CAZ: Scheme must deliver alternatives

Who benefits from clean air, and clean every other aspect of the environment? We all do. Who prospers if commerce and employment in this city prospers? We all do. Whose lives are enriched by the cultural activity, heritage and sport that thrives here? The lives of all of us. These three characteristics may, broadly, summarise objectives we might all have for life in the city of Bath. Our challenge is that the second and third of these rely on the feasibility of moving people and goods around the city freely and at will. The question we really need to address is: what can we do about both traffic pollution and congestion without negatively impacting on the aspects of life in Bath that we value. “The polluter must pay” is an easy declaration to make, but it is equally right to declare that a communal charge or tax that falls more heavily on the poor than on the rich is a form of “regressive taxation”. All who enjoy the commerce and recreation available in this city should contribute to maintenance of the clean air that is diminished by all this activity. Once we have