Glasgow councillors to advance 'congestion charge' plans
And users of the Clyde Tunnel could be hit with an additional road tax.
However, plans to implement a workplace parking charge, which would have raised £8m a year, have been shelved.
The Glasgow LEZ was implemented in June 2023, and has been one of several controversial traffic restrictions in recent years.In a report to councillors, Executive Director of Neighbourhoods, Regeneration and Sustainability George Gillespie wrote: 'While the Council does not intend to progress a Workplace Parking Licensing scheme at this time, officers will now direct resources to the exploration of alternative potential initiatives utilising local road user charging powers.
'While a WPL scheme has the potential to encourage modal shift and generate relatively modest revenues to support sustainable transport interventions, it is considered that alternative options such as initiatives utilising local road user charging powers may prove more impactful in achieving these aims.'
Councillors will be asked to note the findings of the report at a meeting next week.
SNP councillor Ricky Bell, who serves as city treasurer, previously expressed support for a congestion charge.
He said: 'We need to have solutions that work for Glasgow, and things like a tourist tax, congestion charging, tolling on the tunnel are the big ones that would make quite a difference to the amount of money we get.'
In July, city councillors expressed interest in rolling out the tariff.
Greens councillor Blair Anderson told a full council meeting: 'The only way we can meet our climate targets is moving people from cars to public transport.
'A road user charging scheme would give us the money to make Glasgow's buses publicly owned, reliable, fast and free.'
Meanwhile, a 5% tourist tax, which was approved by councillors in June, will be implemented from January 2027.
Visitors to the city will be charged an extra £4.83 per night in a bid to raise £16m in fresh capital each year.
Drivers on the M8 would be charged upon crossing the city's boundaries. (Image: Getty Images) The Federation of Small Businesses Scotland has urged the council to proceed with 'caution'.
Hisashi Kuboyama, the group's West of Scotland Development Manager, said: 'The city's post-Covid recovery has been painfully slow, and businesses' confidence isn't back up yet. The council needs to ensure the impact on local businesses is fully considered as it develops policy proposals if they want to bring the city centre back to where it was.
'We welcome the city council's decision to drop the idea of a workplace parking charge. That would have placed an extra burden on small businesses who need vehicles to carry out their work
'Similarly, we would urge extreme caution when it comes to considering a congestion charge for driving into the city or a toll on the Clyde Tunnel.'
Reform Councillor Thomas Kerr also hit out at the proposals yesterday, posting to X: 'The SNP's plan in Glasgow? Tax, tax, tax.
'This congestion charge will strangle business, turn off visitors and kill investment in our city. These chancers need to go before their damage is irreversible.'
A potential congestion charge has been mooted for years.
In 2023, Katy Loudon of the SNP was left red-faced after her colleagues in Glasgow City Chambers raised the issue amidst a heated by-election in the Rutherglen and Hamilton West parliamentary constituency.
At the time, a campaign source told The Herald: 'We're in a real scrap here and our prospects are not being helped by [Cllr Bell] telling our voters that under the SNP they'll have to pay an extra £5 a day or whatever to get into their work. It's madness. It does our chances here no good.'
Loudon was subsequently routed in the contest against Labour's Michael Shanks, by a vote of 58.6% to 27.6%.
Read more:
Russell Findlay calls for 'pause' on new energy projects in Highlands
Highland Broadband secures £50m in bid to connect 150 towns and villages
'A dire predicament': Union Street closures as 23% of units lie empty
A congestion charge was implemented in London in 2003. Motorists pay £15 each day to travel within Central London. New York City followed suit in January this year, charging drivers $15 during peak driving times.
Congestion pricing has been praised for reducing the amount of car traffic and carbon emissions in city centres, as well as cutting down on noise pollution.
However, critics have said the tariff will cut into the profits of local businesses.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
What J.K. Rowling misses about Sturgeon's memoir
When someone one day writes a true history of Scotland during the baleful tenure of Nicola Sturgeon and reflects on what brought about her downfall as first minister, 'Isla' Bryson might be worth a footnote but J.K. Rowling surely merits a chapter. No one has managed to articulate the opposition case to Sturgeon with the verve, intelligence and penetrating wit of the Harry Potter author. Rowling's review of Frankly, Sturgeon's recently published memoir, is in many ways as brilliant as her other mainly tweeted thrusts. It is incisive and damming, outclassing her adversary and doing so with courage humour and originality. In other ways though it misses the mark, failing, as many observers of Scottish politics do, to see the details in the rotting wood for the petrified forest of trees. What is good is Rowling comparing Sturgeon to Bella Swan, heroine of the Twilight series, in that it conjures the image of blood being sucked from the body politic of Scotland (the SNP have been positively vampiric in their predations). It also highlights the eternally adolescent quality of the Sturgeon persona, a woman who had never had a serious job outside politics, a woman who avoids all serious scrutiny (even yesterday she cancelled what could have been uncomfortable interviews with the media) a woman who didn't learn to drive until she was in her 50s, a woman who recently got a tattoo. Sturgeon never moved on from her teenage obsession with independence. She never seriously addressed independence's huge practical obstacles or seemed interested in doing so, and certainly does not attempt this in Frankly. She never seems to have acquired wisdom or depth or humility, and never truly managed to emerge from the shadow of a charismatic mentor – Alex Salmond. Rowling takes a well-aimed swipe too at Sturgeon's propagandistic assertions that the 2014 referendum was a glorious inclusive positive exercise in democracy, a revisionist mantra from the still active veterans of the Yes camp repeated so often it's in danger of becoming accepted as gospel truth. The actions of those Yes voters at the time would suggest otherwise. As Rowling says: 'Oddly, this message didn't resonate too well with No voters who were being threatened with violence, told to fuck off out of Scotland, quizzed on the amount of Scottish blood that ran in their veins, accused of treachery and treason and informed that they were on the wrong side of, as one 'cybernat' memorably put it, 'a straightforward battle between good and evil.'' She is also right to have a dig at Sturgeon's 'London friends' who were dazzled and beguiled by the first minister, and couldn't see or were not interested in hearing about her and her party's endless failings. Rowling points out that these serial calamities get no serious mention in the book. As she rightly says, the omission of any reference to Scotland's soaring drugs deaths figures in particular is, frankly, appalling. Rowling is also relentless and remorseless in highlighting the dangers of the Gender Recognition Reform Bill (GRRB) and the culture of intolerance and vilification of any criticism Sturgeon engendered in its wake. Many political commentators focus on this piece of legislation in terms of its apparent consequences for Sturgeon's career, for her party, and for the broader independence cause, ignoring or downplaying the surely more important point that it relegated biological women to a sub category, putting them potentially in harm's way, and then told them to shut up and live with it. As Rowling puts it: 'She's caused real, lasting harm by presiding over and encouraging a culture in which women have been silenced, shamed, persecuted and placed in situations that are degrading and unsafe, all for not subscribing to her own luxury beliefs.' But where Rowling perhaps misses the target is in taking Sturgeon's support for the GRRB at face value, in assuming that her interest in self-ID was genuine and sincere. She says that Sturgeon was 'unshakeable in her belief that if men put on dresses and call themselves women they can only be doing so with innocent motives.' Really? Not everyone agrees with that, starting with Alex Salmond who once remarked that Sturgeon had never shown any interest in the issue of gender self-ID in the long time that he had known her, hinting in that Salmond-ish way that perhaps something else was going on. To find out what that something might be, one must, as so often with Scottish politics, depart the mainstream and head to the media by-waters, to the bloggers that pick through the rank smelling weeds of Scottish politics. Robin MacAlpine, a freelance journalist and former director of the Common Weal think tank (and independence supporter) has charted Sturgeon's shifting positions on gender issues over her career and sees them in purely strategic terms. As he puts it: 'Sturgeon and Murrell operated through fear… and their most aggressive punishers were young, digitally savvy activists – who happened to be strongly committed to trans politics. Sturgeon's most effective thug squad had to be kept placated. That (I believe) is why Sturgeon was so quick to announce gender ID legislation and so slow to produce it. She needed their rage, but not the legislative headache…' Which might explain the initial interest. But why then actually push for full enactment of self-ID? Why not just fudge the issue? MacAlpine explains: 'Then something else happened; the fall-out of the Salmond trial and the parliamentary inquiry. This nearly finished her career and some of the most dangerous revelations were down to her lack of a parliamentary majority when the Greens voted for disclosure. It is really important to understand the significance of this. Sturgeon was utterly desperate to close down the Scottish Parliament as a body that would scrutinise her and the way to do that was to have an overall majority bound by collective responsibility.' MacAlpine points out that Sturgeon could have had a parliamentary majority with the Scottish Greens in 2016. But she didn't pursue one, preferring to pass most of her legislation with votes from the Scottish Tories. MacAlpine calls the Bute House agreement an 'anti-transparency' move which he believes was designed to ensure total control at a critical moment and ensure the Greens were friends not foes. In other words, the GRRB perhaps had little to do with trans rights and was more about keeping a lid on a potentially explosive scandal. In which case, the cause of independence, her party's reputation, the women and girls of Scotland were expendable. Rowling ends by admitting she may have missed the point of Frankly, that perhaps it isn't intended to entertain, or enlighten but to serve as a CV distinguisher, and assist her on the way to her long coveted 'cushy sinecure' with UN Women. Well perhaps, though cynics might suggest that unlike the ferry Sturgeon 'launched' back in 2017, that ship has sailed. More likely Frankly is not just a CV distinguisher. It may just be a pre-emptive plea for mitigation.
Business News Wales
2 hours ago
- Business News Wales
The Value of Early Resolution
Having been involved in industrial relations in some form for around 40 years, it's hard to identify a time when there has been so much political, economic and social focus on it, as there is currently. The Labour government has centred 'rebalancing power in the workplace' at the heart of its growth strategy with the comprehensive Employment Rights Bill introducing a new wave of rights for workers and regulations for trade unions. While employers have highlighted risks of increased costs, the direction of travel the government has committed to should provide an impetus for employers to get ahead of these risks by auditing their current employee relations systems and processes. Even without these new rights, there is an incredibly strong argument for managing workplace disagreements better. Analysis by Acas shows that the cost of workplace conflict to UK employers is estimated to stand at £28.5 billion, the equivalent of £1000 for every employee. Even before any new employment rights are brought in, that's a powerful case for improving how we resolve workplace level disputes. When workplace issues escalate and become formal disciplinary or grievance processes, costs, both financial and emotional, escalate significantly. Anyone who has been party to these processes will understand that these are far from pleasant experiences for managers or workers and the more it escalates, the more costly they become. It does seem to be the case that as escalation has become more prevalent, we've lost the skills to disagree well and resolve issues quickly and informally. Acas's 2025-25 Annual Report shows that it dealt with over 117,000 individual disputes, an increase of 13,000 on the previous year, with the figure the highest since the Covid pandemic. There's much evidence to support a better way of resolving conflict. New Acas research carried out by The Social Agency outlines a series of values and characteristics that can prevent issues escalating into costly and damaging formal processes. Because disagreement happens wherever there are human relationships it's critical that we're able to manage concerns as amicably as possible through early resolution conversations. Our research suggests that, while there is no single approach that works best and no one-size-fits-all solution, there are principles that consistently apply. Critically, informal resolution must be early, close to where the issue arose and voluntary. There are scenarios where a formal process is the right one, but there are many cases where a direct, honest and open conversation can lead to a satisfactory solution. The key goal is to create a space where people feel listened to, and their concerns heard and acted upon. Our research too showed that language mattered. The word 'conflict' itself can induce a defensiveness, and any talk of 'grievance' can trigger a sense that the conversation is not informal at all, but merely the first stage in that formal process. The type of conversation for early resolution is, and should be, very different from any formal process. Grievance or disciplinary investigations are ultimately about ascertaining facts and then making a judgement. Early resolution conversations should be about understanding ill-feelings, identifying the basis for those feelings and what will resolve the concern. That includes appreciating that different parties may see things differently. These types of conversation require different skills. Managers are often trained in leadership, managing performance, absence or development. Early resolution conversations require a range of skills we don't often talk about: empathy, compassion and emotional intelligence. Environmental or cultural factors can be an enabler or a barrier, too. For early resolution conversations to take place, let alone to work, there needs to be a level of trust. For workers to have confidence that they will be heard and issues resolved, they need to feel a sufficient level of psychological safety to raise issues in the first place. This level of trust can take a long time to gain and can be lost very quickly. Acas is there to help organisations resolve conflict when it emerges, and we also help employers to establish the culture and systems that prevent disputes arising in the first place. The case for trying to achieve it is overwhelming. Early resolution may not always be the right course, and it may not work, but where it does, there are huge financial savings as well as huge emotional gains to be made.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
BBC Scotland slammed for ‘farcical' Debate Night impartiality ruling
The BBC hosted a 'Glasgow Special' episode of the show on the night of June 4 – a day before voters were set to go to the polls for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. The panel show featured the SNP's Glasgow Council leader Susan Aitken, Scottish Tory MSP Annie Wells, Scottish Labour MSP Paul Sweeney, Labour peer Willie Haughey and artist David Eustace. An SNP source at the time told The National that Debate Night appears to have 'thrown the BBC's proposed guidance on balance out of the window' by including two Labour representatives. READ MORE: BBC Scotland breached accuracy standards with Labour peer on Debate Night This was before we subsequently revealed that Eustace also appears to be a prominent Scottish Labour supporter. The Glasgow Greens submitted a formal complaint to the BBC, highlighting that it has far more elected representatives than the Tories – for example – and branding it a 'farce'. Now, the BBC have also responded to the complaint and argued that the panel makeup didn't breach its impartiality guidelines. 'While the composition of the panel would have been inappropriate for an item governed by the BBC's election guidelines, these apply in the case of by-elections only to coverage of the by-election itself or the constituency in which it is taking place,' the organisation's Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) ruled. 'The item in question was unconnected with the impending by-election, and focused on the future regeneration of Glasgow, a topic on which (as the ensuing discussion illustrated) there is a large measure of cross-party agreement.' The statement added: 'The ECU considered the composition of the panel appropriate to the circumstances and found no breach of the BBC's standards of impartiality.' (Image: Supplied) This was a point that Glasgow Greens councillor Anthony Carroll (above) still took issue with, branding the decision 'farcical'. 'Even by the BBC's standards, this was a panel that was not representative of Glasgow. The Greens came 3rd in every constituency just last year, and the 3rd largest party in the council with 11 councilors – having just won a by-election last year for our party's first time ever,' he said. "And yet the BBC think a panel of two Labour representatives and a supporter of that party is somehow representative of the city, but it's clearly not. If the BBC wants to be representative of Glasgow's politics then Green voices must be included in these debates.' The ECU did rule, however, that it has breached its standards of accuracy by not making it clear that Haughey – as well as a Labour donor – is a Labour peer. The Scottish Labour candidate, Davy Russell, ultimately won the Hamilton by-election by a little over 600 votes with the SNP's Katy Loudon coming second.
