Well Hume for one wants us to be London!
London towers over Toronto in transit thinking
TheStar.com - GTA - London towers over Toronto in transit thinking
September 13, 2007
Christopher Hume
LONDON—The days of Swinging London may be over, but this is still a city that moves.
It's not that the streets of the British capital are any less congested than ours in Toronto, but in London, there are alternatives. This city takes public transit seriously, very seriously. Toronto, which isn't in the same league, is content mainly to talk about the idea of mass transportation, but not to pay for it.
To some extent, the reasons for London's superiority are historical; the Underground has been carrying riders for over a century. Ours is barely 50 years old.
But the differences go beyond that. Like the vast majority of North American cities, Toronto is hooked on the automobile. We see a car as a sanctuary, a symbol of freedom, mobility and status. The reality might be otherwise, but however irrational, these emotions run deep.
By contrast, the English have decided not to worry about the psychology of how they get around, but the practicalities. London has so many subway lines, it's damn near impossible for the visitor to figure the system out. And buses – the iconic double-deckers and the new "bendies" (articulated buses) – are everywhere.
Then there are the bicycle users, who have their own lanes throughout much of the city. And, of course, the famous London taxis, those wonderfully retro black boxes, ply the roads in vast numbers. Each cabbie owns his vehicle and is free to work when he or she wants. But before they can get a licence, they have to learn "the knowledge," a three- or four-year immersion into the nooks and crannies of London streets that turns graduates into a walking road map.
And let's not forget the controversial Congestion Zone. Introduced by London Mayor Ken Livingstone in 2003, it has cut weekday vehicular traffic by 20 per cent. Earlier this year, the zone was doubled in size and now there's talk of upping the $17 (Cdn) daily fee.
Meanwhile, back in Toronto, TTC officials met yesterday to decide how to deal with its chronic funding shortfall. They wisely opted to raise fares by 15 cents rather than cut already inadequate services. That would have been disastrous. The decision was not taken lightly, and is at best a stopgap measure. The fact is the commission operates in an environment of minimal public support.
It's worth noting that the British government has just spent $12 billion to build a high-speed rail line that will link central London's newly refurbished St. Pancras Station to Paris (in two hours and 15 minutes) and points beyond.
True, this isn't the same as a new subway line, but it demonstrates the U.K.'s commitment to mass transit. Getting people out of cars – and in the case of the new train route, planes – is a priority. Despite the cost, it's something the national government – whether Conservative or Labour – was willing to undertake.
Where are Ottawa and Queen's Park in the Great Transportation Debate? The former gives nothing, the latter as little as possible.
And yet the relationship between urban dynamism and transit is more fundamental than ever in an age of global warming. Cities that can't move citizens from A to B quickly and efficiently are on the slow road to nowhere.
Though we all know this, the political will to deal with it head-on doesn't exist. We persist in the attitude that public transit is for those who can't afford to drive, the rest of us needn't worry.
The truth is that we can't afford not to drive.
----------
Not that I think London should be our model, but it is true that for the first time in a generation Londoners are experiencing a complete re-investment in their system and some very aggressive anti-driving policies. Still, that doesn`t mean you won`t wait 20 minutes for a train on the Hammersmith & City line.
