The Cambridge congestion charge proposals have hit a dead end over a year after the plans were first announced.
After political support for the proposed £5 road charge crumbled, the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) board said it could not recommend taking the proposals forward.
However, board members said something still needed to be done to reduce congestion and improve public transport in the city.
Cllr Elisa Meschini (Labour), chair of the board, said she challenged those who said there were other options to “up their game” and show them.
The GCP announced its initial proposals for a ‘Sustainable Travel Zone’ in Cambridge last year.
The plans proposed a £5 weekday road between 7am and 7pm – with some exemptions and discounts, including those on low incomes – in order to fund an expanded and cheaper bus service, as well as improvements to cycling and walking routes.
Thousands of people responded to the public consultation on the proposals with 58 per cent saying they opposed the congestion charge, but with 70 per cent saying they supported the proposed expanded bus network.
Revised proposals were put forward by the GCP to try and address the concerns that had been raised, including reducing the time the congestion charge applied to peak times only, and offering discounts for small businesses, and 50 free days.
However, divisions appeared after reports that the Liberal Democrat group at South Cambridgeshire District Council would not support the plans, with the Labour group at Cambridge City Council pulling its support shortly afterwards.
The night before the GCP board meeting this week to decide on the next steps for the plans, a statement was released signed by some regional Liberal Democrats – including the leader of Cambridgeshire County Council and the party’s parliamentary candidates – stating that congestion charging was “not the way” to reduce congestion.
At the board meeting (September 28) the divisions became clear as Cllr Brian Milnes (Liberal Democrat), representative of South Cambridgeshire District Council, said he and the leader of the district council had not been consulted on the previous night’s statement, and said it did not reflect their views.
He said “considerable time” had been spent by the GCP trying to find a “compromised solution” and said he thought the revised plans met the partnership’s strategic objectives and appropriately responded to the concerns raised in the consultation.
Cllr Milnes said he was “hugely disappointed” by his colleagues who “changed their allegiance” and said he did not think people would thank them in 10 to 15 years time if they “did not pursue this opportunity”.
However, he highlighted that a congestion charge would need to be approved by the county council, and that its leader – Cllr Lucy Nethsingha – had announced she did not support it.
Cllr Mike Davey (Labour), leader of Cambridge City Council, said the Labour group did not think the proposals could continue without political support.
He accused the Liberal Democrat members who dropped their support for doing so for “purely political” reasons and said this was “hugely disappointing”.
He said he did not support the plans being taken to the county council as they “cannot afford to waste money, time and energy progressing a scheme that we know cannot be delivered”.
Cllr Meschini, who is also deputy leader at the county council, said she had not been aware of the statement signed by the county council leader before it was released.
She said it was “unfortunate” this announcement was made before the board had an opportunity to make a recommendation.
Cllr Meschini challenged those who said there were alternative options to “show them” and said if they could then she would deliver them.
She said: “We have got problems in this region, we have got to fix them. Those who say we can absolutely do that then step up your game.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here