78.8% of voters say NO to the Congestion Charge in Manchester
Seeing as I get a lot of my news from b3ta I thought I'd share this with anyone who hasn't seen it yet. Woo hoo!
Its not just Manchester news- it will have a knock in effect on lots of big cities in Britain.
(
t0ria has forgotten how this all works, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:02,
Reply)
78.8% of voters are shortsighted wankers.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:04,
Reply)
Thanks
I am a short sighted wanker
EDIT: By the way I would have voted yes if the charging zone was in the right place, and not put in such arbitrary places as was proposed
(
t0ria has forgotten how this all works, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:05,
Reply)
Well, all right then.
ALMOST 78.8%.
Happy now?
:)
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:07,
Reply)
I take it you voted yes?
The problem with a ballot like this is that a lot of people are going to make a rash judgement soley based on the fact it will cost them money, and a lot more are going to make a similarly rash judgement based on the environmental benefits. I personally think it should have been properly thought out and more notice taken of people who answered the consultation before the ballot was done.
Oh and I wear contact lenses so my short sight is ok thanks ;)
(
t0ria has forgotten how this all works, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:11,
Reply)
For may part...
I don't think it should have been put to the vote at all.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:13,
Reply)
78.8% of voters have seen it as the scam it is
The London congestion charge hasn't reduced congestion, but has proven a handy money-raising scheme.
(
evil_andy Stick stick stick stick sticky sticky stick stick, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:56,
Reply)
People with cars vote against, bus travellers vote for
The reason Woolworths is bust is because they're high street stores and shoppers with cars are being chased out of town-centres and city-centres and into out of town stores with ample free parking
(
CanonCaliber A big bore, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 14:15,
Reply)
78.8% of Mancunians upset with traffic congestion.
Oh statistics, is there nothing you can't quantify?
(
lazygamer VS tittybiscuits, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:07,
Reply)
No
Thats not what it says at all. I am confused?
(
t0ria has forgotten how this all works, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:08,
Reply)
Very surprised by this
Thought they would have gone with it no matter what "the people" thought.
(
ERG1008 is climbing in yo windows & snatchin yo people up, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:08,
Reply)
Will have to wait and see
I suspect it might come back in a different format sooner or later anyway
(
t0ria has forgotten how this all works, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:09,
Reply)
Toll booths on the A6 & A34 next. ;o)
(
ERG1008 is climbing in yo windows & snatchin yo people up, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:15,
Reply)
Thats fine
I don't have a car and use the buses daily anyway!
(
t0ria has forgotten how this all works, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:15,
Reply)
Gutted.
Predictable, but gutted.
The galling thing is that it shouldn't even have gone to a referendum. Any sort of decent political leadership would have pushed the proposals through AGMA and it would already be underway.
(
barryheadwound Mul-ti-pass? Multipass!, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:17,
Reply)
Snap.
I voted yes :(
I'm not entirely sure why they let students vote though.
(, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 13:24, Reply)
Despite being a car driver,
I said yes.
I think it's important to establish decent public transport links and encourage people to use them.
Anyway, by the time it comes in I won't be living in Manc and would be more than happy to either use park and ride facilities or travel at less congested times...
(, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 14:31, Reply)
I would have been for it would if it didnt cost 6 quid a day
for a return on the metro to have to stand up there and back.
If public transport was more efficient and reasonably priced I would have no issue with it at all.
(
lord turkey boy and the cleft of venus, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 14:45,
Reply)
But that was the point was it not?
That Public transport would be improved so you didn't have to stand all the way there and back...
*Confuses*
(, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 14:57, Reply)
This
Everyone I've spoken to said they're voting 'no' because "public transports crap innit?". Yes, that's exactly why we desperately need the £3bn of funding to improve them, then when that's all done (or near enough) the charge would be brought in.
I think it'll come in anyway at some point over the next 10-15 years, but reckon we'll be overlooked for funding because of our refusal to cooperate this time, and PT will remain the same.
Not surprised though.
(, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 15:13, Reply)
To a certain extent yes that is supposed to be the point....................
However, people are not stupid. Nobody believes that the money raised by this is going to be recycled in to public transport. It will just be diverted to other areas.
I have spent most of the last 12 years living in Melbourne where the council spent a shit load of money on some very nice motorways. They put toll gates on them to pay for the cost and also to raise money for public transport improvements. Once the cost of the roads were paid off (6 years ago) they decided it was such a good revenue raiser they were going to keep charging people to use this network of roads. End result a lot of people paying a lot of money every day to go to work and how much improvement has there been to public transport from all of this? None whatsoever. Nothing different would happen here. Its nothing more than a local tax for the people of Manchester.
(
lord turkey boy and the cleft of venus, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 16:42,
Reply)
I use the metro every day and I don't drive
and I voted NO despite the promise of yet another metro stop within walking distance of my flat
when someone promises me the moon on a stick I'm always a bit sceptical
(
Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Fri 12 Dec 2008, 15:45,
Reply)
78.8% of Mancunians are not 'mad for it'.
(
@RBFesquire Good luck b3ta, was nice knowing you. So long., Fri 12 Dec 2008, 15:53,
Reply)
