Many city planners argue that making buses and trains free of charge is the most effective remedy for traffic jams. While I agree that free public transport would help, I only partly accept this claim, because congestion cannot be solved unless driving itself is made less attractive.
On the one hand, abolishing fares removes a real barrier to using public transport. For low-income commuters, daily tickets are a significant expense, and when travel becomes free, many will happily leave their cars at home. Tallinn, the capital of Estonia, introduced free transport for residents and recorded a noticeable rise in bus use. Fewer private vehicles on key routes during rush hour clearly eases the pressure on crowded roads, so the policy points in the right direction.
On the other hand, experience shows that price is not the main reason people drive; convenience is. Motorists value privacy, comfort and door-to-door travel, and many will not abandon these advantages merely because a bus costs nothing, especially where services are slow or unreliable. Moreover, roads freed up by new bus passengers tend to fill again quickly, as easier driving tempts others onto the road — a phenomenon transport researchers call induced demand. Cities that have genuinely tamed congestion, such as London and Singapore, combined good public transport with congestion charges, parking limits and vehicle quotas. The decisive factor was restricting car use, not free tickets.
In conclusion, free public transport is a useful measure that would persuade some commuters to switch, but on its own it is not the best solution. Congestion falls decisively only when better alternatives are paired with firm restrictions on private cars, so I can only partly agree with the statement.