Manchester rejects road pricing

obsessed_saver

That's a resounding "No, thanks" then. 80%:20% is pretty clear.

Thank you, Mancunians!

loofer

derrick wrote: »

So why do you think motorist,(who contribute in excess of 45 BILLION pounds in road taxes and receive less than 8 Billion pounds on road expenditure), should pay for the PUBLIC transport?

Because it is the motorists (especially commuters) who contribute to CONGESTION. If people are going to be priced off the road then they need to invest in the public transport as an alternative for them.

I am a motorist who commutes so it would have affected me, but I saw the need for it. But hey, we're a democracy and that was a refrendum, so majority wins and we all accept that. Weather the (complete or parts of) proposals were good for Manchester is a matter of opinion/belief/confidence.

loofer

nearlyrich wrote: »

All that would have happened if this had come in was the rush hour would move to a little later or earlier as people changed their hours to beat the charges.

Now that would help ease congestion.

With varying start/finish times at work/school, the peak travel hours would spread over a bigger window so that would have a bit of an impact on congestion.

But we would be relying on a lot of the big employers to kick start this off. Same with schools too.

Would take alot of goodwill, commitment and coordination. We're so fixated on 9-5 though it's not crucial for every business.

I would have though a company like CO-OP/CIS would get the ball rolling but they it's a case of business needs really.

scubaangel

When I worked for CIS their hours are pretty wide ranging, my in dept we worked 7-7 shifts, our admin staff were on flexitime so during the day could do their hours anytime that the day shift was in (ie 7am - 7pm) and as far as I'm aware thats the same across most if not all depts. Though obviously the branches have specific opening times to stick to.

123oleary

i dont live near manchester so i havent seen the proposals. were they suggesting an excellent fast cheap wide covering integrated efficient public transport system or were they suggesting a couple of extra buses.

ragingbass

I’m so glad this ridiculous proposal has been rejected! I’m all for improving public transport, but they never make it a real viable option over such a large area. This was an attempt to fleece more money out of the cash cow motorist and they tried to dangle a carrot and say that public transport would be improved. Rubbish!

People don’t sit on the M60 in the mornings and evenings because they just love wasting time!! They do it because they have jobs to go to, so why the hell would we want to punish those people and reduce even more of their disposable income?!?

To reduce congestion the government could do a lot more to encourage more home and remote working in this country. That could take a hell of a lot of commuters off the road everyday. But then, they wouldn’t be able to raise any money by doing that now would they?

Gavioli_UK

bargepole wrote: »

The result of the ballot is in, and the good citizens of Manchester have rejected the Government's proposed road charging scheme with a majority "No" vote in all 10 boroughs.

This sounds the death knell for road pricing in other major cities, and is a well-deserved slap in the face for the Government's so-called transport "experts" who think they can fleece drivers with ever increasing stealth taxes, while spending hardly any of their ill gotten gains on much needed trunk road and motorway improvements.

Well done you Mancs!

Nottingham City Councl is planning a different approach with a charge of around £350 for each parking space at an employer's premises where there are more than 10 parking spaces.

The City web site is talking of expecting this to be passed on to staff who travel to work by car.

As far as I know there is no referendum proposed.

With the failure of the Manchester referendum this could be the approach of other councils.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

I'd love it if they did that. Imagine a large employer saying "sorry Mr Council bloke, we're not staying here. We're going there instead, because they're not implementing this charge. Oh and we're taking the 2,000 jobs with us, that's 2,000 people who won't be spending money in your city each day."

Ian_W

123oleary wrote: »

i dont live near manchester so i havent seen the proposals. were they suggesting an excellent fast cheap wide covering integrated efficient public transport system or were they suggesting a couple of extra buses.

It was a quite comprehensive expansion to the Metrolink trams, buses and even yellow school buses worth circa £3billion BUT ...

A couple of years ago Metrolink was due for a "Big Bang" expansion but with millions already spent on preparations like buying land and demolishing property the Govt stepped in and said, "Sorry folks we've had a rethink and can't fund it" to much wailing and gnashing of teeth in clogland.

Couple of months passed and we were told how lucky we were as the Govt had set up a new fund and in exchange for congestion charging [over an area 10x the size of London's CZ] we could now have the metrolink and a bit more besides. They'd give us £2billion [of our money] and let us borrow [and of course pay back!] another billion. Lucky old us, eh?

The YES campaign was predicated on the fact that 9 out of 10 people [proved wrong!] wouldn't pay the congestion charge, so hey whats it matter if some other sap gets lumbered with up to £1200 a year extra to pay if we get the trams!

oldagetraveller wrote:

Surely, as in the case of the Irish and the EU, the powers that be will just keep asking until the result they want is achieved.

"The people who matter" - including Sir Taggart of Trafford - have just had their kecs dropped and their @rses publicly slapped good-style by 4 to 1 so I don't think there'll be many takers amongst the local great and good for another referendum around these parts any time soon! They were expecting quite a close result and you could see they were completely dumbfounded that not one borough even managed 25% support let alone a majority.

Thank you, Mancunians!

Oy! Watch who you're calling Mancs!
Most of us in Greater Manchester are Lancastrians with postal addresses to prove it! Not the shameless Brigade! :eek:

Now who was it said,
You can fool all of the people some of the time,
some of the people all of the time ...

nearlyrich

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

I'd love it if they did that. Imagine a large employer saying "sorry Mr Council bloke, we're not staying here. We're going there instead, because they're not implementing this charge. Oh and we're taking the 2,000 jobs with us, that's 2,000 people who won't be spending money in your city each day."

One of our local employers recently announced they were moving into Manchester so it didn't put them off.