Congestion charge referendum - trick or treat?

Congestion charging road marking

The Association of Greater Manchester Authorities meets on Friday 25 July and will discuss proposals for a Greater Manchester-wide referendum on the proposed congestion charge. The discussion follows the surprise u-turn when on the 25 June Sir Richard Leese announced that there would be a "referendum". The only previous time that there has been a vote on this issue was the Edinburgh Toll Poll of February 2005, when the people there voted three to one against plans similar to those proposed for Greater Manchester.

Opponents of the plans for road tolls in the Greater Manchester area had been calling for a public vote on the issue but are concerned about what is really in store. The National Alliance Against tolls (NAAT) were involved in the anti toll campaign in Edinburgh and they say that the people of Greater Manchester will not be getting what they expect as there is in law no mechanism for a proper binding referendum on this issue.

What happened in Edinburgh and is likely to happen in Greater Manchester is a "local poll". These polls are not binding, they are not supervised by the Electoral Commission and there are virtually no rules on how the poll is conducted. With a referendum there has to be an unbiased question, equivalence of treatment between one side and the other, and limits as to how much is spent on campaigning. With a local poll there are no rules and the local authorities have a massive advantage.

A spokesman for the NAAT said: "Any poll is better than nothing, but people will be misled if they think that this will be fair. The question is likely to be biased to increase the chances of a "yes" vote, and the toll advocates will spend millions of taxpayers money trying to convince voters. This softening up campaign has already begun in the guise of a consultation exercise. Voters will be denied real facts - last August the NAAT made a Freedom of Information Act request to see the TIF submission. That request was denied and we are still going through the process of appeal. By the time that information is released it will probably be too late."

"Though the English authorities will be spending a lot more money to influence opinion, they are taking a gamble. In our view they are taking this gamble for two reasons. One reason is that it is an attempt to shift the blame for the scheme onto the voters, who may then be less likely to remove the toll advocates at the next elections - local or General.

"But the bigger reason for the gamble is that the poll has only been offered by Sir Richard with conditions. Those councils who are opposed to road tolls - Bury, Stockport and Trafford - would have to agree to implement tolls on the basis of a Greater Manchester wide vote, even if their own voters had voted "no". Under the present law there is no way that the three councils could be forced to introduce tolls, so this is a way of making those councils join in. The big question before Friday's meeting is: 'why would the three councils accept a poll with such conditions and with the whole process certain to be biased?'"