53% turnout, 79% of which voted no to the ludicrous plans.
Even a £3 billion bribe couldn't get the shite plans through.
People of Manchester I'm proud of you (except those dozy fuckers who voted yes
)! Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Yeah, Go Manchester!
last reply
22 replies
1.2k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by varca
Ha! The people of Manchester have shown the Government where they can shove their congestion charges.
53% turnout, 79% of which voted no to the ludicrous plans.
Even a £3 billion bribe couldn't get the shite plans through.
People of Manchester I'm proud of you (except those dozy fuckers who voted yes
Ahh but how many people voted 'No' because they misunderstood the voting forms and thought that by doing so it would mean that the public transport system would get more funding? Apparently quite a lot did. I did not see the forms as I live outwith the voting area but it seems that they were a tad confusing. Were they?
They seemed very clear and very simple to me. All the documentation that came with them was pretty clearly laid out too. The most complicated bit was sussing out which piece of paper went in which envelope :shock:
I am not an advocate of the plans as I think that the government should put it's hand in it's rapidly depleting coffers like the Scottish Parliament did but I do wonder how many people voted thinking of their wallets rather than what was actually trying to be achieved?
The thing is if London or Stockholm are anything to go by then our wallets needed to be thought about. The wording of it all was couched in terms that left the door open for major price increases further down the line. Remember London's congestion charges only affect about 8 square miles, the proposed area for M/cr was ten times that at 80 sqm.
As it happened I wouldn't have been affected by it but it made no sense to me. The Government should just pay for the proposed improvements without all this bollocks of congestion charges.
Quote by varca
Ha! The people of Manchester have shown the Government where they can shove their congestion charges.
53% turnout, 79% of which voted no to the ludicrous plans.
Even a £3 billion bribe couldn't get the shite plans through.
People of Manchester I'm proud of you (except those dozy fuckers who voted yes
Ahh but how many people voted 'No' because they misunderstood the voting forms and thought that by doing so it would mean that the public transport system would get more funding? Apparently quite a lot did. I did not see the forms as I live outwith the voting area but it seems that they were a tad confusing. Were they?
I am not an advocate of the plans as I think that the government should put it's hand in it's rapidly depleting coffers like the Scottish Parliament did but I do wonder how many people voted thinking of their wallets rather than what was actually trying to be achieved?
They seemed very clear and very simple to me. All the documentation that came with them was pretty clearly laid out too. The most complicated bit was sussing out which piece of paper went in which envelope :shock:
There was more than one envelope?? Maybe people got their envelopes muxed ip then?
The vote had to go in one envelope which then went inside another envelope complete with a piece of paper which was apparently a validation code to stop duplication of votes.
Warming the Bed
I was delighted to hear the news.
The amount charged and area affected would have been increased if it got voted yes.
I feel very proud of my fellow Mancunians.
The amount charged and area affected would have been increased if it got voted yes.
I feel very proud of my fellow Mancunians.
Yayyyyyyyyyy!! :bounce:
Go the 79%ers :bounce:
It just seems to me that in this country, it's slowly developing into a 'pay to visit busy places' (ie London, Manchester to start with) and 'pay to use motorways' (ie M6 toll to start). It appears to be just a starter, a taster of things to come.
Will road tax eventually be abolished, to be replaced by these congestion/toll charges??
Edit: Oh and by the way, I live in Southampton, so doesn't affect me - just edgy about things to come and whether the road tax is still valid. After all, if you pay a toll/congestion charge, aren't you entitled to drive on said roads regardless of whether you have road tax or not, you've paid privately to drive on them? :dunno:
Go the 79%ers :bounce:
It just seems to me that in this country, it's slowly developing into a 'pay to visit busy places' (ie London, Manchester to start with) and 'pay to use motorways' (ie M6 toll to start). It appears to be just a starter, a taster of things to come.
Will road tax eventually be abolished, to be replaced by these congestion/toll charges??
Edit: Oh and by the way, I live in Southampton, so doesn't affect me
- just edgy about things to come and whether the road tax is still valid. After all, if you pay a toll/congestion charge, aren't you entitled to drive on said roads regardless of whether you have road tax or not, you've paid privately to drive on them? :dunno: 
Sexlightened
i do live in the manchester area and am so glad my fellow mancunians voted a big resounding no. i honestly don't know why the government bothered they could have just put the 30 million spent on the referendum into transport. no wait that would have been a good idea so scrap it 
.
. 
Sex God
Quote by Missy
Yayyyyyyyyyy!! :bounce:
Go the 79%ers :bounce:
It just seems to me that in this country, it's slowly developing into a 'pay to visit busy places' (ie London, Manchester to start with) and 'pay to use motorways' (ie M6 toll to start). It appears to be just a starter, a taster of things to come.
Ditto Missy,
I feel that once something is introduced it is only time before the population who may of opposed just becomes apathetic towards it. I know its not a Govt thing but look at Post Offices! And this is only a year ago, it seems to of all quietened down nicely now for the fat cats.
Oh and btw Go Manchester :thumbsup:/color]
Sex God
I am so really not going to get into an argument over this but I think it's a shame it didn't get through (easy fer me to say not living in Manc I know).
But this problem really does need a carrot and stick approach.
The carrot - improved public transport - will only work if:
1. It is used fully and
2. Buses are not stuck in traffic jams
So, how do you achieve that?
Well the only way is to get people out of their cars (the stick), especially in the rush hours - at least get the ones who don't have to use them (and there are plenty I can assure you - I was one once but I use public transport now mostly).
But we do love our cars and it does take something extraordinary to persuade the average punter leave it behind in the drive.
If you accept that time is money and that people queueing on roads is a waste of time then you could conclude that the space they are occupying on the road - holding everybody else up - is worth something. If it is worth something then you can put a value on it and you should be prepared to pay for it. This would encourage more people to use public transport and then bingo the essential road traffic moves more smoothly and the public transport becomes more viable.
OK so nobody wants to pay for something that is free so far but if the investment goes into public transport then there is some sort of payback. Just investing in public transport without encouraging people out of there cars will have some benefit but is unlikely to work in the grand scheme of things as. It is important to be careful to target the locations and times when the roadspace is most valuable i.e. on busy roads at the rush hour - otherwise it is unfair.
It is not perfect - as with all things in life - and there will be winners and losers but in theory it makes sense.
I must stress that I am not saying this about the Manchester scheme because I honestly don't know all the detail. So what I say above is generalised theory, which often is lost in the maelstrom of emotion surrounding the subject.
It is true that the benefits of the London scheme have dissipated over time but that I think that is due to there being up to now a growing economic situation ( people can and will pay whatever the charge). It'll be interesting to see if that changes over the next couple of years.
For anyone sharpening their pencil right now - I repeat I am NOT going to get into an argument on this I just wanted to put a statement of the theory behind it all.
I hope I have made sense.
.
But this problem really does need a carrot and stick approach.
The carrot - improved public transport - will only work if:
1. It is used fully and
2. Buses are not stuck in traffic jams
So, how do you achieve that?
Well the only way is to get people out of their cars (the stick), especially in the rush hours - at least get the ones who don't have to use them (and there are plenty I can assure you - I was one once but I use public transport now mostly).
But we do love our cars and it does take something extraordinary to persuade the average punter leave it behind in the drive.
If you accept that time is money and that people queueing on roads is a waste of time then you could conclude that the space they are occupying on the road - holding everybody else up - is worth something. If it is worth something then you can put a value on it and you should be prepared to pay for it. This would encourage more people to use public transport and then bingo the essential road traffic moves more smoothly and the public transport becomes more viable.
OK so nobody wants to pay for something that is free so far but if the investment goes into public transport then there is some sort of payback. Just investing in public transport without encouraging people out of there cars will have some benefit but is unlikely to work in the grand scheme of things as. It is important to be careful to target the locations and times when the roadspace is most valuable i.e. on busy roads at the rush hour - otherwise it is unfair.
It is not perfect - as with all things in life - and there will be winners and losers but in theory it makes sense.
I must stress that I am not saying this about the Manchester scheme because I honestly don't know all the detail. So what I say above is generalised theory, which often is lost in the maelstrom of emotion surrounding the subject.
It is true that the benefits of the London scheme have dissipated over time but that I think that is due to there being up to now a growing economic situation ( people can and will pay whatever the charge). It'll be interesting to see if that changes over the next couple of years.
For anyone sharpening their pencil right now - I repeat I am NOT going to get into an argument on this I just wanted to put a statement of the theory behind it all.
I hope I have made sense.
.
Warming the Bed
Quote by westerross
I am so really not going to get into an argument over this but I think it's a shame it didn't get through (easy fer me to say not living in Manc I know).
But this problem really does need a carrot and stick approach.
The carrot - improved public transport - will only work if:
1. It is used fully and
2. Buses are not stuck in traffic jams
So, how do you achieve that?
If the above was the real reason behind the idea then I may have been in favor of it.
But like so many other things, I think this was just another excuse to tax.
Sex God
Yeah good luck with that. They did the same in Edinburgh and everyone voted no. Now they're digging up the whole city, knocking stuff down that's been there for hundreds of years, causing the worst traffic congestion you can imagine and putting in trams that are costing millions which will do little good to anyone but tourists. And some fat cat is lining his pockets!
Happy days! :roll:
Happy days! :roll:
Quote by Missy
Yayyyyyyyyyy!! :bounce:
Go the 79%ers :bounce:
It just seems to me that in this country, it's slowly developing into a 'pay to visit busy places' (ie London, Manchester to start with) and 'pay to use motorways' (ie M6 toll to start). It appears to be just a starter, a taster of things to come.
Will road tax eventually be abolished, to be replaced by these congestion/toll charges??
Good point, Missy.
The Govenment will now create a charge based on Pavements.
They will claim that people that can walk destory the quality of the ground / pavement. Therefore a Tax needs to be paid on top of a Council Tax.
Or if people want to go out at Dark then they will have to pay for the Street Lights if not buy a Torch.... :idea:
Or becasue Human fart it's making the Earth get warmer so people will be Taxed for every fart made....
Manchester has the most Buses than any other city in Europe. You can't move for Buses unlike Liverpool after 6:30pm...
Manchester also has a Tram System but has never really invested in it's Local Train Network.
That's why people use Car's.
Loads of people in Liverpool travel to Manchester
for work.
Liverpool isn't the same size therfore it's a smaller pond than Manchester.
If Manchester did vote Yes then many people would of been forced on one of the most overcrowed Train Connections in Europe.
So people would of have to of paid the Charge & after this just be living to pay the bills.
No Hoildays, No Clothes, No Pub even No money for Internet.
More people would of ended up on the Jobseeker's Allowance or debt or even Homeless.
It was a silly time to ask people if they wanted give money away when everyone is feeling it bad.
From a Scouser, well done Manchester.
for work.
Liverpool isn't the same size therfore it's a smaller pond than Manchester.
If Manchester did vote Yes then many people would of been forced on one of the most overcrowed Train Connections in Europe.
So people would of have to of paid the Charge & after this just be living to pay the bills.
No Hoildays, No Clothes, No Pub even No money for Internet.
More people would of ended up on the Jobseeker's Allowance or debt or even Homeless.
It was a silly time to ask people if they wanted give money away when everyone is feeling it bad.
From a Scouser, well done Manchester.
Never understood how I can pay road tax to use my car on the road, and then have to pay on top to use the roads, because it is in a certain area. :shock:
Sorry but it is a con, has always been a con, just another excuse to rob the motorist. In London the traffic levels are almost the same as just before the charge was brought in, and no doubt next year will be about the same level.
So they are raking in millions and the traffic levels are still as bad....hmmmmmmm. It works then eh?
They always offer the same old excuses about public transport. They will do more of this and more of that, but I don't see much change in London.
Well done Manchester. A big kick up the arse for the idiots who think it will matter one jot. It is nice for the motorist to get a boost for a change, whilst kicking the politicians in the nuts.
Come on Boris.....get rid of it in London and stop hiding behing smokescreen lies, and give the driver something instead of ripping us off. I hate having to pay the high ammount for my road tax, and then have to pay a fee to go into London, which btw is a toilet in most areas. :lol:
Sorry but it is a con, has always been a con, just another excuse to rob the motorist. In London the traffic levels are almost the same as just before the charge was brought in, and no doubt next year will be about the same level.
So they are raking in millions and the traffic levels are still as bad....hmmmmmmm. It works then eh?
They always offer the same old excuses about public transport. They will do more of this and more of that, but I don't see much change in London.
Well done Manchester. A big kick up the arse for the idiots who think it will matter one jot. It is nice for the motorist to get a boost for a change, whilst kicking the politicians in the nuts.
Come on Boris.....get rid of it in London and stop hiding behing smokescreen lies, and give the driver something instead of ripping us off. I hate having to pay the high ammount for my road tax, and then have to pay a fee to go into London, which btw is a toilet in most areas.
:lol: 
Sex God
Thing is with Road Tax/Road Fund Licence/Vehicle Excise Duty is that it no longer is anything to do with the roads as such but a tax on how high/low the emissions are on the vehicle in question....
I suspect it was changed due to the uproar by the public as the money wasn't being spent on road improvements....
As has been said......Just another tax....
I suspect it was changed due to the uproar by the public as the money wasn't being spent on road improvements....
As has been said......Just another tax....
Master of Sex
if the council want it ,the next time there will be no referendum,it will just happen right after an election, while they have a few years grace,and the money`s in the bank.
Warming the Bed
Quote by annejohn
if the council want it ,the next time there will be no referendum,it will just happen right after an election, while they have a few years grace,and the money`s in the bank.
I suppose they could do that. Then it'll be up to us Mancunians to raise the issue before the next election and vote accordingly.
Sex God
So you pay Congestion charge NOW and there is an upgrade to the public transport system in the FUTURE.
And 21% of the voters actually believed this?????
Come on - no-one in their right mind believes that any govt will honour their 'promises'.
Apart from anything else - this lot of money grabbers will be out at the next election and the next lot of money grabbers will do their own thing, mostly evidenced by a policy of overturning all changes introduced my the last lot - and so it goes on, and on, and on.
And 21% of the voters actually believed this?????
Come on - no-one in their right mind believes that any govt will honour their 'promises'.
Apart from anything else - this lot of money grabbers will be out at the next election and the next lot of money grabbers will do their own thing, mostly evidenced by a policy of overturning all changes introduced my the last lot - and so it goes on, and on, and on.
