TRANSPORT Secretary Alistair Darling today stands accused of squandering millions of pounds of taxpayers' money clearing the way for the massive Metrolink expansion which the government has now abandoned.
Around '200m has already been spent getting the route ready for the new lines - '80m in compensation to pay off affected residents and businesses and '120m on clearance and construction.
Campaigners are now demanding that the investment does not go to waste. Work already done includes:
In Droylsden '2.3m was spent moving a school yards from its original site to make way for the Ashton line - '200,000 of the cash came from the Department for Education's budget.
Houses were demolished at Mumps in Oldham and Brownley Road in Wythenshawe and a tunnel underpass was finished under Alan Turing Way and Gibbon Street in the Bradford area of East Manchester.
There have been alterations to Rammon House in Ancoats and Ringway Trading Estate in Wythenshawe.
Station
The National Grid relocated a main transmission pylon near Mersey Valley/Sale Water Park and a compulsory purchase order was served on nearby New Farm.
Manchester Airport has spent over '1m preparing for a new Metrolink station at its new Ground Transport Interchange, which opened earlier this year. A 75-metre tunnel section, built to carry the trams, is now lying unused.
Geoff Muirhead, chief executive of the Manchester Airport Group, said: "We've set aside all the land to bring Metrolink to the airport to ensure it will be integrated into the interchange.
"The Airport Company has spent well over '1m, including preliminary work in the local area, which is part of our agreement with the council under the terms of the second runway. We've been investing for four years since it was first announced and we are not going to be best pleased, to say the least, if that is going to be wasted.
"We can't now turn our back on it. It would enable staff from across the whole conurbation to easily travel to the airport, as well as passengers travelling to the airport from different areas.
"We have a wall put in front of us and we have now got to think of a way of getting over it or around it.
"I'm confident we will find a different way of doing it."
Taxpayers
Graham Brady, Conservative MP for Altrincham and Sale West, said the government should follow through its investment.
"This is all too typical of a Labour government. It is going to waste the '200m it has already spent of hard-pressed taxpayers' money," he said.
"I am a great supporter of Metrolink. The Conservatives have both backed Metrolink and delivered when we were in control. The extension would clearly be advantageous to Greater Manchester.
"People will be rightly deeply disappointed, not least because Labour is continually claiming to be aiming to transfer people out of cars and on to public transport. The issue of cost is important but it doesn't let Labour off the hook when they have proven themselves incapable of getting this project right."
A Department for Transport spokesman said: ""We would be very willing to discuss possible alternatives but any other scheme would have to be assessed on its own credentials.
"Four years ago we were asked for '282m and in 2002 that figure had risen to '320m. Now that is plus-'12m a year for the next 30 years.
"We do understand Manchester's transport needs and that is the reason we have invested in the West Coast Mainline as well as the announcement about the proposed toll road extension last week."
Should the government be forced to rethink its plans?
Showing comments 1 to 15 and replies | View All
Charles, Alderley Edge, Cheshire (22/07/2004 at 12:49)
James, Liverpool (22/07/2004 at 14:05)
Over recent years Manchester has received hundreds of millions of public money for the commonwealth games. The second runway has been built, Piccadilly has been modernised and the city will be first to benefit from the west-coast upgrade. In addition its population was recently revised upwards so that the City Council could receive more Government money.
Not bad for the North West's second city. You have received more than your fair share now it's time for others to benefit.
Carl Bridges, Manchester (22/07/2004 at 15:03)
Ken Houston, Droylsden (22/07/2004 at 15:20)
Alistair Darling should be sacked for incompetence.
As a resident I understand that the Droylsden locals felt good about the investment being made in their area. It made us feel that our town was important to the Greater Manchester Community. The ecological benefits would have been great too. So is AD happy to keep polution up? Maybe. Given that they are considering taxing per mile travelled in a car, he has to come upi with a plan to recover the B#200m already invested.
Mancunians should unite and apply pressure to keep the project going.
Peter FOY, London Ont formerly Oldham (22/07/2004 at 16:40)
Come on Manchester and area let the people in Westminster know how you feel.
lizzie, rawtenstall (22/07/2004 at 16:43)
Peter, Middleton (22/07/2004 at 17:23)
Message to James from Liverpool, your city has done a fantastic job of reversing it's negative image in recent years, reverting to the style of whinging Scouser doesn't help!
Nathan Pledger, Manchester (22/07/2004 at 19:29)
And a recent report says that it is unlikely to happen, as only the Manchester Metrolink another that escapes me was praised as being value for money.
Di Drinkwater, Ardwick, Manchester (22/07/2004 at 23:08)
There are two many cars on the road and the metro goes some way to helping people find good reasons to not use their car.
Appalling decision! I hope there will be a huge campaign to fight for it to be reinstated.
Steve Jones, Northenden (23/07/2004 at 12:30)
Peter Johnson, Basel Switzerland (13/08/2004 at 16:07)
Barry Edwards, Wigan Wallgate Railway Station (16/08/2004 at 17:54)
I think with all the hulabaloo surrounding Metrolink, one basic fact is kept hidden from view- that the PTE if it had its way would like trams running all railway services in its area simply because it would keep more money for itself ! Nothing to do with the 'better service' nonsense that's been banded about.
The Altrincham & Bury lines carry less people since BR ran them, but that's never mentioned as it would prove that railways are far superior (and cheaper !) than any overcrowded streetcar.
It must be remembered that the PTE evolved from an organisation (Selnec) that was a bus operator and whose priorities lied with buses, not trains. Is it too much to expect that the PTE's initial anti railway stance has changed in 30 years ? I suspect not, given their slavish desire to downgrade local railways to tramways.
Robert, Stockport (18/08/2004 at 01:21)
Do you know something the rest of us don't? It has been reported by MEN on several occasions that the trams on the Altrincham and Bury lines carry twice as many passengers as they did under BR. How can twice as many be less? It has also been reported recently that the "inferior" trams carry more passengers than all the heavy rail services in Greater Manchester. Yes one tram carries less people than one train. But there are more seats across the lines as a whole because there are a lot more trams than there were trains. As for GMPTE making money off the trams, any cash they did get would have to go back into the public transport system (eg paying for the heavily subsidised trains).
Mark, Fallowfield (18/08/2004 at 08:31)
raj, rusholme (17/09/2004 at 21:56)