1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202 
No votes for Christmas
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The people of Edinburgh have voted — and provided the council with a congestion conundrum. Chris Tindall asks what happens next.
Listen to the comments made by councillors in Edinburgh following the crushing defeat of its congestion charge plans and you get the distinct impression they are being forced out between gritted teeth. "We will respect the choice made by Edinburgh residents." says City Council leader DonaldAnderson."We are pleased that a record number of people have taken the time to engage in the debate and give their view."
Whether Anderson means this or not, the fact is the city faces a bit of a problem. The council's solution of a f2 congestion charge was rejected by 74% of the 179,905 residents who voted (CM 24 February). This is despite the fact the Scottish capital has 160,000 vehicles travelling through its streets every day. If congestion charging is not the answer,what is? "We have a number of transport projects happening," says a council spokeswoman. "These have now been brought forward."
These projects, which require a total investment of £1bn ("the biggest boost since Victorian times" according to Andersen) include two tram lines, a rail link to the airport, park-and-ride schemes and more 20mph zones.
This last initiative in particular has been singled out because it is cited as the reason why there have been no child deaths on the city's roads for the past two years.
But there seems to be some desperation to the councillors' comments. For example, Andrew Burns, executive member for transport in Edinburgh. says: "We will have to focus our minds on how we will cope with congestion increases in the years ahead." Cue much scratching of heads.
The Scottish Executive (SE) says it has been up front about the congestion problem Edinburgh faces. Its spokeswoman won't comment on Edinburgh's failure to implement a charge, but she says it also faced a legal challenge from two other councils — one of them Fife, which brought about a judicial action because it claimed the charge was unfair.
The inference is that this did the city no favours.
She also says the issue of singleoccupancy vehicles on toll bridges will be addressed through Regional Transport Partnerships and there will be a review of toll bridges in general to find ways of encouraging road users to use alternative routes into Scottish cities such as Glasgow and Edinburgh.
Perhaps more tellingly, the SE spokeswoman adds that the ScottishTransport Minister admitted in a recent interview that he doubted if any of the other Scottish local authorities would come forward in the foreseeable future with a localised congestion charge on the strength of Edinburgh's result.
"We can't say they won't," she concludes."But he doubted it."
The Department for Transport won't be pressed into speculation about how it will affect other cities' plans for introducing congestion charges south of the border, but a spokesman does say: "The significance of the result shows the importance of the right scheme.
"Road users need to see clear and direct benefits. [They] obviously felt it didn't suit their needs."
The SE spokeswoman is much more succinct: "You don't ask turkeys to vote for Christmas." •