Manchester City Council

Everything you could ever want to know about...

TIF. Can't escape it for long and wouldn't want to because I'm genuinely excited at the prospect of implementing our Transport Innovation Fund Proposals. It will be the biggest single investment we've seen in Greater Manchester, will give us world -class public transport for the foreseeable future, and will be the most beneficial thing that has happened to Manchester whilst I've been a councillor. Very few politicians are lucky enough to be involved in something that will make such a difference and where it is so important to get our citizens on board.

Anyway the formal consultation is launched today with a 24-page booklet being posted to every household in Greater Manchester packed with key information about the public transport improvements and the limited congestion charge proposed for 2013. For most people there is enough here to show how you and your family will benefit, how you and your business will benefit, but for those who want more detail there are even more detailed back up documents that will tell you everything you could want to know or ask about the public transport improvements, when they would happen, how they will be financed, why a congestion charge etc,etc. If that's not enough you can phone, write or e-mail to find out exactly how it will affect you. Please take the time to have a good look!

There are 11 responses to “Everything you could ever want to know about...”

  1. Kill TheCONcharge Says:

    I'm afraid as a Manchester resident who see's the TIF as yet another tax on the already heavily burdened people of the city, I cannot share your "enthusiasm" at throwing £2bn of public money at a failing public transport system. After all these companies are private profit making concerns that should be investing their own profits, not asking the people of Manchester to bail them out. Public transport as a whole in the city is in my experience unreliable, filthy dirty expensive and in some cases downright dangerous. I feel the TIF investment would be put to better use removing the measures that cause congestion in the first place like removing bus lanes so that traffic can flow more freely instead of being restricted to a single lane at peak times. Removing speed bumps to aleviate stop-start motoring and perhaps investing in better traffic management, therefore rejuvenating the traffic flow and relieving the people of the city from this road tax on top of road tax

  2. CONcerned Says:

    I commute into the city centre by bus from Chorlton. As I don't drive to work, I would in principal support congestion charging in return for TIF investment. However I have major reservations about how these private firms, in receipt of huge investment will be regulated. In the past few months Stagecoach phased out the £7 weekly 'Route Rider', forcing people to buy a £10 'Megarider'. Since this change I have also noticed the number of buses on this route has reduced, meaning longer waits at the bus stop and crowded buses. I guess Stagecoach are within their rights to do this as a private company. And as they have a monopoly on this route there is no one to challenge them. However I would like to hear how the Council, having effectively handed millions of pounds to private operators like Stagecoach, will ensure that the public transport users are not held to ransom be these greedy firms once congestion charging is in place.

  3. Anon Says:

    As far as I am concerned, I still little need for a congestion charge in the city. The traffic is no where as bad as some cities such as Birmingham and London. When the kids are on holiday, the roads are virtually empty. There is no clear argument for a charge to drive into manchester. Private companies such as First Manchester should be funding themselves anyway.

  4. Dave Telford Says:

    I see you are vetting out any comment that disagrees. I think that's how ht ecouncil do business, put your head in the sand and you will not hear any opposition.

  5. Future Transport Says:

    Kill theCONcharge: You're post is just WRONG on so many levels it's staggering! I am comfortable in the belief that you are in a minority - not because you oppose the charge - but because your views are so unreasonable showing zero common sense. I've seen several people complain about speed bumps and traffic calming measures: these measures save lives! Lot's of lives. the Council has a moral responsibility to do this. And get rid of bus lanes??? Christ...

  6. Dave Telford Says:

    I understand that you are saying a CC is aimed at reducing congestion. Why are the forecast revenues from a congestion charge suggesting that to achieve this income the numbers of cars entering the zones will have to be far higher than they are now? So to achieve revenues you have to increase cars or (never let it be said) the CC zone will have to be in operation for far longer or at an even far price higher charge than suggested in the propaganda.

  7. Future Transport Says:

    Sir HB's TiF report to the Executive Committee on 25th June states that the DfT have agreed that all net revenues from the local road pricing scheme can be kept for at least 30 years to re-invest in local transport. Does this mean we are not paying back the money for at least 30 years?

  8. Dave T Says:

    Future Transport, I really hope you are not holding any public office. to say you are "am comfortable in the belief that you [Kill TheCONcharge] are in a minority"

  9. Dave T Says:

    I'd like clarification on the loan point too. A repayment holiday with interest accuing at 2-3% is very attractive. That said, it's storing up trouble. I can see the tax-payer in 30 years wondering why they are paying for a transport system that has trams / trains servicing areas that were busy in 2008 but not relevent in 2038 (take a look at the econmic geography of 1978 - things change a lot)

    Furthermore, if (I could use 'when' as the calculations / estimates seem to be very very wrong to me) the congestion charge does not generate the revenues predicted WHO pays. Is TIF underwritten by the council? I'd hope it's not and if the people behind the TIF have got it wrong, TIF goes bust. I think we need to know who stands the bill.

    I have to say, this is a very brave move, The legacy of the major players could well be attributed to the destruction of the local economy, unfortunately, it those individuals will not be paying for mistakes and it's us who are financing their egos.

  10. Badger Says:

    I have to agree with Future Transport with regards to the first post on this blog. Its not that people who are against the congestion charge are in a minority its that the utterly ill informed position of somebody like 'Kill the CONcharge' are in the minority.
    ''Public transport as a whole in the city is in my experience unreliable, filthy dirty expensive and in some cases downright dangerous'' yet you are against ''throwing £2bn of public money at a failing public transport system''. Well whats your suggestion then?

    From your post the answer to all our problems are to let the buses/trams rot and to take out bus lanes and speed bumps! Why didn't i think of that??

    Don't get me wrong, i am indifferent about the TiF and read most of these well thought out posts with intent. But posts such as yours make me wonder whether a referendum is really a good idea.

  11. AndrewBoldman Says:

    da best. Keep it going! Thank you

 

About

The blog of the leader of Manchester City Council, Councillor Richard Leese.

Recent posts

Archives