THE proposed ballot paper that is likely to be used in Greater Manchester's crunch congestion-charge referendum is revealed today.
Click the gallery link on the right of this page to see the draft document. The paper, designed by independent election expert Sir Neil McIntosh, includes a `preamble' with refers to both the peak-hour charge of up to £5 a day, and the `major' investment in public transport it would unlock.
The question itself then simply asks: "Do you agree with the Transport Innovation Fund proposals?"
The ballot paper would be accompanied by a 12-page leaflet, sent out to homes across Greater Manchester next month, with additional information about the deal.
Wording
Sir Neil said: "I regret the continuing suggestion in some quarters that the question is biased because it does not mention the congestion charge.
"Now the recommended ballot paper has been published the public will be able to see for themselves that this is not the case.
"The wording on the ballot paper quite clearly mentions the congestion charge twice, just as it mentions the proposed investment in public transport twice."
Anti-bid Manchester Blackley MP Graham Stringer last night teamed up with two council leaders - Dave Goddard of Stockport and Susan Williams of Trafford - to renew calls for the question itself to mention the charge. "Congestion charging is the most controversial part of the transport innovation proposals and it is only fair that it is mentioned in the question," he said.
But a spokesman for the official `yes' campaign said: "Graham Stringer and others have deliberately tried to mislead the public by claiming there would be no reference to the congestion charge. This shows that to be completely and utterly false, and he should apologise to Sir Neil."
Greater Manchester is bidding for more than £2.75bn to be ploughed into transport schemes, including £318m to set up a peak hour, weekday-only congestion charge. Some £1.2bn of the total would be in the form of a loan, paid back over 30 years out of profits from the charge.
Comments
Login or Register to comment
I am completely unswayed by all the propaganda. In fact, I see through it all and it just makes me more angry. Bring this on, and let the result be final.
yes or no is all that is needed!!
i wonder how much money has been spent on promoting the charge? and it will all have been a waste of money if it fails!!
ask londoners to see if they are happy with the charge and you will get a resounding NO!!
The CON charge underpins everything about the TIF bid.
Not to mention it in the referendum question is utter lunacy.
Vote NO!
VOTE NO do not mortgage your children and your own future with this new form of taxation ie blackmail. You don't get this until we get that!!!
The contentious issue is the congestion charge so that should form part of the question.
I recommend the version that Stagecoach, a major beneficiary of the proposed scheme, has censored from the democratically elected Stockport Council. The proposed advert would simply ask: "C-charge. Want to Pay? Have your say".
VOTE NO In a peace time Democracy you have the right to vote against your master, remember that!
Although I am essentially opposed (as I have still yet to be convinced that road casualties will NOT increase as drivers rush to cross the charging zones before charging period begins) I do not class myself as one of the 'anti' brigade. These 'antis' who complained of a conspiracy regarding the question not mentioning the c-charge itself will simply shift their conspiracies elsewhere.
Flawed as I believe the scheme is in some ways, I do not believe that there is any conspiracy whether it be the wording of the question or deliberately re-phasing traffic lights or any of the other barmy ideas which have been suggested previously by the NO campaign.
If the scheme works and does not increase collisions then I will be satisfied even though I live ten yards outside the M60 as my house faces the motorway wall in Urmston and I will be charged if I continue to travel to work as I do. I recognise however, that many people do not have the same flexible working options that I have.
I saw the proposed ballot paper in the MEN this morning and don't see how it could be any clearer or fairer - both parts of the proposals are mentioned. Think it's time for Graham Stringer to stop implying that the people of Greater Manchester are too stupid to understand what we're voting for.
Just had a preview of the form, my 'X' will be going in the lower of the 2 boxes.
A 'NO' vote.
It"s obvious it"s a con the so called investment in transport initiative is now a Loan!!.. London got 10 Billion for the link to the channel tunnel alone!.. No mention of a loan there.Paul In westhoughton
Excellent news that this is finally drawing to a close.
Hopefully when the Greater Manchester public realise the huge benefits that TIF will deliver the region they will vote the sensible way and back the bid.
Transport will truely be revolutionised when this goes ahead, proper integrated ticketing, regulated buses (was good to see the Transport White paper clear the Commons on Monday), and massively more capacity for more hours of the day.
So long as people understand what the bid is all about, and what enormous benefits it will deliver to the city as a whole, I am in no doubt whatsoever they will realise that they do not want to miss this oppurtunity to take this great city forward to the next level - TIF is the way to do just that.
You know it makes sense, back TIF in Novemeber.
Well, that appears simple enough for even the dimmest of dissenters.
Vote 'YES'.
I think it pretty much does say yes or no, Dessie...?! Seems like a fair question to me, now I just cross my fingers that we can secure this much needed investment in Manchester!
oh Kurt Stephens wake up!
with all the latest info on capped prices it now shows there will be a massive shortfall in money generated to pay off the loan.
it now looks more than likely that everyone will pay!
also making the news is stagecoach who have refused to put stockport councils adverts against the charge!
so the anti group are yet again struggling to get our messages across to you!
Debt is debt. you will all pay!
learn from the current lessons we're going through with borrowing and the credit crunch!
we will still get investment in public transport without the charge. not as much but get rid of labour and we might see more of the money we where originally promised over the last 10 years.
you're basically telling the labour government that its ok to throw a few more taxes on the working people of manchester!
No all the way!
I wish someone would answer the question I have posed several times, also went on the blog of our Leader Mr. Leese but still no answer.
WILL WE HAVE VOTES PER THE ELECTORAL ROLE or PER HOUSEHOLD. This could make quite a difference to the overal result
I am and will always be totally against this 'charge' we travel into Salford from South Manchester by car as a family 3 of us together so no matter what bus or transport changes there are we will not be able to get to our workplace by public transport as we have to carry large items every day.
We will continue to travel by car but why should we have to pay when we don't actually go into Manchester itself, we will have to go over both boundaries.
VOTE NO NO NO NO NO
Take it Kurt works for GM or something to do wth the Con Charge?..This is the biggest con I have ever seen in my life all of a sudden the "grant of 2 billion pounds is partly a loan!..london got 10 billion for the channel tunnel link no mention of Loan there! Wake up people of the North west it"s a big con!..Wonder how many fat cats are getting big bonuses for pushing this through?..Paul in Westhoughton I will be charged every time I go to work night and day!. I am only a driver take home pay£280!
The only sensible option is to vote 'YES'!
I would think that even with the low expectations some people have of MPs these days we would at least expect them to be able to read - the ballot paper contains 2 very clear references to the congestion charge Graham. Perhaps you should spend less time being bitter and more time representing the best interests of your constituents, which are a vastly improved public transport system to take us into the 21st century.
Oh dear, I see the MEN censor is back to it's usualy non-exacting standards.
Sigh.
Vote No - you know it makes sense. Don't give local & national government a blank cheque to rip off GM's road users for the next 30 years - your children won't thank you for it.
"You know it makes sense, back TIF in Novemeber" (sic)
Only if you trust them to deliver what they have promised, on budget, and not waste most of the money on admin or increase the charges later (like they did with London and the M6 Toll)
Remember, they will count all the money spent on installing cameras and beacons, and all the new signs and road markings, and the awareness advertising (some of which will be in the MEN), the cost of registering drivers, and the cost of collecting the charge, and the cost of collecting fines and conducting appeals, and the cost each council will claim themselves for administering the charges, as "transport improvements".
Where is this congestion anyway? It was fine this morning. Oh, I forgot, its half term. It's a pity that most of the short school-run journeys won't cross the charging boundaries, so we won't see much of an decrease in those then.
(And before anyone mentions yellow buses, do you really imagine they will pick up and drop off at every house? Do you think that parents who are too scared to let their children walk to school now will let them walk to a bus stop and wait for a bus?)
A massive 'NO' vote from me, and anyone else who has any sense.
You can't keep conning the people of Greater Manchester.
How could the ballot paper possibly be any more balanced?? The preamble mentions both the charge AND the investment, and the question itself mentions neither - what do they want, illustrations?
I understand that £3 million has been spent promoting the congestion charge. Where, then, are the posters showing a pic of me or someone like me saying - I WILL have to pay the congestion charge for having the audacity to get off my backside and go to work while being unfortunate enough to live in the City Council area and pay my Council tax (full rate!) to them?
The gall of a Labour Council in targeting working people once again appalls me.
dessie
ask anyone if they are happy with any tax and they will say no
ask them if they like having the things taxes pay for and you get a more positive reply
No disrespect Kurt, The idea of transport improvements is not the issue.
For most people it is about the costs both visible and invisible. Despite their big advantage of a well funded campaign the pro charge people have failed to connect with the 2 out of 3 households with access to one or more vehicles. Sadly because they will not or simply cannot answer the valid questions people are asking. The only sensible response in December is a big NO.