While many people are happy to proclaim their green credentials, ask them to vote for measures that might actually achieve something and they seem less convinced. Voting for congestion charging, for example, brings out dirtier tendencies.
Working on a comment piece for the IET's "Transport sector," The wrong medicine to clear congestion, turned up evidence that even Swedes, often seen to be greener than many, will reject such proposals.
When asked for their views on congestion charging in Stockholm, there was a narrow vote for the idea in the middle of the city, but suburban Swedes were heavily against the idea.
As an aside, these commuters would not have had a chance to vote under the original plan. It was only when surrounding municipalities decided to hold polls that the rest of the region got a chance to vote on the plan.
In the event, Stockholm got its congestion charge because it was down to the parliament to make the final decision. That should be a lesson to others who want to implement green measures.
As in London, the charge brought positive benefits. But it seems unlikely that this will carry any weight with voters in other cities.
20 January 2009
Decongestion is not for Manchester
Posted by Unknown at 6:06 pm
Labels: congestion charging, IET, Stockholm, transport
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Congestion charging does not really provide any environmental benefit and does a lot of commercial damage to business and trade within the charging zone.
To simply base the argument for a congestion charge on the environmental issues is flawed.
There are many other problems associated with denying people the freedom to travel within their own city which cannot be addressed by public transport 'improvements'.
Post a Comment