Maybe Mark Twain would have had a different idea of Mauritius if he had visited 21st century Port-Louis on a weekday morning. Instead of writing his diaries under a palm tree, he would have found himself in a stuffy overcrowded bus, stuck in a never-ending traffic jam, sweating in the sun and having to bear the horns of impatient drivers or the body odour of fellow passengers. Not one?s idea of paradise. If his quote had made it to that bottle, it would surely have been full of asterisks.

Over the last decades, the Mauritian authorities have tried to tackle the issue. Ideas have ranged from the ingenious to the downright ridiculous. Consultants have come and gone, reports piled up on desks then stuffed back into drawers, but the problem seems to be worsening.

One of the suggestions was to charge vehicles entering the capital during peak hours. This solution was frowned upon for financial and political reasons. London bravely went ahead, launching its congestion scheme in a blaze of publicity and controversy. A year on, Mayor Ken Livingstone is dancing on the rooftops.

?Congestion charging was a radical solution to a long-standing problem. We estimate that 400 000 fewer car journeys are being made each day as people shift to the bus system because of the scheme.?

Season tickets

Since February 17 last year, motorists have to pay £5 daily to drive into central London between 7am and 6.30 pm on weekdays. The payment, which can be made online, by text messaging, at retail outlets and at self-service machines, can be made in advance or after travelling within the charging zone. Season tickets of up to a year are also available.

At the time of charging, the vehicle?s number plate is registered on a database. Cameras read all number plates of vehicles entering or driving within the charging zone and check them against the database. A fine ranging between £40 (Rs 2,000) and £120 (Rs 6,000) is slapped on those who forget to pay the charge.

After initial opposition, Londoners have gradually warmed to the scheme whose aim is to reduce congestion, improve journey time reliability, make radical improvements in bus services and help make the distribution of goods and services more efficient. Before the introduction of congestion charging, the average traffic speed in London was a mere 10 mph during the day. The clogged- up roads were costing businesses about £2 million (Rs 100 million) a week.

In a year, congestion charging has cut traffic volumes in central London by 18 per cent. Traffic delays within the toll zone have been reduced by 30 per cent. The average traffic speed has increased while more people are switching to buses, which continue to experience significant gains in reliability. There has been a year-on-year increase of 29 000 bus passengers entering the zone during the morning peak period. Transport for London (TFL) estimates that bus usage is now back to the level it was in 1958.

?It is difficult to find any real losers in the scheme because even people who have to pay to drive into the charging zone benefit from clearer roads. Bus users are also much better off because congestion related delays are down,? explains Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent of The Times.

The business community is split on the charge. A survey conducted by London First, the business lobby group, 72.2 per cent of the capital?s businesses said the scheme was working. However, some business leaders claim that the scheme has had a negative impact on city centre trade.

Reduced takings

The feud starts right in the middle of Oxford Street. John Lewis says that sales at its flagship central London store are down 9% compared to its other outlets. The London Chamber of Commerce has backed this claim with a survey revealing that 79 per cent of retailers were reporting reduced takings, and that a quarter of them had laid off staff because of the congestion charge. It has called for a ?window? during quiet parts of the day when motorists would not have to pay the charge.

?The principal effect of the charge at these times is to deter shoppers from driving into the centre of town,? said Colin Stanbridge, the Chamber?s chief executive.

Steve Norris, Conservative candidate for the next Mayoral election, has highlighted the damaging impact of the levy on the capital?s business community.

?The congestion charge has reduced traffic but the price London has paid for that reduction is simply unacceptable. If this is Livingstone?s idea of a better city, it certainly isn?t mine,? he said.

If the scheme can be described as a success in terms of its congestion reduction goals, the jury is out in terms of its secondary objective of raising money for investment in transport.

The Mayor of London initially forecast £200 million profits (Rs 10 billion), but in its first year of operation, congestion charging has only made £68 million (Rs 3.4 billion). In the second year, it is expected to make £90 million (Rs 4.5 billion). This means that at least £3.50 from every £5 paid is swallowed up by administration costs.

Fierce opposition

TFL claims this is a secondary issue as introduction of the congestion charge has brought benefits worth up to £220 million per year in terms of reduced travel time, fuel costs and accidents.

Mayor Livingstone has announced plans to double the size of the toll zone to take in most of affluent Chelsea and Kensington. That same night more than a thousand angry residents and business leaders packed into Kensington Town Hall to voice their fierce opposition.

Their voices will most probably be drowned in the positive reactions to the first year of the congestion charge. Other cities, such as Edinburgh, Cardiff and Bristol, could soon follow the same route. Around the world, other congestion charging schemes are also working efficiently although not always perfectly. Singapore, Melbourne and Toronto are just a few examples.

After all, may be the Mauritian government should dust off that report and have a second look?

by Ryan Coopamah Outlook correspondent in London