It planned to reduce congestion by introducing a daily charge to enter a cordon within the inner city, with the money raised directed to fund improvements in public transport.

Edinburgh's roads radiate from the city centre, which acts as a hub for other modes of transport and facilitates through-journeys.

As of 2001, Edinburgh's public transport relied on buses and taxis; there were two major (and ten minor) city train stations, no light rail system, and the tram network had been decommissioned in the 1950s.

This has helped to drive the local growth of car use in Edinburgh, with daily commuting trips identified as having increased by 72% between 1981 and 2001.

[2] Edinburgh's road network was also in need of extensive repair and refurbishment; although maintenance had been increased to £16m per annum, the backlog of outstanding work was estimated at £70m.

[3] Traffic delays and the impacts of road congestion had been estimated to cost the local economy about £20billion a year.

[4] Although its air quality was generally good, parts of Edinburgh suffered from high concentrations of nitrogen oxides (NOx), mostly emitted from vehicle exhausts.

Minor traffic management changes were planned to reduce this by 5% in the worst-affected areas, but an overall 40% reduction was targeted, partly by introducing a low emission zone to restrict heavy goods vehicles, partly through improved vehicle standards, and the rest through Edinburgh's 'Integrated Transport Initiative', with journeys moving to public transport as a result of congestion charging.

[8] Edinburgh chose to participate in the Department for Transport's Charging Development Partnership of local authorities working considering congestion charging or workplace parking levies, and also part-funded the European Union's PRoGR€SS project ('Pricing Road use for Greater Responsibility, Efficiency and Sustainability') to demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness and acceptance of urban road pricing schemes, under the EU's CUPID European Road Pricing initiative.

[11] The initial plans envisaged a charging scheme that operated in the city centre between 0700 and 1900, Monday to Friday, starting in 2006.

[17] Some political parties and central city traders were skeptical of the projected economics, claiming that shoppers would drive to other out of town destinations such as McArthur Glen in Livingston, shifting business away from Edinburgh.

[11] Friends of the Earth Scotland also welcomed the proposals as they believed they would reduce air pollution and improve the city environment.

[17] The Princes Street association opposed the scheme, stating that businesses in the city centre would be put at a competitive disadvantage.

[11] Two public surveys in March 2002 had shown opposition to a charging scheme from 75% of suburban Edinburgh residents and 64% across the whole city.

[37] The ruling Scottish Labour Party lost a significant number of votes at a September 2002 council by election (slipping from second to fourth place) with participants claiming that the proposed congestion charge had been a factor.

[43] Following the introduction of the London congestion charge, Professor David Begg, chair of the Commission for Integrated Transport, cited the reported of that success as a reason to go ahead with the Edinburgh scheme.

[24] The Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce was joined by the Freight Transport Association[47] in requesting that all commercial vehicles be exempted, arguing that businesses would have to pass on their increased costs to consumers or leave the city altogether.

[46] An early 2004 survey by the Chamber of Commerce had 90% of respondents rejecting the proposed scheme with two-thirds against road pricing as a matter of principle.

[49] Concern was expressed on rat runs and local air quality in parts of north Edinburgh if only a city centre cordon was introduced.

[51] In the run up to the referendum, the council proposed an independent monitoring board for the scheme and possible abolition after two years if it did not work.

[54] There were complaints that the question was biased, referring to the council's "preferred" strategy and there were concerns expressed by some political parties that the information leaflet enclosed with the form would also add to the confusion.

[2] In retrospect, Transport Initiatives Edinburgh noted that, although there was agreement that congestion needed to be contained, there had been clear public opposition to the concept of road pricing as a direct traffic restraint measure.