We should copy Red Ken's London lead - traffic charges have proven effective in just three months, writes Brian Hayes, Fine Gael's spokesman on the capital.
In November 2001 the Dublin Transportation Office (DTO) produced a blueprint for Dublin transport that was heralded, rightly, as the first truly comprehensive, integrated and costed plan to tackle Dublin's chronic congestion problems.
The document, A Platform for Change, came with a price tag of €21 billion over a 15-year period. The objective of the strategy was to return average travel speeds in Dublin to their 1991 levels of 22 kilometres per hour.
Unfortunately for the DTO - and for us, the users of transport services - the plan has relied on a Government that has shown a marked inability to deliver large infrastructure projects on time and on budget.
They are like an architect who has designed a top-quality building and has handed over the construction to a bunch of cowboys.
In practice this manifests itself as the trebling in cost of the Luas plan, and its running years over schedule.
The Port Tunnel is four years behind time and is also running at three times its original price. And the Metro plans . . . well, does anyone know when or where we will see a Metro system in the city?
The Government's inability to deliver on the projects that might make a difference to transport users in the city means that average travel speeds have dropped to seven kilometres per hour on certain key routes into the city, while Goodbody Economic Consultants estimate that congestion is costing the city - you and me, in effect - €650 million each year.
Put another way, every man, woman and child in the city is paying €650 each year because of congestion - regardless of whether they travel in and out of the city centre at all.
These costs are masked because it is hard to put a tangible value on the wasted time sitting in traffic, the reduced business activity because of gridlock, or the increased prices in the city centre because of these additional costs associated with congestion.
Given all of the above, you might think that a solution that could reduce traffic levels by 16 per cent in three months, increase travel speeds by 25 per cent, improve bus times and reliability, and generate a ring-fenced fund for re-investment in public transport services would be embraced by all who want the city to move more freely.
Not so.
But the results just described reflect what has happened in London after just three months of congestion charges being introduced over a small city centre area.
On February 17th, a £5 charge was introduced for vehicles entering a designated area of the centre of London from Monday to Friday between 7 a.m. and 6.30 p.m.
Certain types of vehicles are exempt from charging, such as public transport and emergency vehicles, alternative energy vehicles, and residents' own cars.
You can pay the charge over the Internet, through a call centre, at designated shops or using SMS messaging, and the system is enforced by a network of cameras that generate penalty charges if a vehicle enters the zone without paying.
After just three months the results are real and measurable.
q Travel speeds inside the zone have increased by 24 per cent, from 13 kph to 17 kph.
q Travel times outside the zone have improved by 14 per cent.
q Traffic levels inside the designated zone dropped by 16 per cent.
q 70 per cent of the reduced trips are car users transferring to public transport.
q The fees paid go back into delivering improved public transport services.
In Dublin we have a 15-year plan costing €21 billion that may or may not be delivered and may or may not improve our travel times.
In this context anybody who blindly rules out congestion charges is not living in the real world.
That is why, in the coming months, when my Fine Gael colleague and spokesperson on Transport, Denis Naughten TD, produces his policy proposals on the situation in Dublin, congestion charges will be on the agenda.
Any serious examination of what constitutes a "solution" to Dublin's chronic and deteriorating traffic congestion must realistically include congestion charging.
Yes, we need extra bus capacity to accommodate those shifting from car use and we need a dedicated traffic police who will ensure best use of existing road space. But we also need to consider a system that can deliver immediate relief to the hard-pressed road users.
If a congestion charge were introduced in Dublin - as in London - the following would happen:
Car journeys both inside and outside the central zone would speed up and become more certain.
Bus users would see more reliable and quicker services on a decongested route network while a dedicated fund created by the charges could be used to expand and modernise services even further.
And businesses would see quicker and more certain delivery times, an improved environment to trade in and with staff better able to get to work on time.
If we had a government able to deliver projects on time and on budget the situation might be different.
If we thought that there was a real prospect of things improving in the short term we could keep our heads down and fingers crossed.
We don't have such a government and we can't just keep our fingers crossed.
Nor can we ignore the potential for congestion charges to make a real change for the good.
Brian Hayes is Fine Gael's front bench spokesman on Dublin