 |
He tries not to get the three confused. |
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
I've decided that it's time to ban private car ownership, at least in the UK. Cars are expensive, destructive and, despite the protests of many car owners, a luxury not a necessity. Cars create more problems than they resolve, and the solutions put forward to resolve those problems create more problems in return. I write as a driver, in the sense of someone who has owned cars in the past and who still hires cars regularly, but also as a pedestrian and public transport user. I also write as someone who has seen how, over the last twenty years, cars have come to dominate life in this country. When I first moved to the East End of London in 1984, there were about three cars regularly parked in our four hundred yard long street. Eighteen years later, the average commuter comes home from work and wonders where to find a space. Back in the early 1980s you could drive through the centre of London relatively quickly. You could drive at a steady seventy miles an hour along the motorway and only rarely encounter build-up. Or take a car through a leafy country lane (there still were a few) and go for a mile or so without meeting other cars. Today fast roads have become slow roads and empty roads have become full roads. Car driving, once a pleasure, is a chore, making drivers bad-tempered and impatient, raising levels of stress and road rage. The more cars there are on British roads, the more badly they are driven. The amber traffic light is an excuse to speed up, not slow down. Police or ambulance sirens are a reason to drive faster rather than stop. Allowing other cars right of way is a sign of weakness rather than courtesy. (Once, not long ago, I lived in Los Angeles and have fond memories of cars driven within the speed limit, of stop signs and stop lights rigorously obeyed, of respect accorded to other drivers and pedestrians.) Despite what people say, we do not need cars. Children do not need them to be driven to school; they can walk or take public transport. They will be quite safe doing so; the risk of abduction or murder by strangers is infinitesmal compared to that of accident and illness. If nervous parents feel they still have to take them, they can accompany them on foot or on public transport. "But," many will complain, "it will take more time and I need to get to work." This may be true, but life will not come to an end if you need to spend an extra fifteen or twenty minutes on a bus or a train. "I need it because I live in the country." No, you don't. Human beings have lived in rural situations for hundreds of thousands of years and survived without a car. If you need to get around, whether in the countryside or the city, the solution is not a car for every household but ensuring efficient public transport that meets the needs of the public rather than private shareholders. "I need it to go shopping." Certainly those who have one or two children often have to purchase more than two or four arms can carry. (I have no sympathy at all for those who insist on three or more births - aren't you aware of the appalling price the planet has to pay for each extra human being put on it, particularly in countries where cars are the norm?) But in terms of petrol consumed and time saved it's more efficient to buy on the internet (yes, a free advert for tesco.com), while small purchases can be bought from the nearest shop - and the walk there and back is both healthier and better for the environment. The reality is that nobody actually needs a car. Nobody's life depends on the metal box sitting outside the front door - the metal box which is significantly inefficient, if you consider how often it sits doing nothing and how little time it spends on the road. When we say we need a car, all we mean is a car is convenient. We are too lazy, mentally and physically to consider alternatives to car use, and so we believe that car use is inevitable. What is inevitable is that cars create traffic problems. Their manufacture, use and disposal significantly harms the atmosphere. Cars kill and maim. They encourage selfishness, isolation and ill health, both physically as we exercise much less, and mentally, as stress levels rise. For our own benefit and our children's future, we should be cutting down car use as far as possible. Banning private use of cars would lead to vastly reduced traffic on the roads, allowing buses to run on time and taxis to get to their destination faster and cheaper. Streets would be safer. There would be less pollution. Public transport would flourish with the input of money once spent on cars and petrol and tax and fluffy dice or whatever is this year's favourite gadget. Note that I am not arguing for a total ban on cars. I have no intention of returning us to the stone age or even early Victorian times. People should still have access to cars, but through car hire, with rental outlets no further than the nearest petrol station. If you want to drive to the seaside, do so. If you want to drive the kids to the theme park, go ahead. If you want to spend a small fortune at IKEA, do so. But first go on the internet, or even better, walk down the road to your nearest car hire and fill in the forms. The rates should not be exorbitant. In fact, it should be cheaper to hire a car twice a week than to buy one. But the fact that you have to plan car hire in advance should be enough to make you ask yourself each time, is this journey really necessary? Are there alternatives that are healthier, cheaper and better for the environment? Eventually, most of us will get into the habit of using cars occasionally rather than every day, and rationally rather than for every journey. Life for drivers and pedestrians alike will become more pleasant. Of course it won't happen. Most people are too selfish and short-sighted to take individual or collective action for the long-term good. But the optimists amongst us can dream and one day, maybe, one day, that dream can come true… And while you're thinking about it, give a thought to paying the proper cost of air travel. If you take a flight, the price of your ticket should take into account the cost of the damage done to the atmosphere. How many trees would you have to plant to pay for your Ryanair flight to Hahn? (Let's not pretend that the airport is anywhere near Frankfurt, any more than Luton is near London.) Or United to Los Angeles (yup, the flight I'm taking later this month.) Find out how much your flight really costs; click on the tree below. |
N |
Nothing |
Nothing |
 |
 |
| 6 September 2002 |
 |
|
© Martin Foreman |