MP slams 'bullying and bribing' pay-to-drive bid

Alan Salter

January 30, 2007

| Submit Comments | Comments (20) | Previous | Next

George Osbourne

SHADOW Chancellor George Osborne has accused the government of `bullying and bribing' Greater Manchester into drawing up plans for congestion charging.

Mr Osborne, the Conservative MP for Tatton, said a decision on whether to introduce a charge scheme should be made by local people based on whether it was right for them.

His intervention came as Tory shadow transport minister Stephen Hammond accused ministers of `scandalous' blackmail by insisting on congestion charging in return for Metrolink money.

The M.E.N. revealed last week how Greater Manchester transport chiefs were looking at charging on 15 main routes into the city centre as part of a bid for é1bn to spend on completing Metrolink extensions and other public transport improvements.

The money, from the Transport Innovation Fund, is only being made available to towns and cities considering congestion charges as part of their bids.

Mr Osborne said: "People living and working in Manchester must be free to make their own decision on this important issue - they shouldn't be bullied or offered bribes by politicians several hundred miles away.

"People in Manchester know far better than politicians in Whitehall about what is right for Manchester."

Plans

Mr Hammond, who toured Manchester last Friday on the day council leaders voted to order detailed charging plans to be drawn up, told the M.E.N: "It is pretty scandalous to be told you must consider charging before you can get money for Metrolink.

"The proposals so far look perfectly satisfactory, but the big issue is that a congestion charge should only apply where there is congestion. It should not be a charge to introduce another tax on the people of Manchester by the back door."

The comments came as a new row blew up across the Pennines - Greater Manchester has got é3.2m to spend on drawing up anti-congestion plans, but a Leeds bid to spend é1.7m on research was refused. There is already upset as a Leeds tram scheme was axed by the government after a decade of planning.

Transport Minister Stephen Ladyman got a stormy reception from business leaders in the city when he told them that some council leaders had privately promised to consider congestion charging, but had said in public that they would oppose it.

Research

Chamber of Commerce executive Ian Williams said: "The research element is dead here, although he did say we could look at getting money from other funds for a transport scheme.

"But, after what has happened in Manchester, it is very clear which way we will have to go.

"It is obvious that the government is pushing everybody down one road."

The plans for a Greater Manchester congestion charge have caused fury in some quarters since they were revealed exclusively by the M.E.N. last week.

Thousands have voted in an online poll on our website, with 84 per cent against charging - and just 16 per cent for.

JOIN the Big Debate on congestion charging and have your say here.

Articles

Related files

Download our map of the congestion charge zones. (3.02MB)

| Submit Comments | Comments (20) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 20 and replies | View All

Chris, Manchester (30/01/2007 at 09:29)

Damn straight it is bullying & bribing - and the Greater Manchester public will not accept it from anyone no matter what party they represent. It is about time the Tory party actually opposed Labour on something and this issue should be it - they would walk all over Labour in the elections if they had the balls to stand up and be counted instead of seeing pound signs in front of their eyes.

guy witcher, romiley (30/01/2007 at 10:18)

it is neither bribing or bullying but just a wake up call to Gr MCR that there other factors worth consideration.

Ms D, Manchester (30/01/2007 at 10:23)

I have to agree Chris - this is blackmail and why should car drivers pay for the Metrolink ? We won't be using it !

Labour have made such a mess of everything in addition to transport - crime, education and the ordinary working person is being constantly squeezed of more and more money while the feckless and lazy are left alone to sit around collecting. Why haven't Labour tackled the benefits fiasco in this country ? Many have had enough and I can honestly see them losing at the next general election because of ordinary working people making a stand. This is just another example of it. Bye bye Labour - your'e on the way out !

Anthony, Accrington,Lancashire (30/01/2007 at 10:29)

They should listen to the public and if they say NO to congestion charging then so be it.

Philip, clayton (30/01/2007 at 10:48)

This town is gonna be a ghost town

G. Rice, Todmorden (30/01/2007 at 10:55)

Yes, the people of Greater Manchester should decide on congestion charging, and it should not be forced on them by central Government.

This is why we need devolved government in the English regions.

But the fact remains that money to improve our public transport has to come from somewhere before we all grind to a halt.

If not congestion charging, then what, by raising fares? The Treasury has many other priorities, while Council Tax has reached the limit of political acceptability.

We need improved bus, rail and tram services before congestion charging will be accepted, so we're back to the chicken and egg.

PW, Manchester (30/01/2007 at 11:06)

I think every motorist feels they are bullied - by both central and local government. They just don't want to know when you complain you need 3 buses to get to your job, spending 3-4 hours a day travelling a few miles. If I could walk to the end of my road, drop down some steps and emerge 20 minutes later on the other side of the city, then I would use it. I'd still need my car to get to the proposed Metrolink, and yet have to pay the "congestion" tax as well.

Rachel, M/C (30/01/2007 at 11:15)

If the plans go through I'll probably just move away from Manchester because I won't be able to afford the money. I'm only on Â£15,000.

Ms D, Manchester (30/01/2007 at 11:19)

So Manchester has won the race for the new supercasino ? Call me a cynic but I think this is bribery. Hey, Manchester - force the congestion charge on your residents and visitors and we will let you have the casino. Seems iffy to me when we weren't one of the favourites. I feel sorry for Blackpool as I think they should have won. Something stinks about this decision and I think it's connected to the proposed congestion charge. We don't need this casino or the shady characters they attract.

Mary, Manchester (30/01/2007 at 12:08)

The sad part of this road tax is there are a lot of people commenting, but no-one listening. We the people wont get a vote on it, so we must vote the labour party out next election. The every day people who earn between Â£10000 & Â£13000, and have to travel extra 4 hrs a day because they dont live on the tram station, will be working way under the national average wage, and I might add these individuals also are carers aof family members. But Ha ho who cares about the voter.

blah blah blah, city centre (30/01/2007 at 12:43)

we get told how we are going to live and we ARE going to pay by the government sounds like dictatorship to me doesn't matter who you vote in they don't listen to the public, there is no democracy left here

Chris, Wigan (30/01/2007 at 13:04)

Just another example of the working class baring the brunt of yet further taxes, they are unable to improve the public transport system and offer low priced fares / increase capacity on / reduce public travel costs compared to driving so they propose to increase the cost of driving.

Their is no viable alternative if you have to use public transport for more than one leg of your journey and people will carry on driving and being taxed more. There is no proportionality to this i.e. same cost to rich and poor so driving will be increasingly available for the well-off.

The government has no viable alternative other than to tax, tax and more tax.

They should leave it to market forces and technological development - when the combustion engine is obsolete due to technological advancement, future generations will wonder what all the fuss was about with carbon emissions.

Voter, Swinton (30/01/2007 at 13:15)

I have always voted Labour, but as time has gone by, I now really think that the Tories should be given another spell in government. The present government has lost touch with its electorate, and the Tories (I'm sorry to say) seem to be the only viable alternative that's listening.

Kevin, Blackley (30/01/2007 at 15:04)

Having just viewed the details for the first time there seems a huge disparity in the proposals. I am OK in principle with road charging as a means of trying to get more people to use public transport, I myself have a car but go not use it to go into Manchester. However, looking at the proposed charging routes there is a major flaw the charging is being brought in to fund Metrolink. But none of the current or proposed Metrolink routes are affected. The Charging does not cover Cheetham hill road yet covers Rochdale road. Neither Ashton new or old road are covered. Aside from Chester road and the East Lancs there are no other roads being charged into Trafford or Salford. This really seems like those who cannot get Metrolink are funding it for those who can. Also the charging will impact upon the main route through Middleton as far as it border with Castleton this is not a going to be helpful for Middleton and show as usual poor planning my Rochdale council who don't seem to give two figs about Middleton and will disproportionately impact upon the residents of Middleton for no good reason.

Mary Brooks, Macclesfield (30/01/2007 at 17:35)

First we have Mr Stringer comments and now we have Mr Osborne trying to make personal political capital about the situation. Unless Mr Stringer and Mr Osbornes come up with some viable alternatives on how to fund Metrolink and the other public transport improvements they should keep quiet. Of course Mr Osborne probably doesnt want his rich 4X4 constituents to be affected by the congestion charge as they drive into their highly paid executive jobs in Manchester.
George as shadwo chancellor put your money where your mouth is and tell us how you would fund Metrolink and bus improvements. Cuts to the NHS? Raise Taxes? or how about scrapping the roads programme and taking our boys out of very costly interventions in Iraq etc. I think the latter two suggestions are quite sensible but I doubt any of the major political parties would subscribe to them. I very much look forward to hearing Mr Osbornes and Mr Stringers ideas for funding of Metrolink. I am amazed at the amount of winging from car users on this site saying why should we pay for metrolink. By that logic why should public transport users pay through their taxes for new roads which would not be needed if people didnt get in the car for short journeys. The delivery of a fully integrated public transport service is in the interests of everyone if we don't fund public transport there would be even more cars on the road causing longer car journeys and great inconvenience for business and individuals.

Puzzled, Ashton under Lyne (30/01/2007 at 19:46)

The map shows one corridor stretching from Ashton to Oldham with Mmanchester City Centre nowhere in sight.
How can you trust this lot to operate a road congestion charge with the remotest degree of competence?

Mal Harrison, Rochdale (30/01/2007 at 23:13)

The next Council elections will show what the people of Greater Manchester think of Labour's schemes and taxes!
I have voted Labour all my life, but no more. But for one or two M.P.'s Labour exists in name only. Time to go I reckon!

Andrew B, Gtr Manchester (30/01/2007 at 23:35)

I used to use the metro to get to work everyday so I could hand on heart say I was doing my bit, unofrtunatly using the tram was costing me more than driving and also taking twice as long and therefore was having a huge negative effect on my home life. My journey takes about an hour between the bus to the tram and the tram to Manchester and the walk to work. My car journey takes 30 minutes in the rush hour. Where is the problem? well it lies with public transport. I walk across town every day from Victoria to Portland Street and every day I am dodging empty bus after empty bus, I am breathing in dirty diesel smoke, I am not dodging cars nor am I looking at cars grid locked on the main roads, I am looking a the buses fighting one another and the trams fighting with the buses. The car drivers are not causing the congestion so there is no need to introduce a congestion chrage. I do agree with improving PT so it becomes a realistic alternative but not by charging motorists. We also need to think about safety on the trams aswel, there are too many drunks kicking off every night and too many gangs of youths without tickets with their cans of Stella. One last question, when will metrolink introduce a swipe ticket so you pay for the journeys you make. I do not know day to day if I will need to be in London or Edinburgh on Business so it is of no benefit to me each week or month buying a saver ticket. However I would be happy to buy 50 journeys at a discount if I actually got 50 journeys. I have asked the question before but of course it's not in Metrolinks best interests to introduce that kind of ticket. The trams are full now, a congestion charge would not drive people onto the trams as there is no room, the congestion charge would simply drive skilled people out of Manchester, i.e. the people who have built this city would turn their backs on this city.

anon, cant avoid a corridor (31/01/2007 at 07:58)

Why are the working people being made to suffer again....think I might give up my job and go on the dole then because I won't be able to afford it!!!

Chris, Manchester (31/01/2007 at 09:17)

Mary Brooks, Macclesfield - your are surely having a laugh? I think you will find motorists subsidise public transport nationally to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds a year. Motorists contribute over 50 BILLION pounds a year to this country in taxation alone (not to mention the contribution they make through the work they are invariably travelling to) - and only 7 BILLION pounds is spent on roads in return. Comments such as yours show how biased and baseless criticism of the ordinary motorist is. And tell me exactly WHY I should subsidise something that will never be of benefit to me - I live in Irlam and the Metrolink will never get out here in a month of Sundays! Think about how you would feel if your Metrolink ticket price doubled simply to fund a new road between Irlam & Manchester - would you be happy? I bet not!

()

Report

News