Are they really going to introduce it here? I really hate the idea of it!! There's no need!!
Whose idea was this anyway? I want to scream and shout at them!!
In London that understandable, but this is dumb. I live near the city centre(ish) we won't be able to drive across Manchester because some fool decided it would be a good idea!!
if you live in the zone you'll presumably get a hefty discount. In London all the Chelsea tractor owners are now in the zone and can trundle round London all day for 80p, rather defeating the object of the exercise imho.
I think it depends on the ok from outlying councils Ska. I live in Trafford and the council here has said no, I think Stockport then followed suit. Without complete agreement they can't go ahead, it just wouldn't work, think of the ring road for a start! I think you'll be safe, and I hope they get the trams down to you soon, they're a blessing round here.
roundabouts stop traffic too. That's the point: you have traffic coming from two directions, one of them has to stop. But as for making traffic move faster by widening roads - well, the experience of the M25 suggests the opposite. Build new traffic routes and people will rush out to buy a car in order to use them; there is more traffic than ever before, and just as slow. Traffic volumes aren't static. I read somewhere that there are now twice as many vehicles in London as there were 20 years ago - a startling thought when you realise the population is pretty much the same.
Has anyone ever seen a councillor on a bus? They dont use buses - and why would they when they get free parking ? They will of course be exempt from the congestion charge, and even if they were not exempt, they would be able to claim it back on expenses. In principal I
would not mind using public transport. but on the few occcasions I have had to use it , I have had to sit on a filthy bus, listening to people effing and jeffing usually very loudly into mobile phones. And yes, there do seem to be some very odd people who use buses. I do not feel safe
even in daylight.
Provide you with free public transport? Why? And when you say 'free' I assume you mean at council tax payers expense. So you want to rob little old ladies who pay council tax so that you can travel for nothing?
And I am as pi55ed off as you are about humps and narrowing Streets and poxy signs. They cost a absolute fortune just to make people do what they are supposed to do by law.
And the fine line between an injury and a fatality is speed. Hit a child at 20mph and it will survive. Hit a child at 35 mph and it will be badly injured or die. That is not me taking an extreme case, it is an undisputed fact.
Drivers under the influnence do tend to injure themselves and their passengers, but most deaths of pedestrians are caused by cars travelling at excessive speeds, usually in urban areas.
jno I suppose if I lived in London i would also use the tube. I thought this thread was about Greater Manchester which does not have the presumably excellent public transport that you enjoy. Keep your knickers on!
drivers aren't the only ratepayers, Clarion. Pedestrians, parents, clean-air fetishists and others are also permitted to have their say. As I understand London's scheme, it can not be used to make money; all proceeds must go back into improving London's transport. Bendy buses and suchlike.