A CONTROVERSIAL proposal to introduce a £5-a-day road charge and invest £3 billion in public transport will be put to the public vote.

Leaders of ten Greater Manchester borough councils met at Bury Town Hall on Friday and decided there will be a referendum on the plan that could cost city-centre commuters £100 a month to get to work.

It will be Bury’s second such poll in a year and the first county-wide referendum since 1975, when people were asked if the UK should stay in the European Community.

The firm appointed to promote the project started a three-month charm offensive to inform people of the scheme’s benefits with an exhibition at Prestwich library on Tuesday.

People will be posted voting forms in November and then have until mid December to vote by mail. A result is expected before the end of the year.

Some representatives of AGMA, the association of all 10 Greater Manchester authorities, wanted the referendum to be a single poll for the county.

But lawyers have since cast doubt on the legality of this because some boroughs have higher populations, and could have much higher voter turnouts, than others, Instead, all ten boroughs will hold their own referendum and, afterwards, each local council will be obliged to take forward the result from their area. At least seven councils must back the congestion charge for it to go ahead.

Bury Council leader, councillor Bob Bibby, said the authority is against the congestion charge.

Geoffrey Berg, the Bury-Co-ordinator of independent campaign group Manchester Against Road Tolls (MART), welcomed the referendum but said it should have come earlier.

MART drew up a petition which triggered a referendum to discover if Bury residents wanted an elected mayor.

Its members had hoped that such a mayor would snub the congestion charge plan on behalf of the borough. People voted against the idea on July 4.

Mr Berg said: “This latest development is good news, but what I cannot understand is - why now? We have had a referendum here at tremendous expense that would have been unnecessary if this had been announced sooner.

“What this will mean for a place like Bury right on the border with Lancashire is that businesses will be more likely to relocate to the north and the workforce will go with him, so it will have a big impact on trade and house prices.

“We hope and will campaign for a ‘no’ vote and think there will be a ‘no’ vote.”

Bury South MP Ivan Lewis also backed the idea. He said: “In view of the strength of feeling on both sides of the argument, I have reached the conclusion that the proposals should not be decided by politicians.

“This is not only the right thing to do but will ensure a vibrant and informed debate, which is good for democracy.”

Other groups welcoming the vote included another independent campaign organisation, the Greater Manchester Momentum Group and the Greater Manchester Chamber, an umbrella group for businesses.

Manchester City Council leader Sir Richard Leese said: “I am confident that when the people of Greater Manchester look at what is on offer - and at a congestion charge that very few of them will ever pay - they will come to a conclusion it is a very good deal indeed.”

MART drew up a petition which triggered a referendum to discover if Bury residents wanted an elected mayor.

Its members had hoped that such a mayor would snub the congestion charge plan on behalf of the borough. People voted against the idea on July 4.

Mr Berg said: “This latest development is good news, but what I cannot understand is — why now? We have had a referendum here at tremendous expense that would have been unnecessary if this had been announced sooner.

“What this will mean for a place like Bury right on the border with Lancashire is that businesses will be more likely to relocate to the north and the workforce will go with them, so it will have a big impact on trade and house prices.

“We hope and will campaign for a ‘no’ vote and think there will be a ‘no’ vote.”

Bury South MP Ivan Lewis also backed the idea. He said: “In view of the strength of feeling on both sides of the argument, I have reached the conclusion that the proposals should not be decided by politicians.

“This is not only the right thing to do but will ensure a vibrant and informed debate, which is good for democracy.”

Other groups welcoming the vote included another independent campaign organisation, the Greater Manchester Momentum Group and the Greater Manchester Chamber, an umbrella group for businesses.

Manchester City Council leader Sir Richard Leese said: “I am confident that when the people of Greater Manchester look at what is on offer —- and at a congestion charge that very few of them will ever pay — they will come to a conclusion it is a very good deal indeed.”