THE group which demanded a referendum on having a London-style elected mayor in Bury is refusing to foot the bill.
Geoffrey Berg (pictured) and campaign group
Manchester Against Road Tolls
collected a large-enough petition to force the council to hold the vote.
The referendum cost taxpayers £125,000 - money the council now want the pressure group to refund.
Campaigners believed a directly-elected mayor would back their views and wield powers to kick out pay-to-drive proposals.
But voters rejected the idea by a majority of 5,087 after fewer than one in five of the electorate voted.
Voters were asked if they wanted the council's political administration to change. A total of 10,338 people voted yes, while the 'no' vote was 15,425.
Tory leader of Bury council, Coun Bob Bibby, launched a scathing attack on Mr Berg, claiming the petition was 'a direct vendetta' against him.
He said in a statement: "The petition instigated by Mr Geoffrey Berg was started, neither because of congestion charging, nor in relation to a directly-elected mayor, but as a personal vendetta against me."
Coun Bibby said: "Along with the Conservative group in Bury, I have never supported congestion charging.
Transport system
"I did support... a bid for an improved transport system, but only on the basis that... if congestion charging was to be part of the funding from government, then we would oppose the bid.
"This was also the view of full council, of which Mr Berg is fully aware."
He branded the referendum 'a ridiculous waste of taxpayers' money' and called for the pressure group to reimburse the council, adding: "It had nothing to do with congestion charging and I am glad Bury residents realised its true meaning."
Mr Berg hit back at Coun Bibby and refuted the 'vendetta' claim.
He said: "I refute what he says. It was entirely because of the council's stance on congestion charging.
"We launched the petition because Bob Bibby supported the bid on congestion charging last July and refused a referendum.
"The result is disappointing, but the situation had changed substantially from when we decided to go ahead with a campaign for a referendum in Bury.
"If the council had adopted this position at the start, it would have saved a lot of time and expense."
Tweet
Group refuse to pay for mayor poll
July 05, 2008
Picture by Steve Allen
Showing comments 1 to 12 and replies | View All
Mr Manchester (05/07/2008 at 10:06)
Stockport Dad (Tory public transport leader: oxymoron), Heaton Mersey (05/07/2008 at 10:53)
As previously posted - that should teach opportunistic councillors to buddy up with a group of selfish fringe-politics petrolheads.
roll on the referendum!
rammylad, ramsbottom (05/07/2008 at 11:56)
Anyway a mayor is no longer needed as the c-tax is dead in the water.
Laura Norder, Didsbury (05/07/2008 at 13:22)
Anyway a mayor is no longer needed as the c-tax is dead in the water." - rammylad, ramsbottom
My, what an honourable lot MART are - it's always 'somebody else's' fault to you people.
Keep clutching at straws rammylad, the only thing 'dead in the water', is MART's out-of-touch campaign.
rammylad, ramsbottom (06/07/2008 at 00:00)
Ministry of Truth Spokesman (formerly MC Spanner) (06/07/2008 at 23:10)
Sadly not ture. It should read you have made no effort to find out.
The Bury Website went through the whole think and even had an interactive question about the powers of councillors working with a mayor.
The reason that you feel they made no effort is that they weren't going to waste our money on this sham and this group and it's half truths.
It a shame that some members of MART are using it for their devices just as people on the other side of the argument are the same (United City).
I wish somebody would think about ordinary folk and what they can afford.
citycentre, manchester (07/07/2008 at 09:04)
Maybe the people who should be paying back wasted money are the counillors in Trafford, Stockport and Bury who seem set to block the C charge now so scuppering the TiF bid; maybe if they had come forward a few years ago and said this all the money spent preapring the bid could have been saved.
Tif money was always contigent on road charging, thats why no other city has made a major bid
(DAVE GODDARD FOR LEADER OF MANC) paul teeque (07/07/2008 at 09:07)
As far as a paultry £125,000 goes, what about AGMA's blatant waste of £13,000,000 for the first and second propaganda stage of the TIF bid!!!
I rest my case.
Chris, Irlam (07/07/2008 at 09:24)
Ministry of Truth Spokesman (formerly MC Spanner) (07/07/2008 at 10:00)
That's good news because he does MART no credit.
Black Sabbath (11/07/2008 at 08:51)
What a farce.
Black Flag (11/07/2008 at 11:17)
If you want to protest against the closure of your school, they demand that you pay for it.
If you want a referendum over an elected mayor, they demand that you pay for it.
The next step will be the winner of an election demanding that the losers pay for the cost of the election for daring to oppose them and wasting the public's time by making an election necessary.
If Bob Bibby is so annoyed about the cost of a referendum, he should take it up with the government, which introduced the legislation, rather than complaining about people doing something they were perfectly entitled to do.