Safe Speed Forums

Third c-charge zone revealed
Alan Salter - Exclusive
2/ 7/2007


MOTORISTS coming into the very centre of Manchester may have to pass through THREE congestion charge zones, it has been revealed.

Plans to have two pay-as-you-drive areas - an outer ring and an inner ring - have already been unveiled.

But now a third ring, around the inner relief road, which includes the Mancunian Way, has been proposed by Salford council leader John Merry.

But he insists drivers would not be expected to pay three times - the maximum number of charges would be two.

Officials are examining his proposals for a `smart' charge depending on distance travelled between the proposed intermediate and inner zones.

The aim is to remove the unfairness of people living just outside the originally planned inner cordon having to pay a charge while those living inside paying nothing.

To pay the maximum charge, drivers would have to cross two out of the three possible congestion charge boundaries.

Coun Merry said today: "This would not be an extra charge, but it would mean that people would have to travel a certain distance rather than just cross a single cordon."

The news comes after the start of a six-week consultation exercise into the whole congestion charging scheme.

Rochdale Lib Dem MP Paul Rowen said: "I can't for one minute imagine that people would be happy about this.

"This is a major consultation and it's got to be done properly. Changing the criteria half way through the consultation only serves to confuse and make people more annoyed."

The idea has not yet been put to the independent panel of business leaders vetting the plans and Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce chief executive Angie Robinson said today: "We are in a period of consultation and it is good that people are making suggestions.

"But I am not sure whether this idea would add any value to the scheme."

A six-week consultation exercise is currently under-way to allow the public to give their views on the congestion charge proposals.

Leaders of the 10 councils that make up the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities will meet later this month to receive the results from the opinion survey.

They will then decide whether to go ahead with a bid for £1.1 billion of funds from the government to improve public transport in Greater Manchester, which would be linked to the introduction of a congestion charge.

The M.E.N. can reveal today which roads are within the original inner charging ring.

These are the roads which will cost drivers £1 to cross in the morning rush hour and £1 on the way home under the plan if Greater Manchester wins its bid to introduce congestion charging.

The outer cordon - which will cost £2 to enter in the morning - follows the line of the M60.

But this is the first time that details of the intermediate boundary - costing a further £1 - have been disclosed.

We can reveal that drivers arriving from the east in the morning will be charged £1 for crossing Alan Turing Way, which passes the City of Manchester Stadium.

Motorists who drive in from the south of the city will pay to cross Dickenson Road and Kirkmanshulme Lane at Longsight.

The cordon follows the route of the long-planned intermediate relief road which circles Manchester city centre between the M60 motorway ring road and the inner relief road, which includes the Mancunian Way.

Anti-clockwise, after Alan Turing Way, the cordon enters Queens Road at Collyhurst before taking in Great Cheetham Hill East and West towards Salford - meeting the A6 briefly.

It carries on along Eccles Old Road before crossing the M602 at junction 2 and heading south through Trafford Park to Stretford, joining Wilbraham Road. It then turns left on to Wilmslow Road, right on to Dickenson Road, heading north towards Manchester on Stockport Road, before turning right on to Kirkmanshulme Lane at Longsight and on to Pottery Lane to complete the circle.

The details were revealed by GMPTE interim chief executive David Leather to a meeting of the Pro Manchester group of business leaders but he refused to elaborate afterwards, claiming that the route was only `indicative' and could change.

Councils dismiss airport sale

4/ 7/2007

TOWN hall chiefs have ruled out selling Manchester Airport as an alternative to a local congestion charge.

The proposal – from John Whittaker, boss of Peel Holdings – was dismissed as ‘sheer folly’ by Manchester council leader Sir Richard Leese and chief executive Sir Howard Bernstein.

In an open letter, they called the idea ‘breathtaking in its naivety’ and accused Mr Whittaker of letting his business interests in airports ‘cloud’ his judgement.

Manchester council owns 55 per cent of Manchester Airports Group (MAG) – which also includes airports in East Midlands, Humberside and Bournemouth – and, therefore, has the final say.

The other nine Greater Manchester councils own five per cent each.

In the open letter Sir Richard and Sir Howard write: "There is no way that the majority shareholders of Manchester Airport will ever let this Peel proposal get off the ground."

Last year, the airport generated £25m for the councils and Manchester warns that selling it could lead to council tax increases of 20 per cent in the city.

The rejection came as leading economic figures rounded on Mr Whittaker’s suggestion, put forward in a letter to the leaders and chief executives of the 10 councils and revealed by the M.E.N. yesterday.

The letter, – co-signed by Peel’s managing director Andrew Simpson, said the sale of MAG could raise an instant £3bn and attract a further £4bn in private-sector investment.

That would more than double the £3bn in government loans and grants the councils hope to get in return for a peak-hour congestion charge of up to £5 a day.

Critics have also pointed out that Peel already owns a number of airports, including Liverpool John Lennon – Manchester’s main regional rival.

Geoff Muirhead, chief executive of MAG, described the Peel plan as ‘fundamentally flawed’ and pointed to the unique way MAG’s profits are returned for council services.

In a stinging rebuke he said: "Manchester Airport is a huge success story for the north west region. Year on year, MAG has returned excellent profits for the 10 shareholding authorities of Greater Manchester. The same cannot be said of the privately-owned Liverpool John Lennon Airport.

"The debate about the future of the north west transport system is far too important to be subverted by the narrow commercial interests of a single private company."

Colin Sinclair, chief executive of inward investment agency Midas, whose role includes attracting businesses to Greater Manchester, said the airport was the ‘jewel’ in Manchester’s economic crown and should not be sold.

He said: "The suggestion that the airport should be sold to fund essential improvements to the transport infrastructure is a complete distraction from the key issues facing our economy."

John Merry, leader of Salford council, said the airport had thrived and prospered under local authority control.

He said: "I am extremely disappointed that Peel, who contribute in so many other ways to the development of the Manchester economy, could suggest something that would potentially wreck it."

Mike Chambers, Oldham’s deputy chief executive, said: "Officers at the council are considering the letter along with their Greater Manchester colleagues."

Leaders of the other councils involved declined to comment.

Peel bosses, whose empire includes the Trafford Centre, have said there is no connection between their business interests and the suggestion that MAG be sold.

The idea seemed to be winning support on the M.E.N.’s website last night.

An exclusive poll on manchestereveningnews.co.uk showed 82 per cent of respondents would prefer to sell Manchester Airport to fund the Metrolink extension than introduce a congestion charge.

Peel boss Mr Simpson said: "Sir Richard Leese and Sir Howard Bernstein are dismissing this alternative without any proper debate or review to assess its merits. They seem to be forgetting their commitment not to go forward with damaging road charging proposals unless they have the support of the public and the support of business. It is clear that they do not.

"Last year, Manchester Airport paid a dividend of £25m. Nine of the councils received only £1.25mn in dividend, equivalent to less that £10-a-year council tax. If they sold the airport and put the money in the bank the councils would earn over £150m in interest per year.

"Manchester has no need to own airports in Bournemouth, Hull and Derby. Manchester Airport’s passenger growth has ground to a halt and it is bottom of the pile of major airports. Privatising the airport would give it fresh impetus and capital for expansion to the benefit of the whole region.

"Peel’s proposal is a genuine alternative to road charging and would fund massive transport improvements.

"We only wish to engage in a reasoned debate on the alternatives to ensure that the right decision is made for the region as a whole."

What do you think of the suggestion to sell the airport? Have your say.

Submit your comments | View comments
(36 comments. Last comment 5/ 7/2007 at 18:24)



Most recent 2 of 36 user comments
PW great post!

What level of input do you guys really think they will consider from the public?

Airport NOT for sale

4/ 7/2007

FURY has erupted over a suggestion that Manchester Airport should be sold to fund the Metrolink extension and enable the controversial congestion charge scheme to be scrapped.

The proposal – by John Whittaker, boss of the Trafford Centre – has been branded ‘breathtaking in its naivety’ by council leaders.

Mr Whittaker had claimed the sale of the airport – currently owned by Greater Manchester’s 10 councils, with Manchester the majority shareholder – would raise £7 billion for trams, buses and trains, allowing Greater Manchester to scrap plans for a congestion charge.

But Manchester town hall chiefs Sir Richard Leese and Sir Howard Bernstein have ruled out the sale, warning that it could send council tax bills rocketing by 20 per cent.

Other senior figures in politics and business have also weighed in against Mr Whittaker, pointing out his company – Peel Holdings – already owns a string of airports.

Geoff Muirhead, chief executive of Manchester airport, accused Peel of trying to ‘subvert’ the congestion charge debate for its own ‘narrow commercial interests’. And Salford council leader John Merry , leader of Salford Council, said selling the airport could wreck the region’s economy.

What do you think of Peel Holdings' suggestion to sell the airport? Have your say.

Submit your comments | View comments
(16 comments. Last comment 6/ 7/2007 at 16:48)



Most recent 2 of 16 user comments
So true M Haworth, the cost per year is outrageous
paul teeque
6/07/2007 at 16:48
Hmm lets see... 20% on my council tax is £180...pa being Band A

introducing Tolls would be £1250 pa equivalent to a 138% rise in council tax...

Let face it, if the councillors dont want me to work in Manchester, i will happily find a job in Warrington - plenty of Architectural practices recruiting.

My company moved out of Manchester City Centre (from portland street) to Stretford when the origonal Congestion Charge was first mooted, it will soon move again outside of manchester where it can attract employees who cant afford to pay over the vast sums for the luxury of getting too work.

and that would be yet another empty office building... why would anyone want to pay £3 per day (£750 pa) to work in an office block on one side of the M60 when they can work in an office block on the other side of the M60 outside the charge. zone.
M Haworth, Bacup
6/07/2007 at 14:52

Congestion charge pledge
Alan Salter
3/ 7/2007


DRIVERS in Manchester will NOT have to pay three times to drive into the centre of Manchester, one of the architects of congestion charge plans has pledged.

Yesterday the M.E.N. revealed plans for three cordons that could trigger payments on the congestion charging scheme - depending on the time of travel.

But now it has emerged that motorists would only be charged for passing two cordons on any single journey and that the inner cordon would not necessarily trigger a charge.

Coun Roger Jones, chairman of Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority, said: "The Transport Innovation Fund bid proposals considered by the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities at the end of May include a congestion charging scheme of two charging rings and £3bn of transport improvements.

"AGMA and the PTA have received a number of comments on the proposals, including a suggestion from Salford council leader John Merry. This proposal would not add to charges. There would be no third charge, but it would refine the trigger for implementing the second charge."

The M.E.N. reported yesterday that officials were examining Coun Merry's idea to introduce a third cordon around the city centre.

Coun Jones added: "We are now looking into the practicability of these proposals. All that has been proposed so far is that the outer ring would be at or near the M60, with the inner ring nearer the centre but with the route yet to be determined.

"Drivers would only be charged for crossing inbound (towards the city centre) between 7-9.30am or outbound between 4-6.30pm (away from Manchester city centre)."

"This principle of targeting congested roads at congested times is the cornerstone of the congestion charge proposals and should not be overlooked."

Coun Merry said: "My suggestion was simply that, in order to trigger the charge, people should have to cross two rings. It is not an extra charge but it would mean that people would have to travel a certain distance rather than just cross a single cordon."

In yesterday's M.E.N., the map of the possible congestion charge rings mistakenly said that drivers would pay £1 for driving out of the city during the morning rush hour and £2 to drive into the city in the evening. In fact, there will be no charge for driving in the opposite direction to rush hour traffic and motorists will drive for nothing away from the city in the morning and towards the city at night.

Coun Merry was not advocating that drivers should be charged three times on a single journey, but only that there should be three cordons that could trigger charges. Motorists who passed through all three cordons would only face two payments.

What do you think of the congestion charge? Have your say.

Submit your comments | View comments
(26 comments. Last comment 4/ 7/2007 at 09:24)

How will c-charge affect you?

6/ 7/2007

MOTORISTS can now see how the congestion charge could affect them by logging onto the MEN's interactive map.

Details of the possible charging bands in Greater Manchester and also the tariffs suggested by transport chiefs can be found by clicking here for a full interactive map.

Users can follow their own route into work from home to see which of the proposed charging zones they will enter.

We will keep the map updated as plans for congestion charging are modified over the coming months.

gmfuturetransport.co.uk

What do you think? have your say.

Submit your comments | View comments
(52 comments. Last comment 6/ 7/2007 at 19:03)



Most recent 2 of 52 user comments
Obviously these people have been bribed by the council to say this. I live in the outer ring and work in trafford, what about that? W ill i be charged for living here too!!! The C charge is an absolute joke. I can think of another word begining with C that i can associate with this scandal. Also, when are they going to get it through their thick heads: they can plug as much money as they want into public transport and make it as new and as shiny as they want....the reason car owning people don't use public transport is BECAUSE it's public!! I want to get from A to B without some idiot playing music from thier mobile, without being coughed on or breathed upon by possible cold or flu infected people, without having to watch your back and belongings like an eagle because someone else probably is! I think i've made my piont clear enough. NO CONGESTION CHARGE
Mr R Supwood
6/07/2007 at 19:03
City of Manchester constitution Read 2 and 5 Part 2 ¿ Articles of the Constitution Article 1 The Constitution 1.1 Powers of the Council The Council will exercise all its powers and duties in accordance with the law and this Constitution. 1.2 The Constitution This Constitution, and all its appendices, is the Constitution of Manchester City Council. 1.3 Purpose of the Constitution The purpose of the Constitution is to: 1. enable the Council to provide clear leadership to the community in partnership with citizens, businesses and other organisations; 2. support the active involvement of citizens in the process of local authority decision making; 3. help councillors represent their constituents more effectively; 4. enable decisions to be taken efficiently and effectively; 5. create a powerful and effective means of holding decision-makers to public account; 6. ensure that no one will review or scrutinise a decision in which they were directly involved; 7. ensure that those responsible for decision making are clearly identifiable to local people and that they explain the reasons for decisions.
Professor Bob
6/07/2007 at 17:41
Submit your comments | View comments
(52 comments. Last comment 6/ 7/2007 at 19:03) Have your say
Got an opinion you want to share?
Register now and have your comments heard.

Register now

Latest stories
Five hurt in pile-up
Record fine for phone firm
Funeral of sunbed cancer mum
Quiet man carves name for himself
Celebration for belle of St Clement's

Most readcomments

Tragic end for sun bed mum
Victory for bank charge dad
Freed BBC man speaks out
The terrorist in our midst
How will c-charge affect you?
How will c-charge affect you?
Smoke ban a breath of fresh air
Councils dismiss airport sale
The terrorist in our midst
'Ditch c-charge - sell airport'

Congestion charge
How would you rather fund the Metrolink extension?


Congestion charge
28%
Sell Manchester Airport
72%

Leaflet congestion drivers 'fake'

Transport bosses have admitted using fake residents to promote a proposed congestion charge in Manchester.

A leaflet, sent to every home in Greater Manchester, gives four case studies to show how the scheme will affect travellers.

But the four "local people" featured in the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority (GMPTA) leaflet are in fact American models.

One of them, called Kiki, was portrayed as a solicitor from Ashton Under Lyne.

"Terry", said to be a self-employed van driver from Rochdale in the leaflet, was identified as 22-year-old model Erich Dalke from Seattle.

Their images, along with a mum-of-two named "Rachel" from Trafford and jobless "Neil" from Beswick, are all believed to have been bought from a US internet modelling library.

PR chiefs have admitted that no-one living or working in Greater Manchester was interviewed to produce the leaflet and that the case studies were actually made up.

The GMPTA website has since amended its internet page to say the people are "fictional case studies based on accurate travel plans under current proposals".

Spinoza Kennedy Vesey, the public relations firm which represents the GMPTA, has admitted the pictures were of models but originally claimed the case studies were real.

It said the identities of the local people involved had been changed to "protect privacy".

However, the firm later admitted the examples given were not genuine people at all, and that no-one had been interviewed or surveyed to compile the leaflet.

Transport officials said the Our Future Transport leaflet was intended to give an idea of the charges people may face.

Roger Jones, chairman of the GMPTA, said it had been put together "very quickly" to make sure everyone had a chance to learn the facts about a congestion charge.

"With more time, maybe it would have been better to interview proper families, but I don't mind if they are actors and actresses as long as the information is correct," he said.

A spokeswoman for the Transport Innovation Fund bid said: "The studies have been worked out based on real journeys taken by real people."

Asked why no real people were interviewed for the case studies, she said: "Nobody is paying it at the moment and it is impossible to interview anybody about that."

...do you still trust 'em??????mb

Congestion charge plan for Bolton
By Rob Devey

BOLTON has been earmarked as a town where congestion charges could be introduced in future.

A map drawn up as part of a regional bid for £3 billion in transport improvements, highlights the town as an area where the controversial charge - currently destined for the streets of Manchester - could be phased in.

The Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) bid has been backed by Bolton Council, but leader, Cliff Morris, last night claimed he had not seen the map, which was produced by officers of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority (GMPTA) and the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA).

advertisementCllr Morris, who represents Bolton on AGMA, the regional body which would submit the bid, said the town's inclusion on the map was "unacceptable".

Cllr Morris said: "I and my colleagues are disappointed that GMPTA chose to depict a graphic indicating a future charging zone which the executive of this council are in complete opposition to.

"If I had been aware of the contents of the leaflet, its distribution and production would have been opposed. We will be monitoring the activities of this partnership more closely in the future."

Cllr Morris stressed the AGMA executive had not agreed a future charging scheme for Bolton, adding that his Labour group would block any such plans.

Bolton's Conservative leader, Cllr John Walsh, said he would also oppose any congestion charge in Bolton, adding: "I welcome Cllr Morris's comments but if leaders have not seen this leaflet they are failing in their duties.

"The very fact Bolton is included as a possible future charging location is indicative of the fact that this scheme is being pushed through too quickly with too little consultation."

Lib Dem leader Cllr Roger Hayes, said he was "suspicious" of Bolton's inclusion on the map.

He said that given Labour's control of the GMPTA and AGMA the failure of its leaders to check the leaflet was "incompetent".

Cllr Hayes said he had "big doubts" about a congestion charge in Bolton. He added it could not be justified at the present time, but said it was "silly" to dismiss the idea out of hand in the future.

A spokesman for the TIF project team said: "The TIF leaflet is intended to be open and honest and therefore the graphic indicating a future charging zone around Bolton is simply an indication that at some point in the future, the charging scheme could be extended.

"It is important to realise that there is nothing planned, but it would have been wrong not to show that at some point in the future, the scheme may be extended."

Nine other locations, including Wigan, Bury, Rochdale and Manchester Airport are also identified as possible future charging zones.

If the Government accepts AGMA's TIF bid, Bolton would get a £23 million transport interchange near the Trinity Street train station, an 11-mile bus lane to Manchester and more carriages on trains.

The council's executive committee is expected to confirm Bolton Council's backing for the bid on July 23.

4:12pm Friday 13th July 2007

Print Email this CommentPosted by: John on 4:52pm Fri 13 Jul 07
Looks like the Manchester bus company are running the Bolton council now. What a farce.
Looks like the Manchester bus company are running the Bolton council now. What a farce.

Congestion charge could cost Bolton drivers £5.5m
By Rob Devey


MOTORISTS in Bolton could pay around £5.5 million a year to drive in and out of Manchester if congestion charging is introduced.

Charging zones at the M60 and on roads into Manchester city centre are among proposals in a possible regional bid to the Government for £3 billion to improve public transport.

The Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority (GMPTA) would get around £1 billion up front with £2 billion borrowed against future congestion charge income.

Bollton Council's Lib Dem leader Cllr Roger Hayes, said he worked out the £5.5 million figure after councillors were given estimates of rush-hour journeys from Bolton to Manchester.

He said Bolton's Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) working group was told around 12,000 cars would pass through at least one of the two proposed charging rings.

Cllr Hayes calculated that would equate to £21,000 a day, £106,000 a week and £5.5 million a year paid by Bolton motorists alone.

Over the 30-year period during which congestion charge income would be used to repay the £2 billion in loans, Bolton drivers would pay £165 million.

In return it is estimated that the town would get £120 million of the £3 billion cash for public transport improvements.

Cllr Hayes, who believes a referendum should be held in Bolton to allow residents to decide on the proposals, said he believed that was not enough.

"It is very questionable whether that represents good value," he said. "Admittedly there would be fewer cars if a congestion charge was in place but even then we have been told the estimated reduction in traffic would be 10 per cent which I think is disappointing.

"Cars passing through both congestion rings would pay £5 a day and I think that is too much and it could be increased by inflation.

"It poses the question as to whether we are trying to bring an income stream in or whether we are looking to discourage use of vehicles.

"The trouble with long term loans is that you can start becoming more concerned about getting the income in rather than discouraging use of cars."

The calculations by Cllr Hayes were based on officer estimates that 7,000 cars from Bolton currently cross the M60 ring in morning rush hour, which would cost £2.

Of these, about 1,300 carry on through what would be the inner charging zone, which would cost £1.

Returning to Bolton during the evening rush hour, where the charge would be £1 for each zone, the figures drop to 5,000 and 900.

Roy Sammonds, chairman of the Bolton Institute of Advanced Motorists, and a congestion charge sceptic, said: "£5.5 million a year is a lot of money. We are talking £5 a day and £25 a week, which takes some covering.

"Some businesses have no alternative to using cars or lorries and would have to pay it.

"They would be left wondering 'can we afford to carry on working there or have we got to do something different'?"

"Even if real public transport alternatives are put in place they will have to reduce the prices to attract more people."

It is estimated that the congestion charge will rake in £52 million a year across Greater Manchester.

Improvements planned for Bolton include a £23 million transport interchange near the Trinity Street train station, an 11-mile bus lane to Manchester and more carriages on trains.

Bolton Council last week gave its backing for the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) to bid for the £3 billion.

AGMA is expected to decide whether or not to press ahead with the bid on July 27.

12:47pm Tuesday 17th July 2007

Trafford says 'no' to c-charge
David Ottewell and Yakub Qureshi
21/ 7/2007

TRAFFORD council is ready to vote against plans to introduce congestion charging in Greater Manchester.

The Conservative group that controls the authority decided on the move

ahead of a crunch meeting of the leaders of all 10 Greater Manchester councils next Friday.

They will decide whether to bid for £1.2bn from the government's Transport Innovation Fund and permission to borrow a further £1.8bn.

The loan would be paid back over 30 years from proceeds of a peak-hours road toll of up to £5 a day.

Councils supporting the bid are confident it will not be derailed because they believe Friday's vote will be settled on a simple majority basis.

That means if six out of 10 Greater Manchester councils give their backing, the bid WILL be submitted to ministers.

But officials from the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) were unable to confirm last night that the vote would be settled in this way.

Even if a bid goes forward - and is accepted by government - there would be no way for the other councils to force Trafford to take part in a charging scheme.

The decision by Trafford's Tories is expected to become council policy when the authority's executive committee meets on Monday. The executive is made up of members of the group.

Susan Williams, leader of Trafford council, said: "The group expressed its opinion against going forward with a bid, and congestion charging. We have done a lot of consultation and there has been a very clear message against.

"It will now be for our executive to make the decision on the basis of the facts before them."

The Conservatives' decision came less than 24 hours after the M.E.N. revealed the results of a huge poll commissioned by AGMA as part of its consultation on the congestion charge plans.

Fifty seven per cent agreed with the principle of road pricing in return for £3bn for trams, buses and trains. But that figure dropped to 53 per cent when respondents were told the planned charge would be up to £5 a day.

The Conservative shadow chancellor, Tatton MP George Osborne, added fuel to the fire when he accused the government of `blackmailing' councils into accepting road tolls. .