Jump to content

No Congestion Charge for Manchester....


Bazj
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

not just a beating but a clear beating. No vote lower than 72% no and over 1m voted.

 

Add Manchester to Edinburgh as cities who voted no and pay as you go is now dead in the water.

 

I commute to Manchester by train and was so against this. terrible plan, not welel thought out with sporadic benefits all relying on 85% of the congestion remaning just to pay for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it seems that those supporting the "yes" vote are bad losers from the comments that they made, no doubt they will make sure Manchester becomes very congested....so that they can say...we told you so. :wink:

 

Guess there are lots of folk not going to be in well paid jobs that they had lined up for themselves had the vote gone in their favour. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all very well saying we won't be parted from our cars, but sooner or later, unless cars can be made squeaky clean, we will HAVE to be parted from them whether we like it or not.

This was clearly not the way, but something has to be done about congestion because it has made Manchester a no go area for me for years. It is also making Warrington a no go area.

I and my wife deny ourselves shopping trips, theatre trips, concert trips ...everything simply because of (a) the congestion and (B) the inadequacy of public transport. Yet years ago we used to enjoy a trip to Manchester. Can't remember when I last went - must be at least five years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just don't go at rush hour if you don't need to!

 

I drove to London on Thursday and left Warrington at just after 4:30 in the afternoon. I arrived at my destination about 8:45 (stoppedc on the way too) I collected what I had gone for and was back home in Warrington just after 1am in the morning. No traffic jams and no congestion. That included doing a trip on the M25, M11 and the North Circular Road as well!!

 

I admit to being a little luckier than normal but the only time I stopped was for some food and a wee!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it seems that those supporting the "yes" vote are bad losers from the comments that they made

 

You're right, Paul. However, the "No" vote told some terrible porkies during the campaign, and aren't exactly magnanimous in victory - so I can understand their frustration.

 

I was a last-minute weak "yes" voter. I don't have a problem with the concept of a congestion charge, but had some major concerns about the proposals and whether we were getting enough bang for our bucks. Plus, I thought some of the Yes campaign's arguements were a bit misleading - although that may have been down to grassroots misunderstanding and poor reporting rather than any genuine intention to deceive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="JimmyMac

You're right' date=' Paul. However, the "No" vote told some terrible porkies during the campaign, and aren't exactly magnanimous in victory - so I can understand their frustration.

 

[/quote]

 

I guess that is true JM, I sensed it was a bitter campaign, with both sides very entrenched, and there was always going to be a winner and a loser. Although I happen to think ultimately Manchester will be the loser. What they should have done was to improve the public transport provision firstly rather than link it to a charge...and of course the timing doesn't help, asking for people to pay extra...albeit some years ahead, when we are currently in a recession.

 

Just wondering how much the Yes campaign cost...and who footed the bill...ditto the No campaign.

 

Interesting to note that it was a relatively high turnout....as good as a General Election, so I guess you could say democracy was a winner. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that they would still have to have something like 86% of the current congestion just to pay for the system in the long term. If that is right, they would have spent all that cash just to achieve a 14% reduction!

 

It would always have been just another tax anyway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an item on N/W News about the trains to Manchester/Liverpool being chocker, which merely tells us that it's not about "the car"; it's about "people" movement. :shock: So we need to stand back, look at the big picture and ask why, in this densly populated Island, folk need to get from A to B in the first place - and perhaps look at ways of demand reduction, whereby we get the mountain moving towards Mohammed rather than the other way round. :? Now it may sound like a recipe for everyone staying at home in their bubbles, but short of a system of giant travelators, congestion is going to get worse and the stress that goes with it. :shock: So, perhaps the old question: "is your journey absolutely necessary" should be asked of ourselves - EG; should mum pack the kids into the 4X4 to take them 500metres to school, thus adding 20% to road congestion, rather than letting the little darlings keep fit by walking? :roll: Should we employ localist policies, so we don't have 25,000 a day leaving Warrington to work elsewhere, while 25,000 come from outside the Town to work here, thus we could have policies that all public service employees live near their workplace, rather than commute; we could even return to the old system of "police houses" which would have added benefits of having a local copper in communities? :roll: Time to start thinking outside the box folks. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn sure the government could easily have funded the scheme without the need for a charge to pay for it out the mi??ions they have made from the recent relentless fuel & ensuing vat price increases not to mention the crippling road tax being collected but not spent on road & general transport improvements.But then again we mustn't forget that Gawd needs this money to finance the much exploited, so called welfare state & to try & stem the downward spiral of the near bankrupt economy.

 

RIP UK economy....land fit for heroes...bah ! humbug!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds fine in theory Obs, but do you really expect people to move house every time they change jobs - or even when their employer relocates them from one site to another?

 

I'm sure that estate agents and lawyers would be happy to see such a policy, but those two professions aren't all that high on most peoples "must bee nice to them, they do such a good job" list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds fine in theory Obs, but do you really expect people to move house every time they change jobs - or even when their employer relocates them from one site to another?

I've put this same question to both observer and Paul Kennedy a few times, and so far they havent even bothered to reply. Too busy looking through the rose tints hey!?

 

Would Observer and Paul Kennedy honestly move house from near to where they have worked for years as a well paid and highly achieving employee, to a new house near Tescos as an hourly paid shelf stacker? Get real :roll:

 

The yes campaigners have their tails well and truly between their legs I'm afraid, but lets hope the local authorities do not vote to take it further at next Friday's AGMA meeting.

 

I also love the way all the Yes nimbys were trying to make all the no voters feel guilty and how Manchester will now never get the money. Oh shut up - where do all the BILLIONS go that each and every motorist (the Government cash cow) in this country pays every year? Certainly not on any road or transport improvements, that's for sure. Why the hell should the motorist pay AGAIN to line the pockets of private firms for what should, in fairness, already be in place?? I imagine a lot of it goes into supporting local govt pensions so lets have a share of that and put it towards our benefit for a change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rent a: personally, I couldn't care less where I live, so long as it's warm and keeps the rain out; houses are for living in IMO not some kind of shrine or status symbol. :roll: Plus, if we had a larger (cheaper) rental sector, folk would be much more ready to move closer to their jobs at the drop of a hat - now that's what you call "social mobility"! :wink: As for congestion: we'll remain in denial until that great day when we have the ultimate total grid lock; IE: everyone leaving their home, in their car at exactly the same time - reality - you wouldn't even get to the bottom of your street! :shock: I merely suggest (as usual) extreme solutions for an extreme problem - now, I'm quite relaxed about waiting until that great day you can't get beyond your drive, when you'll be demanding such solutions! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My employer changes the customer site that I personally am based out of every 2 to 3 years on average. This is done for sound and well thought out business reasons with which I wholeheartedly agree, but don't propose to go into here.

 

Our team covers the whole north west of England - and we do have to be customer site based since the machines we maintain weigh in excess of 4 tonnes each and take 4 engineers the best part of a week to install. So my next move of base location could take me from my current one in Whiston to an existing customer in Halifax, Accrington, Salford, Speke, Middleton, Bootle - or to a new site altogether. There is simply no way that I'd contemplate going through the stress, expense and upheaval of selling up and moving every couple of years.

 

A couple of us in the team are live close to Warrington, and that's probably because it's about as central within the north west as it's possible to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's confirmation, that despite all the lip service to public transport options and hand wringing over global warming; we just won't part with our cars - now perhaps the politicians can start getting real. :shock::wink:
Been a long time since I agreed with anything you've said obs, but you're spot on here. The only way the public will ever support public transport is if it can pick you up at your door, and take you to exactly where you want to go, just like your car. A lot of lip service is paid to token support for better public transport, but in reality what most of us want is greater public transport use by everyone else, so we can get quieter roads all to ourselves. :lol:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there is a way of doing that Fats. :shock: You basically price everyone out of their cars, in order to fund "free" public transport for all. :wink: Alas, with the love affair with the car being what it is; no one would dare! :shock::wink:
And pricing us out of our cars is not gaining "support", like I say there is no support for public transport if it actually meant having to use it yourself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's confirmation, that despite all the lip service to public transport options and hand wringing over global warming; we just won't part with our cars - now perhaps the politicians can start getting real. :shock::wink:
Been a long time since I agreed with anything you've said obs, but you're spot on here. The only way the public will ever support public transport is if it can pick you up at your door, and take you to exactly where you want to go, just like your car. A lot of lip service is paid to token support for better public transport, but in reality what most of us want is greater public transport use by everyone else, so we can get quieter roads all to ourselves. :lol:

 

I think all we want is just something a bit better than primitive transport...

 

I travel into manchester by car, The fuel and parking costs per week are exactly the same as the weekly return train fare......

 

from front door to office the car journey is on average 10 minutes longer (admittedly this is due to a long walk from train station to office -otherwise the Train journey would be considerably quicker).

 

however after 2 weeks of train travel that was enough for me....

for ?35 just once or twice it would have been nice to have had the luxury of a seat..... :shock:

 

and for those crying about global warming....a zero emmision car we'll all be driving soon....

http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm a regular (and committed) rail commuter and opposed this completely.

 

out of the four rail companies travelling into Manchester, 1 might have got some support from the ?300m allocated to rail improvements. As they are currently overcrowded on all 4 operators services, and with a park and ride being built (proposed anyway as part of TIF) at Birchwood, then more would have got dumped onto them with no extra investment.

 

Basically it was a terribly thought out idea. A central (inner ring road) charging zone would make more sense but a 80sq mile zone didnt. And there was no concession for the ?40bn a year that the motorist pays in tax each year i.e. it was simply a bigger tax burden.

 

Also by definition a CC needs congestion to pay for the system and the investment. a 15% reduction would have made little difference. See London - now back to pre-congestion charge levels of congestion. If you tax the motorist out of the car you actually lose money as the motorist is currently supporting other parts of the economy. Also London gets ?13bn for crossrail and ?5.5bn for thameslink with no strings.

 

Drivers were advised to park at stations but no additional car park spaces were included. They were invited to change their working patterns to fit around the charge And thus reduce the income from it.

 

The benefits of TIF were sporadic and mainly financed new tram lines which ironically replaced existing rail lines in some cases.

 

The question is what now. The car is part of the solution whether you like it or not. Park and ride is certainly an answer. Investment must be made and then only followed by the stick but the stick MUST be focused on ONLY where there is a trully viable alternative. They have a long way to go to achieve that

 

BTW 6% increase on rail fares year on year is more than enough to pay for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been impressed by the London underground system as an efficient means of people movement, but even that is now struggling with the capacity - as I suggested; we need to stand back and think outside the box - demand reduction means having access to the venues we need within much shorter (walking) distances, otherwise we're just going to grind to a halt -eventually. :roll::wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...