TWO cabinet ministers have called for a new plan to improve the transport network in Greater Manchester after plans for congestion charging where overwhelmingly rejected by voters.
Hazel Blears, the communities minister and James Purnell, the work and pensions secretary, both said a period of 'reflection' was needed after the landslide referendum vote but said the problems of congestion still had to be addressed.
Ms Blears, who is MP for Salford, said: "It is important that we get the traffic moving so that those extra jobs that our economy needs come to Manchester and not elsewhere.
"All of us now in Greater Manchester, councillors, MPs, and Ministers need to look at the situation and see where we go from here. I think many people did not realise that the charge would not come in until 2013.
"There needs to be a period of reflection to take stock but clearly the problems with congestion, the fact that people find it hard to get in and out of Manchester are still with us. I also believe that public transport needs to be improved. "We need better railway services, and improvements to the Metrolink."
Mr Purnell, who is MP for Stalybridge and Hyde, said voters had turned down a 'a unique opportunity' to invest billions in trams, trains and buses. "Unfortunately the decision of the referendum will bring those plans to a halt," he said.
"A 'yes' vote by the people of Greater Manchester would have marked the start of a new era for public transport.
"As well as taking more cars off the road it would have widened the opportunities available for the significant numbers of people in the area who do not have access to a car.
"Now, instead of the hope of a radical overhaul, we continue to be faced with a transport system that struggles to keep pace with the expectations of 21st century commuters.
"The need to improve the transport network is as crucial as ever. We cannot let the result of the referendum diminish the attention that needs to be paid to improving services.
"After a short time of reflection we need to look at alternative measures that will ensure that the transport network across Greater Manchester is fit for purpose, in a way that reflects the views of transport users."
The leaders of Greater Manchester's 10 councils will formally pronounce the cash-for-congestion-charging deal dead at a meeting on Friday.
The sheer scale of its rejection - 78 per cent of voters said 'no', compared to just 22 per cent saying 'yes' - means it is off the agenda for good. Some £1.5bn of the planned investment was in the form of a grant. That money will now be made available to other areas prepared to introduce congestion charges.
The Greater Manchester referendum, however, has made it far less likely any will come forward. Cambridge is the only other place near to submitting a bid - and political leaders there said they were 'studying' the Manchester vote this weekend.
'Yes' campaigners were still trying to work out why they suffered such a crushing defeat after polling earlier this year suggested the vote would be close. Professor Austin Smyth, one of Britain's leading transport experts, claimed the economic downturn had been crucial.
"The timing of this referendum could not have been worse given the onset of a recession, with people and businesses tightening their belts," he said. "In these circumstances they are less likely to want to pay more to use the road network."
Professor Smyth, the head of the department of transport studies at the University of Westminster, added: "The proposals failed in part because the problem of congestion in Manchester is not as severe, and because a higher proportion of people would be affected by the charge compared to what happened in London following the introduction of the congestion charge.
"Alternatives to the use of cars are not as comprehensive as in London, where the vast majority of people use public transport."
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 24 and replies | View All
NS (14/12/2008 at 20:41)
The sheer weight of the NO sentiment is tangible proof of how bad this whole plan was and how little most politicians, with a few exceptions, understood its weaknesses.
Powerful figures like Ms Blears should have seen how divisive the idea was becoming in the city and told the AGMA leaders to calm down and seek consensus. Instead we got hotheads like Leese and Bernstein acting like Col Kurtz up the river - out of control and taking everyone else down with them.
Who now can build consensus around a plan B?
Sir Pentest , Newton Nr. Hyde. (14/12/2008 at 20:51)
And as far as Blears goes, she wont even ahve a seat in the shadow cabinet at the next GE, and cardboard cutout Purnell should stop reading from the thoughts of chaiman Prescott.
You've had at good bloody nose over the proposed 'CON' charge, now stop whinging and bleeting before you get kicked into political oblivion.
The country is sick to the teeth of NuLab lies and decite.
Cllr Ken Hulme, Delph (14/12/2008 at 21:12)
In London the voters did vote for a congestion charge when they voted in Ken Livingston as Mayor - standing as an 'Independent'.
I'm not a fan of Kens but he is a politician of stature (no 'sizeist' remark intended Hazel) and no one either in Local Government nor in the Cabinet as Transport or Communities Secretary commands the public's attention or engages with them in the way Livingstone does.
Don't just blame the public or decide to avoid letting the people have a say on future schemes.
Something has gone seriously wrong with the way politicians like Hazel, Richard Leese & Co ply their trade. Reflect on the public's widespread alienation from our political system and how out of touch Ministers and Council Leaders have become.
And Change !
Rt Hon Dr Rev MC Spanner MP QC FCA FRICS JP OK (14/12/2008 at 21:52)
Alternatives to the use of cars are not as comprehensive as in London, where the vast majority of people use public transport."
I'm sure the no campaign were shot down in flames for suggesting that
Blears talks about a new plan. That's exactly what she said after Brown stole the Casino from Manchester. A year later, NOTHING.
Labour are finished in Britain. They may be on a temporary high while their tactic of trying to turn their economic disaster into a national crisis, but when people see that it is al a con, they will disappear into oblivion.
The referendum has shown that people who answer opinion polls don't always come out and vote. Blears and Purnell are on borrowed time if they abandon Manchester for showing the courage not to be bullied.
enlightened (14/12/2008 at 22:33)
Pat Karney when asked if he, R Leese and co are out of touch he strongly denied it and then went on to give an interview prooving that is exactly what he is.
Personally i am shocked 22% of people wanted it. Of the dozens of people i spoke to over the months, and without leading them, not a single one said yes, the current economic problems seem to be the convenient excuse for them and an excuse will all it will ever be.
These people are out of ideas and completely out of touch with the people they represent. I am sure we will resign their names to history the next time they are up for election.
ENGINEER, Heywood (15/12/2008 at 00:20)
Also the central london congestion zone was to reduce traffic and allow public transport to flow easily well here is a truth it has not worked there is still congestion and all it is now is another tax to pay. People have had enough of being taxed to death and not having more of their hard earned money for themselves to decide where to spend it not the goverment or councils.
MICHAEL ASH (15/12/2008 at 00:58)
Buzza2008, Oldham (15/12/2008 at 05:50)
"All of us now in Greater Manchester, councillors, MPs, and Ministers need to look at the situation and see where we go from here. I think many people did not realise that the charge would not come in until 2013”
People were fully aware of what was on offer it was New Labour that got it so spectacularly wrong. They thought they could create yet another tax and a very unfair one at that. Yet traffic congestion in the proposed charging zones had been reducing year on year since the late 1990’s. If there is any congestion it has been created by New Labour’s obsession with removing road space.
I guess that Ms Blears and Mr Purnell have seen the scale of the No vote across Greater Manchester and in particular in their own back yards and they are trying to do damage limitation. The strength of the No vote in both Salford and Tameside suggests that both these ministers were being told by their constituents that congestion charging was unacceptable. Instead they chose to support the government line.
It is only a few weeks ago that most Labour MP’s supported the congestion charge in the MEN. People need to make sure that they remember this when the next General Election arrives. While most parties now support environmental issues, it was New Labour that used it as the opportunity to excuse a whole range of new taxes.
Bigfoot (15/12/2008 at 09:35)
You are so out of touch with the British public it's embarrassing. It was clear to everybody that this crazy scheme had absolutely no chance of being accepted as that it was even more unpopular than the poll tax!!
So if you had bothered to speak to the public you could have saved your embarrassment and millions pounds of public money....not that the pound is worth anything nowadays as you've also destroyed that, by losing control of the financial sector.
WELL DONE HAZEL AND RICHARD (SORRY SIR RICHARD)
Terry Mahon, Ex Mancunian (15/12/2008 at 10:03)
Now for "Plan B".
Get busses back into bus layby's.
Get rid of all these useless bus lanes.
Get rid of the cameras watching the bus lanes.
Get the roads back to the width they were.
Get rid of all the extra bollards created.
Get rid of stupid mini roundabouts.
Put the traffic light sequences back to normal.
Get the bus companies to spend some of their own money on new busses & trams.
Last of all, sell the airport and use the funds to bring in decent public transport.
PW, Manchester (15/12/2008 at 10:23)
Ask the road-users how to do it, if it doesn't occur to you. It is so obvious as you well know. Although don't expect them to offer you a scheme that will lighten their wallets.
Jay B, oldham (15/12/2008 at 10:34)
but i can picture leese and his council cronies with that hands over their ears pretending they cant hear you!
just like they where before!
Leese out!
Caped Crusader, Gotham City (15/12/2008 at 11:05)
alvinlwh (15/12/2008 at 11:34)
Bigfoot (15/12/2008 at 11:45)
How about targeting drug dealers, muggers, antisocial behaviour, uninsured drivers, illegal immigration etc
Get the Police some proper targets and the power to achieve them. Rather than dreaming up the most ridiculous transport proposals in history!!
Then you might get some respect and appreciation
uygfwejh (15/12/2008 at 19:25)
Sally Brompty (16/12/2008 at 10:32)
Hazel should reflect on what happened to Roger Jones instead and quick.
Jay B, oldham (16/12/2008 at 10:40)
you where defeated!!
you lost!!
now we want an investigation into the funding of this ludicrous campaign! too much money has been wasted on nothing!
heads should roll!!
Fran M (Permissum Populus Constituo) (16/12/2008 at 12:05)
Many of the people I have spoken to about the CON tax cited the stupid road schemes and traffic light sequences as the causes of congestion.
Whether the traffic management schemes that cause the increasing number of bottlenecks are by design, stupidity, ideology or sheer incompetence, they need to be removed.
Unfortunately, I think the people responsible will not accept their culpability so these madcap schemes are likely to stay and more will appear, possibly as a vindictive response to the massive NO vote.
ilyas orhanli (16/12/2008 at 13:05)
Jay B, oldham (16/12/2008 at 14:29)
and this will only lead to their downfall!
they must have blinkers and earmuffs on! because they still dont seem to be able to see and hear what the people think!
they just carry on with their own personal agendas
Ewan Oosami, Halifax (16/12/2008 at 16:55)
johnnyboy, Ashton-u-Lyne, Lancashire (16/12/2008 at 18:54)
Buzza2008, Oldham (16/12/2008 at 20:06)
The money that these people have spent on TIF and trying to sell it is nothing short of scandalous. It seems to me that they had no trouble spending so much because they believed their own propaganda and were convinced they had the yes vote in the bag. They really thought that they could divide the community between those who would have to pay the charge and those who they wished to mislead into believing they would be getting something for nothing.
They certainly did not bargain for a No vote and not one so decisive that they lost by a landslide in all 10 boroughs. Since their complete humiliation last Friday New Labour has continued to insist that they still want to introduce national road pricing. It seems that only a spell in opposition is the only thing that will cure New Labour of this obsession.