SINCE Labour Cllr Roger Jones, chair of GMPTE, recently lost his Irlam seat to the Community Action Party who ran a campaign against the congestion charge, Lord Peter Smith of Leigh looks to have taken over as spokesperson for the propaganda machine that has become the “Yes” campaign for the TIF and congestion charge bid.

Lord Smith of Leigh is also Labour Council Leader of Wigan MBC, a Greater Manchester outpost geographically situated far away from the proposed congestion charging zones.

I have never heard of such biased, one-sided propaganda. How can up to 30,000 future new jobs, that don’t exist, be lost? Many believe the charge will kill existing trade and jobs. “Could be” does not mean “will be”. Up to is speculation and includes zero. Like the sale signs outside shops. Is it not misleading and inaccurate to say a “no” vote at the referendum will result in no money and no investment in public transport?

Isn’t investment already planned and money set aside for this? The one in 10 divide and conquer tactics being used are deplorable. Didn’t the results of the consultation find the majority of respondents were opposed? The money wasted spewing out this yes vote would be better spent on ensuring council services are not cut.

Who remembers when VAT was introduced and we were told it will only affect the rich? No mention of the major shake-up of road tax planned for April 2009. Some post-2001 small-engined cars set for heavy increases. Why should Greater Manchester have to pay a congestion charge to benefit from transport improvement? A charge rejected three to one in Edinburgh 2005, a referendum proposed for Manchester 2008, where next? It didn’t stop Edinburgh's commitment to improvement without the charge since. Why is all the information coming out so biased and one-sided? Why are they not telling us everything in order to make a fully informed choice? Why won’t these people look further than their own propaganda and see there are alternatives?

Name and address supplied