The arguments in favour of free public transport<\/p>\n
Prof Graham Currie from Monash University is a leading world expert on public transport.<\/p>\n
He says making bus, tram and train travel free is a relatively easy measure for state governments to implement, and one which will make a difference to Australians\u2019 lives.<\/p>\n
Unleaded petrol has jumped by about $1 a litre since February to about $2.60, and diesel is up by more like $1.50 to $3.20 a litre over the past six weeks. Households were already suffering from the high cost of living, and free public transport can make a difference to those struggling to pay the weekly fuel bill.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt is quick and that is part of the motivation for governments,\u201d Currie says. \u201cWe are in a bit of an unusual situation, and this is quite a nice thing to do.\u201d<\/p>\n
Prof Mark Hickman, a professor of transport engineering at the University of Queensland, said in a pool of limited options, free public transport was \u201cone of the better ones\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt certainly provides a more economical way of getting around. But a lot of people who use their cars for a variety of different purposes, including commuting, are actually not very sensitive to fuel prices and probably will not switch to public transport that frequently,\u201d Hickman said.<\/p>\n
This is all sounding like a case of a policy being damned with faint praise, so let\u2019s turn to the other side of the ledger.<\/p>\n
The arguments against free public transport<\/p>\n
Both professors agree that the main drawback of the policy is that the beneficiaries of free public transport tend to be higher-income households in the inner city.<\/p>\n
\u201cOnly about half of urban Australia has access to public transport of any quality, so for those guys it will make things easier,\u201d Currie said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe issue is that a high share of people who have got public transport are quite wealthy and are in inner city areas; Toorak has great public transport.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt doesn\u2019t help those who haven\u2019t got any access in the fringe of cities. This is not helping the bush, and not helping regional towns.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hickman has studied the impact of Queensland\u2019s 50-cent fare policy, which began 18 months ago. \u201cWhat we have seen is that it does get people to take more travel with public transport, but the number of people who are switching from motor vehicles to public transport is actually a very small percentage of it,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe increase has been from people who used to bicycle or walk, or [who used] to not travel at all.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hickman noted that the analysis is based on cheaper fares, and that we have very little experience of how fuel shortages<\/a> drive use of public transport.<\/p>\n Currie said he was glad Victoria\u2019s policy was limited to just one month, at least for now.<\/p>\n He also raised the question of whether $71m could have been put to better use, although the advantages were not as immediate.<\/p>\n \u201cYou could probably put the same money into different areas to get wider benefits. You could put that into increasing services in areas that don\u2019t have any public transport.<\/p>\n \u201cThat would also increase ridership, but it is a long-term question of using this money. We should be electrifying the bus fleet and using renewable energy to fuel that fleet.\u201d<\/p>\n