Debated in Parliament on 9 Sep 2014.
Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Transport (a) during the quarterly ERP rate reviews in the last three years (excluding school holiday adjustments), how many ERP gantries (and corresponding proportion of the total number of ERP gantries) (i) have not had their rates revised; (ii) have reverted to the previous rates; and (iii) have an upward or downward trend of rate adjustment; (b) how does such data support the position that drivers' behaviour has been influenced positively by ERP; and (c) how will the different method of road pricing through ERP2 influence driving behaviour more effectively.
Mdm Speaker, in the past three years, 58 of the existing 74 Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantries, which is 78%, have not had to have their rates revised. Of the remaining 16 gantries that had rate revisions, eight had an upward trend, while four had a downward trend. The remaining four gantries had no discernible trend. None of the gantries are currently at the rates they started with when they were introduced.
The effectiveness of ERP in influencing drivers' behaviour and keeping our roads congestion-free is not evidenced by the number of gantries that see rate changes, but from the changes in traffic speeds that result from each rate change. Rates are changed when speeds exceed or fall below the range that is optimal for traffic throughput.
For the eight gantries with an upward trend in ERP rates because speeds had fallen below the optimal range, speeds subsequently rose an average of 7% per dollar increase. As for the majority of the gantries which did not need a rate change in the last three years, a
Page: 27
balance has been achieved, with the ERP rate sustaining a traffic speed in the optimal range.
With a satellite-based ERP system, we have the flexibility of charging drivers according to the distance they travel on a congested road and not just at specific gantry points. This is an inherently fairer system as those who contribute more to congestion will pay more. The incentive for these drivers to change their time, route or mode of travel would thus be stronger.
Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I do not disagree with the principle of using financial disincentives to control traffic volume and, hence, alleviate traffic congestion. However, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, has our consistent tweaking of ERP rates been confusing motorists on keeping track of and remembering the prevailing rate of a specific gantry during different time slots of the day and how effective has this scheme in addressing psychology of motorists and changing their driving behaviour? It is interesting, given that the high percentage of 78% of gantries had not changed their rate in the last three years, would this not indicate that the ERP had not helped to bring down the traffic volume across those gantries?
Mdm Speaker, the ERP rates are changed when the speeds fall outside the optimal range. So, it is not an optimal speed, but it is a range. And the range is 45 km/h to 65 km/h on expressways. The reason why this is a range is so that you do not have to make ERP rate changes so frequently. Speeds have to go below 45 km/h for us to increase the rate. Speeds have to go beyond 65 km/h for us to bring down the rate. And that is precisely to address the Member's concern. We do not want to confuse the motorists too much.
Speaking as a motorist myself, I have to confess that it is probably true of many motorists that even when rate changes are announced in advance through the media, we do not always pay attention. Very often, we only pay attention when our in-vehicle unit goes "beep", we look at the number and realise that it looks different from the last time we were on the road. With that, the motorists take notice and then they have to make a decision on whether they should modify their travelling behaviour.
From that perspective, we try not to adjust the rates too frequently. When it is adjusted, we also make sure that the amount is significant enough for people to take notice in the hope that this will cause them to rethink their driving behaviour. Not all will respond because even with the rate changes, they may consider that it is still well worth the time savings for them. Alternatively, they may assess that they have no better alternative but to travel in that particular time slot. But each time there is a rate change, we do notice that there are certain drivers who have changed their travelling pattern, and that is why there has been an impact on the speeds of travel on the particular stretches of road where ERP rate changes have
Page: 28
occurred.
Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, will the Ministry look into reviewing the evening ERP along CTE to zero?
May I make sure I understand the Member's question clearly – you are proposing to reduce the ERP rate, that is, to abolish it completely? The current traffic speeds along that stretch do not justify such a consideration.
PAPERCUTS