The chairman invited Cllr Burford, Chairman of
the Strategic Overview and Scrutiny Committee to present the
inquiry report from the committee regarding parking management.
Cllr Burford began by thanking the committee
for its work in producing the report. There had been a lot of
evidence gathered and considered in a relatively short time. All
interested parties had contributed after the inquiry had been
widely publicised. Both the evidence from town and parish councils
and business organisations taken at the all-day session and
individual written evidence were available in the annexes to the
report, which was on the council's website. A hard copy was in the
members' room.
The committee had made findings based on all
the evidence, followed by recommendations based on those findings.
The committee had not made a recommendation regarding whether the
council should or should not charge for parking, since that was for
the cabinet to decide, based on the scrutiny inquiry evidence and
the debate at Full Council.
During the inquiry it had been clear that
there were two diametrically opposed views on the issue of
charging.
He believed that the way to
proceed was for him to move that the report be received without the
need for a seconder and he invited the Solicitor to
explain.
The Solicitor suggested that
the Full Council take the item in two parts; firstly to agree to
receive the report and then to have a
full debate when motions may be proposed and considered.
On a show of hands members resolved to receive
the report as at the agenda.
Cllr O'Neill confirmed that there had been
opposing views during the consideration of the issue. He proposed
and Cllr Pugh seconded the following motion:
That, following the intensive scrutiny review of potential charging
for off-street parking and assessing all of the evidence gathered,
the cabinet, in light of the current economic downturn and the
impact this is having on our town centres, delays making a decision
until full public consultation, including all town and parish
councils, has been carried out and the economic situation has
improved.
Speaking to his motion Cllr O'Neill said that any
responsible authority would have conducted proper consultation, but
that he could see no plan in place. To date neither town and parish
councils nor the council's own regeneration team had been
adequately consulted. He referred to the recent publication of a
report by Mary Portas, who had been appointed by the government to
lead an independent review into the future of the high street. He
cited recommendation nine, which stated ' Local areas should implement
free controlled parking schemes that work for their town centres
and we should have a new parking league table'
He said that the cabinet had announced a
four-year council tax freeze, yet had introduced charges or
increases for services such as pest control and garden waste
collection. If council tax was used to cover the cost of
maintaining car parks it would lead to an increase for a band D
household of £12, equivalent to 25 pence per week, which was
cheaper than the proposed 40 pence to park for one hour. He
believed he knew how residents would vote if this were put to them,
given that the economic climate was currently worse than in 2008,
when the proposal had been deferred.
Cllr Pugh added that to rely on consultation
conducted in 2007/8 showed a lack of a proper plan. He believed
that revenue considerations had overshadowed all others. If he and
others had not called in the cabinet decision in September 2011,
there would have been no recent evidence gathered at all. It was
remiss to rely on scrutiny to do the consultation, since the
council had the ability to undertake a full exercise and not just
rely on the statutory process.
Cllr McMahon supported the motion, commenting
that the inquiry report had been only narrowly accepted by eight
votes to seven at the meeting of the Strategic Overview and
Scrutiny Committee on 5 December. He said that full information
from the town and parish councils and from the council's
regeneration team was pivotal. He had no doubt that the scrutiny
report and the views of 7000 residents in the form of a petition
would be ignored and not affect the cabinet's decision. He believed
that a four-year freeze on council tax would have a detrimental
effect. He appealed to the independent members to support the
motion to show that the majority of elected members did not wish
the proposals to proceed.
Cllr Connell offered as information the fact
that the Portas review recommended 'affordable' parking and it had
also concluded that retail workers were taking free spaces before
shoppers arrived.
Cllr Molyneux stated that the council had
proposed to introduce parking charges as a result of an
unprecedented squeeze on local authority funding. The public sector
was bearing the brunt of measures resulting from the previous
Labour government's actions. The council had needed to save over £4
million and had been determined to protect front line services. The
council did not wish to increase council tax, but to give people
choice, so that rather than everyone paying for car parks, only
those who used them would contribute. He accepted the Portas review
and its 28 recommendations wholeheartedly and emphasised that the
recommendation picked on referred to controlled free parking. She
did not see free all-day parking as a solution and was suggesting
managed car parks. This council could not manage its car parks
without a modest charge. No member had come up with a sensible
alternative. To increase council tax by nine or ten per cent would
lead to a referendum. The motion before members had already been
put to the Strategic Overview and Scrutiny Committee and had been
voted against there, where members had been in the best position to
make a judgement. He could not support the motion.
Cllr Gardiner commented that to charge for
parking would be detrimental and costly to set up and there were
doubts over income generation. He had made the case for free spaces
at hospitals and surgeries. The whole issue had been around for
years and he believed it negative that the Northern Quarter plan
contained no rural parking. The council needed to find ways of
freeing up areas such as Cinderford and there was a good case for
further consultation. It was difficult, but on balance he was in
favour of the motion.
Cllr Quaile believed the Portas review had
been useful. He commented that shop rents had not reduced to
reflect the ongoing economic downturn and many retailers had not
been able to afford to renew leases. Times were changing with the
growth of out-of-town shopping centres and particularly on-line
shopping. The base issue for consideration remained the maintenance
of the car parks. Consultation had taken place during the six major
meetings over the previous months. The council could not wait to
resolve some of the key issues in austere times. It would be
difficult but the council would work together to take decisions
step by step.
Cllr Whitburn did not agree that consultation
had been sufficient. He did not believe that the income from
Mitcheldean car park would be as predicted. Traders were struggling
and the council was proposing to penalise them. The district's only
advantage over others was its towns' free parking, which it would
lose.
Cllr Diana Edwards noted that it was
interesting that Mary Portas worked for the company that owned one
of the biggest out-of-town shopping centres in Europe.
Cllr Bevan hoped that when tweaked, the
proposal would benefit the short-term parkers in Lydney. The
district needed better quality car parks and he was sure that
people would be willing to pay for that. He was unsure as to
whether Cllr O'Neill wanted a consultation or a referendum. He also
asked members to think about the parking implications of two
upcoming planning applications by large supermarkets for
Cinderford.
Cllr Lawton said that consultation had taken
place, albeit not formal. The motion represented a delaying tactic.
At a recent meeting in Newent regarding crime and disorder attended
by 70 people, parking had been considered a problem because there
was nowhere to park legally. Newent needed a steady turnover of
spaces; otherwise visitors would keep on driving and go to
Gloucester, depriving retailers of trade. Parking regulations
needed enforcement and the arrangements needed to change. He did
not want to pay for parking, but charges would not deter him and he
would reluctantly accept payment as necessary.
Cllr Smart commented that this subject had
been extensively scrutinised, adding that it had been an excellent
example of good scrutiny. The matter had led to debate within the
council and more widely in the district. There had been 23 hours of
meeting time devoted to the issue, the scrutiny report was well
balanced and its recommendations were thoughtful and sensible. She
fully supported the report and its recommendations.
Summing up Cllr O'Neill commented that to
blame the previous Labour government for the current economic
situation was to forget the actions of Lehman Brothers and other
banks. He was clear that the cabinet was not going to change its
mind. However he paid his council tax so that others' streets could
be lit and children be educated. It was the nature of taxation in
this country. The only choice was to elect or deselect
representatives. He repeated the additional cost of £10 to £12 per
year to a band D household if the cost were put on council tax and
urged members to support the motion.
When put to the vote the motion
was unsuccessful. The voting was as follows.
For (19) - Julia Gooch, Ian
Whitburn, Dave East, Maria Edey, Clive Elsmore, Andrew Gardiner,
Paul Hiett, Graham Morgan, Max Coborn, Frank Baynham, Bill Osborne,
Paul McMahon, David Thomson, Bernie O’Neill, Don Pugh, Val Hobman,
Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Jackie Fraser,
Against (22) - Norman Stephens, Roger Yeates, Jim
Connell, Gethyn Davies, Brian Jones, Brian Edwards, James Bevan,
Judy Davis, Frankie Evans, Carole Allaway Martin, Marrilyn Smart,
Len Lawton, Peter Ede, Marion Winship, Arthur Thomas, Terry
Glastonbury, Terry Hale, Diana Edwards, Martin Quaile, Patrick
Molyneux, Brian Robinson, Jane Horne
Abstained (1) - Philip
Burford
PDF 122 KB