the area. A review of the scheme should be conducted towards the end of the 10 years to decide whether the scheme has been successful. Success criteria will include air pollution improvements, traffic reduction and increases in walking and cycling in the City.
Are there identifiable disadvantages?
Park and Ride capacity may well become an issue with an operating ERP scheme. There are land use advantages of decking existing Park and Rides rather than increasing the number of them, wherever the traffic pressure seems to suggest this. However, Park and Ride schemes still accommodate to car users contributing to traffic congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution and noise.
Increased use of buses and trains in the initial stages of ERP operation may run into the difficulty of under-investment. Whilst bus service levels in parts of central Oxford may be at capacity, there may be scope for better bus services to accommodate a larger bus travelling community. Under-investment in rail occurred before privatization, leaving a rail system without electrification in some locations, with under-provision of carriages and a past legacy of disused rail lines awaiting re-opening. A Rail renaissance in Oxfordshire would be welcomed, and all the more so if accompanied by long-term increases in rail investment. This becomes more of an imperative if ERP is pushing road traffic use downwards, as people need increasing means of public transport to make their journeys eg by a re-opened rail line from Witney/Carterton into Oxford connecting to the Oxford to Cowley rail line and eventually through to Wheatley and beyond. This would involve deciding how best to deal with the issue of the bat community living in the disused rail tunnel.
The location and availability of schools and school places may make some parent ferrying of children to school more difficult under ERP. ‘Walking bus’ arrangements, school minibuses or buses are already needed to help reduce rush hour traffic and take the burden of the ‘school run’ off beleaguered parents – and communities with schools in the middle of residential areas.
In order to avoid the higher ERP charges of entering parts of Oxford, especially the central area, for deliveries, distribution firms will need to link up with Cargo Bike enterprises to maintain distribution networks. Naturally, distribution firms dealing in greater bulk deliveries, like to supermarkets, will almost certainly not take up this option and must pay ERP fees appropriate to the areas into which they wish to send HGVs.
Exemptions
Inevitably, some groups of road users will be exempt from ERP under certain conditions including:
- The disabled
- The mobility impaired
- The Emergency Services
- Patient Transport
- Taxis
Implementation
Trial period of 10 years with reviews of impacts/modifications every 2 years
Oxford can be judged as ripe for ERP. It would have big advantages in curbing traffic growth and making the City a more liveable environment than at present, especially when combined with other reinforcing measures such as more pedestrianisation.
We want to hear your views. Please send any comments to editor@westenglandbylines.co.uk
