GM unveils ‘investment-led’ clean air zone vision
After dramatically pausing proposals last year to make drivers in polluting vehicles pay to use the city region’s roads, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham has revealed plans for a non-charging CAZ.
Instead of charging drivers up to £60 a day to drive in Greater Manchester, as was proposed under earlier plans, the revised clean air zone will aim to get people out of their cars and onto public transport by investing in the bus network, among other interventions.
More than £50m of public money would be spent on further upgrades to the Bee Network, including taking steps to have a fully electric bus fleet by 2032. In addition, a £22.5m Clean Taxi Fund would provide grants of between £3,770 and £12,560 to help all taxis licensed with a Greater Manchester local authority meet a new minimum emission standard by 31 December 2025.
A £5m investment in measures to manage traffic flow on roads in Manchester and Salford, including Regent Road and Quay Street, also forms part of the plans.
As well as softening the blow on the pockets of small businesses, the revised strategy, Burnham claims, would be more effective at reducing emissions than a clean air zone that charges drivers.
He said: “By accelerating investment in the Bee Network to create a London-style integrated public transport network, and upgrading GM-licensed taxis, we can improve air quality faster than if we introduced a Clean Air Zone, and without causing hardship to our residents or businesses.
“I’d also ask government to urgently consider allowing Greater Manchester local authorities to remove charging Clean Air Zone signs, as modelling shows that only Greater Manchester’s investment-led plan can meet the legal test placed on the 10 councils to deliver compliance in the shortest possible time and by 2026 at the latest.”
Greater Manchester’s clean air zone was paused at the eleventh hour in 2022 after backlash from small business owners who said they would be unfairly impacted by the plans to introduce a London-style low emissions zone.
Speaking at the time, Burnham said the plan would be significantly reworked to provide a fair solution for residents and businesses.
Understandable political move so close to Mayoral elections, but frustrating to see a lack of action despite massive accumulated political capital.
The city core is beyond density that can be supported by car commuting, & if MCC / GMCA wants to see density increase even more, we can’t expect change by sticking to the same approach as we have done – especially as we (rightly) are restricting road space and giving it over to peds and cycles.
After almost 10yrs since metrolink’s big bang, time to see an inner city ring road congestion charge, with funds going into public transport improvements in parts of GM under-served by public transport.
By Anonymous
He’s absolutely bottled it. Caved to the Facebook keyboard warriors. Do what’s right for GM and get people out of their cars.
By Anonymous
Invest more in towns so that people in places like Oldham and Stockport don’t need to go to Manchester and tax offices so that people are encouraged to work from home.
By Gilly
Looking forward to Highway Engineers increasing traffic flows in GM to defeat air pollution…
By Anon
A rare but welcome dose of common sense
By Eco realist
Clean Air but Same Congestion,
By Bentley Driver
Regent Road should be tunnelled from the M602 to the A56, so the surface can be used more for sustainable modes of transport and a greened corridor.
By Albert
I use the 335 dento to Ashton I am sick and tired of complaining about the times i have waited for the bus for it not to arrive especially on a Saturday
By Roger
Burnham presents all news as good news and then Sacha Lord and the rest of his cronies share with glee. He’s bottled it. Burnham only believes in what gets him easy votes.
By Peter
Everyone knows the city’s public transport strategy doesn’t hinge around cycling, more tram routes or reliable bus services even. It hinges around cars. Our region heavily relies on *private hire vehicles*, at zero cost to the public purse, to get commuters in and out of the city.
Everyone also knows that most private hire vehicles operatoring in Manchester originate from Sefton and Wolverhampton. We have discussed this many times before.
This £22.5 million clean taxi fund is clearly not funding their transition.
So what is the CTF actually paying for, exactly?
By certain death & taxis
A victory for common sense, can’t give in to the Eco extremists. Now get the signs recycled, thats what I call recycling!
By Hurrah
How is a relatively handful of yellow buses going to sort out one of the most polluted cities in the country? While the children of Manchester are poisoned in their beds because the ‘King of the North’ is afraid of militant drivers…
By Greg
Everyone, Andy B included, knows this “investment-led” plan doesn’t work. 70% of GM air pollution comes from private cars and at some point we’ll have to address that elephant in the room. This plan simply kicks the can down the road at the expense of children’s lungs.
By W
Oh dear, the few middle class eco ‘warriors’ are going to get in a real tizz about this. At least businesses will survive and even thrive now that the ridiculous threat has been removed. When the silent majority vote it makes a difference. Well done everyone.
By Just stop Boils
Very disappointing decision. Andy Burnham is losing his credentials by doing this. Many people from the outside of Greater Manchester drive to the city centre and pollute the air for people who live in GM every day. We should have a congestion charge in the city centre. The revenue could be used on developing metrolink/public transport further.
By Johnny
So he wanted to charge now he changes his mind to not charging. Playing Politics as usual. Other Cities sorted themselves out. In the meantime Red Nose attitude is making Health worse in Manc. Politics before Health.
By BBC Bias
I live in Bath and the CAZ has not reduced the pollution that it was supposed to do, businesses have closed and the city has suffered as a result, there has been no real investment in public transport. CAZ is a tax as it does not actually fulfill the design brief and is not delivering Clean Air. It is refreshing to see a different approach to the Charging System adopted by other Councils, I will be interested to see how this develops.
By Anonymous