If the press reports are correct, tomorrow the Transport Secretary (and Bolton MP) Ruth Kelly will announce that Greater Manchester will be allowed to borrow a huge sum of money to invest in local public transport - on the strict condition that the money is repaid via the introduction of a congestion charge.
Now of course things are never this black-and-white, but I suspect that are three broad strands of public opinion on the TIF congestion charge proposals:
- Those who support congestion charging in principle (a small group)
- Those for whom congestion charging will never wash regardless of the deal on the table (a larger group)
- Those who will look at the deal on the table and make their made up (the largest group)
Now we will hopefully see the final details tomorrow (although David Ottewell isn’t so sure we will get the whole truth and nothing but the truth) but for local residents in Salford who fall into the third group - from Kersal to Cadishead and Langworthy to Little Hulton - the decision is likely to be a complete no-brainer.
Salford residents will feel the full force of the costs of the TIF scheme - a £5 a day tax on commuting if implemented at today’s prices and likely to rise through the roof once rising costs are taken into account - and will have a multi-billion pound debt hanging over their heads for the next three decades at least.
However, if the draft plans are anything to go by, the benefits are few and far between no matter where in Salford you reside. No improvements to local rail services serving Swinton, Walkden, Eccles and Irlam. A vague promise of more bus - but no powers for GMPTE to control where those buses go. The Leigh Guided Busway which will increase congestion but will not provide any local communities in Salford with an improved service.
Our Labour Government and Labour Council are asking us as local residents to back a scheme with a huge cost and few discernable benefits. We will not be fooled by Labour’s TIF pyramid scheme.
THE CONGESTION CON, SEEMS LIKE THE POWERS THAT BE HAVE TAKEN OVER THE ASYLUM WITH RUTH KELLYS STATEMENT TODAY ABOUT THE CONGESTION CHARGE , I PITY THOSE WHO STILL BELIEVE THEY WILL BE GETTING SOMETHING FOR NOTHING ACCEPT MORE FAILED DICTATOR GOVERNMENT BACKED QUANGOES
Now now Iain. I am going to be kind to you and say that you are ‘bending the truth’ to make your point.
Firstly, your ‘£5 a day tax’ generalisation. This is complete nonsense! Yes it is up to £5 a day, however it is more complicated than that. Drivers would pay £2 for crossing the outer ring in the morning and a further £1 for crossing the inner ring. Outward peak-time journeys would cost £1 for passing the inner ring and £1 for passing the outer ring. So it is not a set £5 a day as you like to portray it as. Peak times will be between 7am-9.30am and 4pm-6.30pm. Drivers will NOT be charged outside of these hours.
Secondly I don’t think you have given justice to the benefits that the TIF bid will bring to Salford. More buses, more trams, more trains, an extension of the metrolink to MediaCity, improvements to both IRLAM and ECCLES train stations, real time electronic information for commuters, new bus rapid routes, extra yellow buses for schools, a new travel Smartcard and much much more.
I do share one cause for concern with you Iain and that’s with the GMPTE’s lack of say over where the buses will be running.
Some interesting comments there Adam.
I make no apologies for calling it £5-per-day. Most regular commuters into Manchester will pay the full £5 at today’s prices. God knows what that figure will be come 2013 - and that’s before you get to the inevitable price creep for the infrastructure projects.
As for the improvements, I think it’s worth looking at whether the Salford taxpayer gets value-for-money in return for a congestion charge and £2bn mortgage. I simply don’t think it does.
First of all, just for clarification, the funding for the MediaCity extension is separate and has nothing to do with the TIF bid.
The only major project to affect Salford will be the Leigh Misguided Busway - a disaster from start to finish. By following the East Lancashire Road it bypasses all the communities that it purports to serve - Swinton, Worsley, Walkden, Boothstown and Ellenbrook. Indeed last year FirstBus came within a whisker of canning the 32 service that follows that exact route. By reducing capacity on the A580 it is going to cause gridlock in the nearby communities and cause more congestion than it alleviates. It should have been a complete non-starter and yet the bulk of the money allocated to Salford will be spent on this absurd scheme.
If GMPTA and Salford and Wigan Councils were serious about providing improved transport links from Leigh, they would look at reinstating the rail link together with a new park-and-ride station in Little Hulton.
As for the rest of your improvements, what proportion of the £2bn mortgage will they comprise? Real-time information and station improvements (even complete rebuilds) are small projects in the greater scheme of things and that investment should and could be being made anyway. Indeed stations like Atherton, Daisy Hill and Westhoughton were getting those improvements anyway under current funding arrangements - doubtless those projects will be included within the TIF documents to make them look better.
I’m glad we are in agreement about the buses. Investing in bus services without appropriate methods of controlling that spending is quite likely to result in huge amounts of money being poured down the drain without any benefits to passengers.
If the TIF scheme goes ahead it will prove to be an unmitigated disaster which Greater Manchester taxpayers will have to fund for years to come. The road toll-tax will cripple the majority of motorists on typical incomes; it is a cynical stealth tax to exploit the already beleaguered motorist. And it will not deliver a public transport paradise in any case. I can really only echo the sentiments expressed by Iain (in his superb response to Adam) above.
I believe that it is an abuse of democracy to allow the scheme to go ahead on the basis of councillors’ votes - as may well happen at the end of the ‘consultation’ period. This scheme should be put to the whole of the Greater Manchester electorate in a referendum. I understand that the overwhelming majority of the Greater Manchester public is against the scheme; the will of the people should not be ignored in this matter; it is outrageous that a handful of zealots [primarily] in the Labour Party might impose their will - against all sound judgement and reason - upon several million people in Manchester and its hinterland.
referendum the key word? the people must be given the chance to speak
one more labour Tax. I am sick and tired of talking to poeple who are finding the day to day simple things of living harder. I suggest the people who come up with this rubbish. Talk to the person i have spoken with who this week as lost is home job and car. So much for LABOUR
joe
I must say that I was pleasently surprised to read Cllr Lease’s somewhat reluctant backing of a referendum on the congestion charge. Something I have argued for some time.
His views in my opinion are very distorted although any move to give the people a voice is one I welcome although I will echoe caution that any referendum is not highjacked by one side or the other.
I only hope now that our own Cllr Merry will listen to the calls and give people a referendum.
Cllr M O’Neill
TO PUT THE TOPIC OF CONGESTION CHARGE WELL AND TRULY OUT WITH THE HOUSEHOLD WASTE ,WE HAVE HAD THE BLOGS,MARKETING,TV ADVERT AND FALSE ADVERTISING CLAIMS I FEEL BEING CYNICAL THIS CHARGE WILL STILL BE FORCED UPON US PEOPLE POWER COUNTS FOR A LOT SO WHILST THE GMPTA CONSULTATION ON THE C CHARGE RUNS ,ALL PEOPLE WISHING TO VENT THERE OPINION SHOULD DESEND OUTSIDE GMPTA HQ,HAS ANY BODY SEEN THE GMPTA CONSULTATION IN ACTION ,OR IS BEING INVISIBLE THE KEY TO ITS AIMS ??????