Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: STMO123 on 12 December 2008, 12:38:33
-
What it says ^^^^^^^^^^^
:y :y :y :y
-
And there's me thinking Mancs are stupid ;D
-
And there's me thinking Mancs are stupid ;D
I think the powers that be must be stupid for ever thinking there was a chance of 'YES' ;D
-
Now how much money has that wasted?
-
The government were holding Manchester to ransom over this - get congestion charging and we give you £3 billion.
Rejected - they will get some anyway next goverment (I hope)
-
Good to see the people of Manchester stand up to blackmail/ransom over this.
I hope this awful government will wake up and see what this vote means to motorists.
Mike
-
I think the 53.2% overall turnout suggests that we wanted to say what we felt about it.
Just listening to the BBC news on the radio, Manchester council were 'disappointed at the outcome' ........ I'm very pleased .... even though I rarely go into Manchester city centre at all.
-
I think the 53.2% overall turnout suggests that we wanted to say what we felt about it.
Just listening to the BBC news on the radio, Manchester council were 'disappointed at the outcome' ........ I'm very pleased .... even though I rarely go into Manchester city centre at all.
Cant fault you there.
-
The Beeching programme on BBC4 last night was well timed then
-
In one of his many newspaper rants....Jeremy clarkson said that he would be happy to pay £100 each day for the congestion charge in London............WHY?.....well.....JC explains it this way........£100 each day would remove 95% of all traffic......which means no traffic jams.....which means no speed limits would be required.
I can see his thinking behind this .....but....
Would only work if you are very...very..... very.... very...wealthy.
I like Clarkson...... great on TG......but he sure as hell ain't no socialist. :y :y :y :y
-
I wonder if they'll now undo all the changes they made to the roads
to cause congestion prior to the vote.
Bus stop pull-ins blocked off to keep the bus on the road as a rolling
road block.
Traffic Islands placed on the outside lane of dual lane roads to
effectively reduce them to one lane.
Traffic light sequencing and timing changed to snarl up the junctions.
'Traffic Calming' barriers blocking one side of normal roads, so forcing
one direction to queue up behind it, waiting for a gap in the traffic
from the cars coming in the priority direction.
We've seen it all here.
-
I wonder if they'll now undo all the changes they made to the roads
to cause congestion prior to the vote. .......
I think we all know the answer to that one. >:( Years ago Manchester Rd (Bury) used to be treated as dual carrageway at 'rush hour' and all traffic moved reasonably well, then as you say they reduced the width, by islands or red tarmac, in loads of places to prevent you from doing so. There are now loads of places where it backs up where before there was never a problem. Oh! And there's loads of empty strips of green tarmac for the odd cyclist, also reducing the width of what was once a bloody great wide road.
-
would have been equivalant to Turkeys voting for xmas.
There are now more cars on London roads than there were before the so called congestion charge was introduced.Its just another stealth tax.
-
would have been equivalant to Turkeys voting for xmas. ......Its just another stealth tax.
That's the thing. They think we're daft enough to not realise that bit by bit the charges would have gone up, the charge times would have been extended & the coverage area would have increased.
Wasn't the London congestion charge 'just' £5 to start with?
-
What it says ^^^^^^^^^^^
:y :y :y :y
LETS FACE IT, ITS LIKE HAVING A VOTE FOR THE MANCUNIANS TO SHOOT THEM SELVES IN THE FOOT, IT WAS A FORE GONE CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD FALL FLAT ON ITS FACE,
-
Well voted Manchester :y :y :y
-
Apparently another city will now have the chance to vote No for a congestion charge now that Manchester has f***ed it off. :-/ :y
-
Obviously there's a lot of sensible people in Manchester :y :y :y :y :y :y
-
Obviously there's a lot of sensible people in Manchester :y :y :y :y :y :y
On the blue side there is ;D
-
Obviously there's a lot of sensible people in Manchester :y :y :y :y :y :y
On the blue side there is ;D
theres only one side in Manchester :) :) :) :)
-
Obviously there's a lot of sensible people in Manchester :y :y :y :y :y :y
On the blue side there is ;D
theres only one side in Manchester :) :) :) :)
What about Moss ;D
-
What's the betting this will turn into another situation like the lisbon treaty in ireland - the government will give Manchester 'another' chance to vote, having 'properly educated' them about the options...
-
What's the betting this will turn into another situation like the lisbon treaty in ireland - the government will give Manchester 'another' chance to vote, having 'properly educated' them about the options...
[/highlight]
Which of course basically means "accept this charge or you will be royally bent over the desk and rodgered stupid"
-
where will it be tried next, Liverpool may be ???????
-
heres something i just read, In the event of a "no" vote, the local authorities in Manchester would first have to agree to a new package – highly unlikely in the face of a popular vote rejecting current plans; these are politicians after all. The government would then have to give the go-ahead to a new scheme – again, highly unlikely if key principles of Transport Innovation Funding like the congestion charge were left out. And all this would need to happen before any other city – already queuing up to get their slice of the pot – put in their own bid.
does any of that make sense :-? :-?
-
What's interesting is that even though it was only residents of Greater Manchester who had a vote, it was still a resounding NO. Everyone else living outside of Manchester - those people who need cars to get in and out - those who are the majority of car users (like me) got no vote. All of us out of towners would have voted NO as well.
The scheme was rediculous in size. It was way too ambitious and will scupper any future proposals. What needs to happen is for viable alternative to be developed first. Jez, they can't even get the poxy tram system to run reliably.
Frankly, I don't know what all the traffic congention fuss is all about in Manchester anyway. It really is not so bad. It's only roadworks and crashes which snarl things up. Congestion regulates itself anyway by incentivising those who can, travel a little later or a little earlier. Whacking on a charge won't regulate traffic - it simply penalises those who must travel at peak times.
-
t the end og the day, wherever it is, successive governments (of all colours) have gradually eroded the public transport system into virtual non-existence! If they put in place a well run, reasonably priced and effective transport infrastructure comgestion would sort itself out naturally. We would not have been forced to be so reliant on the car ---- in many cases there is no choice!
Montpelier has the right idea, a tram network in the city centre, which runs like ... well .. clockwork, fed by a bus network from the suburbs. One, low priced, ticket works on all and is valid for travel within the network for a limited time.
-
heres something i just read, In the event of a "no" vote, the local authorities in Manchester would first have to agree to a new package – highly unlikely in the face of a popular vote rejecting current plans; these are politicians after all. The government would then have to give the go-ahead to a new scheme – again, highly unlikely if key principles of Transport Innovation Funding like the congestion charge were left out. And all this would need to happen before any other city – already queuing up to get their slice of the pot – put in their own bid.
does any of that make sense :-? :-?
In laymans terms it means that sooner or later the charge will be introduced, whether the public voted yes or no. There are too many anti car people in local and national government, remember this when the elections rear their ugly head. Public transport is not an alternative for many people who start or finish work at unsocial times or who have to work the public holidays and sundays.The onus should be on the government to ensure that public transport is available and affordable to ALL, not just those who live on popular profitable routes. Anyway, as Clarkson says about bus lanes, why do poor people need to travel faster in London than those with cars ?