YOUR article, Greens back executive in vote to keep bridge tolls (February 9), fails to reflect accurately the position of the Greens in the debate on bridge tolls. We did not "back the executive"; indeed, we voted against the executive amendment. We voted against the SNP motion, too, because it was equally unsupportable. Both motions would have resulted in more pollution and more congestion - an absurd position in the face of the urgent need to reduce climate-change emissions and growing traffic levels.
We did "back" our own amendment: to replace tolls with a fairer system of "smart" charges to tackle congestion, reduce pollution and lengthen the lifetime of expensive bridges. Such a system, with no tolls on public transport and reduced charges for multi-occupancy vehicles, would encourage people to car-share, use public transport alternatives and help fund those alternatives. This would end the ridiculous situation where most HGVs pay less than a bus to cross the bridge, and a car full of passengers on a Sunday afternoon is charged the same as a single-occupancy vehicle at peak times.
The convener of the Forth Estuary Transport Authority, Lawrence Marshall, says abolition of tolls would only increase traffic, leading to more congestion, pollution and maintenance difficulties. We wanted a serious debate on serious issues, not cheap politics.
Mark Ruskell, MSP, The Scottish Parliament
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article