The thorny topic of congestion charging is dividing the boroughs of Greater Manchester, with some seeing the benefits and others voting against it, fearing the worst. Clarissa Satchell examines who in the business community stands to gain and who stands to lose.
For some it is a bold step towards a cleaner, greener Manchester, bustling with modern public transport to rival our most forward-thinking European counterparts. For others, it is a lurch towards deserted city centre businesses and increased financial burdens, which plays into the hands of the government and the green lobby.After years of speculation, which began way back when London decided to implement a charging scheme, Manchester is to submit a bid for £33bn of government funding to introduce public transport improvements and congestion charging at peak times. But across the boroughs of Greater Manchester some civic and business leaders are rubbing their hands with glee, while others hold theirs up in alarm.
"It's a difficult stance we're taking and we wouldn't be doing it if we didn't think it was the right stance," says Roger Jones, chairman of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE), who acknowledges that businesses will take some convincing that this will not damage the city's economy. "With the Metrolink campaign, everyone was behind us and it's not the case with this, but I think the tide is turning since we announced the proposals.
"This is a chance for us to become the first city outside London to have major investment in our public transport system. Make no mistake though, this is a competition. We need the business community behind us if we are to win."
Under the proposals, two charging zones will be introduced - the outer ring roughly following the M60 and the inner ring encircling the city centre. Unlike the London charging scheme, drivers will have to pay only if they travel past the charging points from Monday to Friday inbound between 7am and 9.30am and outbound from 4pm to 6.30pm.
A day return trip to the regional centre and back, with both inbound and outbound journeys made at peak times, will bring a daily charge of £35 in total at today's prices - the scheme is scheduled to be introduced in 2012.
A capped charge will be introduced for business-related users such as haulage companies and fleet discounts will be considered.
So what is the incentive for businesses to back such a controversial and unproven scheme? The City Region Development Plan identifies potential growth sufficient to deliver around 220,000 jobs in the next 15 years, but it also estimates that 30,000 of these jobs could be at risk unless congestion is addressed.
Daniel Charles Mouawad, chief executive of professionals body Pro.Manchester, says: "Successful economies have good integrated transport networks in place. Manchester therefore needs to invest in a transport system that offers real alternative choices. If Manchester does not address its transport and congestion issues now, it runs the risk of losing some of the 70,000 financial and professional services sector jobs expected to be created over the next decade.
Clearly, that would not be acceptable or forgivable."
But Richard Stokes, associate director in Jones Lang LaSalle's Manchester office, says some city centre occupiers worry charging could hamper their ability to realise these ambitions.
"Some think it could become more difficult to attract and retain staff,"
he says. "With annual car parking now costing £33,000 per annum there is already an incentive to find alternatives, but we need a guarantee that the public transport improvements will be implemented before the charge. I don't personally believe charging will stop Manchester city centre attracting occupiers if we have that. However, while there is ambiguity that could deter inward investors in the interim."
Stephen Kinsey, commercial property partner at law firm Cobbetts, believes Manchester's rivals could benefit. "Liverpool would certainly become more attractive to inward investors, especially in light of Peel's £310bn Liverpool Waters scheme, which will transform the docklands," he says. "Smaller cities and towns such as Preston and Warrington will also benefit greatly."
While this is a common concern, Manchester's inward investment agency, MIDAS, disagrees. Colin Sinclair, its chief executive, says: "Road congestion and under capacity of public transport, particularly the commuter rail network, is going to hit all of the UK's major cities and, in taking steps now, Manchester is positioning itself to have a real competitive advantage in the future.
"Cutting congestion in our city region would bring real and tangible benefits to business and to inward investment. Good transport links - including public transport and free-flowing roads and motorways - are one of the key elements for attracting mobile international investment to the subregion."
The geographical scope and dual zoning of the proposed scheme means businesses' concerns vary depending on their location. While some city centre-based businesses fear investors and job seekers will relocate, others in the area worry they will be the ones isolated.
John Gower, operations director at Bolton business transfer agency SBS Commercial, says: "At least one of our consultants travels into Manchester for an appointment every day, so introducing a congestion charge would cost the business a fortune. It's hard enough for outer city-based businesses to compete with city centre companies and hitting us with a congestion charge will prove to be a great financial burden."
Among those most concerned about losing out are trades reliant on road use. John Falder, managing director of HMG Paints, in Collyhurst, says: "We employ 170 people involving around 200 to 240 vehicle movements per day in total and estimate a cost of £3500 to £3600 per day to our staff, visitors and our own transport. That is clearly unsustainable."
In contrast, Peter Heginbotham, senior partner of law firm Davis Blank Furniss and a member of the
independent panel assessing the scheme, describes himself as an "unreconstructed motorist", who until two or three years ago opposed charging.
"Two things made me think something needs to be done," he says. "Firstly, growing congestion in many parts of Greater Manchester throughout the day with the consequent loss of productive time. Secondly, the fact, that like most drivers in this area, I don't object to using the M6 Toll road. By getting a scheme going in Manchester we will at least be able to shape the scheme and not finish up with a one- size-fits-all solution."
At risk of losing customers and staff under a charging scheme are retail developments heavily reliant on the driver. Trafford Centre owner Peel Holdings has emerged as a fervent opponent to the proposals and commissioned a poll of 1,246 people between April and May 2007, before
the proposals were released.
Asked if they would vote against charging in a referendum, 80 per cent said they would and half said it would put them off investing in the city. Gordon McKinnon, Peel director of operations, says: "This region is being blackmailed by the government and it is wrong for us to be used as a guinea pig. If this is not implemented everywhere we will be isolated economically from the rest of the country. We can find no evidence that congestion here justifies something as draconian as this. Once it is up and running there is nothing to prevent the extension of the hours and area, or for the price to be raised. Anyone who doubts that need only look at London."
Roger Jones at GMPTE counters that those who opposed the charge could benefit from improved transport links - and lose out if nothing is done. "Doing nothing is not an option with congestion growing at the current rate and charging is going to be on the agenda whoever is in power in ten years' time," he says.
"Public transport isn't good enough to persuade people to swap at the moment and that's why we need the investment. We would like to see the Trafford Centre working with us and investing in public transport like the Metrolink, which will bring even more customers and staff in as they use the tram to access all the facilities in that area."
Among the certain winners if the proposals do go ahead will be those living near reliable transport links.
David Law, head of valuation at property agency King Sturge, says: "Values around the termini of any new Metrolink extension at Rochdale, Ashton etc could also see increases, particularly in residential. There may well be an impact on house prices in those areas of Cheshire, Lancashire and Merseyside from where commuters come from - again putting upward pressure on areas close to good rail links, but negatively affecting those rural areas which are poorly serviced."
The operators of this invigorated public transport are also among the most obvious beneficiaries of charging. Mark Threapleton, chairman of the Greater Manchester Bus Operators Association and managing director of Stagecoach, insists it will not become a gravy train.
"If the congestion charge works it will throw a lot of people onto public transport," he says. "If public investment has generated a surge in the passenger market, there has to be a mechanism that redistributes the benefits. That could impact on the level of fares people pay or fund additional investment to further improve public transport. I can reassure people that it is not going to end up in our back pockets. We are looking to form a strategic partnership with the public sector to give them more influence where the bus network is concerned."
Christopher Bowes, head of planning at DLA Piper in Manchester, who advised Transport for London on charging, believes any potential ill-effects can only be countered by stringent planning and communication. "It is important to bring the public along with the scheme and persuade them that this is not just another tax on the private motorist, that there are genuine alternatives to travelling by car and that the environmental improvements will be tangible and will be delivered," he says. "The challenges include the funding for the scheme and precisely defining the routes or zones where the charge should apply, as well as the level of the charge."
Businesses across the region are still debating the pros and cons of congestions charging and the associated investment in the public transport network. Greater Manchester Chamber is holding a series of meetings as part of the six-week consultation process before GMPTE and the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) submit a bid to the government's Transport Innovation Fund in July 2007.
Chamber chief Executive Angie Robinson says the Chamber will not adopt a stance until members have had a chance to respond. "One of AGMA's acceptability tests is that congestion charging has to be acceptable to the business community," she says.
"We have always said that until we have a guarantee that we will get the necessary investment to improve public transport to the necessary level, congestion charging isn't even worth discussing. If we do decide that we want to go ahead with this, then to have a cast iron guarantee that we
will get that investment would be fair in my view."
Also in: July 2007
-
"Sell the airport to pay for transport,' says Peel
Manchester Airport Group should be sold for £33bn in order to pay for the radical transport improvement that the Manchester local authorities claim will give the city region a competitive advantage.
-
Empire builders
Peel Holdings just keeps getting bigger and bigger. Neil Tague gets his head around the powerhouse that is Peel and speaks to managing director Andrew Simpson to ask: "Where next?"