mtua
HOME   Back to NEWS


WIRRAL COUNCIL 25 APRIL 2005

1. Last October we sent to Merseytravel and all Wirral councillors, details of MTUA proposals:- a) no tolls increases,
b) off-peak reductions (inc Sundays free),
c) no tolls for buses.
This was to be financed by:- a) tolls only being spent on the Tunnels,
b) increased use of Tunnels off-peak,
c) borrowing to finance capital spending.
2. The proposals were rejected and Merseytravel this year will take nearly £6 million of the tolls. (Wirral's 2005/2006 Council Tax "Explained" booklets shows a surplus of £2,963 thousand from the Tunnels. But this figure does not include £700 thousand going to the Ferries, and £2,300 thousand included in "Funds Management".)

3. The issue was debated at Monday night's meeting, where Labour and Lib Dem councillors again endorsed Tunnels Tolls.
This is the MTUA response to some of the points made by those councillors:-

Effect of MTUA proposals

4. It was said that MTUA misinterpret economic data and that if our proposals had been agreed then:- Council Tax would rise 8%, Merseytravel Capital Programme would stop, 300 people would be "sacked", and Concessionary fares would end.
It is a wonder that our proposals would not also mean that the Vikings would invade the Wirral!

5. "Council Tax would rise 8%". This would mean that ALL Tunnels tolls had stopped completely and the expenditure on the Tunnels remained the same. But MTUA did NOT propose any subsidy, never mind the immediate scrapping of all tolls.
In the long run, we do want to see the Tunnels toll free as part of the normal road network. In other hands (e.g. Highways Agency) and without the costs of tolls collection, the Tunnels could be run at lower costs than at present. The Merseytravel levy would not be affected except to the extent that tolls had been used to subsidise Merseytravel.

6. "Merseytravel Capital Programme would stop". It is rather strange this would end because of our proposals as, apart from the Tunnels, the programme is financed from grants and borrowings.

7. "300 people would be "sacked"". We don't know who these 300 are, but it seems that it is ALL the people employed directly on the Tunnels, of whom 57 are toll collectors. If the tolls were stopped and the Tunnels transferred to say the Highways Agency, then there would be less staff, but that would be more than offset by the boost to the local economy.

8. "Concessionary fares would end". Apart from the fact that >b>MTUA would never have dreamt that Merseytravel would ever willingly pay one penny subsidy towards the cost of the Tunnels, the Labour and Lib Dem councillors appear to have forgotten that the Chancellor has said that pensioners will get free off peak travel from April 2006. Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary, John Thurso, then said: "I welcome the fact that the Chancellor has taken on board yet another Liberal Democrat proposal."
So it appears that Merseytravel far from having to stop Concessionary fares may be given more cash.

Buses

9. MTUA proposed that buses should not have to pay tolls. Freedom from tolls would not be that significant in terms of total bus operating costs, but it would be a stimulus to the provision of more bus services (more frequent, more routes, more operators).

10. This was the proposal for which we received the most negative feedback from Labour and Lib Dem councillors. What appeared to upset them was the thought that this would benefit private companies. As Merseytravel originally wanted to privatise the operation of the Tunnels, this seemed a strange objection.

11. Though Merseytravel rejected our suggestion, the buses benefited from the reduction in tolls which Merseytravel gave to some HGVs (those over 3.5 tonnes gross weight and with either 2 axles or 4 or more axles). The way the vehicles are categorised for tolls purposes, it would have been difficult to exclude the buses from the reduction. This incidental benefit to the buses was praised on Monday night and it was said that this meant that Arriva had been able to freeze cross river bus fares.

12. Perhaps the Labour and Lib Dem councillors could explain their logic in refusing to waive Tolls for buses, but then boasting about what they say is a freeze of cross river bus fares?

"White vans" and Lorries

13. It was stated that the Merseytravel toll changes meant big savings for "white vans" and "lorries".

14. "White vans" tolls will actually have gone up, as they are usually less than 3.5 tonnes gross weight.

15. There will be savings for most lorries (providing that they are over 3.5 tonnes and don't have 3 axles). These savings for lorries will apply at all times. We think that the MTUA proposals for off peak reductions for all vehicles would have been better.

Wirral economy

16. It was said that the toll changes were good for the Wirral economy, but that the MTUA proposals would have been bad. To support this it was said that Wirral Chamber of Commerce had objected when Merseytravel made the Tunnels free at Christmas, because Wirral people would be encouraged to shop in Liverpool.

17. We must admit that we had not noticed that the Tunnels were free at Christmas. But it is strange that Labour and Lib Dem councillors want to turn Wirral into a location for the "Prisoner", with people discouraged from leaving.

18. It is also strange that the Chamber are cited as being in support of tolls.
When MTUA petitioned against the Bill in the Lords, we submitted a letter from the Chamber. The full letter is on our web site, but here are a few extracts:- "The Chamber's view is that tolls are detrimental to the wider Merseyside economy and that of the Wirral in particular"

"The tolls are an added cost to business, a burden which businesses in no other area are forced to bear in the same measure."

"It would surely be a nonsense to enshrine tunnel tolls for time immemorial as an extra burden on the local economy long after the period in which they need to be collected at such a high level."

"Ideally the Chamber would like to see tolls removed and the roads financed from the £40 billion or so taxes that are contributed annually by road users."

"If the Bill were to be passed with its provision for tunnel tolls to be collected on an ever-increasing basis, it would be a grievous blow to the businesses of Wirral and one that would blight the area for generations to come."
19. Perhaps the Labour and Lib Dem councillors could say who the Wirral businesses are that want Tunnels tolls? When the MTUA were recruiting last year we signed up many of the traders in Birkenhead Market. Those who did not join, said that there was no point as the politicians would never let go of the tolls.

Government help

20. It was said that Wirral Council asked for Government help for Tunnels but it has been "rejected by both Tory and Labour governments". The only details that were given was a visit from Wirral councillors to see four local MPs - Lynda Chalker, Frank Field, David Hunt and Barry Porter. Merseytravel have made a similar claim but also said that the last time that they tried was 1992.

21. So perhaps the councillors can say which Labour government they are referring to? Perhaps they can also say why they have not approached the present government for help? We don't know if they are afraid of a No or a Yes.

Use of the Tunnels

22. It was said that "all Wirral households use the ferries and trains", but "only 3% of Wirral population use the Tunnels". Similarly it was said that the MTUA want "97% of Wirral to subsidise the 3%".

23. By coincidence the BBC were filming on the Ferries on Monday, and wanted to know where the people were!
We wonder about this 97% who don't use the Tunnels. Do they always use the ferries and trains to cross the river, or do they never cross the river?

24. Presumably it is largely this 3% who pay Merseytravel £35 million in tolls each year. Wirral has just over 300,000 people, including 250,000 adults. 3% is about 8,000 adults. It was implied in the Lords that a typical Tunnels user is a "chap" driving a "Bentley" and "handing out £50 notes to get out of my way and go through the tunnel". But even so, do the councillors think it is fair that these few people should have to pay so much? They already have the burden of constantly shuttling back and forward through the Tunnels, to keep up the illusion that there are more of them.
There is also the unfortunate position of the bus operators who pay tolls but apparently have to drive empty buses through the Tunnels.


25. The MTUA have not asked that the 97% of Wirralites who avoid the Tunnels subsidise those that do. But perhaps the Labour and Lib Dem councillors can explain why through Council Tax and national taxes, it is alright to "subsidise" the road where their dwelling is (and every other road in the North West), but Tunnels users should have to pay for the Tunnels road, it's policing, old losses, toll collection, and then some more to help public transport?

MTUA arguments in House of Lords

26. It was said that MTUA arguments were wrong because they had been rejected by the House of Lords.

27. Merseytravel defeated David Hunt's motion at second reading by just ONE vote. And this was only after the Manchester peer who sponsored the Bill announced the support of the Bishop of Liverpool.
The Lords committee endorsed the Bill. Though only one of the committee went on to vote for the Bill at Third reading, the other committee members were either absent or abstained.
The Third reading was won by Merseytravel by 75 votes to 65 votes.

28. We do not feel that our failure meant that Merseytravel had the best case. It is difficult to overcome what was in effect a Labour / Lib Dem coalition who supported Merseytravel. It was also difficult for MTUA to fight an organisation that was using Tunnels users tolls to promote the Bill. An amount of money which they have refused to disclose. Perhaps, most of all it was difficult to win when Wirral councillors were not united on the side of Wirral.


HOME   Back to NEWS