Congestion Charge +
Comments: 0
Stars 
: 0
There has understandably been a lot of reaction to the proposed Infrastructure bid by the Association of Greater Manchester Councils that includes a congestion charge. The overwhelming response reported in the media is, so far, distinctly "NO".
Its now time to get past the sound bites. The argument needs to be widened, and we are now better placed to do this as more details of the bid emerge.
First of all, how much does congestion already cost us? No-one has mentioned it. The off peak journey time from Middleton to Manchester by bus is 20 minutes. At peak, it is 30 minutes. So congestion adds half again to the journey tme. Who pays for that? It's not the bus operator, you can be assured it's the passenger who pays. If you're in a taxi and it's held up in a queue, does the meter stop? Not on your life. The passenger pays.
We need to have a much better idea how much congestion actually costs each and every one of us right now. Then we have to look forward five years, and guess how much it will be then. Of one thing I am certain, if we throw out the Infrastructure bid it will be more, much much more.
So if the introduction of the charge in five years time means there will be less congestion, then journey times will be quicker with reduced cost to the travelling public. The question we need to ask is: Will this indirect saving outweigh the direct charge?
Agreement to run a congestion charging pilot comes with a bribe. The bribe is nearly £3 billion to improve public transport. No charging, no £3 billion. Graham Stringer says the government should pay for improvements to public transport anyway. Maybe so, but that's pie in the sky. When it comes to handouts, the whole country is crying out for this cash. How much will each city get? Not a lot. He also believes that technical improvements can solve the problem. They would be sticking plaster. There would a difference for a bit,then we'd be back to the old problem. The Victoria Avenue nightmare has been fixed, now we queue down the road at Blackley.
In essence the Infrastructure bid is all about making public transport attractive and convenient enough for people use to get into and out of the city at peak times. There will still be many who, for one reason or another, have no choice but to use their car or van at peak times. For them, the charge they pay will be compensated by shorter journey times.
This issue is much, much too important for the simple but understandable response of "NO".
We will not get a second bite at the cherry. We have to look beyond immediate self interest and decide what's best for the people, what's best for the economy. It might be easy to mirror the views of a particularly vociferous section of the community, but this decision has to be made with reflection, deliberation, and consideration for all sections of the community. In particular the next generation. They will have to live with the consequences of our decision.
Its now time to get past the sound bites. The argument needs to be widened, and we are now better placed to do this as more details of the bid emerge.
First of all, how much does congestion already cost us? No-one has mentioned it. The off peak journey time from Middleton to Manchester by bus is 20 minutes. At peak, it is 30 minutes. So congestion adds half again to the journey tme. Who pays for that? It's not the bus operator, you can be assured it's the passenger who pays. If you're in a taxi and it's held up in a queue, does the meter stop? Not on your life. The passenger pays.
We need to have a much better idea how much congestion actually costs each and every one of us right now. Then we have to look forward five years, and guess how much it will be then. Of one thing I am certain, if we throw out the Infrastructure bid it will be more, much much more.
So if the introduction of the charge in five years time means there will be less congestion, then journey times will be quicker with reduced cost to the travelling public. The question we need to ask is: Will this indirect saving outweigh the direct charge?
Agreement to run a congestion charging pilot comes with a bribe. The bribe is nearly £3 billion to improve public transport. No charging, no £3 billion. Graham Stringer says the government should pay for improvements to public transport anyway. Maybe so, but that's pie in the sky. When it comes to handouts, the whole country is crying out for this cash. How much will each city get? Not a lot. He also believes that technical improvements can solve the problem. They would be sticking plaster. There would a difference for a bit,then we'd be back to the old problem. The Victoria Avenue nightmare has been fixed, now we queue down the road at Blackley.
In essence the Infrastructure bid is all about making public transport attractive and convenient enough for people use to get into and out of the city at peak times. There will still be many who, for one reason or another, have no choice but to use their car or van at peak times. For them, the charge they pay will be compensated by shorter journey times.
This issue is much, much too important for the simple but understandable response of "NO".
We will not get a second bite at the cherry. We have to look beyond immediate self interest and decide what's best for the people, what's best for the economy. It might be easy to mirror the views of a particularly vociferous section of the community, but this decision has to be made with reflection, deliberation, and consideration for all sections of the community. In particular the next generation. They will have to live with the consequences of our decision.
Back to entries Comment on this entry
