Welcome to Manchester Confidential
Reset Password
The Confidential websites will be undergoing routine updates. This may cause the sites to go offline. We apologise in advance for any inconvenience.

You are here: Manchester ConfidentialNews.

Manchester Congestion Charge results are in: It's a NO!

Greater Manchester says no thanks to congestion charging

Published on December 12th 2008.

Manchester Congestion Charge results are in: It's a NO!


It’s a no.

After all the money spent, all the campaigning, all the passion and stimulating debate (and bitterness and rancour), we’ve got a negative.

The voters of Greater Manchester were clearly unconvinced by the arguments of the Yes campaign. They were unconvinced - if the thoughts of our readers are anything to go by – that the local authorities could deliver the package of tram, train, road, bus and ticketing improvements and they were unhappy about the level of debt the region might face in the coming decades.

Most of all – fanfare for the key stumbling block please - they were deeply worried about the thought of a limited congestion charge.

The dislike of the latter seems to have spread across all sectors of the Greater Manchester population from key workers through to big business. Many Mancunian commercial interests were very worried that as a region we would lose competitiveness.

Of course, it’s easier arguing a negative than a positive. Also some of the tactics of the No campaigners, especially on their frankly disturbing far right fringe, were underhand and distorting – especially the emphasis on the congestion charge and the downplaying of the other benefits. Then again some might argue the Yes campaign didn’t play it straight either.

But in the end, what can’t be denied is that the majority of the good folk of the region have had their say, and it was no. And a resounding no too, by four to one and in all ten boroughs. Clearly for the majority the Transport Innovation Fund package simply didn’t add up.

The question is will we all regret this in the end?

Have we turned down an opportunity to lead the regions of the UK forward in terms of public transport?

Have we reneged on the principle that Manchester should be a pioneer: forgotten about how our transport innovations of the past have benefited us from the Bridgewater Canal through the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, Manchester Ship Canal, Manchester Airport to Metrolink?

Time will tell.

Like what you see? Enter your email to sign up for our newsletters which are chock-a-block with more great reviews, news, deals and savings.

283 comments so far, continue the conversation, write a comment.

gorDecember 12th 2008.

what a waste of pissing money.. even a one legged blind tramp with only half a brain could have predicted the result of this one.with the extra cost of getting to work whats the point in even going to work! might as well sit at home knock a few kids out and get a free house and get your bills paid for and still afford gold chains with clowns on and designer trainers.

Ha Ha...December 12th 2008.

So many "clever" people, Its because of this and that why the NO VOTE WON...it won because it was the ruight thing to do !All the smart @rses above saying beacuse the no voters didn't know what was happening ??? Sore losers ?

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

thoroughly depressing result

ChrisDecember 12th 2008.

Good result. Why should the punters pay before any investment happens?? You get held to ransom that investment is a condition of a yes vote, instead of investing & proving there is a viable alternative. Congestion is consistent, the bus always takes roughly the same amount of time to get to Manchester. I'm pleased at the result

Paul FDecember 12th 2008.

At last! Common sense has prevailed.Mancunians have shown the rest of the country that we dont have to pay extra taxes, when given a vote. Now, lets have a referendum on VAT, The Euro, Channel Tunnel & Immigration & then the Government as well as our City Father's will listen to common sense!

HeatseekerDecember 12th 2008.

Hey James i buy thoughs papers.There cheaper than bog roll and much more absorbant.

Rick WDecember 12th 2008.

An absolute vote for common sense, history tells us that no matter how much money is pumped into public transport it would never guarantee improvements or savings in costs, public transport is poor that is the reason people use cars here.

KlunkersDecember 12th 2008.

Yes to Not for profit public transport, profits to be re-invested and running of this corporation to be independently monitored. Yes to syncronised traffic light timings, across council boundaries and along main arterial routes. Yes to secure monitored park and ride sites. Yes to the existing extensions to the Metro that were promised long before the congestion tax was hatched. Yes to safe routes and guided school foot buses to encourage kids to walk to school again. Were not just NO voters.

For Crying Out Loud...December 12th 2008.

Just remember that a No vote wasn't a vote for selfishness and short-sightedness, as most of the disappointed Yes-es imply. This is a vote against a really badly thought-out idea, where we get to shovel more of OUR own money into the pockets of private companies - and their shareholders and directors who are taking SUCH a risk - when this should have been provided for during these last few years of plenty by a totally public and accountable transport SERVICE.Going for a lie down now...

cool4door64December 12th 2008.

The money wouldnt go ont he tram system they would line their pockets or spend it on riduculous clever art like the big bang which I hear they are going to replace with something equally stupid and a complete waste of money how about plowing it into recruiting police officers to tackle crime! Or spending it on schools? Whats that oh thats not as important as a money making scheme which will no doubt be taxed to high heaven increasing the cost further! Stupid sods!

costelloDecember 12th 2008.

The Yes campaign wasn't out-fought, it was out-bought.It was the Peel millions wot won it, with their vast resources to pay bloggers, to fund huge poster campaigns and lobbyists to fund what was really a battle front in their anti-Manchester war.They own everything westwards from Salford to Liverpool - of course they don't have Mcr's best interests at heart. But the mainstream press can't say that can they? This is geo-political, folks!But Joe Public never looks beyond what's in his wallet, so maybe it was always going to be No....

OBURGERDecember 12th 2008.

Well said Chris, am just getting in my 4x4 to drive to my favourite massive retail park, threatening to tw*t any pedestrians along the way. I'll buy a massive telly and chicken wing / reggae reggae bucket to celebrate the fact most drivers hate us public transport users who just want a city with a transport infrastructure that works.

Oh deary meDecember 12th 2008.

Oh dear. You people who voted no. You have no idea how miserable you have just made your lives. Traffic light management systems will work against you. Bus lane systems and cameras will work against you. There will be unknown and unforecastable changes in road network. Roadworks will become never ending. Your fancy little 40 minute trip will become a 2 hour trip. Going home will take longer than ever. Some days you'll be so late for work, your boss will feel he has no alternative but to hand you your cards. You might have thought the TIF was a conspiracy but now there'll be one you can't even prove.If you want to see how it'll be in 2012, drive your car from Chorley to the centre of town tomorrow morning. And then you'll wish you'd taken up that privilege to pay to drive your metal coffin into work.Too bad suckers. I'll wave from the train.

KateDecember 12th 2008.

Actually, I would rather pay out of my council tax for public transport improvements than for ridiculous football matches, that have nothing to do with Manchester, starting riots and general mayhem when one little thing goes wrong. I am sure sure that my council tax contributed to that fiasco. So what if a portion of it went to trying to get hold of a lot of money that would have finally put Manchester in the present day of transit? Yeah, okay the advertising wasn't the greatest and the people on the adverts were ugly or whatever. If anybody had taken the time to read the info book that came with the ballot, like responsible voters, maybe some common sense would have come through. And none of this 'we don't believe the council will follow through'. You think they were just going to pi** all the money away? Independent regulatory body. It said so in the info. What this NO vote says is that Manchester is resistant to change and risks and basically not standing up for cleaner air, better transit and a chance to actually get home from work at a reasonable time. And I don't even work for the bus companies, or the council! Tis a real shame, I am sick of paying over £2 for a one-way bus journey where the vehicle is in a right state, the driver is exceedingly rude and I have to fear for my life because every time he goes round a corner I am sure we are on 2 wheels.

CleverDecember 12th 2008.

I live in Blackrod in Bolton and work in Old Trafford. To avoid the congestion charge and taking public transport to work each day, by my calculations my journey to work would've taken 2 hours from door to door. No real financial upheaval but in terms of accumulated time lost - immeasurable. In the proposals by the Transport Innovation Fund commitee, apparently there was to be an introduction of two additional trains from Blackrod Station to Manchester, although not in the hours when commuters would find the new timetable useful. Perhaps there may have been additional trams to Trafford Bar from the city centre (perhaps not?)So, did I vote no? Hell yes I did!Residents of GREATER Manchester have clearly made their opinions known and I would be curious to know whether the majority of the 53% that actually voted live in the outer reaches of the area and who have guessed all along that the billion pound proposals wouldn't be any benefit at all.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Arggggh!!! I cant believ it - Manchester and surrounding boroughs you have all just shot yoruself in the foot! How can you be so short sighted?? Gutted totally gutted for you all!!

KateDecember 12th 2008.

Peeved, are you on the voters register? That was the only way you would have got a ballot.

ZabzyDecember 12th 2008.


AlDecember 12th 2008.

A sad day of selfish attitutes. Reducing pollution, improving public transport, unclogging roads all sound a good idea to me. Thats why I voted yes. What world do people want to live in?

LairdDecember 12th 2008.

Glad it's a no. I wouldnt count on any local authority to deliver anything, especially MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL, having worked for MCC for seven years, I'm well aware of how BADLY things are handled by 'Management' and of the CULTURE OF PRETENDING TO WORK. I live near the proposed inner circle, or at least I think I do - and this is the crux of it for me; the Yes people didnt even have a clue where or how this would be laid out. Living on the fringes of Town, I really need to know this information to gauge exactly what's being proposed. Furthermore, the mapping-out of what resembles existing bus, train and tram routes (with a few proposed extensions) in London Underground fashion was a commendable effort, but it didn't fool the likes of me.

chrissy hot babeDecember 12th 2008.

Who cares about this congestion charge i like to drink and get f*****d.Come on boys

GDecember 12th 2008.

'First' 'Pioneer'?? Have we overlooked the fact that London already has a congestion charege? I love Manchester and consider it my home but can't stand this deluded idea that it's the centre of the universe.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Hey whatAshame,Go and live in london they have a congestion charge!Oh, or maybe York they have a lovely park and ride scheme.

ChrisDecember 12th 2008.

I feel truly let down by the short-sightedness of my fellow Mancunians. I hope London enjoys the cash (again) and that when petrol costs £3.00 a litre and there's still no buses the nay-sayers are happy!

NumbercruncherDecember 12th 2008.

None of the literature stated that the money raised was ONLY going to be used on public transport initiatives, why would anyone vote for throwing money into a blackhole?

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Great news! I am all for better public transport, but either let the people that want to use it pay for it, for take it out of everyones taxes. Why should the people that don’t use it pay for it, we don’t all have the option of NOT having to use a car. And Why should we be penalised for going to work, so that the people who don’t work or pay taxes can also have better transport to the job centre.(I know not only unemployed people use the buses)Make everyone pay or not at all.D

shifty edDecember 12th 2008.

Was it close or a landslide? Do you have the figures for & against?

OBURGERDecember 12th 2008.

A lot of buses in Manchester are unsafe to use. The NO result will continue this trend due to lack of investment and choice. Why bother to live in a city and not give a crap about it?

whatAshameDecember 12th 2008.

The No campaign was a dirty one. How short sighted of the people of Manchester. Time to leave the area.

DelightedDecember 12th 2008.

My my what a bunch of bad losers. Let's face it the losers who voted yes were never going to directly pay the charge, that would have been left to Joe Motorist. And when the debt mounted so would the costs of public transport and the Council Tax. So in effect we have done the losers a big favour. Although being losers they didn't deserve it.

shifty edDecember 12th 2008.

Chris - that was the point that there would be no charge until improvements were in place so you wouldn't have to pay upfront!

aDecember 12th 2008.

Chris and Bash, both of you say why should we pay before the charge comes in, but the proposal was the work would be mostly done before the charge came in. In the main the reason most people voted against the charge was that they didn't want to pay

Artie fufkinDecember 12th 2008.

Finally, if TIF *really* believed their claims of huge economic benefit, the business plan should have been able to confidently forecast repayment from increased council tax and business rate revenues as employers flocked to manchester from around the world to enjoy the Utopian conditions for doing business. The reality, it was another TIF lie and 4 out of 5 could see the truth.

gorDecember 12th 2008.

pammyran obviously wouldnt have to pay the charge or earns enough to not give a ****.

ZabzyDecember 12th 2008.

Manchester confidentials poll was made up of 10,000.00 voters when compared to the real poll of some 3million. The BBC websites poll reflected a more accurate result

Darren sDecember 12th 2008.

Why dont MCC take back control of the public transport network from stagecoach and then have a vote who wants better public transport in exchange for an extra £5 a day for public transport users.See how many vote yes then!That is a fair choice!

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Piss up, brewery.

media typeDecember 12th 2008.

Woah woah woah Chris Gibson! Merry Christmas!Sounding ever so slightly like a tw@ in that post there...

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

How does your brain work?

mrspg01December 12th 2008.

I use public transport but I voted No this was never a congestion charge for Manchester it was a tax, They quoted £2 pound for the outer ring and £1 for the inner ? shouldnt it have been 1 ring (the inner one) at £2 I would have said yes to that not to a further burden being placed on people who wouldnt even be travelling into Manchester.

yipeeeeeeDecember 12th 2008.

BJ - yes we did and don't believe me then! And congratulations on passing judgment on a business you know nothing about. Are you a bitter ‘yes’ man? Regards Captain Sensible

MartinDecember 12th 2008.

a vote against progress, great

SteveDecember 12th 2008.

I voted NO - not because I don't want improvements to public transport or that I am a car driver - but because we do not have a *public* transport system - it is run by PRIVATE companies (one of which is run by a homophobic retard) who take MILLIONS in profits each year! I voted NO because we are being taken for a ride - literally!The transport system is a postcode lottery - compare fares between north and south Manchester - in north Manchester we pay twice the fare for journeys half the length!The council have been 'traffic-calming' for years by painting red boxes at previously perfectly functional junctions to turn them into snarled-up, queue inducing danger black spots to try and add credence to the false claim that there is a congestion problem in Manchester.£1.2 billion on trams - this is absurd!Yellow school buses - YES!£2 to travel 2.5 miles is NOT cheap!I am delighted with the result!For those who think public transport can't work - look at almost any other European city!Now - let us all gather together and lobby the government for a sensible plan that doesn't involve the likes of First and Stagecoach syphoning off massive profits to line their own pockets!PUBLIC transport FTW!!!

JohnDecember 12th 2008.

Anonymous is certainly right about York, I used their system for the first time on Tuesday, it was like being on another planet: brand new buses, bus stops with plasma screens telling you when the next one was arriving, frequent buses, reasonably priced. If the charge money had been going to whoever runs that system it might have been an option but the people who run the Manchester system just treat the passengers with total contempt and deserve sacking not being given another huge wedge of cash to buy themsleves big dinners.

ian bDecember 12th 2008.

it would be a muggers paradise, all the people with laptops and brife cases walking the streets, where would the police be? would they bring back busconductors? no! crime would rocket and thank the council for all the road works and lain closures trying to make things look wores then they realy are! you diddent pull the wool this time! well done the people of manchester!

AndrewDecember 12th 2008.

How did you find out before it was official??? Well done for getting it first before any other site!!

**goodnews**December 12th 2008.

Good news.. I agree with Delighted the yes voyets were never going to pay the charge... I was not prepared to pay £1200 of my money towards upgrading the network... it is the governments responsibility and should seek the monies from else where

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Ermm. Public money in private hands. No thanks. I fail to see how improvements havent been made over many years past...i also fail to see how the appropriate money hasnt been creamed off in the wrong direction. And please, dont try to use manchesters pioneering and innovative past as a guilt trip..this is about people reaching a threshold as to how much money they are willing to cough up to finance improvements made to mask previous mistakes. Look across the channel....why are we getting it wrong?

DaveDecember 12th 2008.

I don't understand - how come ManCon know before everyone else?!

FidelDecember 12th 2008.

I suggest anyone that wants to use public transport should have to buy a pass for £1200 per year for the right to use it in addition to the standard fare.This would pay for the new transport system.Lets all vote on that!!!

Victor MeldrewDecember 12th 2008.

The only surprising thing about this whole affair is that anyone seriously thought that the people of Manchester would go for it. The 'Yes' campaigm seems to have eminated from a naiive and introspective left wing bubble, somehow intellectually insulated from the reality that the nation is sick to death of stealth taxation from Labour. Yes we need investment in our transport infrastructure but this was entirely the wrong package for the majority. Does anyone really believe, given the lamentable record of government (Local and Central) in mananaging major projects, that this package wold have come in for £3bn? Assuming, on track record, that it had cost £9-12 bn, would the yes voters have been willing to stump up the extra and pay £10-15 per day. Alternatively, and more likely, we would have had another botched incomplete project that would have had to be bailed out by more direct taxation. There is nothing in the management of the current transport system that gives any confidence that Local Authorities and the PTE are capable of managing anything!

Sad No voterDecember 12th 2008.

Maybe they shouldn't have put together a proposal that included the same plans they promised for free in back in the 90's... maybe people would have voted differently. They couldn't even manage to have trams running on time the week people went to vote - how clever is that?

BashDecember 12th 2008.

Brilliant! We should have the trasnportation improvement without paying for it upfront, at the end of the day, why do we pay massive taxes?!they should work it out without charging us for everything they do, afterall, this is the governments job!

peteDecember 12th 2008.

I like the fact that so many people are calling me stupid for voting "no".What my degree-educated simple mind tells me is one thing: I'm all for public transport improvements to relieve congestion but I'm totally against car drivers being the sole source of funding for it.Now, if the question had been along the lines of "can every tax payer in Greater Manchester please pay £50 extra per year to fund public transport improvements" would we have seen a yes result?

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Fantastic result! The average wage in Greater Manchester is £14k. The people who were going to be hit the most were the low to middle wage workers in Manchester City Centre. We already pay road tax, income tax, council tax etc why should we pay more!

For Crying Out Loud...December 12th 2008.

Steve (previous post to this) has it about right. Rather than FORCE people onto public transport and then overcharge them, make transport clean, safe and reliable. Easy...

SausagesDecember 12th 2008.

Enjoy your cars, your potholed and un-cyclable roads, your overcrowded trams and non existent buses. At least you can still drive around the gridlocked centre slower than a pedestrian. What a victory. Well done.

DaveDecember 12th 2008.

sickening result

LAIRDDecember 12th 2008.

Did they have any albinos?

Eric JacksonDecember 12th 2008.

The bottom line is that Mancunians are just to too lazy to get off their backsides and cycle or get the bus or train to work. Go to Amsterdam, Brugges or any German city to see what public transport investment can do - no stinking fumes and lardy drivers

sijowaDecember 12th 2008.

fools! just shows how short sighted the public truly are!

A realistDecember 12th 2008.

This raises an interesting question, if 60/40 on here voted yes (and the editor says you can't fiddle that) but the public voted 80/20 (approx) no, then how out of touch are the people on this site?

missfleaDecember 12th 2008.

I voted no and I am ecstatic at the result. Can't believe your article is so negative. If you know anyone in London, you'll know the congestion charge is hated there as congestion is still terrible and they have a new tax to pay for it. I made my decision based on the promises of the yes campaign which I do not believe. And on one note alone, the metrolink was never completed in its entirety in the first place so why believe they will acheive it now? Great result.

Garry BurnsDecember 12th 2008.

Its a crying shame. Victory for the short sighted lazy car dwellers who will now continue to sit in traffic jams for hours on the way to work, pumping out their pollution and no doubt complaining about the queues. Bang goes many millions of funding to improve the situation for everyone. Well done you ignorant bunch of gits.

Inside JobDecember 12th 2008.

Looks like the sheep bought the propaganda.Morons...

Very HappyDecember 12th 2008.

Well done everyone common sense wins out this really was a stupid plan

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

A resounding No! A big pat on the back for Manchester

Artie FufkinDecember 12th 2008.

Mr L Smith you say “We have missed out. We've lost out on 10,000 jobs, short-sighted.”I can't agree, where were these 10,000 jobs? A lot of the construction is going ahead anyway which is why many smelt a rat when TIF were claiming credit for improvments that did not depend on TIF. The jobs created to collect revenue? - non-jobs just created to produce nothing and in turn, the job losses due to the additional employer costs would have dwarfed any number of jobs TIF created. Any 'jobs for the boys' would have been a waste of money and bordering on corrupt. Tif was booted out as it was far too expensive and ineffective attempt to solve a problem that has easy wins. I can see the need for £1/2m to £1bn spent but all the periphery spend seemed public sector mentality waste. AFAIS go beyond £1/2m and you get into diminishing returns which made £1bn of the grant and £1.25m of loan as wasteful.

Secret SquirrelDecember 12th 2008.

FANTASTIC! I don't that it was a case of the moronic and undereducated winning the vote, I think it was more the case of refusing to be treated like morons and accepting a congestion charge! As said previously by many a level headed contributor to the 'rants' we pay far too much in tax - the public transport should be improved now - we shouldnt have to pay a congestion charge later! If things were improved people would use them! I live outside of the voting area and I know that if the trains were more reliable I would use them. The government should stop wasting money and fund these sort of things!

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

thanks anon - I am most proud of my NO vote and will be celebrating a FREE Manchester with a HUGE pat on the back for myself tonight!!

DaveDecember 12th 2008.

In the end, yes was just too abstract whereas no was so easy to grasp. Even for those willing to make the effort to properly understand the proposals (and/or vote), there were still no guarantees about future charge increases, zone/time changes, nor regulation to ensure that Stagecoach would deliver.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

The money would have gone into the pockets of the shareholders of First Bus and Stagecoach.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

as a business owner in manchester, i am extremely satisfied with the no result. i agree that manchester needs investment, but the plan itself was both short-sighted and inappropriate.

Phil GriffinDecember 12th 2008.

Agreed Steve. A negative result to a poorly judged campaign. I worry that Manchester will now flounder in a falling economy for at least a couple of years, whereas the city region could have been moving forward and benefiting from (dwindling) government funds. Whoever advised City Council on campaign strategy started off on the wrong foot, and stumbled ever after. The issue should never have been presented as Congestion Charge, but as a benefit-related strategy to keep the city and the region moving forward. Turkeys, we know, would not vote for Christmas, but they might just be persuaded to vote for a radical change in the region’s attitude to Christmas dinner. As of now our transport infrastructure remains National, rather than local policy. You may be certain that there will be some form of additional road charging in place by 2013, only now without the benefits that have been on offer.

LegionDecember 12th 2008.

From your article 'Have we turned down an opportunity to lead the regions of the UK forward in terms of public transport?'. I assume that you really meant 'regions of England'. As some one who lives in Scotland and works for Glasgow City Council I need to use my car to get to work and to visit all the schools in the city to carry out my duties. This means driving to all points of the compass throught Glasgow and I would obviously fall foul of any congestion charging. It's fortunate that we don't have to follow any decisions made south of the border.

DavidDecember 12th 2008.

No we have not reneged on any principles, the aforementioned projects were predominantly funded by forward thinking industrialists . Motorists pay Road Fund Licence, parking charges and 70% duty on fuel! enough is enough! it is National and Local Governments responsibility to resolve transport issues, which means they should provide us with a reliable, safe, cost effective alternative to using a motor vehicle for commuting, simultaniously do something about the 100's of half empty buses racing between bus stops and clogging the roads and heavy goods vehicles destroying roads that were never designed to support them. The money is already there without asking the overtaxed and criminalised motorist to dig even further into their pockets! what's lacking is the lack of vision in our Town Hall, collectively they couldn't hold a candle to their Victorian predecessors!! they have spent £M's of our money on a political campaign, when the dust settles who will be held accountable?

Richard TurpinDecember 12th 2008.

How long will it be till the bus companies put their fares up - now this little transport hiatus is now past and will not influence the vote?

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Does anyone know where London's funding for the huge cross rail project, Jubilee Line extension, and the new Euro trains terminal at St Pancras came from?

johnthebriefDecember 12th 2008.

The Government have already stolen the money that had been earmarked for transport improvements to pay for white elephants in London. Are they really surprised that given the option to load the city with huge debt for years in return for getting back that same money, the population was just a teensy bit cynical?

lucky chrisDecember 12th 2008.

Good point.... Kevin Peel - WHERE ARE YOU NOW??? A campaign so quick to point out that the majority of people won't pay anything (ie, bugger the rest) deserves to fall flat on its arse.

alDecember 12th 2008.

James, so you're actually calling the whole idea of a referendum into question? We should just accept what our leaders tell us is going to happen and not question any of their decisions? That's an excellent idea James, in that case we'd still have a poll tax and going even further back, the corn laws. I never disputed that minorities rule but in this case our leaders asked us what we thought and we told them. I'm not suggesting mob rule. James Patterson - another bitter, patronising yes voter

Darren sDecember 12th 2008.

Just a thought,It isnt PUBLIC transport anymore, when it’s run by a incompetent private company, what happened to by the people, for the people. It is no more PUBLIC transport than a PRIVATE HIRE TAXI.And we know how reliable they are!?

NeilDecember 12th 2008.

Welshbob...there's no tram to the airport but there's a lovely train. One that links in with the tram system, central Manchester and lots of other lovely trains going places. Trams are not always the answer. They're [still] going to close my local line for over 12 months to get rid of a perfectly good train system to put in a slower tram (that is going to really struggle getting up the hill to Oldham).

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Yee ha,as someone who has to get from Stockport to Manchester every day and would have ended up paying to get to and from work with no help from my employer towards the cost and also use my car for my job, I am sooo pleased, read the info with great care and ooooooh guess what Stockport got nowt, no trams nothing. Yipeee.

Sir AlanDecember 12th 2008.

Save the world, make it a better place. For you and for me and the entire human race...etc. [strokes beard]

KlunkersDecember 12th 2008.

Right people, now we have had a good laugh at the Yes losers, lets show them what we really need. Can we have a list of all the Council Transport directors and wether they voted for or against the congestion tax. All those that voted yes, a new career beckons..elsewhere, you had your chance, and blew it. The ones with vision that voted NO, lets be having your ideas for what to do now. There have been plenty of suggestions for improvements throughout this debate, and lots of reasons why people do not use public transport. Lets get sensible heads in each council who can work with the population to improve services, re-invest in this county's public transport and meet the working people's needs. Not fill the pockets of private companies.

James PattersonDecember 12th 2008.

My post was obviously intended for the coward calling him/herself To James Patterson.

YipeeeeeeDecember 12th 2008.

I run my own business and purely on the strength of the 'yes' campaign have already decided to moved two thirds of the business out of the city centre into the suburbs. Although the 'no' vote won we won't be moving it back, in fact, more than likely we will move more out. Well done to the 'yes' people for helping to destroy our city centre with plans that just didn’t add up. Maybe all the money spent on both campaigns could have been put towards sequencing traffic lights to ease the congestion hot spots. As for the state of public transport, blame deregulation. To the ‘yes’ people calling the ‘no’ people uneducated, put your toys back in your pram!

roisinDecember 12th 2008.

Roll on congestion and more sitting in our cars wasting our lives. Big mistake.

Bob MDecember 12th 2008.

In answer to Fidel - you are almost right but everybody should contribute, not just Public Transport users and not just Motorists. We all pay Council Tax which includes a contibution to Public Transport. Step 1 - Increase Council Tax ... Step 2 - Spend that money on providing State of Art Public Transport System ... Step 3 - More People use that State of Art Public Transport System (assuming it is cheapereasier than using car) ... Step 4 - Congestion is reduced ... Step 5 - GOAL !!!

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

ultimately what I find most amusing is that the people who say that our current public transport is not up to scratch poorly run and inefficient and cannot be relied on are the same, short sighted selfish right wing conservative twits that voted for selling of Britain’s public transport to private companies saying that it would save us money and improve our service....... when will we ever learn that as a nation we need to put something into our communities whether its time money, or simple effort before we can ever get anything good out.

James PattersonDecember 12th 2008.

To the last poster. You clearly have no idea of history or the unwritten British constitution. Leaders are elected (that is the check to their power that they must seek public approval) and then they decide. Otherwise soviets (which become corrupted) or committees decide and nothing gets done. Shame on the city region I have lived all my life in and love that we have voted no by a landslide.

SamDecember 12th 2008.

I voted yes, though like most people I dont want a C Charge, but I do want a huge investment in MCR transport, and so I judged it a price worth paying. I would like to see us get the same investment without having the charge, but I feel this is unlikely to happen, all the more so as a result of the recession and public money needed to prop up the banks. Thus I feel this is an opportunity missed, but i hope to be proved wrong.

SchofeDecember 12th 2008.

Fantastic result! Although it was never going to be close. Obviously the 3/4 of us out there who are NOT naive and ignorant agree that the government already steals and wastes far too much of our hard earned cash.For the other 1/4 of disappointed voters out there here's a suggestion, if you want to give our government more money to waste because they've told you what they're going to spend it on and you believe them *rolls eyes* then go ahead...YOU pay! I'm sure they'll gladly take it. A fool and their money are easily parted.....Well done Manchester, we're finally telling them where to stick it! :-)

Chris CDecember 12th 2008.

What no one has said is that myself and I suspect a few thousand others did not believe the 'Yes' promises. I remember when the Commonwealth games were awarded the city and the promises of re-generation to Newton Heath Beswick etc and years later what have we got?Nothing, also when the London congestion charge was introduced the price and timings promises have been abandonded in return for money. Am I also alone in my cynical thoughts, that major roadworks on Oldham Road, which is down to 1 lane for the last 1/2 mile into Manchester City centre. Have been timed to coincide with the vote.Seriously slowing down bus and car drivers/passengers. I passed this morning and there is digging on 5 consecutive corners, surely this can be reduced as the bottleneck shortened.I will also wager that democracy will slip and the congestion charge/Tax will be introduced in some form or other.If the council needs funding so badly then sell the City of Manchester stadium to MCFC, or what about a super casino?

yes votersDecember 12th 2008.

YES voters seemes to have had the right idea but see the world through tinted glasses.How clear does it need to be that there were too many holes that were never addressed supported by an incompetent council?

hellersdadDecember 12th 2008.

I voted NO because I don't believe they would have ever delivered their promises. They need to sort out the public transport system we have at the moment - unreliable freezing cold Metrolink, buses that don't turn up according to the timetable. It's a complete shambles which needs taking by the scruff of the neck. Sack Satgecoach from running Metrolink, bring back bus regulation and let's see some proper consumer input into the running of the public transport system.

scoteeeDecember 12th 2008.

NO Kevin Peel millions of pounds spent on unconvicing the majority, not just misleading the "yes" argument...The "yes" campaign was unconvincing to the majority and thats is where you let yourselves and all of us down, you couldnt answer what needed answering but continued like a bull in a china shop to force your view creating an alienated response. That is why you didn'tt win!!

SamDecember 12th 2008.

missflea 1. London already has extensive public transport unlike MCR so the C charge had little to offer them, unlike here where public transport is massivly underfunded. 2. you made your decision based on the yes campaign that you did not beleive - that makes no sense whatsoever. 3.Yes the metrolink was not originally completed due to lack of money. This was a chance to get that money.

BexDecember 12th 2008.

ANON's quote "if the congestion charge got voted in we would have received millions from the government to implement the plans."What planet do you live on? Just because they said they would doesn't mean they will!! That's why people voted no. Also we should be getting millions to improve the transportation system without having to pay it back. The government is a joke!

alDecember 12th 2008.

Let's be clear people, the no campaign, with their "bloke dressed in a shark outfit" did not win this vote. The Yes campaign was an awful lot more prominent throughout the city at least. Do not be so ridiculous as to think that people were fooled by "lies" cooked up by the No campaign. Neither should you be childish enough to suggest that if people didn't vote the way you wanted them to then they are stupid or ignorant. This was a democratic vote that got a result, like it or dislike it. Obviously more people who did not want the charge voted, the fact that there was only a 50% turnout means that the other 50% didn't care, so their vote is not required. The freedom to vote is exactly that, a freedom which gives you the choice to abstain. The best thing to do now is move on with plans to help improve public transport. We should count ourselves lucky that we got a say in the matter, that is more the spirit of Manchester than introducing a short-sighted money-making scheme without consulting the people who it would affect. You only have to look at the M6toll road's continued price rises to see that motorists would have been paying ridiculous sums to drive into the city.

zabzyDecember 12th 2008.

i think i might run for local government, they wouldnt get away with this sh1t on my watch!!

IdeaDecember 12th 2008.

Why is our city not run like a business, with the citizens seen as share holder that need to be put first. Politics is a popularity contest not a sensible choice based on relevant business experience.For example, why do NCP own most of the car parks in the city, these should be owned and run by the MCC and the profits ploughed back into the city’s transport network. NCP obviously make a lot of money from parking, stagecoach obviously make lots of money or they wouldn’t do it. MCC should take back all transport and traffic related companies and make them make money for the city and not private companies that are probably based elsewhere anyway.The same goes for Hackney carriages, these should be better regulated so we don’t get ripped off or queuing till the early hours for cabs that never come. And watching people fight of the few cabs we have.Sack the council and get a more qualified buch of business focus consultants in to shake up the system.

anonDecember 12th 2008.

did anyone even bother to read the information provided? they need a shed load of money to improve public transport to the extent they were proposing, that would be impossible on what they currently have to spend. If the congestion charge got voted in they would have recieved millions from the govt to implement all the plans (all before the congestion charge even starts). Now we get nothing. Well done everyone, a clap on the back for you all.

KirschDecember 12th 2008.

The benefits were not pointed out enough. People just saw the word "charge" and voted no. The second paragraph of the article vastly overestimates how much people looked into it. Biased coverage by local papers didn't help. No-voting motorists ticking over in queues burning their ever more expensive ration of the world's diminishing oil reserves might one day ask themselves how much it is costing them to go nowhere, but it's unlikely they'll make the connection.

ManicBeancounterDecember 12th 2008.

It is a pity that this campaign degenrated into a campaign of "Let us hit the rich, polluting car drivers" v. "A stealth tax of £1200 a year".We need better public transport, AND quicker roads. But the solution provided was cooked up to satisfy some pre-determined criteria. Then the PR people set to work to distort reality. If we are going to make some people worse off to make society as a whole better off, we need to be objective in our analysis. In the current political climate we get spin (or properganda in old terminology). As nearly 80% said NO to the bias, politicians who supported this campaign need to take time to get a grip on how they could have got so far removed from the people they are meant to represent.

lucky chrisDecember 12th 2008.

'Sickening'? Get over yourselves - Manchester just won't be lied to. Maybe all future investment will ACTUALLY be spent on public transport, rather than motorists putting money in Stagecoach and Metrolinks' back pockets. We deserve better public transport ANYWAY.

pammyranDecember 12th 2008.

what a bunch of short sighted sods. all that investment, gone. and does this also infer that all those people already using public transport just didn't bother voting (cos obviously there was no impact on cost for them, or even worse, they were thinking 'well what if i want to use my car'). I spent years on lengthy bus journeys that annoyed me, but why were they lengthy and unpleasant, cos the rounds were always full of bloody cars (tis always a lovely noticable change in summer when school runs, and holidays on upon us!), and the lack of quality and frequency of public transport services. Well all you NO voters, I hope your happy with yourselves, cos you've just done the city a great injustice! ****ing morons

PeelDecember 12th 2008.

My Trafford Centre Investment is safe .. phewie!!

steveDecember 12th 2008.

ive heard the same from other sources too

cool4door64December 12th 2008.

Garrett I agree it sole reason I bought a car that and the fact my home is on the other side of manchester from my work, but some of these people own expensive cars without indicator thus negating them from manners when you kindly allow them into your lane to ease congestion, and they do not return the favour or even thankyou causing you to curse and crash your lesser valued, albeit better to the environment one.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Well done manchester!!

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Realist, it may well just be that Manchester Confidential's demographic isn't quite exactly the same as that of the city of Manchester. I put the no's win down to short sighted idiots that didn't understand the proposition. They probably don't understand the internet either. If nothing else, 10'000 new jobs just vanished.

UPeNDeRDecember 12th 2008.

well done MANCHESTER and all the surrounding areas, LANCASHIRE, TAMESIDE, CHESHIRE, all of you who voted NO to this draconian 'big brother' system go out and enjoy oyur lives .. ..those who voted yes, get on your bikes, stop wearing clothes not made in thsi country and never go on overseas holidays or trips . ..because these are the things that harm the enviroment, not people tryingt o earn a living!! - Manchester City Council . .are you listening your crass propaganda failed . . .sort out the transport systems its a seperate issue to congestion charge

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

In theory I would have voted yes but I had huge doubts about any of these improvements being put into practice. I get the bus all the time and already know that if a service improves or a fare goes down it is only ever temporary. The people behind the YES campaign were also behind the poor advertising for it, so they already fell at the first hurdle.What else would they have messed up? The London congestion charge has not made the money they expected it to and general business in the area has also suffered. Not to mention the huge amount of money it costs to run the congestion charge in London and congestion has only very slightly improved and is gradually getting worse again.If these ideas for Manchester transport are really so fantastic then they should get funding to be put into place through taxes paid already without soley trying to rely on income from drivers, which as I said earlier has not been as high as expected in London. Eventually everyone will end up paying for it anyway whether you drive or not.(which I dont) I'm glad it was rejected.

ZabzyDecember 12th 2008.

Excellent News

scoteeeDecember 12th 2008.

Where are you now Kevin Peel? the masses have spoken and your rubbish convinced no-one

City FanDecember 12th 2008.


blackstaDecember 12th 2008.

I don't understand but didn't the proposals include the regulation of buses to provide a smoother integrated system. The whole point of it was to change the way things have been done until now. It's a sad day for Manchester

zabzyDecember 12th 2008.

with regards to there being no charge for driving a prius...... The congestion charge was meant to stop... CONGESTION.... not reduce carbon emmissions so why would a prius not get charged, its still a car thats going to cause CONGESTION.

jimjamDecember 12th 2008.

ITs a shame for public transport that the campaigning was so very poor. I still think Leeds needs it more than Manchester, but this was a once in a lifetime opportunity for such massive investment.

Cleetus Van DammeDecember 12th 2008.

Garry Burns- hahahaha!

sheikyerboutiDecember 12th 2008.

LOL at Garry!! Sat in my car for hours? 30mins max from edge of city to 'burbs? Its hardly a rush hour!! That was the whole point of this, WE DON'T HAVE MASSIVE CONGESTION!!!

JohnnyDecember 12th 2008.

I am glad the people of Manchester have made the right decision. I travel in London in my car most weeks paying £8 for the privilege of sitting in traffic that moves no quicker than it did before the CC was introduced. Another stealth tax may have got through to our pockets had the No vote not been successful. I am proud to have voted No and would do so again and again even when presented with public transport funding.

SmithersDecember 12th 2008.

If MCC could be trusted, if there was just one precedent that showed C-charges actually reduce congestion or improve air quality in even the medium term, if the chaotic greed-driven bus system had been looked at in any seriousness, if 'England's second city' didn't deserve a sensible degree of investment and an integrated approach anyway, if we were not made to feel as if we were being blackmailed by central government, if this wasn't one of the most poorly planned and ill-judged campaigns (see floating boundary in oh-coincidentally comparatively wealthy M21 & ASA-pulled advertisements), and if there was some kind of transparency and assurance that this money would not go the way of all other taxes - into some opaque and non-accountable abyss of misappropriation - then the people of Manchester might have reason to believe in an approach designed to make all our lives cleaner and happier.Until that day, I remain unconvinced.

James PattersonDecember 12th 2008.

Al you're plain wrong. The majority need leaders who are often when in power making a decision that is a minority one. Otherwise we'd have in the UK a death penalty and all Eastern Europeans placed in detention....alongside anybody who likes the Turner Prize. Minorities do rule (elected in the West) and thank God. Don't know whether you know but we have democracy (of the people) not ochlocracy (mob rule). In otherwords people vote in rulers not rule themselves.

motoristDecember 12th 2008.

For me it just wasn't clear enough. I'm all for pioneering and the city building on it's already great status but the information was too confusing.Agree with Steve - where did they get tha bunch of folk? "I don't want to be late for any meetings".....set off earlier.

pammyranDecember 12th 2008.

the congestion charge (probably not the best term for it), wasn't only about reducing congestion, but being able to put in place an infrastructure of public transport, which would mean that more people would leave their cars at home, and not continue unnecessary pollution 5 days a week. To enable cyclists a safer route to work, and to generally aid the city it making it a cleaner, safer place. To the people who voted no because they didn't beleive it'd happen, well what's politics all about. You're meant to vote for what you want to happen, and when people do that en masse, then we're in a culture where the voting people have a means to question the government. And as to those who say it's bribery, investment for a charge, well what do we normally do in general elections - we get told that we can certain things, only if we vote the right government in. It my not be right, but again, if people don't vote for the things they actually want at a higher level, then we have no control over the progression of the country or councils.

cool4door64December 12th 2008.

Well said George, and for those who believe that a London type scheme is London is the answer, it isnt they do benefit from the underground but its expensive, and we have not got that advantage. Plus even so the city is still congested nothing has eased all its as done is make money from the people who are already paying ridiculous prices to use the shoddy roads. Stealth tax it is the Yes campaign are typical of people coming to Manchester and trying to make it into another London, I like London but only to visit Manchester is my home and I love it as it is, so leave it be ya barnacle limpet land lubbers!

Sir Richard LeeceDecember 12th 2008.

I quit...

dominic of EcclesDecember 12th 2008.

Fantastic! Well done people of manchester you saw through the propoganda and did the right thing. I wonder who is for the high jump at agma? they could not have been more out of touch with the people if they lived on the moon!

SparkyDecember 12th 2008.

Very good point Ronyag.I must admit I desperately WANTED to vote yes... but the poorly constructed and last minute Yes campaign worried me no end. Firstly why didn't they start the debate on the charge a year ago - they knew it was coming and that would have given people all of the facts way before the vote. As one other comment mentioned EVEN NOW, people don't understand when they would and wouldn't have had to pay!?! HOW CAN PEOPLE VOTE ON SOMETHING WHEN THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE VOTING FOR?! This is not the fault of the voters but the fault of local and national government for not bringing this issue into public debate early enough and for a very poorly constructed and rushed ad campaign And that is why I voted NO. Hang your head in shame 'government' - you have only yourself to blame!

NeilDecember 12th 2008.

I can't believe people are saying that we've 'lost 10,000 jobs' as if it was a cast-iron fact. They were the very generous and very optimistic projections of one side of the campaign. They also took no account of the testimonial reports of many businesses building in break-clauses for their commercial rents for the implementation of the charge.

DebsDecember 12th 2008.

as I type, final checks are still being carried out. How have you managed to find out before everyone else?

KlunkersDecember 12th 2008.

Council wasting money!!!! And they wonder why we don't trust them. :o(

ChrisDecember 12th 2008.

Face facts, we're entering a massive recession - we've probably just missed the last opportunity to get that level of up front investment for the next decade.

SteveDecember 12th 2008.

This poorly thought out package was never going to inspire the same passion for a Yes vote that the No campaign were able to mobilise. People who voted No are not all short sighted plebs, many of us would have voted Yes if what was on offer guaranteed delivery of a safe, affordable, and extensive public transport system. Unfortunately both Manchester City Council's reputation for ineptitude and the sometimes extremely vague commitments in the plan pointed towards wastage and mis-spend. Combine this with the blackmail tactics of central government and the 30 year pay back hanging over us and you have a guaranteed No. Please please come up with some plans to subsidise fares, regulate the farce that is the bus service, possibly re-introduce guards to make trams and buses safer, demonstrate it works on the existing scale for a few years and you might, just might, convince people that a public transport future could work and be a viable alternative. We need a more compelling argument than a few electronic boards around town or more chaotic and expensive buses and trams.

spenderDecember 12th 2008.

a good result because- anyone paying peak fares for trams, trains or buses coming into manchester, except students, know public transport costs a fortune already. I also found out, only today, that it would have been the largest congestion charge in the world, a total of 80sq miles much larger than London's. and also all this about being good for business. Great! Just not actually any good for the travelling public squeezed onto trains with inflation busting ticket prices, or the monopoly of the stagecoach service that charges double for passengers on certain routes. as soon as ferguson and prescott got involved- oh and the dude responsible for organising it on £100k for a 2 day week- it just sounded more and more like another tax on the working class!

Hooray-HenryDecember 12th 2008.

Unfortunately Al, life's not as simple as that.

SHDecember 12th 2008.

Best news I've heard in a long time. To all the no voters - thank you for taking the time to vote. Who really wants to pay another 'tax'. I've travelled into the City Centre for c 20 years on public transport - no-one has kept to their 'policies' especially Metrolink - what happened to trams every 6 minutes at peak times; 12 minutes off-peak, double trams for rush hour - I cannot remember when we last had a double tram from Bury on the 08.18. Also the Bury service deteriorated greatly for Bury travellers when the line opened up to Altrincham, and then Salford Quays some years ago - it was obvious that Metrolink did not have enough trams to service the system. When United are playing the trams to Bury are always delayed..... Metrolink have not invested for years in their transport infrastructure and should not be given further funding when they cannot deliver what they once 'promised' when they had the funds.

DigDecember 12th 2008.

People voting no receiving several voting forms. People going to vote yes receiving none. Big Brother has indeed been watching you.

BJDecember 12th 2008.

To Yipeeeeee - no sensible business person would make a decision as big as this based on an emotional response to a political campaign, so I don't believe you. You would have moved your business anyway. It's a bit dishonest to pretend that people stating their point of view have brought about the alleged disaster of you moving your business. Maybe you moving your business will actually help towards solving the problem of traffic - now that would a much better thing for you to be proud of!

Chris PaulDecember 12th 2008.

If only it were so. What happened to my BNP-SWP-BMW rant btw Jonathan?

democracywinsDecember 12th 2008.

The very fact that the No vote was so overwhelming should go some way to silence the Yes campaign's claims that those voting against were short sighted.Motorists are forever being penalised. We didn't invent cars, build roads, put work places away from residential areas, privatise buses, ruin the train network or spend public money on a misleading advert.However, we do pay vehicle excise duty, duty on fuel, tax on car insurance, council tax, exorbitant car parking fees and income tax (in many cases) and VAT on the up keep of our cars. We also pay VAT on our MOTs, which we legally have to have.Yet we still have to drive on pot holed, bumpy roads which cause many of us to shell out repairing our cars, where we pay VAT again.Most motorists that I know would ditch the car if a cheap, clean, safe, reliable alternative was already available. What they aren't prepared to do is foot the bill so an unregulated bus and train network can corner the market even further.It must be very nice not to need to drive, pay all those taxes and have the moral high ground to call us that voted No foolish. I'm just very satisfied that not only did the No side win, but we completely hammered you lot. I'd be very humiliated if I was one of those losers walking about in a Vote Yes T-Shirt yesterday.Any way, I've left my massive Range Rover running on the drive way to warm up a bit before I make an unnecessary journey in to town. I'm off to buy cheap flights to Europe...

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

I drive in and out of Manchester every day during the rush hour, after having lived in Edinburgh and Tokyo I really dont see what the problem is, the traffic in Manchester is virtually non-existant....

To AlDecember 12th 2008.

A free world!

crispy40December 12th 2008.

The public transport improvements should be viable in their own right, not by charging drivers. If the public transport offering is better then more people will use it thus decreasing congestion... it's not rocket science!

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

The Yes voters here are very quick to point out how all of the No voters are ignorant, stupid and short sighted. That in itself is short sighted. Just because people have voted No does not mean that they cannot see the benefit of improved public transport. Manchester does not have teh proper transport infrastructure in place to support a congestion charge, and probably never will do. The Public Transport improvement plan was so far short of the mark and although in some areas promised vast improvements, in others proposals were nowhere near comprehensive enough so as to get cars off the road. Voting No does not mean that you're uneducated, Warmers, it means that we don't like beign held to ransom by a government notorious for breaking its promises.

AndyNorthStandDecember 12th 2008.

FANTASTIC NEWS !!!!!!Mancs are not cockneys - we saw through this pile of lies and bullshi^t for what it was - a hidden tax attempted to be pushed through with a billion pound bribe - and one that should never ever have been pushed onto the working people of Manchester as we enter the worst recession in a century.Thank god we said UP YOUR BOLLOCKS !How idiotic does it also make the politicians and council leaders look - 10-0 as regions, and for every person a 4-1 majority. How out of touch can you be.Anyone with any self respect would resign I think.Maybe we should force them to.

cool4door64December 12th 2008.

Sounds to me like service as a whole has gone top the dogs in this country in everything, mobile phone providers, car credit providers, banks should be called ****s, and not a good one at that! Metrolink and Stagecoach have ruled for too long im sure there are many other bus companies that could provide a dam site better service overall. The bus drivers today, (not all, I have met some bloody cracking ones!), dont have any customer service they act like they hate the people using the buses, I dont know what it liek to be a bus drivers I have never been one. I think we should get some AMerican customer service training in this country everthing int he states want to help and bend over backwards to make you happy! Ove here they bend you over bcakwards and empty ya pockets then do a runner! Pff

heatseekerDecember 12th 2008.

Couldnt we ask the banks for some of the 37 billion quid we gave them ?Or have they already spent it on jollies for the boys?It seems lots of cash can be conjured up up fast when the old school tie brigade need it.

The MinxDecember 12th 2008.

Yippppppeeee! Result!!!

Joe GobelsDecember 12th 2008.

Inside Job wrote;“ Looks like the sheep bought the propaganda. Morons...”Look on the bright side, only 218,860 took the bait.

James Chapman-KellyDecember 12th 2008.

Well done Manchester.The MJORITY said 'NO'Let's see how long before the brainless ones in power come up with an alternative question and another vote.What is it that people don't understand about the most powerful word in the world. 'NO' Proud to be a MANC

JamesDecember 12th 2008.

Realist, the people who voted no are all Daily Mail/Star/Mirror... Sun readers. Not sure they're Mancon readers. We're cleverer.

scoteeeDecember 12th 2008.

park outside get a train in roisin thats what i did !!!

WarmersDecember 12th 2008.

What an utter shame. I guess this has been decided by the uneducated who only thought about what they "may" have had to pay. I am sure Manchester will regret this in the future.

Mike WaterfootDecember 12th 2008.

I was undecided. I live on the Rochdale to Manchester, via Oldham train line. Next October the line is due to close for up to 3 years, robbing us of 10 train stops.I went to the congestion road show, wrote to GMPTE and even my MP asking that if the vote was a NO would we keep out vital rail link. None could answer me so we, the train users, decided that if we voted YES then we would definately loos our link so we better vote NO in the hope that by next October some one would see sence

viva chris ronaldoDecember 12th 2008.

Just seen the big news on ManCon that JLS have won the x-factor! That boy Sleuth is in the know!

SamDecember 12th 2008.

AndyNorth, what are you on about lies and bribes? It was simply an offer of massive public transport investment with the trade off being the C Charge to help pay for it. And now because of the recession there is even less chance of MCR getting the investment needed to give it a half decent public transport system. I understand that for some people they judged the investment not worth the C charge, but most of the comments on here are just rants and conspiracy theories. What nonsense.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

I was a yes person who just didn't believe they would deliver. How could we believe that they would invest in transport and infrastructure in the future when they do little or no investment at the moment? No effort has been made by GMPTE since the deregulation of the buses. Bring back regulation, and use the taxes we already pay to make improvements to what we already have...

jeff dDecember 12th 2008.

more importantly, Carol Vorderman's final ever letters on Countdown were: JSQDUAOTT

JohnnoDecember 12th 2008.

Catch a train in from Cheshire every morning. 25 minutes. Great service, reliable, cleanish, £6.90 return. Catch a bus from Picadilly to work, great service, bit crowded at times, free. Drive in maybe once a month. 40 minutes reasonable traffic movement, parking £6.50.We don't need a C Charge.

JayceeDecember 12th 2008.

The TIF wasn't perfect, but it made some good steps towards a truly integrated public transport system for Greater Manchester that would have benefited commuters and local people. The congestion charge was a smaller element that would have affected a smaller number of people and would have been introduced over a timescale that would have allowed employers to adopt more flexible working patterns to enable more staff to be unaffected by it. How short sighted peope (the few that voted) have been. I am disappointed about the result but still pleased to be a Manchester resident.

where do we go from here?December 12th 2008.

i think we go home and re-think what we can do to improve what we have...a better thought through plan was needed and failed our city the promtion of an unclear proposal is why the No was delivered in my eyes...and as for the 60-40 mancon poll just goes to show how many yes voters must have clicked on that poll so many times their mouse must need replacing what a joke!

markDecember 12th 2008.

well i hope we dont have the same people who voted no bleating on about the poor public transport, lack of investment in a few years when the opertunity has passed, is nothing more than the goverment are going to spend 3 billion pounds less in greater manchester, so thats less jobs also thanks you "NO" brigade for not beeing able to look any further than your wallets

SwitzerlandDecember 12th 2008.

I was a fierce No campaigner because like most i heard the words 'CHARGE' and "Manchester City Council" and not a lot else. Then i ignored all the chat and looked into the facts for myself and ended up voting Yes. Most people seem to agree on here that the whole campaign was a brilliant example how to make a total cock-up of delivering any kind of clear or concise message. Piss up in a brewery springs to mind on the part of MCC. This was totally not about a congestion charge, that was just the hook of the No Campaign, it was about a decent, modern transport system to rival all other top european cities and destination locations around the world. Do you know Manchester is ranked 9th in the UK's most visted cities. 9th!!! As a proper Manc, who loves his home town, thats rubbish because we have so much to offer. Trouble is we are sitting back now resting on the successes of years ago like the Metrolink, "life after the IRA bomb" and the Commonwealth Games. This was a golden opportunity to invest in something that would enable the city to grow and develop and continue to offer more great things 10 years from now. Instead we'll all be sat in our cars for an extra hour in the morning trying to get in to the city, probably complaining about how we could have an extra hour and half in bed if there was a decent transport link into the city.I think ManCon have hit the nail on the head with their closing paragraph. Our pioneering forefathers are probably turning in their graves.I think ManCon have hit the nail on the head with their closing paragraph. Our pioneering forefathers are probably turning in their graves.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

I really supported the improvements, and would gladly stop driving around the M60 if I could get to work using public transport that were reliable and frequent. I would also pay the charge if Manchester improved but it still did not fit my needs, so was happy to vote 'yes'. We had a choice and we voted, but, why were the plans so vague. My key questions were, could I buy a green car, like a prius and avoid the charge, as you can in London, when the new trams arrived, would they cross Manchester quickly, efficiently and often, and why couldn't we be told how often the new services (and old) would run? Also, why can't they build us an underground that runs every 3 minutes or reinstate train lines that are fast and regular? Why is that so ludicrous an idea? Why don't we have bus and taxi lanes that cars cannot use? why are people allowed to park on cycle lanes? Manchester has lost an investment that it needed, but no-one who voted was an idiot. The people who put the package together failed us. A drive to work for me takes 30 minutes, a train and tram takes 90 - on a good day! We need a better system, and as suggested by others, we need innovation and MCC control of services. Can the plan be reviewed and improved? Can most of our journeys in cars become faster and more reliable on public transport, or safer by bike? Can we be encouraged to reduce pollution whilst still sat in our cars? If the aim is to improve, regardless of funding, this should still happen, surely?

Fair for allDecember 12th 2008.

We deserve a better public transport system; we don't deserve to be made to pay for it whether its a driver or public transport commutor. We are already paying over the odd's for fares and in taxes! Other cities and countries have excellent transport systems, why can't we?! Local authorities and government need to follow the successes of other cities and employ the same strategies... they don't persecute and bankrupt their motorists.

MildredmoptonDecember 12th 2008.

Short sited lazy car dwellers....???? I think people are also forgetting the impact on local businesses. In this current climate, a Yes vote would have seen many other businesses fold or at least start to worry about the cost implications. So it not only affects commuters.

oxmancDecember 12th 2008.

I am sick to death of this attitude that because we voted no we're short sighted, we're stupid, we're f****ng morons.. All quoted from posts on this page. Get over it. If you're that concerned then start camapigning for regulations that make the Stagecoaches and Firsts to have to provide better service. These are private companies that answer to shareholders, MAKE them provide us with the transport service we deserve. And it's not like it scraped through is it? Overwhelming majority and a victory for common sense and democracy.

dont judge the no votersDecember 12th 2008.

I voted 'No' due to the ground area covered and the timings of the proposed charge. As a female I would be very uncomfortable walking to a remote train station in Irlam before 07:00 however to travel by car, in what would of been a new rush hour i would be charged for crossing the outer boundary.The consultation did not amend the proposal and represent the views. I travel by public transport but when travelling to Leeds (train from piccadily) there is no way a viable and workable option was proposed. We pay for tickets on the train which are so overcrowded there are no seats so the guards don't get tickets and no one pays. it is madness! turn you energy to one pointing at how pubic transport is segreated and privatised. For a country the size of the UK there is no rational explaination for why trains can't seat people, were this a world class service i am sure no one would mind a charge being introduced as we would all be on the train.

KlunkersDecember 12th 2008.

Anyone want to buy a donkey?

WinForManchesterDecember 12th 2008.

The fat exec's of the PRIVATE public transport network are not getting a big fat bonus this year.private companies should fund their own improvements, and now maybe the council will set all the traffic lights back to normal and allow traffic to flow easing congestion, just like they would have done had everyone voted YES

Hooray-HenryDecember 12th 2008.

Applause is due indeed! As others have said, the public transport should be sorted out anyway. Why the heck should we have to take on further debt for this?? If the provisions were better, people would be more inclined to travel by bus, train and tram and there would be no requirement for the congestion charge at all. The buses are an utter shambles. Dangerous, urine-soaked sheds frequented by drunks and low lifes. I would like to see a change in the public transport system now (particularly in Stockport), only then will I believe the authorities have demonstrated sufficient sincerity in the matter. Perhaps Manchester City council could use some of the funds from the hideously financially inflated Christmas market this year to put towards better transport provisions. Just a thought.

SchofeDecember 12th 2008.

George Stephenson - Very well put! *claps*

Inspector BlakeDecember 12th 2008.

Thank gawd no more buses than there are now on the roads .Butler drives me bleeding mad as it is yeaaaaaah Butlter.

Jonathan SchofieldDecember 12th 2008.

Dear Mr Chris Paul, I would have put your rant up if you'd sent it to me.

Mr TDecember 12th 2008.

Isn't there still £1bn or something that we can spend though? I thought the congestion charge was to get us an extra £1.5bn from the gov, not all of it?

mandragonDecember 12th 2008.

Thank god it's a no. We would have had the same idiots mis-managing secveral extra billion pounds of debt on our behalf. Lets face it the service we get for the money currently invested is appallling.The cheque book managers out there always want to throw more money at a problem rather than fix the current problem in more imaginative ways.If you contract out to huge organisations to supposedly save your own organisation time, effort and money you had better manage those outsourced contracts effectively and have highly effective contracts in the first place.The bottom line is that the transport system we currently have could be 10 times better if it was better managed.

T BrowneDecember 12th 2008.

NO VOTE = SELFISH, that's why the NO VOTE won, because basically we're all selfish gits!

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

I'm not silly, shortsighted or ignorant, I think it's funny that it's the yes voters who are still the most vocal and rude because we made a democratic decision. I don't think this plan was thought through properly the outer limit was far too wide and that's why it failed. We would have benefitted nothing and have no choice but to drive in! If I had a real choice I would work closer to home but it's not that simple!

SteveADecember 12th 2008.

Chris - I think you'll find the cost of fuel is dropping, and is likely to continue to do so for some time. Perhaps you might have missed mention of a recession / credit crunch on the news?In any case, TIF would not have added any more buses on the road (unless you're a schoolboy wanting to catch a yellow bus). Again, you may have missed the fact that Manchester buses are owned by private companies.

Robin SkylarkDecember 12th 2008.

what congestion charge?

Fair for allDecember 12th 2008.

Ronyag - well put!!The public transport routes are very limited especially in the suburbs. The commuter routes are expanding further into country locations where little or no public transport is available. What happens to employees from these locations; as for losing 10,000 jobs, what a load of rubbish! The city/businesses are more likely to lose well trained employees at the expense of the charges. As comparing Manchester to London, the transport system there was well established before the congestion charge, which has done bugger all apart from creating revenue! As for today’s congestion, the so called traffic calming has calmed nothing; buses seem to create congestion by endlessly blocking roads and driving dangerously like they own the space. Privatisation has created over-priced and under serviced routes. The government has only encouraged this. Other European countries have managed to develop and run successful transport infrastructure without levying huge charges. To those who say 'No' voters are selfish.. can you read or are you just stupid?!

i hate the public...December 12th 2008.

noticed a few comments from people asking if the folk that use our existing public transport actually voted......from experience i can say that the majority of these people can not manage to wash themsleves, never mind put a cross in a box, seal an envelope and post it.

guttedDecember 12th 2008.

They should have campaigned harder...

zabzyDecember 12th 2008.

Did you know the metrolink paid sale golf club like a million pounds because they wanted to put a line through some of its land..... then after paying this they didnt do anything. What a way to waste a million pounds eh.

ClarebrasschickDecember 12th 2008.

Personally, I think its a great result though one does wonder whether a Yes vote might have come out had we not been in the dire financial and economic position we now find ourselves in - had we been in boom time with more money in our pockets would people have been more enthusiastic? Just a thought but would be interested to hear other views on that one

SAS watching Clock Tower SniperDecember 12th 2008.

Might aswell come on down C.T.S its not going to happen.Lets go home for christmas yeah.

Angela HalesDecember 12th 2008.

Gr8 News!!Yeah, you're so right about those posters! The student lad looked like a were wolf. Lol

KlunkersDecember 12th 2008.

There there there. Better luck next time

Peter RivendellDecember 12th 2008.

Have we missed out on massive investment in public transport? Yes! But HOW DARE THEY blackmail us with that iniquitous congestion charge! Incidentally, if Metrolink can't manage two lines through the city centre how on earth were they proposing to add more lines?

RichardDecember 12th 2008.

It was no because we didn't believe that we should all pay for the council to waste over £1bn in putting in a poorly thought out scheme.Or to increase Stagecoach and other companies' profits for more of the same poor service.

championDecember 12th 2008.

next time you hear someone complaining about public transport ask them if they voted. If the answer's 'no' - push them under the next bus, train or tram

commuter in exileDecember 12th 2008.

It'll be interesting to see the council by council split - the local authorities couldn't agree either so who should we listen to?

Wet boyDecember 12th 2008.

People seem to forget also that London has a nice warm dry public transport system called the under ground which isnt subject to traffic.Manchester has terrible weather and no amount of new buses or trams will convince some people to stand at a cold and windy bus stop, getting soaking wet because it rains all the time, waiting to get on a heat sweaty steamed up bus. Not a great start to the day, I would choose congestion everytime!OR charge us for improved weather conditions if you want to play god!

YEEEEEES!!!December 12th 2008.

What a brilliant result for the real people of Manchester!!!, all you city living non mancs can go and live in london where you probably all came from anyway. What a shame you can't stroll out of your s****y apartment and travel around the Manchester district at ease, while the workers of Manchester who we're re housed back in the 60'S (I used to live on Liverpool Road) have to pay a premium to travel to their work destination!!!, Great!. Who was this really going to benefit? not me who has to be in Salford every morning earinig a crust for my family and being taxed for it while the city people get a lovely new transport service to ferry them around.. Lovely.

Darren sDecember 12th 2008.

It would have been like bailing out the banks again!If stagecoach get the contract to run our transport system then they should have to meet the required standards and invest their own money to retain the rights to the contract. If they can’t meet those standards then give it to someone who can and make it work as a business, that pays for it’s own improvements. We should be looking to have the best transport system in the world run by a world class company with vision and the peoples interests in mind.Why should the public of manchester keep investing into a failing privately run business.Get rid of stagecoach and stop the rot, let the MCC run it and get a successful european transport company in to consult on a restructuring programme. Lets learn from the Germans, Dutch and French all have great transport systems.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

I heard the Yes campaign cost £34 million. Think what good things they COULD have done for Manchester with all that cash...that's if they were smart enough in the Town Hall to administer it efficiently...oh, ha ha, what am I thinking?! In principle I was totally in favour of substantial investment in our city's dire public transport system, but I worked for the council for years, and know they're completely incapable of organising the proverbial p*ss up in a brewery, let alone administering an 80 square mile congestion zone...and yeah, on that subject: EIGHTY square miles? That just smacks of greed.

SMARTDecember 12th 2008.

S.M.A.R.T is the route to any business plan that has to succeed all good businessmes will tell you this .it stands for SPECIFIC,MEASURABLE.ACHIEVABLE,REALISTIC and TIMELY i think the Yes campaign delivered the timely but floundered miserably on the rest thank god it did too!any bank manager and financial investment comany can see that this plan was Flawed!

lucky chrisDecember 12th 2008.

Oh, there he is.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

New York didn't think it would benefit local businesses and clearly Manchester doesn't either- how true!!!

forrestDecember 12th 2008.

public transport improvements....for transport provided by private companies and funded by me driving to work. No thanks.I wasnt influenced by the traford centre, I dont give a hoot about the no campaigners adverts and the yes campaigners adverts, I voted no becuase no is my answer.If transport was run by the local government and didsbury needed trams (wythesnahwe included) I'd have re-considered, but it's privately run, didsbury has 2 train stations a half million buses, wythenshwe has busses and trains at heald green and the airport. NO NO NO.

caroleDecember 12th 2008.

I think what a fantastic answer about time commen sence prevailed,what can they charge us for next. We pay road tax, bus fares are always going up, poll tax,NI is a tax, tax on your wages tax on your saving what will they think of next well done Greater Manchester.

The Ghost of Christmas FutureDecember 12th 2008.

Chriss, Greater Manchester already has 19,000 buses, all it was getting extra was 180 Yellow School Buses. Don't say people are short sighted when at least most know the facts.

Paul JohnsonDecember 12th 2008.

If Geoff Hoon say's there is no plan B does that mean Labour are happy to do nothing and just let the congestion get worse. If that is the situation then we have no option but to vote for a party that does have a plan B.Liberals and Tories - start stating your plan B so we can have an alternative

Chris GibsonDecember 12th 2008.

At the end of the day, all that most people want from life is to drive to the call centre, earn a basic wage, get back and watch telly. Repeat until dead. If they can save a few quid to spend on ready meals in the local Tesco Metro on the way home, great! It's not the way I choose to live, but it doesn't affect me either. I suppose that the annoying thing about their decision today is that it DOES affect me, especially as I live in town, but hey -- the people have spoken. As one person above put it so perfectly: PLEBS VOTE FOR GRIDLOCK. Good luck to them.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

I voted NO and I don't drive. I would love to see improvements to public transport, less congestion, more cycle lanes etc but not as a result of political blackmail. I'm pleased yet apprehensive about the result. What happens now? One thing's for sure, if Manchester City Council and the Government provide no alternative means of setting up this marvellous public transport system, the World will see what a money obsessed and fickle country we live in.

ashton happyDecember 12th 2008.

public transport should be paid by the public... not by the motorist. When will government understand this! Millions of pounds wasted again that should have been spent on public transport.

scoteeeDecember 12th 2008.

a poor yes campaign with foggy answers to clear questions reulted in a NO and im glad it did.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Surely we already pay taxes for public transport - why pay more to validate an investment programme that should already be taking place. If public transport was a viable alternative for the masses and the council hadn't gotten greedy with a double charging ring system we might have had a different result.

scoteeeDecember 12th 2008.

Artie, have you ever heard of over- kill? haha

NEATJOBDecember 12th 2008.

nice one.maybe if they started to invest routes that cross the area i.e oldham/knutsford trafford/oldham i may have voted yes.just upgrading routes that already exist is not enough to change my mind not to drive to work as its impossible now to get here by public transport (or would cost a fortune)

JhoDecember 12th 2008.

*Wonders if all the Yes voters with a tendency to whinge will now blame the No voters for anything that goes wrong in Manchester from now onwards*That aside, I'm glad that the CC didn't go through. I didn't get to vote, and have to commute by car (well, it's either that, completely relocate, or use a public transport system that wouldn't have been affected by the CC, costs more, is unreliable, and adds 2 1/2+ hours onto my daily travel times). Would the CC have reduced traffic? I don't think so. A lot of people drive into Manchester because they HAVE to. On top of this, given past performance there's no way I'd expect privately owned public transport companies to deliver.

JoshuaDecember 12th 2008.

Typical short-sightedness. Living in Macclesfield as I do, we didn't have a vote even though we would be contributing... we are losing some of our public transport options with the "new improved" rail timetable which starts on Monday and reduces our train service... we can't even get a bus anywhere useful like the airport... A sad day for us.

Ali McGowanDecember 12th 2008.

What a wonderful day - Manchester [well, most of it] saw sense. As for the bunkum about regretting it... no, someone needs to come back with a more robust proposal that is not full of holes and perhaps then we'd have a yes. We shouldn't accept a half-arsed proposal; if we are going to improve public transport, let's do it properly...

peevedDecember 12th 2008.

Well I'm feeling very let down I never recieved my voting slip or any information on how-to or where to vote (and I wonder howmany other yes people were also left high, dry and with out a vote) so much for democracy....

Clock Tower Sniper.December 12th 2008.

Does anyone know when the Metrolink station near Miles Platting will be open?I have been lay on this roof for ages.

RonyagDecember 12th 2008.

The public transport system was privatised by the government and has been run down to the state it is in now . The Trains and buses should be government run not for profit but for the good of the community and to build it up to a place where people can use it with confidence. I would happily get a bus and train to and from work but they are not reliable, they are late or do not turn up at all. I will use public transport and get out of my car when the services are run properly and for all. The private companies only want to run the profitable routes, public transport should be for all the public not just people living on a profitable route. The government made a big mistake privatising public transport and now they want us to pay for it and want to impose charges on drivers to correct their mess. NO! The British public need to assert their rights and stop letting the government do what ever they want.

GSDecember 12th 2008.

This was a battle of (mis?)information and delivery.'Vote yes and a congestion charge comes in' was a simple message that everybody received. The levels, details and time-scales of infrastructure input was simply not absorbed by the average voter. When the result came in, some educated and esteemed colleagues of mine where still summarising the result based on misinformation: "Why should we pay before improvements happen..."The result only tells part of the story. My conclusion; the average voter simply did not care enough, as seems to be all too oft the case.

George StephensonDecember 12th 2008.

Once upon a time all the major roads into Manchester were all wide enough to accommodate 2 lanes of traffic coming into the city. Now we've got single lane arteries into the city, endless obstacles installed under the guise of "traffic calming" and a traffic lighting phasing system designed to make the traffic as slow as possible. Congestion my arse, it's all a fix, and thank god the people of Manchester have had the brains to see through this political bullying tool. Yes to improving public transport, but NO to yet another stealth tax. The right result.

Artie FufkinDecember 12th 2008.

Kevin Peel...."We won't let those who voted no devastate the future development of our city-region."There's democracy for you, I was joking when I had Dickie leese lined up with Kim Il-Sung but it looks like you favour that approach.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Common sense prevailed.NO MORE TAX RISESThose who proposed this are so out of touch with people they should all resign. They are not required, let them go and save us more money.ANON

malhDecember 12th 2008.

They don't know when they would have to pay? Good grief, where have they been for the past few months - or do you work in an office full of dopes.I see that despite not knowing anything about it they all were against it - inspirational!

JoDecember 12th 2008.

As said, it's much easier to get a negative vote than a positive. The No contingent ran a very successful disninformation campaign, whilst the Yes brigade seemed rudderless. In the end, the better run campaign won-it was never about the voters.

WindyDecember 12th 2008.

Why not still put the improvements in place, and if it's good and value for money people will choose use it instead of being forced to. The government dangling a carrot from a stick as it has done was always bound to upset people. The loan/funding was based on Manchester providing partial funding itself, which in turn was based on revenue from congestion charging. If cc had it's 'desired' environmental effect and everyone stopped using their cars suddenly, no revenue would be raised, and no transport system would be improved.

Nic NacDecember 12th 2008.

Over 812,000 voted 'no' to the scheme, against 218,000 in favour. This represents a 79-21% split.

Man ConDecember 12th 2008.

Because we have our finger on the pulse of the city and Gordo and Sleuth are currently on the scene.

scoteeeDecember 12th 2008.

democracy wins ...i love you ...brilliant and totally my thoughts!!!

championDecember 12th 2008.

and from the looks of it there always was a plan b so they fibbed about that. here comes a council tax increase - will it be across the sub-region or just for manchester though?

ChrisDecember 12th 2008.

SteveA - With regard to the buses, surely with less traffic on the roads the existing buses could circulate much more quickly and efficiently? The yellow bus scheme would have delivered massive improvments to peak time traffic - have you noticed the difference on the roads during the school holidays?

Excellent NewsDecember 12th 2008.

Just goes to show that the public won't be conned!

BobLDecember 12th 2008.

Just goes to show how out of touch our supposed political representatives are.Lets elect some with some common sense next time round.

becksDecember 12th 2008.

Everyone who is making out that i am stupid because i voted know needs to grow up and understand that this is how democracy works.I voted no, not because of tbe CC - i will not have to pay it. I voted no because it was a badly planned waste of money. Manchester does need better public transport, but for me TIF was not the way to do it.

For Crying Out Loud...December 12th 2008.

The more I read the name calling from disappointed Yes-ers, the more annoyed I get. Why the hell do we all have to think it's right that we have to pay AGAIN for something that most civilsed countries have as a norm - a decent transport system that works,and not some over-hyped potential financing of something that might work in the future. Oh, and it's probably a little "greener" too.....

SteveADecember 12th 2008.

Oh yeah, the poor old Yes campaign. How many millions of taxpayers' money did they waste? At least £230k on one misleading TV advert which was pulled by the Advertising Standards Agency...

CarlosTheJackalDecember 12th 2008.

You're off, are you, whatAshame? I can hear Manchester's average IQ climbing even as I type.

AnonymousDecember 12th 2008.

Silly people of Manchester - you have just said no to the transport links of Greater Manchester being improved massively, jobs being created (yes, we are in a recession) and us being a city that leads the way! Madness that people hear the words 'congestion charge' and automatically assume it's bad! Sad day!

steveDecember 12th 2008.

totally Phil...well put

GarretDecember 12th 2008.

the hatred and vitriol expressed by some of these disapointed "yes" voters is unbelievable, you don't get your own way so you abuse and insult those that don't agree with you? I'm going to buy a car just so I can avoid such horrible, hideous people...

steveDecember 12th 2008.

in fairness the messages were not put across well enough...the no campaign was dismal, but people will always vote no if they have a slight doubt...Did weird billboards saying "i cant be late for work again..that's why Im voting yes" married with frankly the weirdest bunch of people I've ever seen really get the messages across in the best light? nah.

cool4door64December 12th 2008.

The city council have money to inject into things that most need it they make this money off various taxes, parking, and services to name but a few. They waste that money then coming robbing us blind to pay for something they know we need but wont cough up for. The big bang artwork in eastlands is the prime example of money not spent on better things. The Yes campaign used how much to make its campaign shown, stupid amount of money that could be used for better things. And the reasont he buses are kanckered and unsafe is because the bus companies spend less and less on new vehicles and dont bother repairing old one why because they want us to pay for it so that they get richer via the congestion charge. Im sure we could go on arguing over this but the truth is our money that we are taxed on isnt being spent wisely. How about a Yes campaign for wise spending of taxpayers money? not gonna happen is it! No doubt they will introduce the congestion charge in some other format

alDecember 12th 2008.

Chris Gibson, you're a dick. Supercilious, patronising and unbelievably stupid. How dare you assume that everyone who voted no lives their life in the way that you describe. You and all the people who have said comments such as, "they're all sun readers" deserve this, you deserve the fact that this decision hasn't gone your way because your over-inflated ego and sense of righteousness may just have taken a minor denting. Get over it and accept you're in the minority and the minority is not always right.

shabsDecember 12th 2008.

sickening? time to leave the area? get a grip losers....if people who vote 'yes' believe that we really would geta better public transport system then move to london where they do have a congetion charge and trust me....they all look pretty miserable over there too so do us a favour and join them!

ZabzyDecember 12th 2008.


IZTDecember 12th 2008.

Hurrah! Thank goodness for common sense.Government should pay for better transport not us.

Jo SDecember 12th 2008.

Maybe if the Council had come up with a fairer way of paying back the investment then everyone would have voted yes. You can't expect people travelling to work by car (some of whom have no choice) to basically pay for other people to get public transport. I worked out that it would cost myself and my husband twice as much to travel by public transport, than it would paying the congestion charge, and it would also add another 40 mins (minimum) onto our journey.

BunnyDecember 12th 2008.

A personal thanks to all NO voters from me, I would have had to pay at charging times to visit my local park or supermarket and neither are anywhere near the city centre. Further there would have been a charging station virtually at the end of my street. I am delighted with the results of the voting.

I care about Manchester's future.December 12th 2008.

Well, what a surprise!Actually it's no surprise at all when you ask if you want to pay a new tax for some uncertain improvements to the transport system that most people are bound to vote NO. How utterly short sighted!I hope all those selfish idiots that think they were clever by voting NO get immense pleasure sitting alone in their cars crawling along for endless hours every morning and afternoon on Regent Road and Princess Parkway are pleased that have contributed to better future for Manchester.You selfish short sighted idiots, do you really think that our already terminally congested road system can go on absorbing more and more cars forever? A system that has been an overwhelming success in London, would, for less than the cost of half a pack of cigs a day, have given Manchester a chance to avoid the total gridlock that IS coming, have no doubts about that.But hey, you've saved 3 quid a day so well done.

To post this comment, you need to login.Please complete your login information.
Or you can login using Facebook.

Latest Rants

Ashle Kumar

After putting password in our system often we forget it. But don't worry it can be recover by a…

 Read more

Postal services in goverment sector are pretty awesome. Now USPS offering excellent services in…

 Read more

Know your username(which is same as your employee number) Now click this link. And complete your…

 Read more

Link below to an MEN article on future plans for the area.…

 Read more

Explore The Site

© Mark Garner t/a Confidential Direct 2021

Privacy | Careers | Website by: Planet Code | SEO by The eWord