Make no mistake, the key to Livingstone's success in taming London's traffic jams was to inflict pain on motorists by hitting them where it hurts most - their pockets - to compel them to rationalise their car use and consider switching to public transportation. It is as simple as this: people who want to drive into central London have to pay for the privilege - £8 (about Bt550) per trip.

To Thai politicians, including Apirak, such an unpopular policy would be the surest way to end one's political career. That's why Bangkok's spoiled motorists have never faced a challenge to their right to drive wherever they please, even if it means crawling at a snail's pace through the city's clogged streets, burning precious fuel, polluting the air, contributing to global climate change and generally making everyone miserable.

It is easier said than done, politicians everywhere else would say. But Livingstone was expecting this kind of self-defeating fatalism when he spoke at a panel discussion on "Beating the Congestion and Surviving Your Next Election" at the summit to tackle climate change, attended by politicians from 40 of the world's largest cities.

The London mayor spoke eloquently, urging his counterparts and politicians everywhere to adopt and adapt his successful measure, which has reduced the number of cars in the centre of London by as much as 38 per cent, significantly improved traffic flow, reduced pollution, cut back on carbon emissions and generally raised the quality of life.

Things were not easy for Livingstone when he first introduced the drastic and hugely unpopular scheme four years ago. But through perseverance and sheer stubbornness, Livingstone managed to pull through, prove his critics wrong and persuade the previously hostile public to switch over to his side. What's more, his popularity ratings went up.

But this kind of political courage is a rare commodity in this country.

The standard response to traffic congestion in Bangkok is to build more roads and flyovers, which not only does not solve the problem but also encourages people to buy more cars that eventually clog up city streets further. Despite the fact that efficient public-transportation systems, particularly rail-based ones, have been introduced in the past several years and an extensive expansion of these networks is in the pipeline, Thai motorists' love affair with their cars continues to be indulged - instead of being discouraged - by the government.

Apirak's Bangkok Metropolitan Administration is no exception. The BMA could have introduced a congestion charge: the government's Transport and Traffic Policy and Planning Office (TTPPO) studied the idea during Thaksin Shinawatra's administration. But both agencies decided to shelve the plan for fear of a political backlash.

Every once in a while, central and city governments in this country consider the possibility of imposing harsh demand-side management measures, such as road-pricing schemes, only to back down and shelve these proposals after they make calculations and find that it would be politically too costly to implement them.

When a proposed road-pricing scheme was raised by the Thaksin government a few years ago, petrol prices had just broken the psychological Bt20-per-litre level. Petrol prices now hover at around Bt30 per litre, and neither the central government nor the BMA have dared to even mention road pricing again.

Livingstone offered Apirak some words of wisdom: "Politicians like to underestimate the intelligence of the general public: trust your people that they recognise the problem." Well, Ken, we are not so sure about that one. In this country, we have a situation that represents the worst of all possible worlds: an irrational public that is quite content with its spineless politicians. Obviously this must change before a rational public debate is even possible.