MOVES to bring in congestion charging in Greater Manchester were in turmoil after three councils withdrew their support - amid claims that some councillors were being deliberately misled.
Trafford, Rochdale and Stockport, the region's three non-Labour-run town halls, made the shock decision just weeks ahead of the local elections.
They believe Labour- dominated transport groups know exactly how much they want to charge, and where - but are keeping it quiet ahead of the May 3 elections.
Rochdale council leader Alan Taylor claimed that the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives were being 'deliberately misled' about how advanced the plans for the charge were.
But Roger Jones, chairman of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority rejected the allegation and accused the rebels of electioneering.
The row threatens to derail the controversial proposals to include road-pricing as part of a bid for £1bn of government money for public transport.
Those plans, revealed in the M.E.N. in January, were based on charging 'corridors' on 15 major arterial routes radiating out from the city centre.
Sir Richard Leese, Labour leader of Manchester council, indicated at the time that drivers could be charged up to £6 a day - although those travelling off-peak, or for shorter distances, might be charged much less, or nothing.
The Labour-dominated GMPTA and the GMPTE have since said details of the scheme could not be publicly released because they would not be finalised until the end of May.
Rebellion
The non-Labour councils have made clear their support for road pricing would be dependent on the details. Their anger finally spilled over into rebellion at a meeting of the GMPTA, when Lib Dem Richard Knowles announced the three councils were withdrawing support. He said: "The opposition is no longer prepared to support an unspecified congestion charging scheme."
Tory Doreen Dickinson confirmed her party shared the Lib Dems' view. Susan Williams, leader of Conservative-controlled Trafford council, said: "We think they are leaving the publication of the proposals too late for a meaningful consultation."
Coun Jones denied anyone was being kept in the dark and said leaders of all parties would have to wait until the end of May to see the proposals.
Sir Richard added: "As far as I can see, that is exactly the same position of every single local authority in Greater Manchester."
Sir Howard Bernstein, who is clerk to the GMPTA and chief executive of Manchester council, said: "No one is being asked to support anything until they know the details."
But Coun Taylor later told the M.E.N: "We have been supportive from the start. The fact remains that Labour refuse to tell us where they plan to charge. The reality is they know. The transport bid runs into hundreds of millions and it is inconceivable they haven't submitted detailed plans.
"I can only therefore conclude they are deliberately misleading us and for that reason we are withdrawing our support."
The move may not prove terminal to the congestion charge plans, as the rebels could reinstate their support when the plans are released in May.
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
Chris, Irlam (16/04/2007 at 08:50)
You cannot tell me Labour do not have a very good idea how much this hated Toll Tax will cost Greater Manchester's road users - if they do not want to tell us before the local elections then be rest assured there is a very good reason for it....time to give Labour a bloody nose on May 3rd I would say, VOTE THEM OUT!
Simon B, Warrington (16/04/2007 at 10:37)
Ron Silver (16/04/2007 at 10:50)
Colin W, Stockholm (16/04/2007 at 11:03)
Ace Riley (16/04/2007 at 11:15)
Sid (16/04/2007 at 11:20)
Philipac, Northenden Manchester (16/04/2007 at 11:57)
Tony (16/04/2007 at 12:17)
WHY! Do these people really believe that Labour will still be in charge of OUR councils after May 3rd.
Max Speed, Cheshire (16/04/2007 at 12:27)
Jake Long, City Centre, Manchester (16/04/2007 at 12:28)
Now all that we have to do on May 3rd is KICK
We need a firm commitment from the councillors who have withdrawn their support that they will not re-instate it after the elections, as this would be typical of the dirty slimy tricks that are often associated with politicians.
The best option would still be a referendum so that we can kill this plan off once and for all.
Mr Manchester (16/04/2007 at 12:32)
Chris, Irlam (16/04/2007 at 12:37)
Let the Labour Council goons tell us what the intend to charge us and then let us have our say - nothing less will do.
If Jones & his ilk refuse to give us our referendum then we can begin to think about direct action, what would the French do in a similar situation?
Chris, Irlam (16/04/2007 at 12:58)
A new group has been formed to fight these Toll Tax proposals - MART (Manchester Against Road Tolls) - if you are interested in helping fight this then Email naat@notolls.org.uk
Cheers.
NB, Eccles (16/04/2007 at 12:59)
Chris, Irlam (16/04/2007 at 13:11)
How much do you think this system will cost to set-up & run - £100 million, £200 million?
Why can this money not be spent on improving public transport NOW rather than handing it over to private companies to develop & build this system?
When will the pro-tolls people realise that public transport is not a cure-all for everyone's travelling needs and that a mix of all types of transport is required?
Stop the anti-car tirade and concetrate on offering viable alternatives - a bit more carrot and less stick please!
Paul D'Ambra (16/04/2007 at 13:20)
Why? Because the experience in London is that it works!
Eddy B, Monaco (16/04/2007 at 14:07)
Joey, Ashton under Lyne, (16/04/2007 at 14:26)
It "works" in London because it is an area - You enter You are Charged. Greater Manchester propose to charge you to travel along "Selected Routes". London gets by on the penalty charges for those avading/avoiding the charge. Comrade Ken did not put the charge in London from 5 quid to eight to discourage motorists - but because they were loosing revenue.
The councils are bobins at getting value for money - The scheme will come in over budget and they will expect muggins to pick up the bill but unlike the centre of London which is mainly a 9-5 area - Manchester is 24 hours a day, so If it is going to work - they are going to have to charge us for going to the Supermarket at midnight, week-end which are free in London will not be free to us, If they can charge the football fans, Theatre goers, Hospital visiters etc They will!
D_C_, Manchester (16/04/2007 at 14:35)
Climate change is going to cost us a fortune through our taxes in the coming years, _whichever_ party is in power, if we don't get to grips with it.
The London experience shows basic congestion charging works and Manchester City Council isn't suggesting the clumsy model used in London but a much more intelligent approach, where it costs to commute by car at congested times but costs little or nothing at other times-something which according to the MEN poll earlier this year, a majority of Mancunions support if the money raised can be kept in Manchester and used to improve our public transport and expand Metrolink.
Me, - I'm with that majority!
SB, Audenshaw (16/04/2007 at 15:14)
Simon B, Warrington (16/04/2007 at 15:25)
At no time has Number 10 said the Congestion trials are anything to do with CO2 emissions.
They cite "Costs to Businesses"
Those who can not get to their jobs by public transport, and can not afford the C Charge will find jobs outside of Greater Manchester.
Greater Manchester will go from being a boom area to a bust area in only a few years.
There are other towns and cities in the North West who will promise businesses not accept C Charging, these places will thrive, while Greater Manchester suffers.
Trafford Park will empty, I promise you all if Greater Manchester has road pricing.
The 25% growth in congestion is a joke too, the DVLA are predicting a 3% growth in drivers in next 10 years, and there simply are not enough drivers to drive all these extra vehicles.
People simple have more that one vehicle now, say Hatchback for going to work in Monday to Friday, and Motorbike or Sports car for the weekends, they can't drive them all at once.
With out massive investment, public transport will never ever be up to the job, why waste 100's of millions of pounds on an electronic tracking and billing system, when they could fix the road surface, buy loads of new buses, trams and trains with it, it makes no sense from a business point of view, It will economic suicide for Greater Manchester, the business's will pack up and leave.
The TIF (Traffic Innovation Fund) is simply a great big carrot to bribe cities in trying Road Pricing, plain and simple, a bribe.
Roger Jones and his fellow Labour councillors on the GMPTA want their bribe.
Local Elections 3rd of May, this time, your vote counts !
Bobby (16/04/2007 at 15:38)
Ms D, Manchester (16/04/2007 at 15:41)
Voyager (16/04/2007 at 15:47)
That is in LONDON, not Manchester.
London already had a good Underground system, and hundreds of Busses and Taxis, before the charge came in.
Manchester has nowhere near the public transport infrastructure London has, especially the Metrolink which is a very limited service compared to the Tube in London.
London also has hundreds of CCTV and ANPR cameras to make the C-Charge workable, though it's only penalty charges which actually stop it going bust.
As for there being no funds available to improve 'public transport' without charging drivers - what public transport? It is run by private profit-making companies, let them pay for it out of their profits like all other businesses have to.
One more thing to consider :-
All this 'road-pricing', 'congestion-charging' etc is down to one thing, and it isn't what the politicos tell you.
The EU is in deep trouble with it's Galileo satellite system. The only way to fund it is by forcing drivers to pay road-pricing.
This is a quote from another website :-
"For instance, the Commission refers to a 2004 directive on European electronic toll systems. That directive assumed Galileo would be in service by 2008 and required electronic toll systems by January 2007 to use satellite positioning, a 5.8GHz terrestrial system or mobile telephony. "
The simple fact is, Councils are being 'persuaded' by the government to bring in congestion-charging. The government will then roll-out national road pricing (to make it 'fair' on everybody) and the unelected EU Commission gets what it wants. (Not to mention profits for some very big companies outside the UK.)
Paul1966, Manchester (16/04/2007 at 15:50)
The stark truth is thus. If the scheme is brought in, public transport will improve but not substantially because it is impossible to develop it in a meaningful way. Trams will not go to all districts effected by the charge and if we have any more buses in the centre of Manchester, they will provide enough congestion of their own. The fact is, people will stay in their cars, pay the tax and be worse off. The environment will be, as a consequence, unaffected.
The only thing which will be substantially affected will be the local economy. Remember London is unique. Major businesses have to have a capital presence - but Manchester has to fight to keep commerce, with Leeds and Liverpool close by.
One final point. There is a total lack of logic in the argument that the local economy will be damaged by increased congestion - the main reason offered by GMPTE for bringing in the charge. If rush hour traffic is to go up by 15 per cent in the next 20 years, does that not mean more people are travelling to work? If more people are going to work 20 years from now that could only be because there are more jobs for them to do. More jobs can only be created if an economy is growing. So greater congestion actually reflects a healthy strong economy and not the opposite.