Transport chiefs order city car toll survey

Clarissa Satchell

January 10, 2005

| Submit Comments | Comments (58) | Previous | Next

A SURVEY is to be held to test opinion about the introduction of road congestion charges in Greater Manchester.

Transport bosses say they want to find out what people think about the possibility of car drivers paying a toll to come into some areas during the busiest parts of the day.

They say planning for the poll is at an early stage and its exact form has not yet been decided.

The results of the survey could form a springboard for the introduction of a scheme to cut traffic jams in city centre areas, similar to the system now used in London where motorists have to pay a charge to take their vehicles into city centre areas.

Government ministers have consistently said that Greater Manchester should consider other transport options as well as proposals to expand the Metrolink tram system and have mentioned congestion charging as well as innovative bus schemes.

Transport Secretary Alistair Darling has reinstated the '520 million package of funding for the `big bang' Metrolink expansion after the M.E.N.'s successful Get Back on Track campaign, launched after he withdrew he cash in July.

But the money is still not enough to fund even two lines and transport bosses must submit a new plan to the government by the end of March before they can start any building work.

It is hoped the government will approve a new plan to build three new lines in stages - but transport bosses want to consider other options to complement the tram system.

Roger Jones, chairman of Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority, said: "In the past we have discussed setting up a commission to investigate the issue of congestion charging in principle and it wasn't thought that it was the right time. But that time is coming now. We are not looking at implementing congestion charging but looking at the feasibility.

Overnight

"Congestion is going to become an increasing problem but we have always maintained that we need to improve public transport and then look at congestion. It has to be in that order.

"Charging is one possibility. We will have to learn from London and other places. Manchester will ask why should we charge people to come and shop in Manchester when other towns don't charge and the Trafford Centre offers free parking?

"What Manchester and Salford will not do is disadvantage their businesses. That is why we will have to conduct a full study looking at all the different options. This is a 10-year agenda and nothing is going to happen overnight, if it ever does happen."

The study will include looking at the possible impact of a congestion charge on businesses and also question commuters and residents about their views on congestion charging and other ways to tackle congestion.

The new plan will also suggest setting up `guided busways' using tram-style buses in areas that will not get Metrolink.

Tony Vickers, spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said: "I don't think the poll it is a good idea on the whole. If it is anything like the surveys they held in London the questions were loaded and aimed at a pre-determined result."

Edmund King, executive director of RAC Foundation, said: "Our view with central London was if public transport was improved upfront not after charging was introduced, to give motorists an alternative, that would make it much more viable.

"The difference between Manchester and London is before congestion charging, 86 per cent of people in London used public transport anyway. The figure is not as high as that in Manchester."

What do you think of congestion charges for Manchester? Have your say.

| Submit Comments | Comments (58) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

Rachel, St Annes (10/01/2005 at 10:26)

I spent 8 years commuting into Manchester from Blackburn and then St Annes. The congestion has become absolutely appalling and the parking costs astronomical. No-one with good transport links or who does not need their cars for other reasons is likely to come by car anymore.

I finally decided to work outside of Manchester instead and I very rarely go in to shop.

If the costs of getting into Manchester increase further I can see more following me out of the city. Please don't compare Manchester too closely to London. I spent six years there and the public transport there is in a different league altogether. People there do not tend to need their cars.

John, Manchester (10/01/2005 at 11:12)

Why is it that every solution to problems these days is to charge more. Alongside the atronomical petrol prices, road tax and insurance motorists have to pay, now we will get this charge as well. A great way to improve the congestion in the city centre would be to sack whoever is in charge of the road planning which is appaling. One wrong turn in a crowded Manchester can leave you with up to an hours driving extra, not too mention just how few car parks there are left in the city centre.

Handyrider, Whitefield (10/01/2005 at 11:13)

I have worked in Manchester for 7 years and have always travelled in by Bus. Nowadays Im almost forced to drive in as the congestion on the main roads has made a 6 mile Bus journey take up to an hour and a half.

Its catch 22. I drive because I no longer get to work on time if I travel by bus, but this in turn is adding to the rush hour congestion. Im all for the Toll charge for motorists. Hopefully it would free the roads up and if more people used Public transport they might even lower the prices (especially the Met which is daylight robbery)

PW, Manchester (10/01/2005 at 11:41)

I am based in the city centre with my job, and need to use my car to get out to see companies. I pay too much for motoring already and cannot wait to get out of my car at night. I also spend or waste hours of my time in local authority manufactured traffic jams. Public transport is not an option for me. Isn't the London congestion charge due to rise substantially from the initial B#5 per day? Didn't bus and tube fares rise in London soon after the introduction? Also, once again, if you don't tax or insure your car, nor possess a licence, then this is just a further crime you can get away with, as with speed cameras. When the businesses in town go broke due to competition from shops in outlying areas, there will be no one left to pay the business rates. We should all collectively refuse to pay this as a further tax on cars, and there would be absolutely nothing the authorities could do. Better still, vote out this Government. Looking at the problems with Blair and Brown at the moment, that dream seems highly likely.

Andy, Dukinfield (10/01/2005 at 11:47)

I suspect their minds are already made up, and that the 'consultation' will be a sham, just like it was in London. Why should motorists pay any more to use the roads they already pay for? Why should the car owner be forced to the back of the queue, especially as we contribute around B#40 Billion per year in extra taxes? Get off our backs!

John, Ashton (10/01/2005 at 11:55)

Here we go again - time to whack the car-owner. Most of the congestion in and around Manchester has been deliberately manufactured by the introduction of road-narrowing and spurious 'safety' schemes. Now it's time for the second part of the plan - blame the motorist for the congestion and raid his wallet. This is exactly the same deceit as was used in London. I would be very willing to join some kind of protest group to make sure this does not happen.

Frustrated Car User, Manchester (10/01/2005 at 12:29)

You just despair don't you. Who has created this congestion? Nobody but our wonderful "transport planners" who have closed and narrowed key roads, introduced barely used bus and cycle lanes, set up traffic lights every few yards, closed car parks and other wonderful measures to make life more difficult for the car driver. Manchester is the only major city where road access to and across the centre is so poor, with just a single lane each way on Deansgate to get from one end of the centre to another. Leeds has the A64M and Liverpool has just announced a B#50m scheme to improve access to the centre from the M62. (Note to Manchester transport planners - improve means make it better not worse). I used public transport (bus and Metrolink) regularly for many years but gave up as both were so unreliable and unpleasant. Can't Manchester understand that the car is here to stay and they could improve road access, parking
and non-Metrolink public transport for far less than they plan to spend on the white elephant they call Metrolink.

Karen, Bolton (10/01/2005 at 12:36)

I ride a motorcycle. Join me and don't get stuck in traffic congestion.

Kurt Stephens, Sale, Manchester (10/01/2005 at 12:46)

I think that some 'out of the box thinking' is required here. At the moment too much of the cost of running a car is paid up front, e.g. tax, insurance, purchasing the car etc, however, the actual running costs of the car are very low - this provides a huge disadvantage to someone to stop using a car and start paying the additional costs of using public transport. There needs to be a fairer representation of how much it costs to USE a car, as opposed to how much it costs to OWN a car. I would suggest some form of congestion charging, or work place parking charge scheme would be a fairer way of charging at the point of use for a car. Having said that, I do not think the blunt method as used in London would be appropriate for Manchester, a couple of things need to be considered, for example, we need to ensure that the shops in Manchester as not disadvantaged compared to the Trafford Centre - maybe only have congestion charging until 9:30am??? Maybe congestion charging could be introduced on the entrances to the Trafford Centre. Maybe, as the transport bosses are saying this will only take place in 10 years time a GPS tracking system could be considered - technology should have moved on by then, also the Germans now use this technology on their autobahns. Using a GPS system it would be possible to charge those people who use their car in areas which have better public transport provision than areas with poor public transport. In short, I think congestion charging is a step in the right direction, however, it needs to be done in the right way - and that is not following the London model.

Rachel, Ashton (10/01/2005 at 18:34)

Forget charging cars - ban them altogether! What bliss it would then be to walk the streets without fear of being run over or being subjected to pollution from noise and fumes.

Andrew, Sale (11/01/2005 at 06:47)

Public consultations are a sham. In both London and Edinburgh, the council only allows people who live in the city to vote on the issue. Those who live outside and drive in are not allowed to vote. The whole exercise is weighted so as to deny drivers their democratic rights.

Bernard Abrams, London (11/01/2005 at 08:14)

Manchester should avoid following Kengestion Livingdrone's bad example. This isn't about traffic jams or air quality, if so there's be no buses allowed on the roads. It's about car hatred and forcing people into lifestlye changes to suit the tree huggers. Manchester isn't Lodon, ever more people and businesses will go elsewhere.

Adrien, Manchester (11/01/2005 at 09:51)

Rachel of Ashton should realise that most of the 'fumes' in the city centre come from diesel-engined buses and taxis, and banning cars would make little difference. Secondly, since when did pedestrians get knocked down by walking legally on the pavement? If they looked where they were going and obeyed the 'green man' instead of blundering across the roads at random, they would be perfectly safe!

Roger Lawson, London (11/01/2005 at 10:05)

As someone who already suffers from the London Congestion Charge, I would advise Mancunians not to do it. The London charge was supposed to cross subsidise public transport, but in fact barely makes a profit. All it subsidises is call centres in Coventy and Glasgow.

As a result the mayor is proposing to up the charge to B#8 which is more than many people can afford, even when use of a car is essential to them.

Also it has not improved air pollution as was claimed it would, central London still has traffic jams, and the average bus loading is down to 15 passengers which mean they lose a billion pounds per year!
Altogether it is financial lunacy and only the non-driving Ken Livingstone and his anti-car pals would ever consider such a scheme as being a success.

It's also a nightmare for users who waste more time paying the charge (and arguing with the operators over erroneous penalties) than they save in reduced journey times

Andy L, Leeds (11/01/2005 at 11:37)

Congestion charging is just another one of these money grabbing schemes. Before embarking on congestion charging authorities should first identify what is causing the congestion in the first instance - is it too many badly coordinated road works, poorly designed roads, lack of the right public trasport etc.

Then they should look at all other alternatives such as park and ride schemes, approriately located car parks and so on.

Motorists should not be made to pay to travel roads that they have already paid for in road tax - if this funding is not getting to the local authorities then this is an issue for them to take up with the government and not take the financially easy option and introduce congestion charging.

Mr.Crowe, Bristol (11/01/2005 at 13:26)

Congestion will increase outside the tolled area.

M.H.Howells, Droylsden (11/01/2005 at 13:43)

Why should motorists pay even more for using roads? The amount paid each year by motorists is already nearly three times the amount the government spend on roads, rail and other public transport put together.
This statistic is courtesy of the House of Commons library researchers - due thanks to my MP.

John McGoldrick, National Alliance Against Tolls, North West (11/01/2005 at 13:44)

Hopefully the people of Edinburgh will knock this idea on the head when they have a Toll Poll in February. Transport bosses should concentrate on improving public transport, not on trying to hit road users.
Tolls mean 5 things:-
1. More money taken away from already highly taxed road users.
2. Cars and lorries driving further on less satisfactory roads in order to avoid the tolls.
3. Vast sums wasted in the cost of collecting and administering tolls.
4. Some less well off drivers forced off the road.
5. Shoppers, businesses and jobs moving elsewhere.

B. Holden, Manchester (11/01/2005 at 15:22)

Yet stealth taxation, if you really want no cars in Manchester, close the roads instead. A lotof the so called congestion arises from bus lanes. Roads were designed at one time to allow free flowing traffic, but no more it seems. It appears that anything that could inconvenience road users has been thought of, with humps and chicanes etc, calming measures? I don't think so, it hurts driving over them - yes I have a bad back. If the roads were left so that people could travel in using side roads, the main routes would be clearer. Charging for this is a good way of generating income, but does little else - for gods sake look at things from the driver's point of view for once.

Mark Smith, Rochdale (11/01/2005 at 16:32)

An excellent idea as the ensuing decline in central business areas will promote further out of town development bringing new and more appropriate road systems with the bonus of free parking.

David, Trafford Park (11/01/2005 at 16:49)

I run a business in Trafford Park making frequent deliveries into the city centre. Congestion charging will only push up my overheads further leading to either higher prices for customers or ultimately job losses. The congestion charge may work in London where public transport is at least acceptable (well OK it's bad but at least it's there), in Manchester it is not even nearly good enough and introducing a congestion charge without improving public transport links (and not at the motorists expense) will do nothing other than drive shoppers, tourists and business out of the city.

Paul Michael, Ashton-under-Lyne (11/01/2005 at 21:28)

Congestion charging? No thanks. Remove all the deliberate congestion causing measures from Manchester and replace the inadequate A556 with a new motorway - it should have been built years ago. London businesses are suffering due to the C-Charge - the smaller ones are particularly vulnerable.

ian, mancheseter (11/01/2005 at 22:01)

no no no no BAD bad idea

Anon, Association of British Drivers (11/01/2005 at 22:45)

Same old same old.

If you want to get organised and protest then I suggest you join the ABD (www.abd.org.uk) and seek out the Local Campaign section.

The gentleman from No Tolls below is worth contacting too, try www.notolls.org.uk .

Good Luck against those that have probably already made up their minds, only the businesses in Manchester can make a dfifference if they don't want to lose revenue like the London ones have they should protest, strongly, loudly and NOW!

A. Howlett, AUL. (12/01/2005 at 14:25)

It's always the motorist who has to pay, isn't it? The pavements in Manchester are extremely crowded, but no-one suggests that pedestrians should pay, despite the fact that they drop litter, gum, chip papers and fag-ends all over the place. And let's see the bus companies stumping up for their filthy, polluting diesel buses!

()

Report

News