WHAT HAPPENED?

Manchester voters reject proposals for £5 charge. Last week voters in Manchester turned down proposals for a new congestion charge zone. Almost 80% rejected the scheme, which would have charged drivers up to £5 a day for travelling at peak times. The plans needed to be approved by seven out of the 10 Greater Manchester boroughs: more than 1m people voted, a turnout of 53%, and every borough said no. The scheme was strongly supported by the government, with Geoff Hoon, the transport secretary, warning that Manchester would not receive £1.5 billion of funding for public transport unless it approved the plans. The city would then have borrowed a further £1.2 billion to pay for trams, buses, improved rail infrastructure and park-and-ride facilities.

WHAT WERE THE PLANS?

World’s biggest zone, covering 80 square miles. “This was a bold move, possibly too bold,” said Richard George of the Campaign for Better Transport, a green pressure group. “It was much more subtle and targeted than London so we’re disappointed by the vote. We have to do something about rising traffic and CO2 levels.” Unlike in London, where drivers pay a flat £8 fee to travel into the city in the daytime, Manchester drivers would have had electronic tags fitted to their cars and prepaid accounts. The charge would have been deducted automatically as drivers passed roadside beacons marking out an inner and an outer ring around the city. The scheme would have covered 80 square miles, which would have made it the world’s largest.

VOTERS’ DOUBTS

Whenever asked, public says no. Peter Roberts of the Drivers’ Alliance said drivers were not prepared – in the middle of a recession – to pay another “stealth tax” to drive on roads they had already paid for, although the Manchester scheme would not have started until 2013.Congestion charges are controversial because everyone pays a fixed price, meaning that it hits low-income groups harder. When public opinion has been tested, results have been unequivocal. In 2005, 75% of Edinburgh voters said no to a road-pricing scheme. Last month London’s mayor, Boris Johnson scrapped plans for an extension to the city’s congestion zone after 67% of people questioned in a consultation said it should go. Planned zones in Cambridge, Bristol and Leeds must now be in doubt.

DO THEY EVEN WORK?

Evidence from London shows few benefits. Earlier this year figures emerged showing that in some parts of London traffic speeds had declined since the congestion charge was introduced. Traffic moved along the Strand, a main east-west corridor, at just 1.8mph. Businesses also said they had suffered after the introduction of the zone. In Manchester, firms ranging from Kellogg’s to Unilever joined the campaign against the new charge. “People don’t like the surveillance involved either,” Roberts, left, said. “The admin costs are huge as well and the environmental benefits are unclear.” Durham, which introduced a scheme in October 2002, has seen an 85% drop in traffic, but the zone covers only a tiny area of the city centre.

Times Recommends

• UN may halt 400-year-old 'freedom of the seas'
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone
• Gas deal on hold, but Ukraine may pay in the end