To charge or not to charge a ‘Congestion’ tax on public roads – that is the big question at the heart of Manchester and London consultations

Residents and businesses in Manchester have been asked whether they want to pay a new ‘Congestion Charge’ tax to drive on the public highways they have already paid for – in exchange for massive government ‘investment’ in public transport development. But that is merely in theory. In practice, as the Manchester Evening News points out today, consultation respondents were not asked anything of the sort. In practice they were invited to answer a much better spun but perhaps beguilingly soothing question: “Do you agree with the proposals?” And ‘the proposals’ that were mostly mentioned involve billions of pounds for lovely trams, buses and bicycle tracks. But TC notes that the hugely attractive sounding £2.75bn ‘investment’ carrot for Manchester to accept a new road user tax is via the government’s Transport Innovation Fund (TIF). And, in practice beneath the government’s spin, TIF is really just a clever scheme to ‘encourage’ city burghers to impose Road Pricing or Work Place Parking schemes, and so the huge investment sum is in practice for Manchester simply a funding package for a massive debt that will take thirty years to pay off… Meanwhile, the time has gone for Londoners to ‘have their say’ in consultations about the controversial Western extension of the capital’s Congestion Charging scheme – that the previous Mayor Livingstone imposed despite a massive 75% opposition to the extension plan at the time. TC notes that the new Mayor Johnson has at least made TfL offer a straight choice between keeping the extension or binning it. Go here to see. But TC suggests that the biggest questions to ask for the people of Manchester, London or indeed anywhere that road pricing is being considered are these. Has the London Congestion Charging scheme really reduced traffic congestion to an extent that justifies the extra tax on drivers? And, Who can be trusted to say what effect it will have on most peoples lives in Manchester? So far, the information offered in ‘support’ of consultations by promoters of the Manchester charging scheme and TfL have been met with significant criticism and doubts over claims regarding the actual and likely success of road user charging schemes in deliverring tangibly better transport for most people and goods. All TC will say for now is that TfL themselves admit that congestion is now as bad in London as it was before Congestion Charges were imposed…

2 Responses to “To charge or not to charge a ‘Congestion’ tax on public roads – that is the big question at the heart of Manchester and London consultations”

  1. Mike Harmon Says:

    Nice site. There?s some good information on here. I?ll be checking back regularly.

  2. Mark McArthur-Christie Says:

    One of the key quesitons here is “how flexible are people’s transport plans?”

    People do not drive to work because they’re bloody-minded libertarians, they drive because they either don’t consider the alternatives or because the alternatives are too grim. After all, the government’s own study “All Aboard” damned public transport as “expensive, unreliable and doesn’t go where people want.”

    So yes, there’s an education job to do to promote cycling, PTWs and other personal modes, but a tax won’t do this. And neither will the sort of hair-shirted, “do your bit” wartime-style lecturing we’ve so far seen.

    At the same time, people travel at peak time because their employers say they must. So why use the lead-filled sock of a tax to hit travellers when they can do so little to (legally) avoid that tax?

    No – peaktime congestion is not a problem that can be beaten out using a tax stick. It needs creative, innovative communication strategies that acknowledge people’s need to travel where and when they want using modes that work. It’s time we started treating commuters like intelligent adults rather than naughty schoolkids.

Leave a Reply