I WAS not best pleased to receive a recent ‘flyer’ from MP Royston Smith, concerning the possible introduction of a congestion charge in the city, as I considered it to be blatant ‘politicking’ against the city council and over- exaggerating the situation.

The reason I say this is that I found the content to be contradictory at the very least and it came across as being nothing more than scaremongering on behalf of Mr Smith (no doubt, with backing of the Conservative councillors as well?). 

I observed that the ‘headline grabbing’ block capital text in the first paragraph stating “Southampton’s Labour Council ARE introducing a charge to drive in our city” was then followed with a second in smaller font “The Labour Council are CONSULTING on introducing a congestion charge for some vehicles driving in Southampton. The Labour Leader of the Council has confirmed the cameras could be ‘re-purposed’ once they were installed. Once cameras are installed around the city, who do we think will be charged next?” 

I’ve capitalised the two key words in these statements and thus take issue with the fact that his initial comment implies that congestion charging will definitely be imposed within the city, whereas the truth is actually contained in the second, namely that this is merely at the consultation stage at present. 

As someone who understands the Queen’s English perfectly well, a consultation is exactly that, ie, a discussion between two or more people with the aim of achieving a particular goal, but one that may not result in it being agreed. For example, I can have a consultation with my bank manager about a mortgage or loan, but I might not necessarily end up with one! 

So, Mr. Smith, please will you not distribute such sensationalist literature in the future, as it was an insult to anyone with a degree of intelligence.

I have visited his website, to look at the relevant survey, needless to say, I found it disappointing, only two questions were posed and there was no ‘message box’ to provide separate comments in writing, so the only way I can otherwise complain about the flyer’s accuracy would be to email him directly. 

Whilst it was to be expected that he will seize every opportunity to score points off his political rivals, it is disappointing that he chose this path, rather than perhaps offer some constructive suggestions to help with the city’s air quality problems (eg, a park-and-ride scheme) instead.

Ralph Frost
Woolston