Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

Council 'stabbing residents in back' over parking charge

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 25 July 2008
MOTORING experts today accused the city council of stabbing Edinburgh drivers in the back with plans to hike up parking charges for gas-guzzling cars.
The association also predicted that richer residents who can afford driveways would see their house prices rise, while those with no option but to park on the road would be left with a "huge hole" in their family budget.

Meanwhile, the council's
calculations were questioned today after it emerged that data is based on DVLA national statistics and figures from the London borough of Camden – which has already adopted a similar scheme – rather than tailored to Edinburgh.

The News also discovered some figures in the original report on the scheme were inaccurate, and officials will now supply councillors with corrected data.

It is now estimated that over 11,000 people will pay less under the scheme, with just 3348 residents paying more. The council expects this to result in a drop in income of nearly £44,000.

Bruce Young, the Lothian and Borders co-ordinator of the Association of British Drivers, said Edinburgh was "not an average city" and said the council was "kidding itself" if it thought it would lose money.

City development director Dave Anderson said the policy might influence householders to consider downsizing when the time comes to change their vehicle.

"Although there is potential that such a change could adversely affect revenues in future, it is considered that the benefits to the environment and to the scheme outweigh this potential negative," he said.

But Luke Bosdet from AA public affairs, said: "Parking permit schemes were set up to protect residents' parking spaces from drivers who don't live in the neighbourhood.

"Using the scheme to hit (residents] with a huge 'environmental' increase is not only an abuse of its original purpose, it stabs in the back Edinburgh residents who don't have the funds to switch to more efficient cars straight away."

Representatives from councils in Camden and Richmond – which was the first place in the UK to introduce a "polluter pays" parking scheme – today said it was too early to analyse the impact of the changes, and said results would appear after year two.

It remains unclear whether councillors will back the scheme next week.

Changes would come in by mid-2009 at the earliest, with 2010 or 2011 more likely.





The full article contains 397 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 25 July 2008 10:01 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

,

25/07/2008 11:22:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Bring Back Poll Tax,

25/07/2008 12:17:29
Right, so I'm going to get rid of my existing car and replace it with Prius that's only built in Japan, needs to be shipped all the way here on a vessel burning bunker grade diesel and which will need to be shipped back to Japan for disposal as it's stuffed to the gunwales with toxic metals (that have been shipped to Japan from Canada).

How does this benefit the environment?

Both vehicles generate exactly 0 pollution when parked.

Probably in the same way as the toy tram network's thousands of tons of steel and concrete, together with 4 years emissions from contractors vehicles.
3

Jed Smith,

Moscow 25/07/2008 12:18:33

Alan Rodent and Catherine Salmond,

I smell a rat, and something fishy...

Yes this council scheme is a disgrace/a good thing

Because cars are brilliant/ terrible.

Commenter # 666 is the antichrist

Commenter # 999 is on fire/ in need of urgen medical attention

etc

4

Liz,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 12:18:46
Idiotic idea.
Unless they expand the scheme to include every car that parks anywhere within the city bypass it will do little else than penalise people who live in the city centre, regardless of how much they drive their vehicle.

If they were serious about 'green' taxes then they should be penalise those who are driving into the city from Fife and surrounding Edinburgh - they are the ones who are producing the most emmisions.
5

Brian Ferrari,

25/07/2008 12:27:09
Electric buses would go some way towards sorting the problem. Or even getting the drivers to turn off their engines when idling. The carcinogenic fumes pumped into our lungs by these inefficient monsters do far more damage than all the 4x4s on the road.
6

Brian M,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 12:28:50
it's about time all residents should refuse to pay for any permits.

And take the fight through the courts if they are given a parking fine
7

calum,

25/07/2008 12:44:29
I wonder what Dave Anderson uses for personal transport ..... any insider know?
8

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 12:51:03
"richer residents who can afford driveways" - what the hell is that bit of Tabloid-speak supposed to mean? If you live in the New Town or a tenement area (which, lets face it, covers most of the parking controlled zone) you'd have to be EXTREMELY rich to build a driveway - presumably in your ground floor neighbour's front room? Does anybody actually read these articles before they're published?
9

Andy Pandy,

25/07/2008 12:54:59
This could be a new series of stories in the EEN where the headline just needs a slight change:

Council stabbing residents in the back over .... (insert any recent item as required - doesn't really matter at all)

Example: Potatoes. Council stabbing residents in the back over Potatoes.

Hey presto - a great read, everyone gets to write a comment, and the story goes on....great.

Sorry - thats what EEN has been doing for years??
10

NYC Hibee,

edinburgh 25/07/2008 12:58:43
No.4 spot on .
It's the commuting cars that cause pollution - not the ones already parked up.
Easy target - easy money!
11

Epicuras,

25/07/2008 12:59:04
what happened to people elected being supposed to serve the people who elected them?
12

Jams,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 13:02:26
My main gripe is that whatever you pay for a 'permit' and no matter what your car sips or guzzles the counicl are taking money from more people than there are spaces.

If you or I sell something that does not exist we would be arrested. The council however can sell two permits for every space!

As for losing money - Aye Right! sure they will (not)
13

I love to eat Sellotape,

25/07/2008 13:03:36
My main gripe today is that my tracksuit bottoms have started to unravel.
14

Statsman,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 13:36:21
Why are unelected council officials deciding on council policy for the electorate?

The elected officials should be creating policy and voting on it. The unelected officials are merely there to advise and implement policy. If some have gotten above their station, they must be severely reprimanded or sacked. It's as simple as that.

It's time the spineless councillors in power started doing their jobs and working for their wages. Show some initiative and common sense for once.
15

Cheese burger,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 13:37:32
Do I want my council spending thousands of pounds on schemes that will LOSE money? No.
Back to the drawing board lads (and lasses) and think up something that actually works!
16

,

25/07/2008 13:44:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Liz,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 13:58:41
#18

No, it is a silly scheme that is badly thought out and will make sod all difference to emissions.
If they were serious about this they should require every vehicle in the city to pay a charge. There are thousands and thousands of cars in the city that this will not affect at all as they are outside the permit zones, a car parked on Montague Street is no more or less polluting than one parked in Liberton.
18

Council Insider,

Council HQ 25/07/2008 14:01:14
#16 - That's the funniest thing I've read in years. Councillors should be creating policy! Have you ever dealt with a Councillor? I'll continue to make policy decisons thank you very much.
19

NorT,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 14:03:25
"City development director Dave Anderson said the policy might influence householders to consider downsizing when the time comes to change their vehicle." Easy seeing he lives in cloud cuckoo land. When I change my car this additional parking tax would be the last thing in my mind. Makes me want to go out and buy a Maybach, the bigger the better.
20

Prin the Dissolving Donkey,

25/07/2008 14:11:19
20.

If comment 16 was the funniest thing you've read in years, then I feel sorry for you.
21

Optimus Prime,

Cybertron 25/07/2008 14:15:22
#9

A gold plated Tram.
22

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 14:40:52
For christs sake wake up!

Most areas in the city did not require a parking permit until stupid labour started imposing it on us and until the stupid SNP continued stupid labour's policies with renewed vigour.

The issue here is not the cost of parking permits, but whether they should be needed in the first place. They should NOT be needed in the first place. Revert to where things were in 1985 and stop harassing people with your stupid, underhand and oppressive politics.
23

Hmm ...,

25/07/2008 14:44:59
... "It emerged that data is based on DVLA national statistics and figures from the London borough of Camden"

So what was the point of that, unless to produce the figures showing a drop in income?

Residents register their car reg. nos. when they buy their permit so the City Council can get a record of the actual Co2 figure for each car. They spent a lot of time "looking at" Richmond (LibDem) scheme so why wouldn't they run an analysis from DVLA of the actual mix in Edinburgh?

And why produce a scheme giving them less money? It's not credible in a cash-strapped council desperate to find new sources of cash to subsidise the trams - even Lothian Buses doesn't produce enough profit to pay the rentals on the trams once they spend the fixed tram money on the unfunded Granton Spur.
24

antifa,

25/07/2008 15:01:43
"The carcinogenic fumes pumped into our lungs by [buses] do far more damage than all the 4x4s on the road."

On another thread, Mario accuses people on this site of failing to understand basic concepts. On the basis of the above, I think he must be right.

"Revert to where things were in 1985 and stop harassing people."

The ramblings of a lunatic.

25

Angus R,

25/07/2008 15:04:15
haha death to all gas guzzling car owners!!!

who can guess this Friday impression?
26

Mr Majestic,

25/07/2008 15:17:07
#24 - Why are you such a knob? You always post a load of sh*t!

Why are you comparing today with 1985, is there the same number of cars on the road now as there was in 1985........I don't think so muppet.
27

Mr Majestic,

25/07/2008 15:18:23
Fuel head, are you a daft wee 18 year old boy racer?
28

Mr Majestic,

25/07/2008 15:27:03
#30 - knobiness.......F*cking brilliant.
29

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 15:35:56
#26:

"The ramblings of a lunatic"

Justify that remark. If you cannot, then shut up.

#28:

If you actiaully stopped to think about things a bit before jerking you knee up to the keyboard, you would realise that the CPZ has been extended for the combined reasons of making money and in pursuance of stupid labour anti-car policies.

Here's one for you... How much more money are they making out of the motorist now, compared to 1985, with repect to the number of vehicle on the road and taking into account the number of vehicle miles travelled?

This is a blatent money making exercise and it is a great pity that many of you are too blinkered to see it.
30

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 15:37:11
Mario,

You are vry persistant in acting like an un-educated, reactionary, moron.

Maybe you are not acting after all.
31

I love to eat Sellotape,

25/07/2008 15:43:30
"Welcome, Ladies and Gentlemen, to the Most Boring Human Being of the Year Award. The envelope, please ..."
32

Mr Majestic,

25/07/2008 15:46:39
#32 - you have to admit you are a bit of an ar*e aren't you?
What is it with you and cars, they get you from A to B, end of.
4 X 4's are not required in a city, neither are high performance cars. 4 X 4's are mostly driven by gold digging tarts and high performance cars are for guys with wee knobs. Which are you, a tart or a guy with a wee knob?
33

Mr Majestic,

25/07/2008 15:47:46
By the way, why is w*lly banned on here but knob is not?
Go figure.....
34

Jed Smith,

Moscow 25/07/2008 15:51:00

Jeremy Clarkson is funnier than Lenny Henry
35

,

25/07/2008 15:54:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
36

Mr Majestic,

25/07/2008 16:04:04
Aw, I hate when I miss a comment that is removed. Mario,was it from his knobiness?
37

I love to eat Sellotape,

25/07/2008 16:06:51
41.

It involved a platypuys, four aubergines and a bottle of Vaseline Intensive Care Lotion.
38

Vandala,

25/07/2008 16:16:11
Here's an idea, Johnston Press: shut down the comments section entirely. Then open up a brand new website allowing only The Genuine Mario Antoinette and Alternative Fuel Head to contribute. Allow them to bicker witlessly online all day about whatever crosses their minds. It would essentially be the same as what passes for serious comment around here.

39

,

25/07/2008 16:22:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
40

Angus R,

25/07/2008 16:22:54
hoho - from #28: #24 - Why are you such a knob? You always post a load of sh*t!

oh my - that comment just made my friday afternoon

knob!!! still laughing
41

Bring Back Poll Tax,

25/07/2008 16:46:51
#35 - "4 X 4's are not required in a city, neither are high performance cars."

Yes, it's much more fun enjoying the rasp and rort of a finely tuned V8 on a nice run through the borders (never exceeding the National Speed Limit or any other posted limit and always driving within the bounds of one's vision and road conditions per the excellent Police Roadcraft manual), however as I LIVE IN A TOWN, THAT'S NOT SURPRISINGLY WHERE I WANT TO PARK.

Imbecile.
42

Flying Upsidedown,

edinburgh 25/07/2008 17:16:29
This plan is just another attempt at imposing a stealth tax on families and the poorer people who cannot just down size thir car on the whim of an official and/or councillor looking for more money to pay for their stupid schemes and expenses.
43

A Clamper,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 17:51:38
Give up your gas guzzlers or cough up. The choice is yours.
44

Charles MN,

25/07/2008 18:43:44
#49 Or use your vote appropriately. There are 27 million car owners in the UK which equals the total vote at the last general election. If you don't like what the politicians are doing make your opinion known.
45

Euan,

Edinburgh 25/07/2008 18:58:34
I said it in a posting on this subject the other day.

There is NO WAY that residents of this City should have this ridiculous, badly-thought-out scheme forced upon them.

It IS NOT the Council's job to try and tax motorists even harder - Alistair darling is doing that job well enough on his own.

A driver should not be penalized for the purchase of a particular car, possibly years after they made decision to but it in the first place.

Almost all residents' vehicles remain stationary 95% of the time and cause little or no pollution compared to all the buses, taxis, vans and lorries in Edinburgh and certainly have very little impact on traffic congestion.

The proposed change in permit regulations is nothing more than blatant attempt to rob Edinburgh's motorists of even more money whilst trying to gain political brownie points for supposedly being 'green'.

46

Scotish Exile,

25/07/2008 20:25:49
Jealousy, from the plebs that can't afford to buy a 4 x 4 or a big engined sports car....this charge won't stop us from driving the cars that we want to drive...Ha Ha
47

Applecrumble,

Balerno 25/07/2008 22:29:59
Once again I click to read a 'news' story that I know before I even read the title is a pile o old drivel, then why do I click it up?
because the laugh I get oot o yous load is just the fabbiest ;)
hehe ta again fer a guid laugh EN commenters
48

tumshie heid,

25/07/2008 23:10:46
Your majesty,
Who are you to decide whether a 4x4 is needed in town or not? What difference to pollution is there between a stationary 4x4 and any other car?
This scheme is a blatant rip off thinly disguised as something "green" (so it must be good then)
49

JFW,

25/07/2008 23:11:37
The biggest polluters in the city centre are the London-style taxis. Those things have much higher emissions than just about any 4x4 you'll see in this country and they are on the go all day every day doing a huge number of miles. Phasing them out would make a much bigger difference to air quality in the city centre than this stupid scheme.
50

jimb4abobor2,

Edinburgh 26/07/2008 01:04:21
#8 who said it was SNP whom ordered this i'ts according to everyone that i'ts labour who are giving the orders to destroy the country and after all snp is a majority not an minority gov and i dont remember seen this in there manifesto about charges. or is this just a hit back from the glasgow east bi-election well you know what they say we are the voters and any slip ups and they will be unemployed again and that goes for any party who is in power so stop winching and sit back and watch this space.
51

Julian.,

edinburgh 26/07/2008 02:45:55
#2 Bring back poll tax,

Or you could always just buy a small car built in this country.
52

Julian.,

edinburgh 26/07/2008 02:50:39
Turnshiehead/Euan,

Where exactly do you guys come to the conclusion that this scheme is about making money. Didn't you read the article fully? A few quotes about taxing gas guzzlers seems to blinker you to the fact that most cars will pay less.

On saying all that, I'm against this scheme. In my opinion permits should be priced on the space that a car takes up in the bays. And I agree that taxing stationery cars is not a great idea. They should take it 1 step further and abolish road tax and increase duty on petrol.
53

Brin 1378,

Livingston 26/07/2008 09:53:47
I agree with 58, Euan. on the last issue abolish the road tax and put the payments on to those that use the roads more often they would then pay pro rata a higher rate. why not stop voting for the city fathers that bring these stealth charges in the first place.They are underhand and sneaky money grabbing !!!!!
54

tumshie heid,

26/07/2008 10:40:28
I see it as a moneymaking exercise because in our city we have a large proportion of the kind of cars which will incur a heavier charge for parking. If the council works out that less revenue will be raised than as now then there is no way this scheme will be implemented.
We are being brainwashed by the use of "green issues" as any excuse these days to ramp up taxes.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.