Public Transport Is Expensive
I did some calculations today regarding my options for transport to Monash Uni in Clayton, from my house North of Melbourne:
The trip, one way, by car, is around 30 kilometres, avoiding Citylink, so I travel around 60 k’s when I go to Clayton and back. I get 500 k’s per tank of petrol, which generally costs me $55 to fill up. That’s $55 for 8 and a bit trips, so around $6.60 per day.
If I catch a tram, then a train to Huntingdale, and then a bus to Monash Uni, I can do it all on a Zone 1 ticket, which is $6.10 per day.
So, I’d be paying 50 cents per day less, for a journey that will take at least an hour one way, assuming I never have to wait to catch the next ride (I drive it in about 30-40 mins). That’s cutting it pretty fine – I’d prefer to drive, and have the flexibility and convenience. The only thing that’s making me think twice is the environmental aspect.
It just doesn’t seem right to me that Melbourne’s public transport is so expensive that driving is the better option.
Of course, this is a bad example, because the costs are relatively similar. If I want to get to somewhere like Hawthorn, for example, it doesn’t make sense financially to do anything but drive, which will cost me a couple of dollars at most, as opposed to $6.10 for a daily ticket, or $3.20 for a 2-hourly.
A debate that’s been in the air since around the time of the Commonwealth Games is that of free public transport in Melbourne, after the success of free transport for Games spectators.
According to an article in The Age, “A radical idea“, free public transport would cost the Government around $340 million a year. There are certainly arguments in favour – it would encourage road users to strongly consider public transport (the article’s estimate is an up-to-30% increase in trips), and thus lower pollution, traffic accidents, and congestion. It may even encourage people to get out more, and strengthen a sense of community.
It’s certainly an interesting idea, particularly in light of the Victorian Government’s plans to blow half a billion dollars ($494 million) on a new smartcard ticketing system (although admittedly this is something I’ve been on about for a while now, in light of the hilariously bad system we currently have. Carrying around 10 kilograms of coins to pay for a day’s travel, because the machines don’t take notes, isn’t my idea of a good time.).
That said, of course the money needed to support a free public transport system has to come from somewhere, and it’s money that could otherwise be spent on improving services, a point that the Public Transport User’s Association make. It’s also money that could be spent on other important things, like education, or things like public housing.
Perhaps a compromise would be an option, combined with some decent decisions regarding service improvements. With more frequent, coordinated services, a safer system with more staff presence, and a more reasonable cost, for starters, more travelers will be attracted.
As the PTUA suggest, there are plenty of international examples of a successful public transport system that we could learn from. Melbourne’s public transport system is mediocre, to say the least; with some brains behind it, we do have the potential to have a system that will actually benefit Melbournians.
| Comments (3)3 Responses to “Public Transport Is Expensive”
Leave a Reply
You’re calculations are too simplistic. A car is more expensive than just the petrol – you’ve got a number of other consumerables involved in running a car. Oil, brake pads and tyres are things that require replacement periodically. Running a car incurs expenses like replacement of parts that become worn. Then, of course, there are expenses like insurance and registration which have to be factored in.
True
Increasing frequency of services doesn’t seem to be viable to me. The London Underground and the Paris Metro can afford to have services running every two minutes because they have a far higher population density. I’ve spoken to people who live over there, and they too whinge about the cost of tickets. I spose this doesn’t necessarily mean that more frequent services wouldn’t be a good thing in Melbourne, but I think there’s a few things to be done first. For example, according to my cousin, there are only three level crossings in the whole of Sydney, while there are 7 on the Glen Waverley line alone in Melbourne. These crossings stop masses of traffic every day. Perhaps to improve all of this city’s infrastructure, money should be spent getting rid of level crossings. This way, more frequent train services would become more viable, as there would be less disruption to the roads, and less of a chance of accidents at level crossings. Gah its too complicated. I’m glad we pay politicians to think for us. :)