Bid to salvage C-charge cash

Mike Keegan

January 22, 2009

| Submit Comments | Comments (101) | Previous | Next

FAILED: The congestion charge vote was defeated

THE government will be asked to consider new transport proposals for Greater Manchester as the region fights to salvage cash from the failed congestion charge plans.

Transport officials met MPs and ministers in London this week in a bid to resurrect the region's case for funds.

The conference was aimed at formulating a 'Plan B' after the congestion charge referendum ended in an emphatic `no'.

A report by Manchester council chief executive Sir Howard Bernstein will be sent to the Secretary of State for Transport Geoff Hoon in an attempt to secure funds.

Downing Street insists any bid for the £2.75bn would have to include some form of congestion charge.

But after the `no' vote across Greater Manchester it is thought unlikely that any region will press forward with plans to introduce road charges.

Details of the new proposals are yet to emerge but it is thought they will not include any form of congestion charge.

Town hall chiefs, transport bosses, 16 MPs and three ministers attended the meeting.

'Confident'

Graham Stringer, MP for Manchester Blackley, said he was `moderately confident' of success.

He said: "The view of the people of Greater Manchester was made absolutely clear. Now it is imperative that we go to the government with proposals that will bring extra resources.

"We won't get everything but I would be surprised if we didn't get something."

Coun Matt Colledge, chair of Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority, said: "I think the unusually high turnout at the meeting speaks volumes. There is unprecedented interest in public transport, and tremendous excitement about developing a new strategy.

"This is just the start. There will be further meetings with MPs in the coming days and last night it was agreed to send a delegation to Geoff Hoon."

The Department for Transport says a bid for TIF money will still have to include some form of traffic management.

But a spokesman said: "Where local authorities decide congestion charging is not the answer to their problems they will continue to receive significant transport investment through existing programmes."

| Submit Comments | Comments (101) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

DaveB, Manchester (22/01/2009 at 08:30)

Let's have some really clever and creative thinking as to how to ease congestion without hitting people for a potential £1,200 annual tax. There must be other ways round the problem and there would be the support of most, if not all of Manchester travellers for a more sensible option or options.

Lawrence Glendinning (22/01/2009 at 08:30)

If only the people behind the CONgestion charge had a plan B, we could have all hit the ground running with the back up plan. Personally I wouldn't trust this bunch with running a tap. We need a whole new team with fresh ideas to get the money we need and not a blinked bunch like what we have now.

dessie, manchester (22/01/2009 at 08:37)

we was promised extensions to the metro link by this government and didnt get it, we were then railroaded in at congestion charge which was well and truly knocked back.
This government promises are broken time and time again yet we spend billions fighting wars in other countries, lets look after our own for a change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mad Welsh Scotsman, Cadishead (22/01/2009 at 08:37)

Forget widening the M60 and use that money on transport improvements, that may get some people onto public transport and off the M60, two birds with one stone

Geoff Hoon has a cheek to say there will need to be some form of con charge, does he not realise by now that thanks to his inept government, the people of Manchester (as elsewhere)are losing their jobs by the thousands

Chris R, Irlam (22/01/2009 at 08:40)

"But after the `no' vote across Greater Manchester it is thought unlikely that any region will press forward with plans to introduce road charges."

Damn straight!

We'll be watching them VERY closely, and if they try to resurrect ANYTHING even slightly resembling a Toll Tax we'll give them another drubbing just like they received in December.

Keep a close eye on these sorts, they're always up to something behind your back....

Malcolm Amersham (22/01/2009 at 09:21)

Are we going to see a new bid with a much smaller ring hoping the public will accept it and then over time widen to original plan.

Dave Sherwood, Irlam (22/01/2009 at 09:37)

John Presott said on tv that there is still money available although not the full amount if people voted no to the congestion charge.So who is trying to kid who? and as for Howard Bernstein he is a past master at keping things hidden.

Cllr Ken Hulme, Delph (22/01/2009 at 09:39)

Of course there is a plan B and always was.

Of course new money will come in to improve public transport - How many Labour MP's are there in Greater Manchester and the North West ? When's the next election ?

NWmancCUB (22/01/2009 at 09:41)

Just when are the Government going to see sense and realise there is no need to "ease or tackle congestion" in Manchester as Manchester simply does not suffer from congested roads....People need to differentiate between a queue of cars at traffic lights and an overcrowded or 'congested' road.

Robert Tocker (22/01/2009 at 09:52)

I was watching Tv recently and John Prescott seemed upset that people thought the congestion charge in Manchester was Rogers Jones idea. He kept saying that it was all his plan to ease congestion.He also said money was available for Manchester even if the public voted NO.Is someone telling us lies or just withholding the truth.

johnnyboy, Ashton-u-Lyne, Lancashire (22/01/2009 at 10:02)

We want our Tram System to Ashton-u-Lyne, Mr new front man Bernstein!

Phil Oldham (22/01/2009 at 10:08)

I remember, at the time of the original proposals... a lot of motorists were saying about introducing a city centre 'parking tax' instead of the charging ring....I wonder how many would still be in agreement with this, if this were to be the new proposal? Or anything that was meantion.....

johnnyboy, Ashton-u-Lyne, Lancashire (22/01/2009 at 10:12)

One way of proving traffic management would be to regulate the bus services giving the bus traveling public a say in the terms and conditions expected as an inducement for use.

Kiwi-blue, Christchurch,NZ (22/01/2009 at 10:17)

The people of Manchester turned down the opportunity for a world class transport infrestructure for a small cost. Now you expect something for nothing. You really are clueless!

Robert Tocker (22/01/2009 at 10:41)

Kiwi-blue, Christchurch,NZ,people like you keep telling us we have turned down a world class system,well for your information Whitehall politician keep saying "Manchester Already has a world class transport system".

scrapyardman, rochdale (22/01/2009 at 10:45)

What part of "NO" don't you understand?

ruth davis, Salford (22/01/2009 at 10:46)

Kiwi-blue,I think you are the Clueless one.We already have a world class infrastructure according to our local labour party members.

jacko101 (22/01/2009 at 10:47)

Kiwi-blue, Christchurch,NZ; Yo are a numpty.

I can't work out if you are trying to just wind people up or whether you are just stupid!

What was this proposed, 'world class transport system' you speak of?

As far as I am aware all that was proposed was more trams, buses, bus lanes and trains. Oh and they said they'd sort out the traffic lights so they worked together to ease the queues......

Well, lets get those traffic lights sorted out, as some are a real mess! Oh, and start taking driving licences away from people that continue to block junctions and make the traffic worse! (cars and buses!)

There was always money when the con charge failed, it's just that the 'Pro' camp didn't want you to know about it. Not seen many of them of here recently............. :)

Albert Bino (22/01/2009 at 10:48)

NWmancCUB: what planet are you on? no congestion in manchester? that's not up for debate. of course there's congestion in manchester. the issue is how to solve it. what manchester (and all other towns and cities in the uk need) is real investment in public transport. the government come out with all these policies and faff to reduce congestion, reduce pollution, get people out of their cars etc, without doing the main thing that would do that, i.e. real investment in public transport. our public transport is a joke.

Black Flag (22/01/2009 at 10:49)

johnnyboy: "One way of proving traffic management would be to regulate the bus services giving the bus traveling public a say in the terms and conditions expected as an inducement for use."

The bus traveling public have a massive say in the terms and conditions bus operators offer, through the pound in their pocket. If passengers don't give bus companies their custom, it hurts those companies.

Allowing politicians to interfere won't improve on that, it will only reduce the say that passengers have.

meldroo, Oldham (22/01/2009 at 10:55)

Maybe the council should re-brand itself as a bank! The money would come flooding in!

Chris R, Irlam (22/01/2009 at 10:55)

"You really are clueless!"

Not half as clueless as you & your chorts who, right up until the 11th December last year, were telling us that the YES side would win & win big.

You're wrong YET AGAIN - when will you learn?

alvinlwh (22/01/2009 at 10:56)

Increase bus, train and tram fares by 100% and you get your cash. Simple!

Sir Elliott Pest , Newton Nr. Hyde. (22/01/2009 at 10:58)

He or she's been quite for a little while, but on viewing the submitted comments, I couldn't fail to notice the WC words of wisdom from our NZ subscriber.
I wonder if the same person can count to ten and recite the alphabet?

Octavius Tinsworth Ace (22/01/2009 at 10:59)

Dessie: those extensions are still going ahead (the Oldham/Rochdale, Droylsden and Chorlton ones). Unless I'm very much mistaken, the TIF bid was for the Didsbury, Manchester Airport and Oldham and Rochdale town centres extensions, among others.

()

Report

News