Manchester Congestion Charge Referendum

[oafc0000]

There should be guarantees put in place that IF (or when) the councils fall short of the intended public system services then the charge is suspended until such time it is corrected.

 

There is a grantee that 80% of the proposed infrastructure must be in place before charging can start...

[Guest sheridans_world]

I drive, I work inside one of the rings and (like this morning) I would have to cross both rings and actually come out of one to get to work by the shortest route.

 

However I have voted Yes.

 

The upgrade to the metro, while not saving time, would save me a small fortune every year.

[Matt]

There is a grantee that 80% of the proposed infrastructure must be in place before charging can start...

Like most things that have politics attached to them, I still won't believe it even if I manage to see it...

 

I think LL puts up some decent posts there oafc0000, I know what he does for a living so it's kinda worth listening to him.

 

..and I really think it takes two for the debate to disintegrate into "having pops" - it's not all LL's fault...

 

EDIT: I knew S_W would vote yes...

[Guest sheridans_world]

EDIT: I knew S_W would vote yes...

 

Haha! How did you know that then?!

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

So what exactly are these public transport improvements I'm supposed to be getting in return for this congestion charge then? The metrolink is going to run along exactly the same route as the ordinary trains do presently, except it's going to take longer, it's going to cost more and the carriages will seat less people. So forgive me if I don't see that as an improvement.

 

I think looking at the Metrolink with that sort of myopic viewpoint is a bit wrong. I used to live in Sale, 7 miles out of Manchester and with a tram every 6 or 7 minutes, I could be from my flat to the centre within 25 minutes at the most. Also, living in Hollinwood now, the trains are much more infrequent, so yes, the trams are smaller, but are far more frequent meaning you don't have to study a timetable to make sure you get to the station at the right time. In fact, because of the infrequency, I get a bus into Manchester if I'm every travelling without the car.

 

But I'm voting NO anyway. I live right on the border on the M60 in Hollinwood. The Metrolink will be happening anyway, funding is set aside for that as Dan pointed out (I'd initially got confused by this factor as I was about to vote thinking the whole Metrolink line hinged on a YES vote). To say businesses won't be affected, or wont go out of business as a result of congestion charging is a massive sweeping assumption. It will affect lots of businesses within the outer ring of the congestion zone purely because lots are situated on business parks that are only really accessable by car. I think business within the centre of Manchester may improve as a result, but I have big doubts about the ones within the outer ring.

 

However, my dad is voting YES which completely cancels out my vote!

[garcon]

This is the saddest aspect of the whole thing.

 

Given all the information about how it'll work, what (and when) the investment will be, when the charge would start, the arguments for and against etc. etc. I might be persuaded in favour.

 

But I'd probably still vote no simply because I do not trust the decision makers and budget holders to fairly and honestly adhere to their side of the deal.

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

Just out of interest, does anyone know what the 10 boroughs who are voting on it are? Just wondering whether me and my dad are part of the same borough.

[Lookers_Carl]

Just out of interest, does anyone know what the 10 boroughs who are voting on it are? Just wondering whether me and my dad are part of the same borough.

 

 

Here are the ten, plus how they looke dlike voting according to a recent poll on bbc

 

Trafford - probs vote no

Manchester - yes

Oldham - toss up

Bury - Probs vote no

Bolton - last time i heard they were edging towards yes

Wigan - yes

Salford - yes

Rochdale - toss up

Stockport - yes

Tameside - Probs vote no

[Matt]

Haha! How did you know that then?!

Just a guess.

 

Little off topic, but I know a medium/palmist/psychic scam that is used to prey on gullable parents-to-be - the couple see said medium wanting to know about their pregnancy, the medium asks them if they want to know the sex of the unborn child - for a fee : "£50 up front and if I'm wrong, you can have your money back"

 

Great one that. Like I said, nothing to do with the thread, I don't know why I wanted to share that - just popped in my head. Apologies to all.

[OldhamSheridan]

He's a witch (okay, warlock).

 

 

BURN HIM!!!

[leeslover]

Any chance of merging these three into one emoticon?

 

 

It could be used to save time for people who want to show that they are laughing heartily whilst talking out of their arses.

 

Anyway, must dash, got to do some analysis on recovery rates for foreign registered vehicles.

[oafc0000]

Like most things that have politics attached to them, I still won't believe it even if I manage to see it...

 

I think LL puts up some decent posts there oafc0000, I know what he does for a living so it's kinda worth listening to him.

 

..and I really think it takes two for the debate to disintegrate into "having pops" - it's not all LL's fault...

 

EDIT: I knew S_W would vote yes...

 

Im all up for debating the points but he just wants to question my whole existent on the boards so I grow tired of him... I don't understand why 1, he replies or 2, dosent add me to his ignore list if I offend him so much

[Matt]

He's a witch (okay, warlock).

BURN HIM!!!

You'll have to apply for a Hot Work Permit first. Take form number OWTB/HW/033 and go to desk 3.

 

I love all this beaurea, bururo, beouri, red tape.

[Matt]

Any chance of merging these three into one emoticon?

 

 

It could be used to save time for people who want to show that they are laughing heartily whilst talking out of their arses.

 

 

I have a new project...

[monkeykieran]

I live in Manchester and use the (disgusting pauper's) public transport that exists.

 

The congestion charge idea is an absolute joke. Whilst I hate the buses there are plenty already, the roads are never as congested as other major cities, and the worst thing about it all is not just the daily congestion charge but the ridiculous debt that the whole Manchester population will have for the next 10 years to pay for tramways to towns outside of manchester itself.

 

What the **** should we pay for them to have easier access to our city? Id rather pay my taxes for a better NHS and education for the people who live here.

 

Don't even get me started on that fat gibbering Scottish monkey "in charge" of the country and how he's helping matters even further

[Jac]

oafc0000 - what do you do with your paper when you've read it? How many holidays do you go on in a year? Do you go on a plane? Do you leave things on standby in your house? Do you have a compost bin? Do you have a water butt? Is your loft insulated? Is your real reason for voting YES that you're doing it for environmental reasons?

 

I class myself as an environmental person, and I'm voting NO. I agree we need better public transport. I do think we need a congestion charge, but only in the centre of town. Not at the M60.

 

I live in Bury and work in Blackburn, so my journey won't be affected. So you may see me as selfish. The public transport as it is is not managed correctly. I have been assualted on a bus before, a full bus, and nobody did a thing. Therefore I do not feel safe on public transport. So it's my choice not to use it.

 

Benefits to Bury are very little. The bus service is fine as it is. The tram is over used and lacks park and ride facilities. If I had seen proper plans of how parking for tram use would be increased then I may have voted differently.

 

And as for that little nobble of charging zone they have brought in around Simister.... well that's just cheeky. A hell of a lot of people will get caught with that.

 

Other areas have brilliant public transport without having to pay an extra tax. Why is it differen't for us?

 

3 people in my house voted NO.

[oafc0000]

oafc0000 -

 

what do you do with your paper when you've read it? - Recycle it

 

How many holidays do you go on in a year? 1 or 2

 

Do you go on a plane? Yes - I pay for carbon offsetting...,

 

Do you leave things on standby in your house? No

 

Do you have a compost bin? Yes

 

Do you have a water butt? No

 

Is your loft insulated? Yes

 

Is your real reason for voting YES that you're doing it for environmental reasons? Its one of the many reasons....

[garcon]

And that's precisely where Ken came unstuck with the London congestion charge.

 

In its original form (to which it will return under Boris) it was aimed simply at relieving congestion. Then Ken decided it'd be good to bring the environment into it and charge "gas guzzlers" more, and extend it into the West End. Although clearly it was never intended as an envy tax. Oh no....

 

As a pure mechanism for relieving congestion in a city centre, I believe a charge can work. Once you build other factors into it, including the environment, it starts to fall apart. Yes, hopefully there would be a positive environmental impact from a reduction of the sheer number of vehicles entering the zone, but it should be kept at that level - a positive side effect. (And the London C-Zone has shown that particular impact is only temporary, and that actually Ken made it worse by extending the zone).

[Lookers_Carl]

To put things into perspective

 

- Work situation: I live in south chadd, just inside the proposed outer ring, and have used public transport to get to work/uni and back in manchester mon-fri for the past 6 years.

 

Yet I am voting no, as has everyone else in our household.

 

I am not against the principle of congestion charging, or the principle of improved public transport at the expense of a congestion charge.

 

I am against the congestion charge proposals that have been put in front of us to vote on. For the following reasons

 

1) First and foremost, I don not think the proposed investment and transport improvements are anywhere near enough in return for a congestion charge, and certain boroughs, such as oldham and rochdale, will see alot more of the benefits than other boroughs, such as wigan, who are only getting a couple of extra bus services and slightly increased train services.

 

2) No guarantees have been made regarding the recent concessions, such as capped bus fairs. They have not said how long these concessions will last, and whether the cap is more expensive than current fairs. I would have liked them to show a pricing structure of somesort to show that fares will be reduced. I know in london the fare for public transport is a hell of alot cheaper if you have an oyster card rather than just buying individual tickets. Has they have done that, I may have plumped for a yes vote.

 

3) THe charging zone is way to big and covers too much residential area. This is just personal preference I suppose but I would much rather have a london style c charge zone, as in you enter the zone, you pay, simple as, straight forward. Anyone living inside the zone gets a 90 percent discount, as they do in the london scheme.

 

Now want to put forward something else, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU ARE FOR OR AGAINST THE SCHEME, how many people actually think it will get voted in?

 

Current polls indicate only 6 out of 10 boroughs are voting yes, with rochdale, trafford, tameside and bury voting no, although oldham (currently yes) and rochdale (currently no) are separated by less than one percent

[Guest M_OAFC]

Not really....

 

Yes, really! There are journeys it is impossible to make by public transport and still get to work on time unless you are prepared to stay in a hotel. These proposals will not change that.

 

Ive had journeys around the 2 hour mark in the past... that's life....

 

People live for a finite amount of time and they want to spend some of it enjoying themselves. It is not unreasonable to refuse to spend 4 or 5 hours a day travelling to and from work, nor is it unreasonable to vote against a proposal that will force them to pay if they want to continue to avoid that prospect.

 

That does not make them selfish and ignorant, in fact I would argue that you are being selfish by expecting other people to put up with that.

 

If you really believe that asking people to go to such extremes to get to work is reasonable then we are so far apart on this issue there really isn't any point continuing to debate it. Lets just agree to disagree shall we.

[Lookers_Carl]

Yes, really! There are journeys it is impossible to make by public transport and still get to work on time unless you are prepared to stay in a hotel. These proposals will not change that.

People live for a finite amount of time and they want to spend some of it enjoying themselves. It is not unreasonable to refuse to spend 4 or 5 hours a day travelling to and from work, nor is it unreasonable to vote against a proposal that will force them to pay if they want to continue to avoid that prospect.

 

That does not make them selfish and ignorant, in fact I would argue that you are being selfish by expecting other people to put up with that.

 

If you really believe that asking people to go to such extremes to get to work is reasonable then we are so far apart on this issue there really isn't any point continuing to debate it. Lets just agree to disagree shall we.

 

Well we will know soon enough whether it is going to happen.

 

Personally, I really cant see it getting the support of 7 out of 10 boroughs.

[Guest M_OAFC]

The upgrade to the metro, while not saving time, would save me a small fortune every year.

 

But the metro extension to Oldham and Rochdale is not dependent on a yes vote, it's happening anayway.

 

The powers that be have been very careful not to publicise that in order to mislead people in to voting yes. In this instance it appears to have worked.

[leeslover]

But the metro extension to Oldham and Rochdale is not dependent on a yes vote, it's happening anayway.

 

The powers that be have been very careful not to publicise that in order to mislead people in to voting yes. In this instance it appears to have worked.

The Metrolink to Rochdale is priceless – same line as the perfectly decent train service, and takes you into Rochdale train station, which might attract some people who previously shopped at the Trafford Centre or the Arndale to travel out to spend their money on quite exceptionally rancid prostitutes. It’s about a 15 minute walk into the town centre from there, totally and utterly pointless.

[oafc0000]

Yes, really! There are journeys it is impossible to make by public transport and still get to work on time unless you are prepared to stay in a hotel. These proposals will not change that.

People live for a finite amount of time and they want to spend some of it enjoying themselves. It is not unreasonable to refuse to spend 4 or 5 hours a day travelling to and from work, nor is it unreasonable to vote against a proposal that will force them to pay if they want to continue to avoid that prospect.

 

That does not make them selfish and ignorant, in fact I would argue that you are being selfish by expecting other people to put up with that.

 

If you really believe that asking people to go to such extremes to get to work is reasonable then we are so far apart on this issue there really isn't any point continuing to debate it. Lets just agree to disagree shall we.

 

Your mindset is that people have a "right" to drive cars and destroy the earth... My mindset is very different...

 

Yes we should agree to disagree....

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

The Metrolink to Rochdale is priceless – same line as the perfectly decent train service, and takes you into Rochdale train station, which might attract some people who previously shopped at the Trafford Centre or the Arndale to travel out to spend their money on quite exceptionally rancid prostitutes. It's about a 15 minute walk into the town centre from there, totally and utterly pointless.

 

From my perspective, it isn't perfectly decent. The trains from Hollinwood and Failsworth into Manchester (And Rochdale) are crap. In fact out of peak hours and Sundays I think it's about 1 train an hour. The Metrolink will mean a tram every SIX minutes in peak times and every TWELVE minutes off peak.

 

I know Rochdale train station is a little out of town, but regular services to and fro will encourage regeneration to that 'unloved' part of Rochdale betwixt the Station and the centre.