Congestion Charges

[Posts: 4755Joined: 07 Oct 2002, 11:50Location: Scotland]

Edinburgh Council have just spent £8M of tax payers money promoting their congestion charges scheme, only to be stuffed in a referendum.

Does democracy work and have a place outside Iraq, or should councils just impose these kind of taxes anyway?

[Posts: 2684Joined: 05 Nov 2002, 15:47]

I'm glad they got stuffed.

Edinburgh's public transport system is p**s -poor.

They should get it sorted out and, maybe, people will want to use it.

Frankly, I think the city needs a metro but the city lacks the vision and the will to build one.

Steve

[Posts: 4755Joined: 07 Oct 2002, 11:50Location: Scotland]

The Council Leader was on Newsnight saying that 'they hadn't got their message across' .. he's only blown £8Mil on trying to get everyone to vote 'Yes'.

This reminds me of the vote for 'Regional Assemblies' that was blown out of the water, last year.

[Posts: 2684Joined: 05 Nov 2002, 15:47]

Hoppy

Maybe you're right, maybe I'm being overly harsh.

I spent a year in Paris and maybe I was spoiled by the metro system there.

No standing around in bollock-shattering cold and wind in Paris. You wait inside on the platform, sheltered from the elements.

No getting stuck in slow traffic (which, in Edinburgh, seems to be mainly caused by buses queuing up behind each other at stops).

No hitting a red light every couple of hundred meters or waiting around at the stop while some bozo hunts around for some change.

No struggling to find a bus at 11.40pm.

Just on and off the train as you zip around town.

I seem to recall a monthly pass was cheaper then than an Edinburgh pass and it gave free use of the buses as well as the metro (and use of the Montmartre funiculaire if you fancied going up to Sacre Coeur to pick up tourist chicks).

So, as far as I'm concerned, a metro is the way to go. There's a bigger start up investment, but we need a  longterm solution, not a temporary fix.

I think it will be cheaper in the long term.

As for trams, I've only seen them in one city (Prague) and, while they were fast, I thought they slowed down other traffic.

Also, I'm not sure that, outside the very centre of the city, Edinburgh streets are wide enough for them.  

BTW Taxi prices in Edinburgh ARE a scandal.

Dave

Let's get a posse together, go round the councillor's houses and get the 8m back. It'll be fun.

Steve

[Posts: 4755Joined: 07 Oct 2002, 11:50Location: Scotland]

It has really interested me this charging business .. on the one hand they are saying that congestion is only going to get worse because of the rising population, with the next breath they are saying we need immigration because the population is falling ... blah, blah ....  

Hold on a minute ... I smell $hiite ... :biggrin:

[Posts: 2684Joined: 05 Nov 2002, 15:47]

Hoppy

"Can't tell from your post whether you live in Edinburgh or not."

And the question is "was this confusion intentional?" ;-)

"Equally, I can't tell if you're ripping the sh*te out of me, or agreeing with me."

As usual, it's a bit of both.

I agree with you in that the traffic problem in Edinburgh is getting worse and will continue to do so without some sort of radical solution.

Personally, I think Edinburgh could sustain a metro. Just look at all the buses on the streets. That's a hell of a lot of drivers and a hell of a lot of vehicles.  

I'd bet serious money that there are more bus drivers working in Edinburgh at noon today than there were metro drivers working in paris at the same time.

Edinburgh would, of course, still need some buses, but, I reckon, the reduction would be significant.

However, this would be a visionary project and would require the willingness for someone to pay the start up costs which would be huge.

Personally, I don't see any visionaries in the council or in the "Gang Hut for F*ckwits That Cant Get Real Jobs".

Nor do I see anyone with the stones (or competence)<br>to make a big money decision like that.

This is (yet) another one of my pet peeves.

If you look at Paris and see the changes that Haussmann led in the mid 19th century, what's astounding is the fact that there was the vision to imagine the city as it could be, the taste to make it into something amazing and the willingness to spend the money that was needed to do the job properly.    

Now you look at the politicians we have today and we've got followers, not leaders, we've got careerists rather than public servants, we've got cowards who, each and every time, choose to put off the symptoms of a worsening problem rather than risk unpopularity by increasing public spending.

And, as a result, we get shoddy crap rather than true excellence. We get towns and cities that are falling apart and are getting worse to live in rather than making real progress.

Steve  

[Posts: 7355Joined: 31 May 2004, 16:52Location: Ubiquitous]

Congestion charges in cities? Absolutely fine by me. If a city is big enough to lend itself to that sort of scheme being considered, chances are there are already adequate enough public transport connections into, out of and within said city to provide a wholly satisfactory alternative. And if there aren't, that's what you lobby for, rather than another six lanes adding to every last thoroughfare.

Compare and contrast - I went from Brum to London for a gig a few weeks ago in the car, coughed up £40 for petrol, £15 for parking AND got got by the cameras a few days later for forgetting to buy a ticket for entering the city centre. Conversely, I got my sh*t together quickly enough to get one of those Stagecoach Megabus things from Brum to London and back for just £3 each way last weekend, and only forked out another £9.50 for a return to Lingfield. Even discounting my silliness with the city centre fees, the public transport way worked out over £35 cheaper, for all that it took a little longer. No contest.

In fact, I must just check Megabus.com just now to see what the Brum - Perth timetable is for late April.....

Jeremy<br>(graysonscolumn)<br>

(Edited by graysonscolumn at 11:21 pm on Feb. 27, 2005)