Skip to main content

Report recommends road user charging for all Australia’s roads

A new review by the commissioned by the Australian Federal Government and chaired by University of Melbourne economics professor Ian Harper makes a strong case for what it calls ‘cost-reflective road pricing’. The 313 page review of competition policy in Australia says the advent of new technology presents opportunities to improve the efficiency of road transport in ways that were unattainable two decades ago. Linking road user charges to road construction, maintenance and safety should make road investm
September 24, 2014 Read time: 2 mins
A new review by the commissioned by the Australian Federal Government and chaired by University of Melbourne economics professor Ian Harper makes a strong case for what it calls ‘cost-reflective road pricing’.

The 313 page review of competition policy in Australia says the advent of new technology presents opportunities to improve the efficiency of road transport in ways that were unattainable two decades ago. Linking road user charges to road construction, maintenance and safety should make road investment decisions more responsive to the needs and preferences of road users. As in other sectors, where pricing is introduced it should be overseen by an independent regulator.

There is currently indirect charging for road use through fuel excise and vehicle registration charges. These could be replaced with direct, cost-reflective prices in a revenue-neutral way.

The review recommends that governments should introduce cost-reflective road pricing with the aid of new technologies, with pricing subject to independent oversight and linked to road construction, maintenance and safety.

To avoid imposing higher overall charges on road users, there should be a cross-jurisdictional approach to road pricing. Indirect charges and taxes on road users should be reduced as direct pricing is introduced. Revenue implications for different levels of government should be managed by adjusting Commonwealth grants to the States and Territories.

Harper told News Corp Australia “we now have the capacity to charge people for their use of the road system according to time of day, size of the vehicle and whereabouts they happen to be.”

He said “the road system is the only example of an infrastructure asset, where the government owns the great bulk of the asset, funded through the tax system and given away for nothing.”

Australian Automobile Association executive director Andrew McKellar said “a road-user charging model … should be on the agenda over the medium-term.” But you’ve got to ensure that motorists don’t end up paying more.”

Related Content

  • Varying acceptance of tolling in Africa
    January 6, 2016
    Tolling technology is now at an advanced state but governments have a key role in ensuring the success of schemes as is evident in Africa. Shem Oirere reports. According to the African Development Bank, the continent has an estimated $46bn of infrastructure financing deficit. The bank says sub-Saharan Africa requires $93bn annually to meet its infrastructure development needs - but only half of the financing is available.
  • Regulating rural road use
    June 20, 2016
    David Crawford looks at problems facing indigenous communities and those unfamiliar with driving in rural areas. While it is well known that the fatality rate for road crashes in rural areas is higher than in towns and cities, some groups suffer far more than others. For instance, the rates of death and serious injury from vehicle accidents is much higher for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI and AN) populations living in rural tribal lands than for any of the country’s other ethnic populations. Crashes
  • C-ITS in the EU: ‘A little tribal’
    April 1, 2019
    As the C-ITS Delegated Act begins its journey through the European policy maze, Adam Hill looks at who is expecting what from this proposed framework for connected vehicles – and why some people are insisting that the lawmakers are already getting things wrong here are furrowed brows in Brussels and Strasbourg as European Union legislators begin to consider the rules which will underpin future services such as connected vehicles. The idea is to create a regulatory framework to harmonise cooperative ITS
  • C-ITS in the EU: ‘A little tribal’
    April 1, 2019
    As the C-ITS Delegated Act begins its journey through the European policy maze, Adam Hill looks at who is expecting what from this proposed framework for connected vehicles – and why some people are insisting that the lawmakers are already getting things wrong here are furrowed brows in Brussels and Strasbourg as European Union legislators begin to consider the rules which will underpin future services such as connected vehicles. The idea is to create a regulatory framework to harmonise cooperative ITS