COUNCIL LEADER’S LETTER TO MP NEIL O BRIEN

EXTRACTS from a letter from Councillor John Boyce to MP Neil O’Brien:

Thus far in our correspondence I have restricted myself to directly answering the points raised about the car parking charges and as far as possible avoided engaging in a public slanging match which is of no benefit to either of us, despite the fact there has been no meaningful engagement with my administration by you to see what assistance, if any, you can provide to avoid bringing these charges in.

Having said that, however, on this occasion I feel I cannot let your recent comments go unchallenged, particularly as you are challenging the political integrity of my colleagues and I with the imputation of hypocrisy vis a vis our election campaign.

I make the following points:

1. Whilst it may be true that a number of candidates in the 2019 election campaign may have referenced free parking in their literature, it was not “party policy” as no formal manifesto was agreed for that election.

2. It is more than a little rich of you to suggest my fellow councillors or I have reneged on election promises.

You also stood for election in that year on a number of manifesto promises – no increase in Taxation or National Insurance, maintaining the foreign aid budget at 0.7 per cent of GDP, maintaining the Triple Lock in respect of pension increases.

Your government also promised to reimburse local authorities pound for pound on the additional expenditure incurred dealing with the pandemic. The reality is that councils only receive £0.76 in every pound spent and all your other promises have now been broken, your justification being that those promises are no longer affordable.

Yet when my authority uses the same arguments to justify the extension of the charging scheme for car parks it is somehow seen as disingenuous and underhand.

3. I also object to your claim that the manner in which this decision was taken lacks transparency when, despite repeated requests. You have failed to publish my responses to you in full on your social media in order that you can continue to perpetuate the false narrative you have created around this council.

Turning to the specific points in your most recent letter I do not intend to answer them line by line but in the following way:

1. I accept that the way the figure quoted in the press release was misleading as the figure of £282,000 was the break-even figure of introducing the scheme and making good the losses of

£170,000.

Following consideration of the various responses, the council is now in a position to release the exempt papers form the meeting of March 30.

You will note that the scheme adopted by members was Option C, following a motion moved by myself, seconded by the leader of the Conservative opposition, Coun Priti Joshi, and subsequently adopted.

That scheme provides for a payment of £1 for up to two hours parking, £3 for up to four hours and £4 for over four hours.

This remains the adopted scheme and I see no reason for a further vote on the “default or casual charge scheme”.

During the debate, and prior to approving the scheme, members requested that officers look at measures that would mitigate the impact of the new charges on residents and further research work was undertaken which ultimately proposed an expansion of the permit scheme.

The purchase of a permit is optional.

Finally, there has been much comment and criticism of the proposed scheme and the suggested impact that car parking charges will have on the business viability of the town centres. Included in the Car Park Review is a resume of the academic research relating to the impact of parking schemes/charges on town centres.

“Overall, the academic studies undertaken extensively across the country indicate the supposed impact of parking charges is more anecdotal then real.

In conclusion, I am satisfied that the information released with this response provides more than a sufficient rationale as to why it is necessary to introduce these charges and also provides information to show how the scheme has evolved after listening to the consultation responses.

Yours sincerely,