GREATER Manchester's only serious rival for government money to revolutionise public transport might not even put forward plans for congestion charging, it was revealed today.
Birmingham council boss David Bull said West Midlands council leaders would not decide for another four to six weeks whether to include road pricing in their bid to the government next month for up to £3bn.
Greater Manchester's 10 council leaders have already given officials the go-ahead to consult the public over plans to charge up to £5 per day to travel in and out of Manchester.
But Mr Bull, in charge of Birmingham's bid, told a major conference at Manchester's Bridgewater Hall today: "The seven leaders of the West Midlands councils have not yet made any decision like Manchester. They will do so within four to six weeks.
"But politicians need to be re-elected and therefore public opinion is key. The initial signs are that it is in the balance.
"Most of the public are not yet signed up for road pricing and I do not know whether the politicians will be including it in their bid in July.
"In Birmingham, we are looking to be a global city but what decisions are going to be made - who knows?"
Manchester council chief executive Sir Howard Bernstein, who opened the transport management and parking conference, showed no such doubts.
He told delegates: "By facing this challenge now, we have an opportunity to sustain productivity, create a vibrant free-flowing economy and maintain our competitive edge.
"That is why it is important that we succeed. Other world cities including London have accepted that congestion costs money and bleeds away investment. The same threat exists in Greater Manchester.
"We are suffering from own success. Congestion is growing and will continue to grow.
"It disrupts business by preventing goods getting to market, delaying deliveries and making workers late.
"The efficient movement of goods and people is the fundamental building block of any modern city economy. Business will not invest if these crucial arteries are clogged and the economy is overcrowded.
"The extensive work we have undertaken so far indicated that, if left unchecked, congestion will suffocate business and cost us 30,000 jobs over the next 10 years or so. Simply doing nothing isn't an option. "
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
The Right to Reply (12/06/2007 at 11:46)
Simon B (12/06/2007 at 12:10)
they know there will be a voting backlash next local elections if they go ahead.
Below is the opinion page from the Greater Manchester bid website.
Tell them what you think.
Be carful with the first Yes or No question.
Its a trick question they will spin into a yes.
http://www.gmfuturetransport.org/opinions.php
Road Safety Officer, Manchester (12/06/2007 at 12:17)
Simon B (12/06/2007 at 12:24)
putting bus lanes on all major road will reduce non bus road space by 50 percent.
That is delibrate man made congestion.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 12:55)
Unlike Manchester were 54% of people said that they would be happy with the planned scheme so long as public transport is improved, I seem to remember the figure for the West Midlands is down at around 42%.
I would imagine however, that once the Manchester scheme is shown to be a success, that other cities such as Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield etc will all be queuing up for TiF money to implement their own schemes, the thing is though, they will have to share the TiF money whereas we'll get the whole pot for a few years.
Congratulations to the PTA and the 10 borough councils for having the guts to stand up to the vocal minority that often descibe themselves as 'the motorist' and doing what is best for the region, for this truely will mark Manchester out as a forward moving city in comparison to those that dither and wait.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 13:27)
Batfink, Manchester (12/06/2007 at 13:29)
Graeme, Manchester (12/06/2007 at 13:35)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 13:37)
Now, which do I (and the PTA and DfT) take most notice of?
About a dozen or so vocal people repeating the same untruths over and oevr again on a newspaper web site, or a reputable polling organistion.
Thankfully none of the scare mongers that post on here actually hold any power.
PW, Manchester (12/06/2007 at 13:39)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 13:47)
It's just a shame that the few selfish people on here (some of whom do not even live in Greater Manchester) are so keen on imposing their view on the majority of the Manchester population.
Technobabble, Manchester (12/06/2007 at 13:57)
And it¿s real easy for an arrogant Labour council to stand up to a so-called 'vocal minority' when you¿ve got the full backing of an equally arrogant Labour government.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 14:00)
In Greater Manchester Labour did better than the rest of the country in those elections.
Then the MEN printed opinion polls shoing the majority in favour of the charges, so long as public transport was improved first. The scare mongers claimed the charges would be implemented without the improvements to the public transport.
The plans were announced and guess what, the charges will only coming in when public transport is improved.
Along with making up charges and just about every other possible way of misrepresenting the proposals those vocal minority have shown themseleves up to be nothing more than ill informed scare mongers.
Darren Sellers (12/06/2007 at 14:14)
The future is PRT. Personal Rapid Transport, like the Taxi 2000 project in Cardif.
Public transport where the small four person car is computer guided on special track to take you where you want to go. They don't stop for traffic lights, take you directly there on cheeply constructed guideway.
Until then, public transport is always going to be crap. The car will win.
Have you been on a bus recently? It's horrible! Scruffy louts, kids annoying you. Have to walk and change loads! Not to mention how slow they are.
I'm in favour of any public transport system that doesn't involve a bus.
Snob Yes, I'll drive otherwise.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 14:18)
Don't you agree shifting taxation away from things that we want to encourage people from doing, i.e. working hard, towards 'bad' things, such as casuing congestion and smoking is an eminentely sensible way of encouraging the population to do things that society values, whilst discouraging those that society dislikes?
So yes, cigarettes, motoring, alcohol etc should pay much more in taxation (higher stealth taxes if you like) in my opinion, and those taxes that discourage hard work should be lowered.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 14:26)
That is all about proposals on how to reduce congestion, there is plenty of carrot on there that goes along with the charging stick.
Open your eyes and live in the real world, we have a Labour government will to pay handsomely for authorities to come up with innovations that will help stop the ever increasing congestion - thankfully we have a very foreward thinking PTA in Manchester who are doing just that, and when their plans come to fruition, then we will have a vastly improved public transport system for people to use.
I've said it before and will repeat it again, bring it on.
Simon B (12/06/2007 at 14:28)
Nice to see the man who gave evidence at the 2005 Transport select committee in Westminster, were Roger Jones was also one of the witnesses on one of the days.
What is you exact involvement in this?
Joe public does not get invited to these committees
Just to be balanced I am supporter of MART, Manchester Against Road Tolls, though not a spokesperson, so what I say here is my own opinion.
Yes I do live in Warrington, but I come to Manchester a heck of a lot, 3 times last week, all during evening rush hour.
If Manchester got the Congestion Charge the 400 pounds I spent in two of your computer parts retailer shops would have been spent elsewhere.
Email MART at
manchester@notolls.org.uk
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 14:29)
It is hardly all stick and no carrot.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 14:35)
Trafford is Tory, that is 30% of the PTA and 30% of the AGMA that are not Labour councils that equally support the bid.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 14:38)
You must have some vested interest given your views on this subject.
I'm off to Switerland on holiday this year, should I have a say on any tourist taxes that they implment in their country?
If you want a say, come and live here, otherwise, keep your nose out of our business.
PW, Manchester (12/06/2007 at 14:47)
Simon B (12/06/2007 at 14:50)
Chris, Irlam (12/06/2007 at 14:55)
I seem to remember an online petition against road tolls, congestion charging & the like being signed by 1.8 million people - but I do not remember one in favour of such measure achieving anything remotely similar.
I wonder why that could be?
In the end Kurt my dear boy, if you are SO confident that the public back these proposals why do you not echo my call for a referendum on the very subject?
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 15:00)
If you have a personal problem with congestion charging (call it a tax if you like PW, I really don't mind what you call it) then it's your choice what you do.
When Liverpool 5 years down the line gets congestion charging but without the improvements in thier transport infrastructrue you'll be back.
Now, remind me, when you said you'd have to pay to take your kids to the cinema in the evening to see a movie, how much did you say it would cost in congestion charges, wasn't it £8?
Obviously a man right on the ball with these proposals.
If you are simply going to start spending your money in Liverpool why are you so bothered? It will not affect you..
Kurt Stephens, Sale (12/06/2007 at 15:07)
"Do the public of Greater Manchester wish to see £3bn invested in public transport?"
Yes or No.
How many times Chris, just like in London, we'd never agree on a question.
Anyway, you and Simon keep up the good work of making the anti's look like a group of people interested in nothing more than scaring people, rather than putting forward a sensible arguement.
Five years and counting, cannot wait.