CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Edinburgh congestion charge plans (2025)

(27 posts)
  • Started 9 months ago by Morningsider
  • Latest reply from gembo

  1. Morningsider
    Member

    Been chatting with a few wonderful cycling folk on Bluesky about this post by Councillor Jenkinson about an EEN article on a possible Edinburgh congestion charge:

    Rotten headline. What I am actually doing is starting a conversation with Glasgow and our surrounding local authorities to see what the appetite for road user charging is in Scotland’s central belt. We have no powers to implement any scheme at this time.
    Obviously, CCE a far better place to post on a complicated issue that needs a bit of space to discuss.

    I think the Councillor has been badly advised, as the Council does appear to have the power to introduce a congestion charge. Exactly the same powers it would have used in 2005, which are set out in part 3 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 and the following regulations:

    Road User Charging (Liability for Charges) (Scotland) Regulations 2005
    Road User Charging (Consultation and Publication) (Scotland) Regulations 2003
    Road User Charging (Penalty Charges) (Scotland) Regulations 2005.

    The Scottish Government also published a guidance note on implementing road user charging schemes called "Delivering Integrated Transport Initiatives Through
    Road User Charging – Consultation and Approval Process: Guidance for Local Authorities" in 2001. Old, not available online but as far as I can tell still in force as the legislation it deals with has not changed. It was used by the Council to prepare its 2005 road user charging scheme - which most people forget received 'approval in principle' from Scottish Ministers.

    Councillor Jenkinson refers to any potential scheme covering the whole of the central belt. There are a couple of barriers to this. The first is practical - the current legislative set-up only applies to local roads, a congestion charge cannot apply to trunk roads - such as the bypass, M8, M9 and so on. The Scottish Government stated in December 2024 that:

    ...the Scottish Government does not have a policy position to progress national (Scotland-wide) road pricing
    Which looks like road user charging on the nationwide trunk road network is not likely in the foreseeable future. Doesn't rule the scheme out completely, but massively complicates its implementation.

    The second barrier to such a scheme would be political. I cannot see Councillors in West Lothian, Falkirk, South Lanarkshire and the rest ever signing up to such a scheme - the political cost would be too great and the opportunity for attacks on "metropolitan elites" in the big cities simply too good to ignore, especially in the current political climate.

    So why propose such a scheme and not one wholly within the Edinburgh Council area? I can't speak for the Councillor's motivations, but if I wanted to look like I was doing something on traffic demand management without any chance of it ever happening, I would do something similar.

    Be interesting to see how this develops. Any thoughts?

    Posted 9 months ago #

  2. chdot
    Admin

    Thanks.

    I suspect you are right about ‘CEC could do it’.

    Also, we all know about ‘consultations’…

    It would be easy/cynical to suggest that Cllr J just wants to be ‘seen to be doing something!, perhaps with some awareness that there will be minimal ‘buy-in’ from other councils.

    Of course it’s possible he has had conversations and some sort of united pressure on SG is coming.

    Meanwhile I agree with “I think the Councillor has been badly advised”.

    Posted 9 months ago #

  3. Frenchy
    Member

    I think the Councillor has been badly advised

    Can we discount the hypothesis that he has been well advised, but isn't following the advice?

    Posted 9 months ago #

  4. chdot
    Admin

    Good point!

    Posted 9 months ago #

  5. chdot
    Admin

    “

    When could it happen? Even supporters of the proposal admit it is likely to be several years before a congestion charge could be introduced, due to the need to amend legislation. Many city councillors and campaigners hope to put pressure on the Scottish Government to make the necessary changes. With no congestion charge plan in the SNP government’s current Programme for Government, supporters hope to turn the question into an election issue for the Scottish Parliament next May.

    “

    https://www.edinburghinquirer.co.uk/p/return-of-congestion-charge

    Posted 9 months ago #

  6. chdot
    Admin

    “

    Oxford’s campaign group Cyclox said it welcomed plans for a temporary congestion charge being discussed by the council, which would see motorists pay £5 to drive through certain roads at peak times, with exemptions for Blue Badge holders, carers, emergency vehicles, and local businesses.

    Ian Loader, Cyclox chairman, said: “The council must be bold and make the city safe for cyclists, bus users and pedestrians, and that means reducing levels of road traffic.

    “

    https://road.cc/content/news/oxford-cycling-campaigners-call-bold-congestion-charge-314401

    Posted 8 months ago #

  7. neddie
    Member

    A congestion charge won't work to reduce congestion with so many exemptions. Anyone could be a "local business" or a "carer", with a modicum of ingenuity to front one. Anyone with children or a granny could call themselves a carer after all. And the whole point of charging businesses is to drive efficiency, so that businesses choose the most efficient means of transportation for the job. A property agent doesn't need a fleet of Minis to visit properties, when a fleet of mostly e-bikes would do.

    So unfortunately, it'll just be seen as a tax that doesn't reduce congestion, penalising those unlucky enough to pay, and deemed a failure.

    I'm all in favour of congestion charging, but designing weak schemes will result in failure (in the same way that leaving LTNs "too leaky" also means you don't get modal shift)

    And like a segregated cycle lane, it has to be "all or nothing". For example, if you don't complete a segregated cycle lane across difficult junctions, people won't use it

    Posted 8 months ago #

  8. chdot
    Admin

    “

    MSPs have called on the Scottish Government to stop their 'war on motorists' through 'reckless disregard' and intervene to prevent a boundary charge being introduced to non-Glasgow city council residents.

    A heated debate unfolded in the Scottish Parliament today over proposals from the Glasgow City Council to explore an at-city boundary congestion charge and potential tolls for the Clyde Tunnel.

    “

    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25655312.msps-urge-action-dangerous-glasgow-boundary-charge-plan/

    Posted 3 months ago #

  9. neddie
    Member

    Strange how the Tories become all socialist when it comes to driving

    Posted 3 months ago #

  10. neddie
    Member

    Would a congestion charge bring benefits to Edinburgh?

    https://news.stv.tv/east-central/would-a-congestion-charge-bring-benefits-to-edinburgh

    Jenkinson:

    “Simply creating more road space and clinging to an outdated ‘car first’ mindset is short-sighted, finite and ultimately counter-productive – it doesn’t solve congestion, it entrenches it.”

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

  11. Morningsider
    Member

    @neddie - thanks for the laugh on a dreich Friday in February. The only question is - is this the best Miles Briggs quote ever?

    The council is undertaking a consultation on this, yet it’s quite clear they do not want to put this to the people.

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

  12. Frenchy
    Member

    Incredible.

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

  13. bakky
    Member

    While not in as praiseworthy a category as actual delivery, is Jenkinson’s rhetoric in that article the strongest we’ve seen from a Transport Convener in the city? I continue to be impressed by what he says, having clearly not learned my lesson from believing the chat his predecessor dished out while in post…

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

  14. chdot
    Admin

    “I continue to be impressed by what he says, having clearly not learned my lesson from believing the chat his predecessor dished out while in post…“

    I think Cllr Jenkinson is the first Transport Convenor since David Begg that I haven’t spoken to.

    This is partly because, after SA, I kinda felt ‘what’s the point’.

    But I agree with bakky, he seems to be saying some good things and actually seems to understand some of the ‘issues’.

    But bakky, you shouldn’t blame yourself.

    SA was clearly adept at saying things to fool (I think that’s a fair word) as many people as possible.

    He, for reasons I still can’t understand, was more interested in people whose main interest seem to be ‘driving without restriction’ or parking near their house.

    Cllr Jenkinson is from the same party as SA, who has since been ‘promoted’ and presumably has some influence locally(?)

    In general, worth paying attention to what he says/does and be supportive as appropriate!

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

  15. chdot
    Admin

    https://www.midlothianview.com/news/stop-the-edinburgh-congestion-charge

    MidL Populism

    Will encourage Ed residents to want it!

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  16. gembo
    Member

    Fokkers destroying our roads and wont pay for it. See also North Berwick allergy to paying for parking etc

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  17. mcairney
    Member

    Miles by name, Miles by nature?

    "Assuming a working year of circa 250 days and a daily charge of around £3.50, commuters could pay more than £800 annually to enter the city."

    I think an LRT bus pass is around the same ballpark, why would anyone drive into the city unless they absolutely have to??

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  18. mcairney
    Member

    Also the main concern people have with bus travel (other than the public aspect of public transport) is how long it takes (despite private cars not being much faster)- reducing congestion would mean quicker bus journeys (much needed given it's widely reported that Edinburgh's bus journey times are at an all-time high) which would in turn make them even more attractive. Seems a win-win/no-brainer to me, it would also be good to finally implement 24/7/7 bus lanes on arterial routes.

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  19. gembo
    Member

    7/7/7 is coming to the A70 bus no 44 route quite soon paid for by LEZ infringers apparently,?? which will lead to a small if vocal amount of screeching

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  20. mcairney
    Member

    As a semi-regular user of the 44 (at the other end of it's long and distinguised journey) I'll probably benefit from that indirectly myself!

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  21. Arellcat
    Moderator

    the main concern people have with bus travel (other than the public aspect of public transport) is how long it takes (despite private cars not being much faster)- reducing congestion would mean quicker bus journeys

    It's the age old dichotomy of public transport being highly accessible to population centres and trip generators, vs being fast. I think trams strike the best balance IMO.

    The main concern people living in Midlothian have with bus travel is that the fast buses like the X62 and X37 are not frequent; the X37 and X47 only run at early commuting and late commuting time. The slow buses like the 37 stop at every piddling little place and take forever to get to the middle of Edinburgh. The fast slow buses like the 47, that stop at every place on the main roads only, mean walking 15 minutes just to reach the bus stop, and so the overall journey time is no shorter; you just spend less time on the bus breathing in germs.

    LB doesn't send buses along the A702/A703 to connect with Fairmilehead and Morningside et al, except the no.15. This, like the 47, requires walking 15-20 minutes to get to the bus stop, and it terminates at Bush and doesn't go to Penicuik at all. This is probably not because Bush is a large employer, which it is, but rather that it's University of Edinburgh, who seems to own all the land in Midlothian. And, like the X62 and X37, the 15 is not a frequent service.

    Midlothian has also now lost its Park and Ride facility at Straiton, although I'm not sure if that was a Lothian Buses decision or a local planning decision. Either way, a lot of people drive into Edinburgh because frankly, there just aren't enough fast alternatives where the reduction in journey time from private transport can easily be 50% or more.

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  22. bakky
    Member

    The park and ride thing I find mind-boggling. Why isn't there one at Hillend-ish, and why has the facility at Straiton been dwindling away and rumoured to be redeveloped when there's already talk of congestion charging that will suddenly see its patronage shoot up...

    Classic Edinburgh issue though where it needs to be doing more than one thing at once and working with Midlothian more closely. 7-7-7 every bus lane, major on enforcement of that, advertise the reduction in travel time, get a congestion charge in place and build more park and rides, not less.

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  23. Arellcat
    Moderator

    My own theory is that Hillend-ish has no P&R because the great majority of the Edinburgh-bound A702 traffic isn't going into Edinburgh necessarily, but around it on its way to somewhere else, maybe the Gyle, maybe Livingston, maybe Newcraighall, and people aren't mad keen to jump on a bus for that portion of their journey because direct buses are fewer and farer between. Probably.

    The Pentlands I think are the main reason the A702 east of Easter Howgate carries so much rush-hour traffic, because there aren't any reasonable alternatives; and the very nature of the A702 makes it difficult to widen without a lot of earthworks. If they tunnelled through the Pentlands to connect, say Carlops with Livingston, and relieved that bottleneck disincentive, I suspect car journeys would go through the roof, but temporarily reduce the burden on the Hillend junction.

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  24. chdot
    Admin

    ‘Of course’

    A lot comes down to ‘human nature’

    Two words used to explain/justify/confuse

    Words that are assumed to actually mean something

    Something that is assumed to exist, is immutable, universal, universally understood/agreed etc

    And, presumably, more or less unchangeable

    Some or all of that may be untrue

    Similarly ’everyone wants to drive/own a car’ etc so more/bigger roads are inevitable

    No doubt there are extremists who believe that there should be no restrictions on their way of life/transport choices anything else is a restriction of FREEDOM (likely only thinking of their own), Human Rights, human nature etc.

    For some reason, such people often make the most ‘noise’ and, too often, deferred to by politicians who notionally want the best outcomes…

    Below that is everyone else having to deal the counterproductive randomness of decisions by individuals, planners and myriad vested interests.

    Elsewhere Mayors, mass campaigns or planned or chance events change things - not always for the better.

    Perhaps (other thread) Harrison residents will get together and refuse to let ‘their’ area become a ratrun again.

    Or has human nature conditioned them to go along with ‘the ability to drive everywhere’ is the most important thing(?)

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  25. gembo
    Member

    People like car free streets, you just have to really, really persuade them and resist the Drivists. And Big Oil Companies influence.
    For example, the nicest street in the whole of Glasgow. Is Buchanan Street. Has been car free since the 1980s anyway.

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  26. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Worth posting this photo again! 1955 vs. 2016:

    The road to Buchanan Street Station

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

  27. gembo
    Member

    Well worth the re-post Shopping Busking Drinking and Eating. Why Not. Bring it On George St
    El Weegeerinos would think it inconceivable to let a motor down Buchanan St. Even for deliveries or road sweeping. As far as I recall in 40 odd years only pedestrians. Not even an ice cream van

    Posted 2 weeks ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin