[ANALYSIS] Transport reform: Strategic carrots but no sticks

The Transport Plan presented by Transport Minister Chris Bonnet on Saturday includes well-thought-out and strategi­cally placed measures targeting young and older people, en­couraging them to give up their driving licences and reduce the number of cars on the road.

However, in the absence of a mass transit system and meas­ures that penalise car use, there is a risk that the reform will only marginally decrease car numbers, without fundamen­tally altering transport patterns. So how do these measures align with the broader goal of reduc­ing car dependence and ensur­ing sustainable mobility?

1. Older drivers will be tempted

Anyone who renounces all driving licences and car own­ership for five years will be eli­gible for a cash grant of €5,000 per year, amounting to €25,000 in total.

The sum offered is attractive enough to make existing driv­ers consider the option. A lower amount would likely have re­sulted in minimal uptake. This suggests that the incentive was not devised arbitrarily but is backed by public attitude stud­ies, focus groups and surveys. While this is a way of throwing money at the problem, it is at least being done strategically.

However, the government should have provided estimates on how many cars it expects to remove from the roads through this and other measures.

The scheme is likely to appeal most to older individuals with­out family responsibilities. For many aged 25 to 50, juggling family duties remains a signif­icant barrier to giving up pri­vate car use. The grant could also be seen as a financial boost for retirees whose incomes de­crease after retirement. How­ever, it is crucial to ensure that the scheme is not perceived as an undignified income supple­ment, as dissatisfaction could arise if participants later regret their decision.

A key drawback is that it pri­marily targets a demographic that already uses cars less fre­quently than workers and fam­ilies. At best, the measure will slightly ease traffic congestion for those who still rely on their cars and will free up some on-the-road parking slots. An up­side, the measure would have greater impact if complemented by disincentives such as parking charges and higher taxes on ve­hicles especially larger models like SUVs.

File photo

2. €6,000 cash grant for 17-year-olds choosing scooters over cars

Seventeen-year-olds who opt to ride a small scooter instead of obtaining a motor vehicle li­cence at 18 and commit to this choice until age 21 will receive a grant of €1,500 per year for four years, totalling €6,000.

The amount is generous and likely to attract younger indi­viduals who have fewer work and family obligations. How­ever, it is questionable why the government did not simply raise the minimum driving age to 21, which would have auto­matically reduced the number of cars on the road without any financial cost to the state.

Additionally, this measure does not promote public trans­port use, as the incentive is on­ly offered to those who choose scooters, not those who opt out of driving entirely. Consequent­ly, young people choosing the most sustainable transport op­tions will receive no financial support.

It is also unclear whether the social impact of having more scooters driven by younger rid­ers has been properly assessed.

One advantage of this meas­ure is that it still allows young people to experience the trill and independence of person­al transport. However, the risk is that at 21, many will simply transition from scooters to cars, making it doubtful whether this measure will instil long-term habits of alternative transport use.

File photo

3. Green travel plans: The challenge of implementation

Green travel plans, which en­courage workers to use collec­tive transport or carpool, could play a major role in reducing car numbers at rush hour.

Currently, green travel plans are mostly mandated as a plan­ning condition to mitigate traf­fic impact from large projects. However, these often amount to vague wish lists with no con­crete enforcement mechanisms, thus often being perceived as lip stick on a pig’s face.

However, for these plans to be effective, they must be enforced by a regulatory authority with the power to penalise entities that fail to meet set bench­marks. For instance, companies that do not reduce car use by a specified percentage within five years could face fines.

A compulsory green travel plan for the public sector is an interesting idea, as it could sig­nificantly reduce traffic during peak hours. Implementation may also be easier since public employees typically have fixed working hours. Extending man­datory green travel plans to all large and medium-sized com­panies could further enhance the impact.

The COVID-19 pandemic also demonstrated that telework­ing is one of the most effective ways to reduce traffic, yet it is barely mentioned in the plan. If employees worked from home just one day per week, traffic volumes could decrease by 20%.

File photo

 4. The elusive quest for mass transit

The plan does not propose a mass transit solution, as this is still being examined in oth­er studies, in what increasingly resembles a search for the holy grail.

But any sustainable mobil­ity system requires a public transport network where bus­es, trams, or trains are not ob­structed by private traffic. At best, the proposed reforms may ease congestion slightly, short­ening travel times for both pri­vate and public transport users. However, if the plan succeeds in reducing car numbers, demand for public transport will likely increase, thus increasing pres­sure on already over-crowded buses.

The plan does include new routes for industrial estates and references a study on re­vised bus routes as part of a new contract with the bus operator. However, this falls short of a mass transit system.

A major drawback of a met­ro system is that its benefits would only materialise in the distant future. However, Malta could develop a transit system that relies primarily on existing roads which can be implement­ed in a much shorter timeframe. This would require reallocating road space, including removing street parking in key areas. Yet, given the government’s reluc­tance to introduce unpopular measures, it is doubtful whether it would take such steps.

Without measures to disin­centivise car use, the proposed reforms are unlikely to be trans­formative. While the incentives are well-targeted, at best they will result in reducing car own­ership without fundamentally altering mobility patterns. To achieve meaningful change, a combination of strategic incen­tives, disincentives and capital investments will be necessary over the medium to long term.