Second thoughts on Park n' Rides

Previously I said that Park n' Rides, or car parks at stations were a bad idea, but the reality is we need them now and in the near future. People use them. My family uses them. Most of them are at freeway stations that are hard to walk to and offer little redevelopment opportunity anyway. But they can be improved.
For one, the concept of partly free parking and partly paid parking is a good one. However the paid bays are at the back, so those who paid are further inconvenienced by walking further, while those who got free parking also get parking close to the station, so the only way to get convenient parking is, well, to arrive early. Or at least this is the set up at Stirling train station; I haven't seen the other stations but I suspect the situation is the same. It would be better to have paid parking at the front and free parking at the back, so people can pay for the convenience of parking near the station.

The case for good off-peak public transport

Public transport is often used as an alternative to peak-hour traffic, but it should be embraced just as much during off-peak times.

Getting more passengers on off peak and weekend services gets the most out of capital investments already spent, such as railway lines, bus stops and vehicles. A bus has already been purchased so there is no extra cost to run it during off-peak times except for the driver and fuel, but the trip will earn money from fares.

Good off-peak services also gives peace of mind to peak hour commuters that should they need to come to work earlier or later, go home early, stay behind or do an errand that services are available for them at that time.

It also offers an alternative to driving to the city because while traffic isn’t bad, it will become an issue in the future, and parking is still a problem. The city is easy to serve well by public transport.

Trains run every 15 minutes all day everyday and some trips are standing room only, but most buses only run every hour during off-peak and so are unattractive to travellers with cars. Even major bus routes have a long way to go on weekends with only services along Beaufort St and on the Circleroute between Fremantle and Southlands running every 15 min on weekends.

In conclusion, off-peak public transport is a good use of infrastructure and fleets that have already been bought, and although Perth is doing well on this matter with its trains, we could improve, especially on buses.

Why free public transport isn't the answer

An idea often suggested in light of rising fares and inadequate public transport is to make it free. This is thought to increase public transport usage and make it better, fighting problems such as global warming.

While free public transport will certainly increase public transport, this will only make it more crowded, and with no revenue from it, public transport will become very expensive for the government. It is also claimed that fare collection costs a large percentage of fare revenue, so by doing away with fares we wouldn’t lose much money. However as I said before, free public transport means that more people will use it increasing costs.

Also, since free travel is not valued, some of these trips may be unnecessary and not taking cars off the road. Night services may become rolling homeless shelters, discouraging use by drivers.

In the end, the only reason why public transport needs to be free to compete with cars is because cars are heavily subsidised and our cities are optimised for them. By raising the cost of travel by car to cost-recovery, public transport-friendly suburbs will develop, allowing high-quality public transport that breaks even or even makes a profit.
However, free public transport in selected areas may be useful, as in Perth with our Free Transit Zone and CAT buses. In following with the second paragraph, the CAT buses are very useful but they can also get quite crowded, and are run from City of Perth's parking money.

The case for road pricing

Congestion charges, congestion taxes, tolls, road pricing – whatever you call it, it’s often a no-go zone for politicians – see the PublicTransport For Perth in 2031 FAQ -  even, if not especially, Liberals. You may be asking, What? Liberals? You expect them to support another tax?, but there is logic behind that statement, and road pricing is needed.

The government has been subsidising the construction of our road network for decades (rego and excise don’t even come close to paying the full costs), so we need to charge properly for the use of roads. We need to charge market rates for roads, more for congested roads and times, and less for quieter roads and times, so that roads are uncongested, benefiting people who need to be on the road, like tradies and emergency services (road-based businesses should be able to get exemptions) If it makes lots of money, so be it. We can use it for essential services, like health, education and police, or cut income tax to offset the extra cost, or even both.

We would have to make sure alternatives like public transport can take the extra load, and if need be we could make it so that half the road lanes are priced and half free, so the toll lanes can be considered express lanes.

Where does this go back to the Liberal statement? Well cutting subsidies and embracing the free market is in line with the Liberal Party’s conservative foundations.