In the weeks leading up to the Congestion Charge referendum, Salford Conservatives distributed thousands of newsletters explaining what we thought of the Congestion Charge and TIF bid, and urging local residents to vote no when they received their ballot papers. I would have liked to have delivered many more but late November and early December are far from ideal for campaigning. I know that Conservative colleagues in neighbouring boroughs like Wigan and Trafford were engaged in a similar exercise.
Salford Labour and Labour-controlled Salford City Council were supportive of the TIF bid, so where were the Labour leaflets urging local residents to vote in favour? If Labour thought this bid was so good for Salford, why did they not get their hands dirty and get out on the doorsteps to argue for a yes vote rather than stay in the ivory towers of the Civic Centre?
The TIF bid was a bad deal for Salford and I am delighted that it has been rejected by such a decisive margin. I would imagine that the Yes campaign are desperately disappointed that their Labour colleagues have shown such political cowardice in the face of a difficult vote. Over the coming months I will waste no time reminding local residents that this was a Labour plan, because the Salford Labour Party haven’t had the guts to actually go out and tell people that themselves.
An excellent post Iain… the thought occurs to me than one obvious reason why we didn’t see the Labour Party out and about – committing Labour Party time, energy and money – is because they had no need to, given all the public money they had to spend on propaganda [and also because it was preferable to use a propaganda front (for the usual reasons why anybody would be a propagandist) rather than make the campaign directly in the name of Labour].
In short, Labour have neither the courage of their convictions nor their own purse.
“Salford Labour Party haven’t had the guts to actually go out and tell people that themselves.”
Unlike the Salford Conservatives that had the guts to deliver leaflets that were full of lies!
I fear you are confusing “lying” with “saying something you don’t like”…
Since Friday I have been looking at the reporting of the results. It is very dissapointing to read but not that surprising that on GM Future Transport website (was this supposed to be politically neutral) the following was written
“Greater Manchester has rejected the Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) proposals and has now lost the opportunity to invest up to £3bn into public transport, tackle rising congestion, and safeguard thousands of future jobs.
Despite the opportunity of more seats on trains and trams at peak times, more buses starting earlier and finishing later, new transport interchanges, capped bus fares and the introduction of an electronic travel smart card, the proposals have been dismissed and the TIF funding package of £1.5bn – along with additional borrowings of £1.2bn – has now been lost.
For full results refer to the table included under editor’s notes.
Instead of a transformed public transport system rivalling the best in the world and the promise of as many as 10,000 new jobs – directly created by TIF – we now face the prospect of a long, slow journey to improve the city-regions public transport system piecemeal over many years.”
Followed by some rhetoric from Lord Smith. Wondered what your thoughts were?.
Iain,
Never in my life did I think I would read a Tory politician complaining about Labour not campaigning hard enough on an issue!
I hope you’ll also be pointing out that it was Labour that gave the public a direct say on this issue – which of course has lead to the result we got last Friday. You’ll have a job making it stick that this was a ‘Labour Plan’ in Worsley, where your own Labour MP was against the proposals. As you are well aware, the ‘fors’ and ‘againsts’ crossed most party lines – including, as Adam has so correctly pointed out, those serial fence-sitters the Liberal Democrats.
I voted Yes and argued with anyone who would listen that this would be a good – if not perfect – step forward for public transport and the environment in Greater Manchester. So obviously, I’m disappointed with the outcome – but that’s democracy.
We may well revisit this issue in the future, but I fear that may be a long way off now. One positive aspect I take away from all this is that any new scheme may include re-regulation of the bus and train networks. Again however, this may be further away than the oft quoted ’33 years’ to pay back investment on the TIF scheme that was rejected so emphatically last week.
Tom.
Tom,
Our Labour Council Leaders cannot complain about the result when they were not prepared to put the political effort in to support the bid. Tell me, why did Salford Labour not put out leaflets supporting the TIF bid? As for Barbara Keeley, well she has a history of local bandwagon-jumping. She claimed to back St George’s but then mysteriously withdrew her support, and failed to show up at the march.
I struggle to believe that you typed those comments about the referendum with a straight face Tom. Conservatives across Greater Manchester urged a referendum from the very start, and Labour only changed their mind when they realised what the political consequences of pushing this scheme through without a direct mandate would be.
Salford Conservatives tabled a motion calling for a referendum in the early summer and this was rejected by every Labour Councillor present.
Just out of interest, what do we understand Barbara Keeley’s current position on St. George’s to be? Am I correct in thinking that Keeley is on side with John Merry and John Warmisham (et al) to kill off the school?
Barbara wrote to the Salford Advertiser with a letter opposing the toll tax – and which was published prominently. She is not so vocal about her stance on St. George’s. Is Barbara not keen to tell us where she stands (and why) on the proposed kill-off?
Barbara was publically supportive of the school until the Council floated the proposal for St Ambrose Barlow to be rebuilt on the Wardley site, at which point she abruptly withdrew her public support for St George’s and has said very little ever since.
The press were briefed that she would be attending the demonstration in the spring but she did not turn up nor contact St George’s to apologise for her non-attendance.
I think we can reasonably conclude that Barbara Keeley is completely in favour of killing off St. George’s RC, unless we get an official public statement to the contrary.
Iain,
Goodness me, the level of double standards here is almost reaching Lib Dem-esque proportions!
Why is it that when a Labour MP opposes a scheme in response to constituents’ views and their own judgement it’s characterised as ‘local bandwagon-jumping’?
Does that mean Tory councillors in Worsley, Boothstown and Walkden who opposed TIF are guilty of the same offence? Or – let me guess – were they bravely representing resident’s views in the face of wicked old Labour’s toll tax?
Simply breathtaking.
Tom.
Tom,
Be kind, no seasonal goodwill for the Lib Dems then. Ive just read the Salford Labour website and there response to the Tif rejection.
I wish I could actually fathom the logic behind some of the statements on there.
“…we should sell off our crown jewels to fund the capital expense…”
This from a Labour politician given their record in Salford.
“…with all major parties having some form of road pricing in the manifesto…So which party is brave enough to stand by conviction and act in the face of such public unpopularity?…”
The only thing they seem brave to do is stand by the conviction of what the party leadership decree. Red, Yellow or Blue if you believe in something then that is standing by your convictions. I may have my opinions about Richard Leese but at least he put his neck on the line for the policy, that I can respect…it was a rare site to see a Salford Labour councillor publicly supporting the Tif, but as it is Christmas I suppose it was the thought that counted.
You want a plan ‘b’. There was never any real wish on the part of those behind the Tif campaign to countenance anything other than Congestion Charging because it was always all or nothing with them. Given the massive rejection, lets move onwards to create a true consensus on solving the problems we face.
Martin,
For you, I am always willing to make an exception – Merry Christmas.
I just hope your old man doesn’t spend Christmas Day teaching the new arrival to say “bah, humbug”.
Tom.
No Tom i will be cooking Christmas Dinner for 150 pensioners in the morning preping a buffet for them in the afternnoon off at five quick shower then i will take up presents. If i have time i will try to get her to say it. All the best to you and yours
joe