manchester to get congestion zone...

[katex]

Originally Posted by cashman

it was not a proposal that wasted money! it was a ballot.

Not sure what you mean here Cashy ?

Have agreed already that having a referendum was a waste of money .. they should have just gone ahead and done it.

Will never again get the opportunity of so much funding from the Government to improve the transport situation in the city.

[shillelagh]

a lot of people in rossendale and hyndburn go to manchester - for shopping, for work, for hospital visits, to visit family, to go on holiday etc. Yes i know manchester airport aint in the zone - but the train station is!!! I know it was for only the busy times in the morning and at teatime but if you have a hospital appointment or an appointment at the solicitor or anything at 9am - you would have to pay that £5 and who's to say that it would stop at £5? So to pay £5 to go to work and then £5 to come home each day is that fair. To catch a bus from here to manchester its roundabout £6 return - now that money goes to lancashire united - not to manchester council for the improvement of the roads. If they charge the buses - whats not to say that theyre going to pass that onto the customers?

[katex]

Originally Posted by shillelagh

To catch a bus from here to manchester its roundabout £6 return - now that money goes to lancashire united - not to manchester council for the improvement of the roads. If they charge the buses - whats not to say that theyre going to pass that onto the customers?

The buses would have been exempt from charges Shill, and the bus companies would have benifited from extra bus stations and bus lanes making it easier for them and, therefore, reducing their costs. Whether these reductions would have been passed on to their passengers would have been up to them of course.

Your pricing was off too .. it would have been £1 to cross the M60 in the morning, £2 to cross the inner ring road. £1 at night to cross both. Full cost £5 per day at peak hours. (people going out in the morning and coming back at night, of course would not be charged).

Yes, I did think it was fair to levy these charges, have to look at the whole picture for the good of society. Ah well, all done and dusted now sadly.

[Margaret Pilkington]

This referendum was like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas,
...it was a non starter and the money spent on it could have gone some of the way to improving the transport in the city.
This is where the government get it wrong every time...they must rake in goodness knows how many millions from the road fund licence and from the duty on Petrol, also there are the fines that motorists pay for parking infringements...and yet they want to charge for going into the city...so everyone who works in the city will have a further tax put on their ability to work.
The transport system does need the money spent on it...but for goodness sake do that and let the travelling public see that it not economical to travel by car into the city...if they don't see this then bring in the charge.

I no longer drive so I have no axe to grind here.....but I don't trust government promises.
And remember once a charge is installed then it isn't going to stay at a low rate, and could even be extended further.

No, drivers pay enough already for the convenience of getting to work.
Sorry Kate I have to disagree with you on this one.

[entwisi]

Kate,


If the councils and goverment did their job right then the money promised should still be spent(They raise enough in road fund license, Fuel Tax, insurance tax etc to mpore than cover this). If the public transport was so good that it was a no brainer to not use it( as is suggested it would be by the level of investment mooted) then the congestion would go away, economy of scale means that they could reduce the fares with a small levy once established(1 or 2p/fare) to recover the costs.

See, win win is still available, it just needs the same level of foresight that you are saying the public are missing. The problem is the sheer one way thought process of politicians that Tax is the only way.

[jaysay]

Myself I think that money raised from the Road Fund Licence and duty on petrol should be ring fenced and used solely on road improvements, then the motorist wouldn't feel so cheated all the time

[West Ender]

They tried to bribe, or bully depending on your point of view, the populace into voting for this charge by promising improvements to public transport etc. only if there was a yes vote. No wonder Manchester said No. Those improvements should be implemented anyway then, as Entwisi rightly says, people would be much more likely to use public transport and leave the car at home.

[katex]

Originally Posted by West Ender

They tried to bribe, or bully depending on your point of view, the populace into voting for this charge by promising improvements to public transport etc. only if there was a yes vote. No wonder Manchester said No. Those improvements should be implemented anyway then, as Entwisi rightly says, people would be much more likely to use public transport and leave the car at home.

And where is the money going to come from West Ender ? Money spent on the scale that the proposed improvements were to be made would have to be paid back (raised) in some way or other. There were no bribes or bullying otherwise would not have been put out to public vote. To improve public transport on the proposed scale submitted, they will have now to look at other areas like parking fees and maybe charging people to park at work on their car parks. Will be a lot slower process and congestion will build up more and more. The Government were willing to loan Manchester this amount of money to improve their transport network, providing they could show a way of recouping it. How else could they do it ?

The money could not be obtained from the Road Fund Licence as this is already stretched maintaining U.K. road networks plus all the other things that go along with our motoring. Was a separate loan from the Government .. motorists would soon grumble if a large proportion of our road tax went to Manchester and not nationally.

To me, is only the same as paying the toll for the Severn Bridge or the Blackwall tunnel .. has to be paid for at the end of the day.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Katex, there is enough money about to do things that the government feel are important.
In my view the transport infrastructure needs to improved before motorists will forsake the comfort/convenience of their cars.
Motorists are already heavily taxed......it appears to me and many motorists that the government see them as a 'cashcow'.
I'm not sure that all the taxes that are extracted from the motorists do go to the upkeep and maintenance of the road system.
This charge could have seen the demise of many small businesses, who are already under great pressure due to the current financial downturn...not to mention being a tax on those whose work will take them into the city during the hours that the charge would be in place.

I would like to know just how much money Manchester makes from motorists by way of parking infringements...why could this not be put to good use?

There is always the chance that in the future the congestion charge could be extended to cover a larger area, be in effect for most business hours, and could be increased.
And who is to say that the promised transport improvements would have lived up to the expectations of the paying publc?

No.....the improvements should be done first.....that is the way to get drivers out of their vehicles......and it doesn't penalise the folk who have to travel into the city to deliver goods and services.

[West Ender]

Does no local authority improve its facilities, then, unless a comparative charge is laid upon just part of the popluation? Remember that the Manchester transport scheme would only have been paid for by the driving population - regardless of who actually used it.

Do you also believe that all the revenue from the proposed congestion charge would have gone into the transport improvement scheme? I don't.

[accyman]

glad theres no charge been implimented , London proves charging motorists dosnt work because the roads are still conjested to high heaven and the statistics are worse than what they were before the charge was brought in,also despite all the money raised by conjestion charges the public transport is still abismal and unreliable

luckily this was put to a vote and the charges were over whelmingly defeated by people with half a brain who a: saw that conjestion charges dont work and b: didnt see why paying yet another tax on top of road tax was fair

road tax unfortunatly dosnt go on improving the roads infact very little if any actually does even though the name ROAD tax would suggest it would

instead of screwing law abiding motorists for money why not start implimenting fines for not having working lights on vehicles and other defects that make a vehicle unsafe to be on the road ,at £50-£60 a pop plenty of money could be raised in accy alone

me thinks i may have spelt conjested wrong but what teh hell its the internet

[accyman]

Originally Posted by West Ender

Does no local authority improve its facilities, then, unless a comparative charge is laid upon just part of the popluation? Remember that the Manchester transport scheme would only have been paid for by the driving population - regardless of who actually used it.

Do you also believe that all the revenue from the proposed congestion charge would have gone into the transport improvement scheme? I don't.

if money raised by congestion fees was put into public transport there would be people traveling for free on the busses because of the amount of money raised by the fees

of course the money was spent elsewhere , probably bailing out the olympic bid