On Friday, Mancunians voted by a margin or nearly 4 10 1 (0r 79%) against the proposed congestion charge for their city and, consequently against the Transport Innovation Fund of well over a billion pounds offered by the government.
Whilst the 'No' vote is clearly disappointing, it can be easily explained:
1. The successful organisation of the 'No' campaign
2. The contrasting 'slowness' of the 'Yes' campaign and its inability to properly inform the public. For many, the congestion charge was just another 'money spinner', similar to council tax as they see it.
3. The recession. At a time when people are tightening their belts, the last thing they want is another tax on car usage. This is despite the fact that the congestion charge would not have come into force until 2013, by which time the recession would have ended and the economy would, I assume, have considerably improved.
4. By this time, the improvements to Manchester's transport infrastructure would have been completed. The public would no doubt have been slightly more willing to pay for a visible improvement.
Given the overwhelming 'No' vote, 79% of the turnout now lack the moral authority to complain about congestion in Manchester ever again. Furthermore, the risible turnout demonstrates two things, namely the failure of the 'Yes' campaign to excite the public and the failure of poorer people to vote who would, in all certainty, have benefitted from the improvements outlined by the TIF.
Maybe the charging zone was too big, maybe it was bad timing. Either way, Mancunians have missed a great opportunity to improve transport in their city.
However, given that we live in a democracy I would not propose to do what the Irish have decided re: the EU constitution. No means no; you cannot ask people to vote again because you do not like the outcome!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
All good points mate, and well made.
Not being an inner city type, I'm not really in a position to comment, but my concern since it was all first mentioned was that I'm not convinced Manchester's big enough for the revenue raised to really make a difference (which probably explains the 'interesting' zoning options).
I'm sure there are much more clever individuals that have done the math and say it will, but I remain unconvinced.
Having said that, by and large I don't have a problem with the charges as a concept, but they're always going to seem anathema to people if put to the vote seeing as society seems fundamentally selfish on the whole right now (separate argument, I'm sure).
Post a Comment