Councillor steers clear of commitment to congestion charge

A proposal for a congestion charge was put to a referendum in Edinburgh in February 2005 – and defeated

It reported that the city’s transport convener, Labour councillor Stephen Jenkinson, said that he thought that it was something that the city council “should consider looking at” when asked about the prospect of a congestion charge being introduced in Edinburgh at a meeting organised by the Lothian cycling campaign group, Spokes. Given that he was addressing a meeting of cycling enthusiasts he probably wanted to tell them something that they were happy to hear, but his words seem to be carefully chosen so as not to antagonise his audience, but were hardly a wholehearted commitment to strive for the charge’s introduction. So, no need for motorists to concern themselves – yet!

Of course Councillor Jenkinson has every right to exercise a bit of caution here, after all, when this was put to Edinburgh residents back in 2005 in a local referendum it was rejected by a whopping 74 per cent of those that responded. Hardly the ringing endorsement of the proposal that the Labour-run council was looking for. Indeed that particular congestion charge proposed an “outer” and an “inner” ring with two separate charges. This provoked Labour-controlled councils in the Lothians to threaten court action against Edinburgh’s Labour administration if the proposal was ever introduced. They did so in defence of their residents who would be charged £2 for driving into the city. So, to say it was mired in controversy would be an understatement.

Councillor Jenkinson steered clear of giving an outright commitment to introduce a congestion charge for Edinburgh when he said that: “I think that it is going to be challenging. We really need the Scottish Government to help us.” He thereby deftly passed the buck and adroitly swerved a potential pothole! Backing him up, council official Deborah Paton told the meeting that the Scottish Government should take the lead and that “leaving it to local authorities to do it on a local level is a real struggle and potentially is a little bit divisive”. If the experience of 2005 is anything to go by, this also qualifies as an understatement, but one worth making, nevertheless.

So, it is obvious that after this understandable exercise in hand washing, the potential battleground for the introduction of a congestion charge is situated at Holyrood rather than up in the High Street. However, it will be interesting to see which, if any, political party (apart from the Greens) includes the introduction of a congestion charge in its manifesto for next May’s Scottish Parliament elections. Conservative MSP, Sue Webber, has been leading her party’s charge to “end the war against Scotland’s motorists”. An accusation which other parties deny but is unlikely to go away. If the issue ever raises its head in the debating chamber at Holyrood, Sue will get her chance to vent her spleen (again) and outline her arguments against what she sees as unwarranted attacks on the country’s drivers. As a bus user, a pedestrian and a driver I’ll be interested to see how all this pans out, but given the potential pitfalls associated with major transport charging initiatives it would take some bold decisions if anything was to change anytime soon. Watch this space!