A fair price does not refer to comparisons with other cities (though to compare Melbourne and Sydney to systems in Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane and Canberra is rather unfair), but rather in reference to the economic price. That is, a reflection of true value of the service.
PT fares do not cover the full cost of the system - no where near it. But the proportion of cost fairly accurately - in my view - reflects the private benefit of PT travel. There are huge positive externalities involved in PT use, and that is why it is appropriate that the State subsidises PT.
Private Road transport users do not pay a fair price. The massive externalities of private car use (environmental, pollution, road trauma, health costs etc.) are NOT borne by the private car user. There is some social benefit to private car use (ie improved mobility), but no social benefit to exclusive car dependency. That is why we should be concentrating on making car users pay a fairer price for car based travel through tradition means (petrol taxes) as well as newer methodologies such as car parking taxes, congestion charges etc.
In terms of Local Government rates as a method of collection I fear that while this may work in some LGA's, but many LGA's do not have universal transport choice. For instance in Moreland there are excellent PT services in Brunswick and Coburg, but the rest of the municipality suffers from bad transport choice. A supplementary rate (which I think is allowed under the current Local Govt Act) would disproportionately benefit Brunswick & Coburg - the wealthiest areas of Moreland, compared to the transport poor, and disadvantaged areas of Fawkner and Glenroy. Hence why I continue to be sceptical of its value.
If your interested in PT subsidies provided by the government I strongly suggest you contact Glenyys Romanes. Glenyys is the Upper House MP for Melbourne Province, is on the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee and is pretty much an expert in this area.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-03-11 04:29 am (UTC)PT fares do not cover the full cost of the system - no where near it. But the proportion of cost fairly accurately - in my view - reflects the private benefit of PT travel. There are huge positive externalities involved in PT use, and that is why it is appropriate that the State subsidises PT.
Private Road transport users do not pay a fair price. The massive externalities of private car use (environmental, pollution, road trauma, health costs etc.) are NOT borne by the private car user. There is some social benefit to private car use (ie improved mobility), but no social benefit to exclusive car dependency. That is why we should be concentrating on making car users pay a fairer price for car based travel through tradition means (petrol taxes) as well as newer methodologies such as car parking taxes, congestion charges etc.
In terms of Local Government rates as a method of collection I fear that while this may work in some LGA's, but many LGA's do not have universal transport choice. For instance in Moreland there are excellent PT services in Brunswick and Coburg, but the rest of the municipality suffers from bad transport choice. A supplementary rate (which I think is allowed under the current Local Govt Act) would disproportionately benefit Brunswick & Coburg - the wealthiest areas of Moreland, compared to the transport poor, and disadvantaged areas of Fawkner and Glenroy. Hence why I continue to be sceptical of its value.
If your interested in PT subsidies provided by the government I strongly suggest you contact Glenyys Romanes. Glenyys is the Upper House MP for Melbourne Province, is on the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee and is pretty much an expert in this area.