Labour claims that it stands up for hard-working families. As it relinquished any credibility in that claim with the verdict of the electors of Crewe & Nantwich on rising prices, taxes and petrol costs, the latest loony Labour policy is Congestion-charging (C-charging) in Manchester.
Yes, congestion is a problem but what about people’s jobs? It is already a tightrope that many families walk when they drive into work, pay the mortgages and the tax burden and try to pay for the many things that kids need (whether small, teenaged or older). But, after the controversy caused by Livingstone’s London congestion charge (which ulimately led to his downfall), why introduce a C-charge in Manchester? Cllr Iain Lindley is on the ball with this matter and notes that:
Salford residents will feel the full force of the costs of the TIF [Transport Innovation Fund] scheme – a £5 a day tax on commuting if implemented at today’s prices and likely to rise through the roof once rising costs are taken into account – and will have a multi-billion pound debt hanging over their heads for the next three decades at least.
The Transport Innovation Fund, which was responsible for funding a series of disastrous Red Routes across the country including one on Stratford Road in Birmingham which ‘devasted’ local businesses, has provided funding for another dreadful scheme.
Labour seems determined not only to make the lives of working people miserable, but to inflict electoral hara-kiri on itself. Already heading for a kicking in the elections of 2010, are they happy to shed not only marginal seats but supposedly ’safe’ seats too directly because of C-charging? The results in Salford’s Irlam ward this year where, as the Manchester Evening News reported:
CONTROVERSIAL plans to introduce congestion charging in Greater Manchester have been hit by the defeat of Irlam councillor Roger Jones in the local elections.
Mr Jones, who was chairman of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority, has been the figurehead of the road-pricing scheme, which would also unlock £3bn of public transport improvements if given the green light by the government.
His high profile support for the plan ensured rival parties made it the key issue and led to claims that his ward was targeted by opponents who saw an opportunity to derail the scheme.
The chair of the GMPTA being defeated in Irlam? There will be a number of MPs and councillor who will be defeated in the wake of this policy. Only a few Labour MPs have stated their position – Tony Lloyd (Manchester, Central – maj 12,587) is for the scheme, whilst Graham Stringer (Manchester, Blackley; new seat Blackley & Broughton, maj 12,315) and David Crausby (Bolton, NE – maj 4,472) is against, according to an anti C-charge campaign. Other MPs need to make their position clear. I know a couple in the highly marginal Rossendale & Darwin, and the husband (who reads the Guardian) drives into Manchester – are they going to vote Labour, a vote for a £5 a day charge to get to work? Even Labour MPs in seats such as the new Worsley & Eccles South (notional maj 7,787) in the Borough of Salford should be particularly worried.
I’m no fan of congestion. My bus to work sits in the traffic on the way into Belfast and, yes, many people should get the bus instead. But this is not such a realistic position, as a neighbour points out it’s still cheaper for two to drive and catch the free park ‘n’ ride bus. For many women, public transport is not safe and they feel vulnerable alone at night. Other people have childcare responsibilities and others need the car for work.
What the Government should be doing is incentivising car sharing, improving public transport, and other fairer measures, rather than this crazy C-charge policy. Just because people have voted Labour for generations, like they used to do in Crewe, doesn’t mean that you can rob them and they’ll say, “Thank you, Gordon.” It just shows how out of touch the Government is; it could have got away with this measure 10 years ago as petrol, tax and prices in general weren’t so high.
The worrying question is are they mad enough to introduce C-charging elsewhere too?
And it gets crazier: Who is outlining the Manchester C-Charge to Parliament, but Ruth Kelly (Bolton West, maj 4,558).
Mountjoy
120g Co2 man said
What is worrying me most is how far do we go with congestion charging. Living between Nottingham and Derby, two cities both looking at charging, I could quite easily find myself facing two charges in a day.
Working within the car industry we have noticed a distinct change in many customers attitudes in the London area, with many people (the ones who can afford it) opting to purchase a congestion charge exempt vehicle, i.e. a prius, to drive into the centre, yet still using a polluting vehicle for journies outside the capital. Will the eventual result be that as more people buy exempt vehicles the goalposts will continually change to maintain revenues, if this is the case any positives of any schemes will be outweighed as the costs of development of existing technologies, not just in monetary terms, but also in enviromental terms will be astronomical and we will still have congested cities, just congested by hybrids instead of “normal fuel” cars.
It must be time to legislate against the companies that have made trillions in profits from our dependence on fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine and make them contribute to a solution, not just keep on passing it to the taxpayer.