One possible assistance is to reduce the need to travel.
For example: It should be illegal for a business in North Sydney to employ anybody south of the harbour and Parramatta River. Every business north of the water has a pool of a million people to find its employees. That should be sufficient to find the right employee.

I agree with much of what you have stated but as I am currently living in Singapore without a car and grew up in Sydney, I think the greatest difference that must be addressed is the cost and availability of public transport. In Singapore, I only wait 0-10 minutes for a train or 0-20 minutes for a bus any day or time of the week. However, when I lived in Sydney depending on the time and day I could wait for more than an hour for either a bus or a train and in some areas public transport was completely unavailable. My son who is living in Canberra is constantly complaining about the reduction of bus services. The Singapore approach only works because not only is the transport system cheaper it is sometimes quicker, the coverage is more comprehensive and taxis much cheaper. I can travel all most anywhere on the island by public transport, sadly this cannot be said of Sydney.

I think we should be looking at ways to make the grid lock even worst. Maybe that will be the trigger to stop our unhealthy focus on these three sites.

Having been to Singapore I can agree that transport works well there. I don't know that too much of this will work in Australia. Singapore is a first-world country where most people speak English, but the similarities with Australia end there. Differences include:

1. Singapore is a one-party state where big infrastructure projects like the MRT can be bulldozed througth opposition.

2. Government=Business (and vice-versa) in Singapore. We haven't quite got there yet.

3. Singapore is a City-State where the needs of the city are the needs of the state. Unlike Australia, where those in rural areas expect a great deal more than their share of tax revenue to be spent.

Sydney's piecemeal toll-road network doesn't lend itself to differential toll pricing. The ridiculous differnce in toll fees for trips from north-west, west and south-west Sydney underlines how far we have to go.

Some of the Singapore policies would work well in parts of Australia but the chances of them being introduced are remote. If we can't even get import duties on 4WDs right, what hope is there for real reform?

Why are so many people on the road, how many are single occupant and how many are single purpose trips? The best way to address traffic demand is to address the real factor that prevents modal change - parking fees.

When discussing the 'car sharing' business model, a car share operator noted:

"Even on the busiest day in Sydney, four in every five cars are parked. It doesn't make sense. Car sharing is about more efficient utilisation of an asset. You don't leave a plane sitting on the tarmac most of the time; you use it as much as you can. It should be the same with a car."

If parking is free, cheap and readily available, then people drive. If a parking fine is relatively infrequent and contains no non-financial penalty (demerit points if you get more than say 3 parking fines per quarter), the 'rich' will continue to drive.

The Singapore solution is as draconian as its 'democracy' and the same outcome could be as easily achieved if commuters were forced to pay for parking.