|
Home
Media Releases
Publications
Policies
Newsletters
Past News Items
The Team
Achievements
Campaigns & Contacts
How to Join the PTUA
How You Can Help
Contact Us
Campaigns & Contacts
Geelong Branch
Outer East Branch
Surveys
Melbourne Transport
The Problem
The Solution
Service Comparisons
Quick Facts
Myths about transport
Other Sites
|
Common Urban Myths About Transport
Myth:
The system is fine: people just have to change their behaviour
Fact:
To suggest that the problem with public transport in Melbourne is with people
rather than with the services is not only incorrect, but insulting to
ordinary Melburnians. In cities where public transport works, people just
use it; they don't need to be told to by 'behaviour change' experts.
Melbourne's public transport network as a whole struggles to offer a
time-competitive alternative to car travel on almost any trip. Each public
transport mode in Melbourne - trains, trams and buses - requires
far-reaching innovations, in terms of operation and infrastructure, to offer
premium standards of service such as those that help other cities perform
better.
---Most Liveable and Best
Connected? Report to Metropolitan Transport Forum, November 2005
Every now and then in a city you have a crisis point where people need to
raise the [transport] vision again. It's happened in Sydney and it's
happened in Perth....if the Government doesn't respond it will lose the
next election on that issue. They cannot afford to keep saying no.
---report author
Peter Newman,
The Age, 5 November 2005
An outsider comes in and makes a comment from far away, the reality is
Melbourne has a terrific public transport system.
---former Transport Minister Peter Batchelor, The Age,
8 November 2005
Why Won't Melburnians Use Public Transport?
Despite recent increases in patronage, public transport in Melbourne is
still very much a minority travel mode. Public transport is used for
around 10% of journeys, which is one-third to half the share in comparable
cities in Europe and Canada.
To understand why the share isn't greater, we need to understand the needs
of travellers and the attitudes that underlie their transport choices.
In this regard Melburnians fall, broadly speaking, into four groups.
-
At one extreme are a minority who would never use public transport, no
matter how good it was.
-
At the opposite extreme are a shrinking minority who are committed to
using public transport no matter what, in some cases despite knowing that
using a car would sometimes save them time and possibly even be cheaper.
-
The third group are those who use public transport because they have no
choice. This is by far the largest group among current users. But
although this group has come to include an increasing number of
CBD commuters since 2005, it is in long-term
decline (especially outside peak hour) as car ownership becomes cheaper
and governments throw money at roads at the expense of public transport.
-
The fourth group makes up the vast majority of the population. These are
the people who do not use public transport, who could be convinced to use
public transport if it were competitive in time and cost with car travel,
but who 'know' that it's currently not up to scratch.
Rather than simply give up in the face of a poor government record on
public transport, most Melburnians support the
policy objective of shifting car journeys to public transport in order to
keep Melbourne liveable. When it comes to shifting actual journeys, the
focus must clearly be on the fourth group above: those who aren't
implacably opposed to using public transport but avoid using it for
all-too-familiar reasons - it's too slow, or too limited in operating
hours, or too overcrowded, or too expensive, or just too plain awkward
compared with driving the car.
The problem has at least been accurately diagnosed, even if not
consistently followed through, at the highest political levels:
Most people would be happy to use public transport if it went from near
where they are to near where they wanted to go, quickly and regularly.
On the other hand, busy people are understandably reluctant to use public
transport if it means planning their day around once-an-hour bus
timetables. In Australia's big cities, public transport is generally
slow, expensive, not especially reliable and still a hideous drain on the
public purse.
---Federal Liberal leader Tony Abbott, Battlelines, 2009
Given this, one might assume that the best way to encourage people to use
public transport instead of taking the car would be to improve public
transport so it's competitive with the car instead of being slower, harder
to use and (often) more costly.
In Perth, the convenience of the motor car has historically been
absolutely paramount. If we're building new public transport, we must
design it to compete with the motor car and be better. Otherwise, don't
bother building it at all.
---Peter Martinovich, WA Government transport planner
But if Victoria's planners were to admit this, they would be committing
themselves to invest more money not just in shiny infrastructure but also
in more frequent public transport services, possibly at the expense of
new road construction. Worse still, it would require some bureaucrats to
actually make the effort to plan new services, rather than act
as mere caretakers for the combination of historical accident and random
experiment that our current timetables are based on.
Denying the Problem
As it turns out, the approach preferred by the bureaucracy is not to take
the public's attitudes at face value, but rather to argue that the public
is misinformed. Public transport, they say, is really much better than
people think it is. If people could just be persuaded to try out the
services that exist, they would realise that public transport is
just as good as driving the car. So the thinking goes, all we have to do
is market the system better (and rely on extraneous factors like population
growth and high petrol prices) and we can double public transport patronage
without having to spend a cent on extra services.
The idea that Melbourne's public transport is 'world class' is frequently
heard - though usually among people who don't live in Melbourne or who
don't use public transport. Sydney and Brisbane residents, and visitors
from North America, are understandably envious of Melbourne's tram
network and the recent growth in train patronage. Our extensive
infrastructure makes a good first impression on tourists, so it's not
unheard of for visitors to lavish praise on our system purely on the
strength of having caught a tram three blocks up Bourke Street and seen a
map of the train system.
Transport planner Jarrett Walker explains in
this
blog entry why people's experience as tourists is a very poor guide to
what kind and standard of transport works in general. Those who experience
Melbourne public transport as tourists easily overlook the fact that most
Melburnians don't have access to either trains or trams, that much of our
infrastructure is wasted on providing a poor quality of service, and that
as a result, our public transport patronage is almost entirely confined to
peak hour CBD trips where there's little choice about whether to use it or
not.
It's when you actually try and use public transport for
day-to-day travel in Melbourne, or speak to people who've tried to do so,
that the truth becomes painfully evident: our public transport is just as
bad as most people think, and may even be worse.
One source of evidence is the census. For example, even though Melbourne
has trams throughout its inner suburbs and Sydney doesn't, the 2006 census
shows that fewer people in Melbourne's innermost suburbs take public
transport to work: 26.8% in inner Melbourne versus 32.8% in inner Sydney.
Other evidence comes from the State Government's own research. A report
commissioned by the government in 2008 from consultants Booz and Co
confirmed that while Melbourne rates well on the extent of its rail network
(which it noted was 7% larger than Sydney's, despite Sydney's higher
patronage), its level of service provision is poor even by comparison with
other Australian cities. Buses came in for particular criticism:
Melbourne’s bus weekday minimum service standards for finish times
are considerably below the standard of all other Australian cities.
Melbourne non-Smartbus routes have a minimum finish time of 9p.m. whilst
almost all other cities have finishes between 11p.m. and midnight.
---Booz and Co. Melbourne Public Transport Standards Review,
August 2008.
(In fact, the real situation is even worse than the report lets on, with
dozens of bus services not even meeting the 9pm 'minimum' standard finish
time.)
The government's own 'TravelSmart' behaviour change programme provides
further evidence of the system's inadequacy. In one exercise in 2005,
university students were asked about their use of 'green' travel modes
(public transport, cycling, walking and carpools) and also about how
much they had expected to use 'green' travel when they began
their course. In all cases, students' actual use of green travel was
less than they originally expected.
| University |
Number who expected to use green travel regularly |
Number who use green travel regularly |
| Monash | 67% | 55% |
| La Trobe | 52% | 47% |
| Melbourne | 96% | 92% |
Source: Evaluation of the 2005 University TravelSmart
Initiative, Institute of Transport Studies, Monash University.
Available from
TravelSmart.
(Figures are for all students surveyed, whether or not they received
TravelSmart treatment. Actual use is less than expected use in both
subgroups.)
Despite the fact that Melbourne University is the most accessible location
by public transport in Melbourne outside the CBD, these figures imply that
1 in 12 students drive to the campus on a regular basis. Even more
importantly, only half this number expected to be driving
regularly to campus when they started. Coming from students, who often
are committed to using 'green' travel for environmental reasons, this
suggests that people's expectations are more optimistic than the reality,
not the other way round.
The most comprehensive evidence, though, comes from the day-to-day
experiences of the very people who use the system. Regular public
transport users in Melbourne muddle through largely because they've
consciously structured their lives around the inadequacies of the system.
They choose to live within walking distance of railway stations or tram
routes, take jobs in the inner city, and memorise the timetable for
every service they use, carefully timing their activities to match the
schedule. They put up with frequent cancellations and late running,
padding out their personal schedules to allow for such contingencies.
And nearly all of them keep a car handy for those occasions when they
must travel outside the times and places where public transport works
passably well.
[Public transport] is never on time, it's always overcrowded, they bump up
the prices and you get horrible service, it's always breaking down. It's
just a miserable experience.
---Shannon Scullin (Fitzroy), The Age, 5 January 2007
In Melbourne, regular public transport users probably know even better
than non-users why it isn't currently a viable option for the majority of
the population. Most people can't live within walking distance of a
railway station, and must put up with feeder buses that still run to
sheep-paddock frequencies and hours of operation (or else attempt to
park and ride, which introduces its own
peculiar problems). People whose workplaces are outside the city centre
have trouble navigating a system run with only central-city commuters in
mind. And most people don't like having their lives run by a timetable,
nor will they tolerate having to leave home half an hour earlier than
necessary in case a train is cancelled.
Examples of the un-usability of Melbourne's public transport, due to
neglect or just downright bad planning, turn up in the papers almost
every week. Here are just a few examples:
Each day, [Patrice Le Miere] rises at 4:30am....At 5:30 he quietly
shuts the front door, setting out on the 15-minute walk to the bus
stop....Miss the first bus and the next one is 40 minutes away.
He'll be late.
Le Miere says the vast majority of his neighbours simply drive to
work. You see less and less people catching the bus each morning -
they've just given up.
---The Age, 23 October 2005
I live in Fitzroy and work in Doncaster, and on Friday night I waited
for 45 minutes at Doncaster shopping centre for a bus home as one bus
appeared to have been cancelled (although I was unable to get any
useful information from Metlink on the missing bus).
I am always trying to convince friends to use public transport, but
with this kind of thing happening far too frequently, I find it hard
to judge my friends when they prefer to drive.
---Scott Baldwin, The Age, 7 November 2005
I work full-time in Cranbourne, a maximum 20 minute drive from
Beaconsfield, but it takes me at least an hour and 15 minutes to get
to work. I used to ride the train to Narre Warren and connect with
a bus. Then the bus timetable changed so the bus was leaving the
station as my train pulled in, leading to a 30-minute wait.
---Chrissie Klerks, Cardinia Leader, 30 November 2005
The bus leaves at 5:53pm. The train arrives at 5:48, but occasionally
it is late, and the bus doesn't wait.... unless forced to do so (i.e.
on one occasion passengers from the train just about had to run in
front of it and cut it off). Too bad if you came from the last
carriage of the train, and/or a slow walker - you probably would
have missed it.... You have to walk to the end of the platform, go
down the ramp, under the train line, past the main bus stop, across
the car park road, and around the (hopefully) parked bus.
The next bus leaves at 6:55pm. The only other bus (after 5pm)
leaves at 7:40pm. As I consider the bus service inadequate for my
needs, I drive to/from the station.
---Brian May, message to PTUA, September 2006
The public transport system is a joke. For the third time this week
my morning train has been cancelled, resulting in a 25-minute wait for
the next. This has again forced me to walk home, collect my car and
drive to a city car park, slightly over the price of my daily train
ticket but well worth the money....
Public transport users have to put up with continuous unjustified
price rises, ridiculous summer timetables and dirty, hot and
overcrowded trains. This comes nowhere near value for money and is
laughable. I'll be taking my car to work in the future.
---Allison Griffiths (Oak Park), Herald Sun, 20 January
2007
Doncaster is crying out for a train.... I have little choice but to
drive. I could catch a bus, which is OK in the morning, but getting
home is a problem because I sometimes work late and it only comes at
hourly intervals.
---Diarmuid McAlary, Manningham Leader, 26 June 2007
Bus services between south-east shopping hubs Endeavour Hills and
Fountain Gate are so poor we found it 30 minutes quicker to do the 8km
on a bicycle.
---Letter to Pakenham Leader, 25 January 2008
The City of Melbourne's new boss caught the train in from far-flung
Eltham for her first day at her new downtown office this week. But by
yesterday, day two in the job, she made the journey by car.
She doesn't want it to become her habit. Kathy Alexander would like to
think she espouses sustainable behaviour as a priority both personally
and professionally, but sometimes practicalities - like when the day is
likely to end - will dictate otherwise, she says.
---"CEO looks beyond ledger to city's vibrancy", The Age,
12 April 2008
On Friday 30 May, the 4.52 pm 279 bus was running early and didn't wait
for me to cross the very busy Middleborough Road. Hence, I was left
running to catch the 271 and had to risk the traffic to dash across the
road so that I could possibly get to Box Hill train station in time....
There is still lack of timetable integration of buses and trains, which
means that there is often a half hour wait at the Box Hill bus station
after arriving by train. Many times a bus has left a couple of minutes
before the train arrives.
---Submission to Whitehorse Bus Service Review, August 2008
I caught the 6:09 V/Line from Southern Cross to Lara last night. We
disembarked the train at Lara and as we were waiting for the safety
gates to open (it's an island platform), a bus pulled into the station
and then straight out again. One person was actually going to
catch that bus - who became very angry indeed! Making matters worse,
that was the last bus for the day (they come every 50 minutes and stop
at 7pm which is a joke in itself).
---Ryan Herbert, message to PTUA, May 2009
Chelsea Discovery Holiday Park resident Jean Harper, 76, said she was
reliant on friends or expensive taxis to get around because the
closest bus stop was at least a 20 minute walk away.
The existing 857 bus route only travelled to Fowler St, too far for
many of the Broadway caravan park's mostly elderly residents.
I could do it when I first came, but it's one I can't do any more,
Ms Harper said.
---"Bus services are stopping short in Chelsea and Bonbeach",
Mordialloc Chelsea Leader, 16 July 2009
Yesterday I wasted a total of 30 minutes on two separate occasions
waiting for buses. I'm over it. Time to buy a car!
The first bus... was 20 minutes late. It then took a further 10 minutes
to get to Footscray station from Geelong Rd / Barkly St. (I should have
just walked to the train station, I know...) Second was last night after
the footy; the 246 from Punt Rd/Swan St was 10 minutes late.... lateness
is not in the order of a few minutes, but often 10 minutes or more, by
which time you wonder whether it's coming at all.
---A frustrated bus user, message to PTUA, August 2009
Raj Soni agrees that [Point Cook's] set up made the family's decision to
opt for four cars inevitable. He says there are too few footpaths, the
local bus service runs only hourly, and busy roads with poor crossings
discourage walking.
Most of the time, with the shopping centre less than two kilometres
away, you would think that we would walk with the kids, but it is not
really a place to walk to and we just drive, he says. I wish I
had a better option.
---"Driven to distraction", The Age, 21 March 2010
My talk on sustainable transport at Doncaster finished just before
9.30pm. The bus stop across the road from the civic centre had a
real-time information panel but it was not operational. Was it broken?
Was it not yet commissioned? A timetable on a post indicated that the
last 307 bus back to the CBD was at 8.24pm, and the next (and last) 207
bus was at 10.21pm. It was cold and I was stranded. No wonder so few
use the bus.
---Steven Ingrouille, Going Solar Transport Newsletter,
June 2010
Amazingly, services in Melbourne can utterly fail to connect even
when they are run by the same operator. In October 2005, Connex
proudly announced it was running extra morning trains from Frankston to
Stony Point on the weekend of the Motorcycle Grand Prix on Phillip
Island. Unfortunately, the scheduled departure time from Frankston was
7:05am, which on Saturday was three minutes before the arrival
of the train from the city to Frankston. People living between Frankston
and the city who wished to try the public transport alternative to get
to the Moto GP, would have to get the earlier train (leaving Flinders
Street at the ungodly hour of 5:40am) and face a 27 minute wait at
Frankston.
The waiting time for the ferry at Stony Point was scarcely better:
either 25 or 45 minutes, depending whether you believed the train
operator or the ferry operator's timetable. On Sunday the connection
at Frankston station was not an issue, simply because there is
no train from the city arriving at Frankston by 7:05am.
All behaviour-change programmes notwithstanding, what person with a
choice would use this 'service' to travel to Phillip Island, when the
same government that paid Connex to run non-connecting trains has
provided a freeway-standard road on which one can drive there in two
hours flat? Once again, the bumper-to-bumper traffic that filled this
road on Moto GP weekend shows that, given no sensible alternative,
people voted with their feet on the accelerator. The road lobby
couldn't be happier with this state of affairs.
As for the Transport Minister who presided over the system between
1999 and 2006, he remained in denial right up until being replaced
after the 2006 elections - clearly still not understanding that public
transport will only become popular when it becomes attractive to
people who don't now use it.
Melbourne has a pretty good public transport system. People who use
it, like it. The biggest complaints come from people who sit in
university cafes or who drive cars.
---Peter Batchelor,
Stateline
interview, 19 May 2006
Efforts to change people's travel habits without actually improving
services also run up against significant forces compelling people in
the opposite direction, due to the self-reinforcing nature of car
dependence in Melbourne.
-
In 1988, Coles Myer relocated its corporate headquarters from Lonsdale
Street in the CBD to a new site in Tooronga. Within months, the method
of travel to work for Coles Myer staff (aside from the 20% who had
company cars) changed from 80% by public transport and 20% by car
before the shift, to 15% by public transport and 85% by car afterward.
The public transport share has continued to decline in the years since,
forcing multiple extensions to the employee car park.
-
The Melbourne PC User Group had operated from premises in the South
Melbourne area (a 10 minute tram trip from Flinders Street) since it
opened its first office in 1988. In 2004, however, it
shifted
its premises to the Chadstone Shopping Centre, admitting that the
principal attraction of the site was the free car parking provided by
the shopping centre. As with the Coles Myer move, members would find
travel by car much more convenient than before, but travel by public
transport would be much less convenient even for those who live in the
south-eastern suburbs (since the nearest station, Hughesdale, is also
the worst served by buses from Chadstone). In this environment,
trying to shift peoples' habits in favour of greater public transport
use by persuasion alone is a hopeless task.
-
Cars are frequently bought under leasing arrangements with favourable
financial terms. Often, however, it is a condition of the lease that
the car be driven a minimum number of kilometres per year: a typical
figure is 30,000km which is twice the average for Australia's 10
million registered vehicles. Buyers who undertake to moderate their
car use will be in breach of their lease conditions and be liable for
financial penalties. These requirements stem from the peculiar
treatment of cars under Fringe Benefits
Tax rules, which should be overhauled as part of a sustainable
transport policy.
Because Melbourne and other Australian cities lag so far behind other
cities in the world in breaking the cycle of car dependence, most of
us are unable to voluntarily switch from car use to public transport
even when rising petrol prices make it worth our while. A global
survey by ACNeilsen, reported in The Age on 8 March 2006,
found that while on average 24 per cent of the 23,000 people surveyed
around the world were using public transport more as a result of
rising fuel prices, the average in Australia was only 19 per cent.
Solutions Required: Better Service, Not Spin
If public transport is to become attractive to the majority of
Melburnians, something has to be done about the real inadequacies of
the system. Feeder buses must be overhauled, so that people can count
on getting to their nearest railway station quickly without having to
fight over a car park. Buses, trains and trams have to be run as a
coordinated network, for easy travel
between any two points. Service frequencies need to improve,
particularly in the evenings and on weekends. And of course
reliability must be assured: even a 90 per cent reliability figure
means a five-day-a-week commuter will have their train cancelled once
every week.
I am so over public transport.
---Letter in MX newspaper, 24 May 2005
The [NSW] Transport Minister, John Watkins, has little doubt about why
motorists keep pouring onto clogged roads. He believes it is a tide of
aggrieved former rail commuters.
Mr Watkins told the Herald last night that restoring
public confidence in the rail network remained his top priority, but
he conceded it was a case of once bitten, twice shy when trying
to tempt disgruntled passengers back onto trains.
---Sydney Morning Herald, 18 August 2005
Our family and our host family - four adults and four children - arrived
at the Heatherdale station mid-morning on a Saturday. We missed the first
train because it took us more than 20 minutes to buy return tickets to
Flinders Street Station. The equipment regularly failed to work....
Lastly, I was surprised at how crowded both our trains were (similar to
peak-hour) on a Saturday. I assume this was due to cost-cutting; all the
trains we saw had only four carriages, which added to the unpleasant
family experience.
I pity the Commonwealth Games visitors if they need to use Melbourne's
public transport system, and I expect that ticket inspectors will have a
field day fining those who have the wrong tickets. And when our family
next comes to Melbourne, we will drive around town rather than use your
public transport system.
---Jason Masters (North Ryde, NSW), letter to The Age,
14 October 2005
After eight years I got sick and tired of our unreliable public
transport and switched to driving. I do not enjoy paying an obscene
petrol price that includes a double tax, or traffic jams and waiting at
level crossings, and I miss reading books on the train. Yet I will keep
driving until public transport is improved enough to provide a reliable
and comfortable service at an affordable price.
---Anna Heifetz (Bentleigh), The Age, 5 February 2008
In Rowville, the Rowe family has five cars on the go. Lynette Rowe said
her sons would like to use public transport more but the irregularity of
bus services and the distance from train and tram lines meant it was
unrealistic.
A new rail line to Rowville, running past Monash University, would
drastically reduce their car reliance, Ms Rowe said.
---Car use driven by lack of trains, buses , The Age,
21 November 2009
By putting the emphasis on behaviour change, bureaucrats and marketing
consultants seek an easy short cut that removes the need to improve
actual services. But there are no short cuts: if a car is the easier
option, people will drive, no matter how much they're cajoled about the
impact on the environment. And there is the danger that real damage
will be done by persuading people to use unimproved services: some
people will discover that public transport is worse than they
thought, and like those in the old story of the boy who cried 'Wolf',
they'll be even less inclined to change their behaviour even if a future
government bites the bullet and improves services. (As the NSW Minister
says: once bitten, twice shy.) Others will be resentful at what comes
across as the government telling them how to behave.
It is clear that [behaviour management] techniques will only work 'on
their own' when there is a large gap in perception between what exists
and what people believe exists. For public transport where services
and travel quality [are] much higher than perceived, personalised
approaches can have very large effects, but where such a gap does not
exist the travel behaviour effects could be negligible.... It would
seem that they need to be thought of as an integral part of a strategy
rather than as some form of 'public relations' exercise, when nothing
substantive is being done to address strategic transport priorities.
---Department
for Transport, UK, 2002
It is easier and less costly to change the way people think about
reality than it is to change reality.
---Sharon Beder, Global Spin: The corporate assault on
environmentalism, 2000
Last but not least, one can always learn from international experience.
The introduction of the kind of fast, frequent and well-connected
public transport that the PTUA advocates has always generated its own
patronage, whether it be the Vancouver Skytrain or the Northern Suburbs
line in Perth. This is because people aren't stupid, and can judge for
themselves whether public transport is as good as car travel or not.
Trying to tell people they're mistaken in their judgments is just
insulting their intelligence, and is no way to win them over.
The greenies can scream as much as they like but until the empty heads
in charge can get it right PT is not an option for people with
expectations of reasonable service.
---Comment on The Age
blog,
November 2006
Return to index
© 2010 Public Transport Users Association Inc. (PTUA), Victoria, Australia. ABN 83 801 487 611.
General copying and distribution on a non-commercial basis is permitted subject to proper acknowlegement.
Authorised by Tony Morton, 247 Flinders Lane, Melbourne, for the PTUA
Last modified: 28 August 2010
|