Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Manchester Congestion Charge - No Vote
22 Answers
Us Mancs have overwhelmingly voted "No" in the Manchester congestion charge ballot. Do you think we were right?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
totally. I lived in manc for 3 years and the roads are a nightmare, espcially regent road / mancunian way / oxford rd corridor, but i can't see a congestion charge changing any of that. perhaps if the council hadn't been so overzealous with the one-way systems in the town centre, it wouldn't be so difficult to get around. they certainly make enough from the parking fees to invest some of it back into the road systems.
Yes. Our forebears fought hard to get rid of tolls. Improve public transport and encourage motorists to give up their daily grind into the city by all means, but tolls should not be tolerated.
Car parks could be more expensive or limited parking only. But the secret is the quality, reliability, affordability and convenience of public transport.
At present in most towns and cities public transport falls short on all counts.
I use a bus every day but the buses are uncomfortable and poorly maintained. I have one bus an hour. But it is reliable and I have a bus pass and I prefer to read a paper while someone else drives. The alternative is a stop start crawl morning and night.
Car parks could be more expensive or limited parking only. But the secret is the quality, reliability, affordability and convenience of public transport.
At present in most towns and cities public transport falls short on all counts.
I use a bus every day but the buses are uncomfortable and poorly maintained. I have one bus an hour. But it is reliable and I have a bus pass and I prefer to read a paper while someone else drives. The alternative is a stop start crawl morning and night.
Did you vote birdie?
It attracted a 50% turn out to vote from all the people that were invited, so 79% of 50% were right in my view. I think it was just too vast at around 80 square miles. No doubt they will shrink it down a bit and then introduce it as a necessity without any future chance to vote.
It attracted a 50% turn out to vote from all the people that were invited, so 79% of 50% were right in my view. I think it was just too vast at around 80 square miles. No doubt they will shrink it down a bit and then introduce it as a necessity without any future chance to vote.
Yes. Bear in mind that this was legislation originally proposed by John Prescott.
This is the second time when voters who have (unusually) been given a direct say in matters that effect them have rejected his proposals.
The first was when people in the North East region sensibly rejected the option of a directly elected regional assembly. The Hull Mauler was aghast at this rejection (how could anybody turn down such a fabulous and well thought out opportunity?) and it effectively put paid to plans to introduce such assemblies throughout the country (with the exception of London, where one was introduced under the stealth of having a directly elected mayor).
Mr P�s answer? Well, to introduce them anyway, but without the inconvenience of having to have the members elected! All �regions� now have unelected regional assemblies, wielding wide powers and controlling large budgets.
Mr Prescott appeared on the Politics Show a couple of hours ago before the result had been announced. He was keen to say that even if a �No� vote was returned, the vote was only part of a �consultative exercise� and that councillors would have the final say on the scheme�s introduction.
Be warned.
This is the second time when voters who have (unusually) been given a direct say in matters that effect them have rejected his proposals.
The first was when people in the North East region sensibly rejected the option of a directly elected regional assembly. The Hull Mauler was aghast at this rejection (how could anybody turn down such a fabulous and well thought out opportunity?) and it effectively put paid to plans to introduce such assemblies throughout the country (with the exception of London, where one was introduced under the stealth of having a directly elected mayor).
Mr P�s answer? Well, to introduce them anyway, but without the inconvenience of having to have the members elected! All �regions� now have unelected regional assemblies, wielding wide powers and controlling large budgets.
Mr Prescott appeared on the Politics Show a couple of hours ago before the result had been announced. He was keen to say that even if a �No� vote was returned, the vote was only part of a �consultative exercise� and that councillors would have the final say on the scheme�s introduction.
Be warned.
It's a tricky subject.
Many people I know would have voted against the congestion charge in London, had there been a vote on it. Several years on, I know that those same people would have changed their minds.
The centre of London is far, far more pleasant than it was. It does require a change of routine though and that's never easy to sell.
Many people I know would have voted against the congestion charge in London, had there been a vote on it. Several years on, I know that those same people would have changed their minds.
The centre of London is far, far more pleasant than it was. It does require a change of routine though and that's never easy to sell.
I don�t know when you last went to the centre of London, Quinlad. I go there most days and in my experience there is no difference between now and pre-CC days.
I took a bus from Victoria to Kensington a couple of weeks ago and it took fifty minutes to cover less than three miles. Yes, I could have walked, but it was raining heavily and I had a meeting to attend where I did not want it to appear that I had fallen into the river.
People who want to drive into London continue to do so and the traffic is horrendous. What the CC has done is to considerably increase the traffic on the periphery in places such as City Road, Euston Road and Chelsea Embankment. Drivers who would previously cut slightly into the zone to take some minor roads are now forced to stay on these main roads with the inevitable consequences. Traffic is being artificially restrained in these areas and it cannot find its own level as it used to.
Congestion Zones will not force people out of their cards, but they generate problems of their own which were not apparent previously. They also, of course, generate huge amounts of revenue. The people of Manchester will, if their decision is respected, have made the right decision.
I took a bus from Victoria to Kensington a couple of weeks ago and it took fifty minutes to cover less than three miles. Yes, I could have walked, but it was raining heavily and I had a meeting to attend where I did not want it to appear that I had fallen into the river.
People who want to drive into London continue to do so and the traffic is horrendous. What the CC has done is to considerably increase the traffic on the periphery in places such as City Road, Euston Road and Chelsea Embankment. Drivers who would previously cut slightly into the zone to take some minor roads are now forced to stay on these main roads with the inevitable consequences. Traffic is being artificially restrained in these areas and it cannot find its own level as it used to.
Congestion Zones will not force people out of their cards, but they generate problems of their own which were not apparent previously. They also, of course, generate huge amounts of revenue. The people of Manchester will, if their decision is respected, have made the right decision.
i do not own a car but i voted NO because the money raised was going to help private companies make more money. the people who are on low pay would be hit the hardest.
when manchester council ran the buses we had a good bus service, enter stagecoach and the only routes they look after are the busy ones like on wilmslow road for the students.
the people who wanted you to vote yes tell you that drivers would have to pay up to �5 a day. this is a LIE. read all the information and there is a little star by the price , go to the bottom of the page and you will see that this is the 2007 price. why put a 2007 price on something that you vote on in 2008.
this extra road tax was to get the low paid out of there cars and back on to the over crowded smelly buses. the ones who voted yes are probably getting a decent wage and could afford the extra tax. i for one am very happy that the majority of people have voted NO
when manchester council ran the buses we had a good bus service, enter stagecoach and the only routes they look after are the busy ones like on wilmslow road for the students.
the people who wanted you to vote yes tell you that drivers would have to pay up to �5 a day. this is a LIE. read all the information and there is a little star by the price , go to the bottom of the page and you will see that this is the 2007 price. why put a 2007 price on something that you vote on in 2008.
this extra road tax was to get the low paid out of there cars and back on to the over crowded smelly buses. the ones who voted yes are probably getting a decent wage and could afford the extra tax. i for one am very happy that the majority of people have voted NO
Look, they gave you the chance, but unfortunately you got the answer wrong. The right answer is of course 'Yes, we want a congestion charge'.
They'll probably save you the embarrassment of getting the answer wrong again, and the trouble of turning out for another vote by just implementing the charge anyway. They're nice like that.
They'll probably save you the embarrassment of getting the answer wrong again, and the trouble of turning out for another vote by just implementing the charge anyway. They're nice like that.
Because where I wanted to go (Kensington Gore, near the Albert Hall) is about three quarters of a mile from the nearest tube station (South Kensington) along the full length of Exhibition Road.
I do know my London and my transport options and a number 52 bus should have got me there quicker than the tube/walk would have done.
I do know my London and my transport options and a number 52 bus should have got me there quicker than the tube/walk would have done.
I hate to think about the amount of money which has been wasted on the campaign with adverts all over, mailshots and people out in force lurking round the tram stops and such leafleting people.
It would be nice to see some improvements to the public transport as, if they did, I'm sure they'd have a lot more people using it more regularly. I used to walk back 4/5 bus stops of a morning when I lived up Swinton way just to be able to get a chance of a seat on the bus. Worse coming back the other way at times, who wants to be stood on a bus jammed in like a sardine for half an hour, just to get out of the city centre let alone home.
There's so little enforcement on the buses either, seen quite a few nasty incidents and things like smoking, including drugs, loud music, offensive behaviour and language etc... isn't dealt with, saying that, 3 of the worst incidents I'd seen were kicked off by people taking a stand so you do wonder if it's really worth it.
I agree with the disparity mentioned above. If you live on a student bus route then you're sorted, buses galore and the vast majority double deckers.
I notice it on the trams as well, Altrincham seems to have a far better service than either the eccles or Bury lines.
Match days are mad as well when Utd are at home. When City plays they put on loads of double deckers out to the City of Light (and for some large concerts) but nothing for Utd which means hell for the commuters trying to get home on the Altrincham and Eccles lines. Bizarre when you realise Stagecoach run both the buses and Metrolink!
It would be nice to see some improvements to the public transport as, if they did, I'm sure they'd have a lot more people using it more regularly. I used to walk back 4/5 bus stops of a morning when I lived up Swinton way just to be able to get a chance of a seat on the bus. Worse coming back the other way at times, who wants to be stood on a bus jammed in like a sardine for half an hour, just to get out of the city centre let alone home.
There's so little enforcement on the buses either, seen quite a few nasty incidents and things like smoking, including drugs, loud music, offensive behaviour and language etc... isn't dealt with, saying that, 3 of the worst incidents I'd seen were kicked off by people taking a stand so you do wonder if it's really worth it.
I agree with the disparity mentioned above. If you live on a student bus route then you're sorted, buses galore and the vast majority double deckers.
I notice it on the trams as well, Altrincham seems to have a far better service than either the eccles or Bury lines.
Match days are mad as well when Utd are at home. When City plays they put on loads of double deckers out to the City of Light (and for some large concerts) but nothing for Utd which means hell for the commuters trying to get home on the Altrincham and Eccles lines. Bizarre when you realise Stagecoach run both the buses and Metrolink!
I voted no because I do not trust either the local politicians or MPs or even the government to deliver what they promise. We are taxed to the hilt one way or another anyway. There is not enough investment in public transport. I do not feel safe travelling on the bus. The few times I have been on the bus in the last couple of years, I have been surrounded by rough, smelly , foul mouthed people. I feel sorry for decent people who have to travel by bus. There would have to be security guards on every bus to make me feel safe. Why dont they put the money up front? Give us decent, safe alternatives to cars and then ask us to vote.Dont they trust us?
