PledgeBank is now closed to new submissions. The site is available as an archive for you to browse, but you can no longer create or sign pledges. Find out more…

United States
I’ll do it, but only if you’ll help

Pledge “MancCCharge”

"I will vote against any councillor or MP who supports a congestion charge in Manchester. but only if 100 other local people will do the same."

— Jake Long, Road Freedom Campaigner

Deadline to sign up by: 25th January 2008
105 people signed up (5 over target)

Country: United Kingdom
Place: Manchester (view map)

More details
Manchester City Council is proposing to introduce congestion charging. Sign this pledge as a message to the council to let them know that you are strongly opposed to the scheme.

This pledge has now closed; it was successful!

See more pledges, and all about how PledgeBank works.

Things to do with this pledge

  • Create a local version of this pledge
  • Creator only: Send message to signers
RSS feed of comments on this pledge

Comments on this pledge

  • i'm the website administrator for a new website dedicated to this congestion charge, the site is in early development but could use the support, if you've signed this petition you must feel strongly about this cause, come have your say, and do what you can to build a strong community that support this cause

  • Great idea - another website to check out is:
    Chris Roughneen, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I'll only be voting for an MP or councillor who SUPPORTS the congestion charge.

    I worry about my children getting asthma. I worry about the effects of pollution.

    If more people used public transport, we'd live fitter, healthier lives, and people wouldn't have to work such long hours just to keep cars on the road.

    Do the maths: a bus pass for greater Manchester costs just £550 per year.
    Nick, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Hi Chris nice site are you the owner?, maybe we could collaberate and have a banner exchange as well as an information exchange, let me know
  • @ Andy - no it is not mine but I know the bloke who runs it. Email him at the address on the site and speak to him direct.

    @ Nick - public transport cannot cope NOW so tell me how it would cope tomorrow if all drivers elected to use it? It would not. Plus in the unlikely event of your children developing asthma it would most likely be from over-reliance on cleaning products in the home than traffic fumes. And before you say "A bus pass is great!" tell me how I get from Irlam to Glossop for 0800H on a bus? Even the 'great' Councillor Roger Jones (Chairman of GMPTE) admits I cannot so for people such as me this proposed charge is nothing but a tax simply for working!
    Chris, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • @Nick - nice idea, but I don't even drive into town. I live in the suburbs and have to drive out to Warrington for work. Public transport would take over 2 hours each way via 3 trains and 1 taxi (or longer on a bike), vs 35 mins in the car. Do I really have an alternative? Decent traffic management plus a decent public transport system would achieve a lot more, without simply pricing us into unemployment! I also worry about children and pollution, but taking an overly-simplistic view is not the solution.
    Dan Flower, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I cannot speak for you.

    For myself and my family, Public Transport, and occasional taxi and trains works fine as a lifestyle choice at the moment. I have no doubt that if more people were "encouraged" to use public transport, it would improve still further.

    I appreciate you can't get to Glossop from Irlam for 0800H on the bus. But then, as I don't run a car, (a) I don't have so much pressure on me to get a high-paid / awkward-houred job to pay for my car to get me to work to pay for my car; or (b) through money saved, I would have the freedom to work nearer where I live (or live nearer where I work) so I don't have to travel so much.

    As a result, I get more time to do what I want with.

    (Of course, there are some jobs that require a car, and that's a different situation.)

    Isn't this the kind of sustainable lifestyle we should be adopting in the face of global warming? If the congestion charge encourages people to think about these options, then that's a Good Thing, isn't it?

    Thanks for your concern about "over-reliance on cleaning products in the home". We are aware of the risks and use them very sparingly - we are ALSO aware of the risks from pollution. Hence the comment above.
    Nick, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I fully support a congestion charge in Manchester. There are far too many lazy people clogging up the roads in the city centre. Leave your car at home! Walk or take public transport. It's not that bad!
    natasha, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I think this shows a lack of intelligence and vision on our Council's behalf. There are other alternatives. There isnt the volume of traffic in manchester that there is in london, when is someone going to sit down and realise that it is not cost effective to do this. It will cripple manchester economic growth.
    darren cunningham, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • the sort of comments you guys are posting would be really valuable on my site, i have a website and forum dedicated for dicussing this matter,
    visit, takes 30 secs to sign up to the site so you can see the forum

    this is a really new website but i hope the interest will build quickly as alot of people are very passionate about this subject - especial those that live in or around manchester in areas of poor public transport, who will get fleesed by the gonvernment/ local councils if congestion charging comes into force
  • I agree that public transport is rubbish and congestion charging would cost me a small fortune - but STILL I am in favour of congestion charging.
    Without some form of severe coercion from government people will not think beyond their own convenience. Without this charge public transport may never improve and without it we may never start to seriously think about homeworking/tele-commuting. Keeping the cars is the lazy alternative.
    Road Freedom campaigns smack of selfishness. How about the freedom to breathe clean air, the freedom of our children and future generations to have a clean, safe and sustainable planet.
    John, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I dont understand this 100 people thing? there are over 400 voters on my petition website..

    sign this and move this forward.
  • John, Nick and Nat, you obviously either live very close to all your friends and relatives and your work place and have easy access to the trains and busses to be making such comments - not everyone is as fortunate as you, either that or you have no friends and dont work or dont have to go to work in rush hour, and you definatly dont drive or own cars.
    I live 20 miles away from my place of work on a route that has no public transport alternative, I car share with a colleague to cut down on traffic, I'd also love my work to enable me to work from home, but not all jobs are as flexible as that. you people all keep going on about the environment too, its only estimated that the congestion charge will reduce rush hour traffic by 13% - thats nothing when you think about it, especially when this 90% of the 13% of drivers will simply drive travel outside of the rush hour period because they DO have flexible jobs that allow it, or even worse will travel further to avoid the charges, therefore damaging the environment even further. if you want clean air to breathe move out of the city to the countryside like i have, oh no you cant do that cos it would require a car wouldn't it - sorry
    Paul, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • This pledge is NOT helping the environment! Why use this fantastic web site to make the world worse?!
    Sarah, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Neither does congestion charging - go get some fact to prove it does help the envrionment - and i dont mean twisted government statistics.
    beacuse more people will avoid the citys and routes where they can to save money by traveling further or to alternative locations - yes the citys congestion may be reduced by n% but there will be additional miles made away from the congestion zones than their would normally - the government know this and thats why they haven't made a big deal about the environment in their recent defences of the national charge scheme - see the bbc website Tonys email.
    Paul, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • @Sarah - without going into too much detail, and I do not want a long drawn out argument about this, but there is no such thing as anthropogenic (man made) climate change. The latest IPCC summary for policy makers is pure conjecture, no proof whatsoever. And besides the IPCC is government funded and the summary only gets released after approval by national governments.

    PS if you want to argue about climate change visit:
    Jake Long, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • @ Paul.

    This issue about living close to where you work has to be an integrated lifestyle choice - integrated because it involves making decisions about where you live, where you work, how you get there, ALL AT ONCE. In fact it has to be more than that, it has also to be about companies choosing where there jobs are located, how flexible their working practices are, etc; and the provision of transport services so that more environmentally friendly choices can be made. Where these issues are not integrated, then, yes, unfortunately, additional burden does end up on already burdened individuals.

    At the same time your attitude, Paul, seems a little bit bloody-minded: in your post to me, "Well move of the city, so you can avoid the problem"; in your post to Sarah, "Well, Congestion Charging won't work cause we'll find a way around it anyway."

    I'm sorry, but our current lifestyle - and your attitude - is not sustainable in terms of (a) the environment; (b) the health of those who live near roads; (c) even the health and wealth of drivers.

    That is the whole point: we need to change before the planet inflicts change upon us. And that will begin with the most vulnerable.

    Choosing to "carry on regardless" and be part of the problem is not enough: we HAVE to find ways of being part of the solution - even if its just one step at a time!
    Nick, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Ok, of the people who are against this pledge:

    Who should be allowed to drive and who should be taxed off the roads?

    Or should we get everybody off the roads? In which case, how would goods and services be provided?

    Modern society has made the car an essential part of it. Without one, you are missing a limb.

    Even if you do not drive personally then you are still heavily reliant on private transport. Everything that you buy, everything that you use, every repair, every delivery made by your company, every sales representative and most workers use private transportation.

    Just how much do you think that road user charging will push up retail prices for all those goods and services that cannot be brought to you any other way than by road?

    We need investment in alternative fuels so that we can carry on driving when the oil runs out, but other than that, the environmentalist argument is nonsense.
    Jake Long, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • @ Nick - i'm sorry you feel that way, i'm just sick of people who use the damaging the environment excuse against motorist, when there is no evidence that introducting a congetion charge will reduce the effects - after all there are some cars out there now that suck in more polluted air than they expell themselfs.
    Jake is right there are other better more proctical ways of tackleing the environmental effects like alternative fuels, and there are better ways of tackling congestion too.
    Paul, 11 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • There is one factor that has not been mentioned, I noticed earlier on a post someone was saying about travelling to work. Unfortunatly, jobs are seriously limited, so ofcourse everyone tries to find work where they can. even if it means, that they have to travel several miles, early in the morning.
    kelvin stanley, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • If this pledge comes to fruition I will protest against it whilst campaigning for better public transport links into the city center. I will vote, and encourage others to vote, for a candidate that pledges to use at least half of the proceeds from a congestion charge to improve public transport links into the city center.
    Kevin M Jones, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • @Kevin - your nostalgia towards public transport is admirable. I myself am a classic vehicle enthusiast, but to consider the use of the antiquated idea of public transport as the main means of travelling into a large conurbation like Greater Manchester when there are considerably more modern and efficient alternatives available (i.e. the motor car) is just daft.

    A further consideration is this: Would it be OK for me to stand at a bus stop and demand money for petrol? - Assuming the answer is NO then: Why should I as a driver subsidise somebody else’s mode of transport?
    Jake Long, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • In response to Jake, I'd say it's clear that motor cars are not an effecient way of transporting a large amount of people into a large area like Greater Manchester. If one were to even try to get through Rusholme or Upper Brook Street or Yew Tree Road in the South, or try to get on to the Manchester ring road anywhere else in the rush hour periods then they would have to wait more than half an hour in busy traffic to get where they want to be. What are the other alternatives to public transport? And have you considered that the less cars used will reduce road related fatalities significantly? Your right, my idea that public transport is efficient and a good thing is 'daft'.

    And what exactly is antiquated about public transport? Is it the idea (which is a ludicrous thing to say) or the technology that is in place (here you have a fair point, but that is up to the council and the taxpayer to put pressure on private companies to make them improve their services).

    And the metaphor you use in your last pargraph is utterly ridiculous. You pay for the privilige to drive. Simple. Transport should be accesable for everyone, not the select few who can afford to own, tax and insure a motor vehicle (most can't and I'm sure that's a reason why more and more people are borrowing stupid amounts of money and leaving themselves in financial ruin).

    I do not have nostalgia towards public transport. In fact, I would say people like me are looking towards the future. We simply cannot sustain the amount of cars we have on the road, never mind more. Motorways, bridges and roads can only be so big, and it's about time more people started being less self centered, analysed their lives and asked themselves, honestly, "Do I really need a car?"
    Kevin M Jones, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • @Kevin - Example: I am leaving A and want to go to Z, I have 2 options:

    1) I can get in my car and I can drive from A to Z directly.


    2) I can walk from A to B where I will have to wait for a Public transport vehicle. When the public transport vehicle arrives I can get on it and it will take me to C, D, E, and F, stopping at each location before dropping me off at interchange G. I then have to wait at interchange G for a connection. Once the connection arrives, it takes me from H through Y, stopping once again at each location to take on other passengers. Then I have one final walk to Z in order to reach my destination.

    This is why I can both say and prove that public transportation is an antiquated clumsy useless system that would be better suited if it were slimmed down to an emergency transportation system for the infirm and the needy.

    You call my metaphor ridiculous, yet that is exactly what is happening, but only as a one way street with the driver paying for everything.

    Drivers are the only ones who actually pay full price to use the roads (48 billion pounds); Selfish cyclists and public transport users are at best using them for free, or at worst actually being subsidised to use them.

    It is about time that public transport users were made to pay in full for the use of the roads, just like drivers do.
    Jake Long, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Sorry, but I am totally against congestion charging, the reasons being are great, but here's a couple.
    Road works, companies just being allowed to dig up roads any where and at any time and just leaving them for weeks and months because its more cost effective to get minor fines from the council than do the repair.
    Traffic lights, especially in Wigan they change to red when you are approaching them and this is on a main route, why because there is no traffic on the other side, as they are turns that lead to either industrial estates or minor side roads.
    This to me is a ploy to increase traffic which intern will justify there congestion charges.
    All any Government cares about is battering the hard working person who's already on the bread line.
    tax, tax, tax, if it moves or breathes tax it.
    I thought we the people where the ones that gave these guys there positions in office to look after our best interests, well I am sorry but its not been like that for a long time.
    Vote them out and get people with brains and some real life street cred, not people who live in ivory towers looking down on there minions.
    I remember my grand parents who spoke about Great Britan and how proud they were of there Country, ask them now what the think.
    We are the laughing stock of the world and we are there to be walked all over by every nation.
    Carl B, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Good to see we've reached the magic figure of 100. With the news that we anti Toll Tax protestors have forced Bury Council to go for a referendum on the Toll Tax it's looking good!
    Chris, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Gosh! Has it taken you 9 months to get to 100.

    Out of 2.24 million in the Greater Manchester urban area (see, that's 0.0045% of the population.

    Those Councillors must REALLY be running scared!

    I think you've shown us all very clearly that most people have a much deeper concern about the environment than so called "Road Freedom".

    Thank you.
    Nick, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Nick - give us our referendum and we'll see what people REALLY think won't we?
    Chris, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I really love the idea of a nice 8 mile walk each way to work and back each day! in leigh we have no real public transport solutions, I would be 4 hours late for work each day if I caught the first available bus!

    I wish people could get it into their thick heads that these councils don't care about enviromental issues, the only thing they care about is getting more people into their own towns and increasing their own revenue through parking, fines, rent etc.

    I could very easily run my car on enviromentally friendly fuel (also called veg oil!) but in doing so I risk having my car siezed unless I pay heavy taxes on it, taking it dearer than diesel, that is how much government and councils really give a toss.
    today diesel is £1.12 a litre, road tax is £196 for 12 months, I also pay tax on my insurance, the mot has vat added (as do any repairs, why should we be bent over and screwed up the backside AGAIN.

    all the tree huggers on here really need to think, if they start with central manchester how far out will they spread? will their kids be able to afford to get to work in the future or are they all going to work on local farms????!! I may just give up work if I cant afford to go there and claim dole, if enough people do this they won't be able to afford to run the congestion tax. regards to all (except the nazi councillors of wigan)
    si, 10 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Lets be realistic, i am for a city center charge inside the mancunian way and the road at the top from MEN arena to chester road, makes sense. but M60 inwards is retail, industrial and mainly a residential area, so it seems to me that this has nothing to do with city center congestion but more of a residentisl-industrial taxation to support the travel to the city, it also makes this clear when you see it costs £2 in from the m60 and only £1 from inner ring, why not have this in the city but just charge £5 any part all day... job done. All the people going to the trafford center and to trafford park will have to pay 2-6 pounds to do so, how pathetic. take a wrong junction off the motorway it could cost you £6 extra just to go to the next juction turn around and then come off the correct one. come on GMPTE, TIF, AGMA ask the locals, ABD, AA, RAC. Get some real advice. A better and more accesable manchester is better for all of us but the further taxation of the motorist will only result in the voting power and rejection of supporting candidates. Come on manchester let US run and vote for our manchester
    (a manchester re-united!), not these thinktank polititian bigwigs.
    JASON PICKSTON, 9 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Simply it is another government tax!
    High petrol prices and costly parking charges are enough to deter most people who don’t need to use a car. The same cars will come in to Manchester, simply the owners will be paying another tax for nothing. In any case I find the worst congestion outside Manchester and it’s proposed zones.
    As they say this is a trial, and if successful you will be paying it everywhere – so how much will that cost to travel to Manchester and back?
    This will all have a huge knock on effect to all prices, and so all will suffer and not just car drivers.
    Chris Scott, 9 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Blackmail to pay a tax to get the public transport system we should already have, have already paid enough for in tax, and which our European cousins with a comparable overall tax take, already take for granted. Typical over complex, over expensive solution to a problem caused by decades of government failure to invest in transport infrastructure.
    Paul Anderson, 9 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
This pledge is closed for new comments.

Current signatories (Green text = they've done it)

Jake Long, the Pledge Creator, joined by:

  • Peter Woodier
  • andy dale (
  • Chris Roughneen
  • Rachel Kirkham
  • Ace Riley
  • Dan Flower
  • Margie Tate
  • MCV
  • Robert Paul tranter
  • Gervais AJ Henderson
  • Graham Harkis
  • matthew Martin
  • Sean Corker (ABD)
  • Tim Frost
  • Andrew Smith
  • Chris Burmajster
  • Kate Roughneen
  • Simon butler
  • rebecca stanway
  • damian brumby
  • Carol Hennis
  • J Roberts
  • Sally Weeks
  • Dean Butterworth
  • Elizabeth Robillard
  • bernard
  • Tony Sims
  • Alan Goodall
  • M Slattery
  • Craig Healey, English Democrats
  • Andy Bullock
  • Paul Myers
  • Rob Hardman
  • Brian Bracegirdle
  • kelvin stanley
  • Steven Hemsley
  • Jesse Smith
  • Shebnem Harris
  • Tom Vallely
  • James Whelan
  • Peter Roberts
  • Woodley
  • carl bennett
  • Steve Collins
  • Neil Birchall
  • cath mossom
  • debbie grimshaw
  • Christopher Smith
  • Gregg Howarth
  • Steve Dawson
  • Bill Appleton
  • reita sheehy
  • Sean greenwood
  • Ben Hughes
  • michael Painter
  • Jonathon Clegg
  • Mark Kreissl
  • martin william sloan
  • sam forlan
  • Steve Savage
  • Brian Polkinghorne
  • M W Fraser
  • Jane Maxwell-Brown
  • Bob Stapley
  • Guy Mansfield
  • Michael Smith
  • Derek Wallwork
  • Mark Scott
  • Nick Fuller
  • stephenc
  • Emma Wilkinson
  • Carl Davis
  • Peter Cope
  • S.Moore
  • Susan Browning
  • Barbara Guisbourne-Hilton
  • Carole Fletcher
  • Europe
  • Graham Kidd
  • Ged Haydon
  • kirsty minchella-storer
  • Rosa Crosbie
  • Paul Davenport
  • Raymond Foster
  • alan jackson
  • 17 people who did not want to give their names, 2 of whom have done the pledge

View signup rate graph


Sign up for emails when people make pledges in your local area — Works in any country!
Email: Country:  Town: