manchester congestion charges

spen - do you live in Manchester ? your theory has so many holes in it, it's not real...

the C-charge was going to come in around 2013 when the loans for the work need to be paid back. so the improvements would come first.

And as someone who lives about 1/2 a mile inside of the M60 - I can attest that there is serious congestion issues all over the city so the outer ring would have been in the right place

I wouldn't have expected any other result (turkeys won't vote for Christmas).

I though we elected polititians to make the hard decisions for us?

p.

They should make public transport and travelling by bike more attractive and accessible in the first place

which was exactly what was planned..

maybe if the government saved some £££££ by, you know, not invading Iraq and the like we could all have more investment in transport systems?

downfader wrote:

And Ford down here are trying to steal money off our government/local councils... Probably the best known and one of the biggest car firms is saying they have no money. Yeaaah right!

They don't....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7779981.stm

a_n_t wrote:

rapid_uphill wrote:

instead the mancs would rather go nowhere waiting in traffic.

the logic of a manc baffles me

funny how the most opinionated dont even come from manchester!

I drive in everyday in winter and fark me, its not actually that bad!

a manc cyclist that voted no.

+1

GeoffNelder wrote:

it is so congested I don't like taking an hour to travel 5 miles.

i've never averaged 5mph in the rush hour! try taking your handbrake off?

I commute up and down Princess Parkway, some days are worse than others. 5mph is an exaggeration but on bad days it's not actually that far off! More-so in the evenings than the morning.

OffTheBackAdam wrote:

GeoffNelder wrote:

I really hope the other towns considering congestion charges aren't put off by the misinformed and misguided no voters.
Geoff

Glad to know you think that 80% of the population are too thick to comprehend the subject.
How about they've experienced the delights of public transport and find that the private car is a better bet?
More reliable, more comfortable, safer and more convenient.

I don't think 80% of Manchester are thick. The No lobby did a more efficient job that's all. What you say about public transport is, sadly, true.
All the more reason to have voted Yes to get the boosted investment to improve it.
Saying No to the congestion charge is a Yes to congestion.

Geoff

It is a fact of life that people vote on how something affects their pocket and little else. Because of this there was little chance of the charge getting in, especially when you factor in the likelihood that people who live inside the M60 (and would not pay the charge) were less likely to vote than those outside and who travel in (and thus would pay the charge). I base this on the demographics of the population and the voting patterns in elections.
Personally, although I live outside the M60, I voted for the charge and not merely because I cycle in. It just seems to be the right way to go. The traffic congestion needs to be tackled, at times it is very bad.

singlespeedexplosif wrote:

train fares were increased by a minimum of 6% at the start of the year, if the year on year rises are the same by the time the charge came into effect and people would have been pushed into using trains the priced would have increased by 30%.


how much do you think they're going to rise now the numpties have spoken?
I think by 2013 we'll all be wishing it was only 30%...

Ahh yes, the democratic majority express a view you don't agree with , so they must be numpties

singlespeedexplosif wrote:

Nothing to do with expressing a view I don't agree with.
More to do with the ridiculousness of turning down an opportunity like that, simply because it might cost them a bit more.

you can't help yourself can you


The majority have made it clear what their views are.
There is nothing ridiculous about not wanting to pay more taxes.

It's a tax, because we've already paid for the roads out of our taxes, be they Income or Car Taxes & Fuel Duties and paid for them many, many times over.
If I decide to use public transport, if I visit Mancherster, be it a bus, train, tram or taxi, then I've not paid tax to use them, so I expect to pay.
The huge amounts of money wasted by governments, especially this current bunch on non-productive employees doing non-jobs and the vast amounts paid to the EU's coffers that will be lost to fraud (I see that accountants have refused to sign off their accounts again, what is it, 13th year running?), would be more than enough to provide an excellent public transport service.
If a service is good, we can chose to use it.
Why, for instance, if I find that the service I get from a utilities company is bad, should I be forced to use them when there's a viable alternative?
Do you think for a minute, that if we all pile into buses, taxis or trams (Probably the worst option there, must be hell trying to cycle along a road with tram lines on it!) then that will magically solve all congestion problems?
Ever tried getting the family's shopping home on a bus?
Ever tried getting a pushchair, plus baby & toddler onto a bus?
Would you feel safe on a bus? Both interms of if it's involved in an accident and also with some of your fellow passengers?
Also, we're not talking about the tax being turned down because only 48% voted for it, you've got 80% voting against it.
Also, it's another tax on the poor, on those who can't put it down as business expenses.