A council has voiced its opposition to the scrapping of tolls on the Forth Bridge, despite being run by two parties in favour of the move.
In a paper submitted to a Holyrood committee investigating the Scottish Government's plans, Edinburgh City Council officials say they have "a number of concerns" about the toll abolition.
The council says the move would increase traffic congestion in the capital, make air pollution worse and lengthen queues on the bridge.
The local authority's written submission also warns that measures to deal with the impact of the road toll removal, such as building more bus lanes and reducing cross-Forth rail fares, could cost the public purse up to £20m.
Members of the Scottish Parliament's Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee will today take evidence on the Abolition of Bridge Tolls Bill from council officials from Edinburgh, Fife and Dundee.
The Edinburgh submission is significant because the authority is run by a coalition of SNP and Liberal Democrats, both of whose parties have been keen supporters of toll abolition.
The submission says: "The council has a number of concerns regarding the potential environmental impact of increased traffic levels, congestion and pollution as a result of removing all charges."
The council also points to the recently published toll impact study, which found that lifting the charge would increase traffic levels by 10%.
"This report indicates that this may lead to increased global and local traffic emissions as well as localised negative impacts in terms of noise, vibration, visual and driver amenity."
The government wants to have legislation on the statute books by the end of the year, with tolls scrapped soon after.
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