Nuxx:E2ee96f1-67ed-4507-8919-a3aa12e0cb40@t11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!t11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Ha Ha Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:38:46 -0800 (PST) Lines: 129 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.160.137.186 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1229117927 2364 127.0.0.1 (12 Dec 2008 21:38:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:38:47 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: t11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.160.137.186; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 7279 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:680666

I don't know what's funnier. The fact that the closet motorist-haters are seething, or the fact that they have nowhere to vent their spiteful anger as that would entail admitting their prejudices. Either way, it's been a great day for reasonable people who oppose undemocratic assaults on our freedoms by cowardly socialist liars. Hooray! How are the silly little turds going to try to dishonestly inflict misery on drivers next? Looks like they've run out of options; looks like the people aren't falling for the lies anymore. Disaster, at least if you're a sadistic bastard who cares more about inflicting pain on others than you do about improving your own quality of life.

(And no, don't worry, I'm not coming back to this shithole, but the motorist-haters have had such a devastating setback today that I couldn't resist rubbing it in here on their main newsgroup. Also, just to remind you all that I'm monitoring this group, and any evidence that it is once again being used as a weapon against drivers will result in my permanent return.  Oh, and just so that I don't have to post anything in response to his inevitable fuckwit reply/replies to this thread: Chapman is subhuman scum, utterly reprehensible, and don't hate motorists, I just support con charging in all towns and cities, and, err, every other anti-motorist measure ever proposed as well actually."  I *honestly* don't know who he thinks he's kidding. He's definitely in that particular category of fuckwit who thinks that everyone around them is unbelievably stupid, gullible and naive.  I know: how ironic can you get?)
 * never* tells the truth about what he really wants or thinks. "I

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/3724490/Road-pricing-in-tatters-as-Manc= hester-rejects-congestion-charge.html

Road pricing in tatters as Manchester rejects congestion charge Pay as you drive charges have suffered a devastating blow after voters in Greater Manchester overwhelmingly rejected plans for local road pricing

By David Millward, Transport Editor Last Updated: 4:23PM GMT 12 Dec 2008 London's congestion charging zone - Manchester rejects congestion charge in blow to plans for road-pricing London's congestion charging zone will not be repeated in Manchester Photo: PA

The results of the referendum, with four out of five opposing the scheme, have left the Government's plans for tackling road gridlock in tatters.

Having shelved plans for a national scheme, ministers were desperate to persuade a major conurbation to act as a guinea pig for a road pricing scheme.

The Manchester vote has left the Government scrambling for new candidates willing to push ahead with a road pricing scheme.

Only Cambridgeshire is anywhere near submitting proposals under the Government's Transport Innovation Fund. Other possible candidates include Leeds, Bristol and Reading.

But their proposals are in an embryonic stage and the Manchester rejection may dissuade councils from pressing ahead with the scheme.

Local businesses and residents must be consulted before any local authority can push ahead with a scheme and the Manchester vote suggests that public support will be difficult to secure.

But even the promise of a =A32.8 billion boost for local public transport was insufficient to persuade a majority of the 1.94 million people to back the scheme.

Voters in all of the 10 local authority areas rejected the proposals in a series of individual polls, with 216,860 voting in favour - just 21 per cent - and 812,815 against.

The backing of voters in at least seven of the polls was needed for the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities to push ahead with the proposals

Under the deal on offer would have seen money being pumped into buses, trams and local trains in return for commuters paying around =A35 to drive in and out of the heart of the city during the rush hour.

Motorists would have been charged each time they crossed one of the two cordons established for the scheme.

The outer ring tracked the M60 orbital motorway, while the inner ring encompassed Manchester's city centre. It would have created the world's biggest congestion zone.

Supporters and opponents of the scheme engaged in a huge publicity campaign in an attempt to sway participants in the postal ballot.

The no vote was hailed by Peter Roberts of the Drivers' Alliance and author of the Downing Street petition calling for road pricing to be scrapped, which attracted 1.8 million signatures.

"The overwhelming defeat of this bid and its associated congestion charge in a heavily contested ballot will be a sharp warning to others considering similar schemes and government who proposed this idea. "With every ballot ever taken showing a rejection of road pricing, it is time for government to reconsider their plans and dump these proposals for good."

Theresa Villiers, the Tories' transport spokesman, described the vote as a "resounding defeat" for Labour."

"It is clear that the Government is completely out of touch with the problems people face in Manchester with the economic downturn. Labour's attempt at bullying the city into accepting congestion charging has failed."

But environmental campaigners voiced regret at the outcome of the poll. "Those who opposed the charge will now have to say how traffic problems in our cities can be addressed," said Stephen Joseph, executive director of the Campaign for Better Transport.

"It's not possible or desirable to build enough roads for free-flowing traffic. We will need better public transport but we will need to manage demand for road traffic too if we are to tackle congestion and cut pollution.

"Sadly the business groups in Manchester who opposed charging want to keep people chained to their cars rather than giving them choices."

None of the Department for Transport ministers were prepared to comment on the result of the vote.

In a statement the DfT said: "This has always been a decision for the people of Greater Manchester, and it is now for the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities to decide on their next steps.