Transparency
8. Major improvements in the public perception
and credibility of decriminalised parking enforcement could be
made if local authority parking operations were more transparent.
(Paragraph 43)
The Government agrees and this has been taken into
account in the recent consultation.
Publication of annual statistics
9. We were taken aback to learn from the Chief
Parking Adjudicator for England and Wales that she could not find
a single annual report published by a council parking department.
Why so basic an administrative action should be left undone is
unclear We consider that the absence of such reports has contributed
materially to the frustration and anger felt by many of those
who become caught up in the parking enforcement system. Local
authorities have shown poor judgement and a lack of professionalism
in failing to publish and highlight their parking polices and
objectives, performance measurements, financial information, and
an appropriately complete range of relevant statistics. Action
to begin to place this important information in the public domain
need not await central Government guidance. The local authorities
need to publish it without delay. (Paragraph 47)
10. We list below what we would expect to see
in the annual reports of local authority parking departments:
Expenditure on the civil parking enforcement scheme
Revenue collected
Revenue outstanding and use of bailiffs
Expenditure of surpluses
Parking compliance survey statistics
Number of Penalty Charge Notices issued and other
enforcement actions
Number of informal representations received
Number of Penalty Charge Notices cancelled by
the council prior to adjudication
Number of appeals against the council lodged with
the adjudicators and the number upheld and refused; and
Details of costs awarded by the adjudicators,
against and in favour of the council (Paragraph 48)
Local authorities must produce annual accounts. They
must also make returns to DCLG about their parking income and
expenditure and the Home Office about the number of PCNs, wheelclamps,
vehicles removals and appeals in their area. These returns are
published on the relevant Department's websites, so it is relatively
easy for members of the public to find out what is happening in
their area. The draft statutory guidance recommends that local
authorities produce an annual report of their enforcement activities,
which should be made available in appropriate media. The guidance
says that as a minimum it should cover financial, statistical
and other data (including any parking or CPE targets), which are
set out in the draft guidance.
Parking as an income generator for local authorities
RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF ANY SURPLUS REVENUES
11. There is some danger that councils will be
tempted to use civil parking enforcement to raise additional revenue.
They must resist this, and in fact we found no hard evidence that
there was a widespread problem. We accept that budgetary forecasting
is a necessary part of prudent financial planning. Forecasts must
not however be interpreted in any way as revenue targets. (Paragraph
60)
12. If local councils set revenue targets these
will override the traffic management objectives which must govern
the use of the surpluses generated. In order to relieve undue
pressure on parking managers, the Department must make it absolutely
clear in the statutory guidance that operations must support transport
priorities and not financial targets. The Department and the Audit
Commission must uphold this principle and challenge any authorities
that appear to be doing otherwise in the operation of their civil
parking enforcement. (Paragraph 61)
The Government agrees and the draft guidance does
this. Local authorities should use parking policy, controls, pricing
and enforcement primarily to keep traffic flowing and improve
road safety. This may generate significant revenue in some areas
where demand for parking is high and that is no failing of the
local authority. Such revenue should not be a target but be properly
estimated and allowed for in local authority accounting.
PARKING CHARGES
13. Councils raise significant revenues from parking
charges, much more than from penalty charges. We do not consider
that absolute national consistency in parking charges would allow
each local area to achieve its transport management objectives.
Local parking charges need to be set within the overall context
of a local transport strategy with a strong underlying traffic
management basis. There should be uniformity of approach in arriving
at such charges, but local flexibility in setting them according
to prevailing local conditions. Charges must be reviewed at regular
intervals to ensure that the levels which have been set are achieving
the intended pattern of use of the parking spaces available, whether
this is short stay, resident use, commuter traffic, or loading.
(Paragraph 64)
The Government agrees that this is a matter for local
authorities.
Enforcement contracts and incentives
14. Incentive schemes in parking enforcement contracts
are utterly misguided. Why these should have ever have been considered
to be compatible with sensible enforcement of parking measures
as a tool of street management is a mystery. That some local authorities
should have started them, in the face of common sense and sound
administration, is deeply disappointing. (Paragraph 69)
15. We cannot stress too strongly that enforcement
contracts with incentive regimes based on the number of tickets
issued or other enforcement actions should not be permitted. Every
local authority operating a decriminalised parking scheme should
be required to affirm that it does not operate on this basis.
Such incentives will squeeze out sensible traffic management objectives
and serve to undermine legitimacy and public confidence in civil
enforcement. We commend the use of the 'model contract' developed
by the British Parking Association for private parking contracts.
(Paragraph 70)
The Government largely agrees with this. The draft
guidance makes a similar point and commends the use of contracts
such as the one produced by the British Parking Association.
Scrutiny of local authority parking operations
16. The Audit Commission must be able to scrutinise
local authority parking departments. In order to provide an incentive
to councils to raise the standard of their parking enforcement
operations, civil parking enforcement should be given more prominence
in the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA). The inspection
regime should examine not only the accounts, efficiency of the
operation and any allegations of maladministration, but also the
professionalism of the service. Under such a system, poor parking
service performance should be reflected in the CPA scoring assessment.
This system would reward those councils that demonstrate effectiveness
and quality in the parking services they deliver for the public.
(Paragraph 73)
The Audit Commission already has the ability under
its existing audit and inspection powers to scrutinise a local
highway authority's parking management performance. It has published
a number of inspection reports of individual council's parking
services often in a wider service context of transport or general
street management functions. Where these reports are less than
three years old, they will be taken account of in the CPA results
for 2006 in relation to single tier and county councils.
The inspection resources available are allocated
on the basis of risk (in line with the Commission's approach to
Strategic Regulation) and in any one year there will only be a
small number of councils subject to an inspection which covers
parking management performance.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
17. In the interests of raising standards initially,
and to ensure a consistently high quality of civil parking enforcement,
local authorities should be required to report against a tightly
focused set of performance indicators. It is a significant flaw
in the existing reporting requirements that the optional performance
indicators for local authority parking activity deal only with
the parking infrastructure in place, and therefore fail to provide
insights into the standard of enforcement service. A 'customer
service attitude towards residents, businesses and visitors to
the area in all aspects of the parking operation needs to be encouraged.
The standards achieved must be monitored and published. (Paragraph
77)
18. Compliance with parking regulations is the
most important measure of performance within a parking enforcement
regime. This can be measured by roadside surveys, and some local
authorities undertake such evaluations now. All councils engaged
in decriminalised parking enforcement should be required to do
so. The key performance indicators should illustrate how efficiently
and effectively local authorities are conducting civil parking
enforcement, and the level of focus on 'customer service'. Examples
might include: accuracy of Penalty Charge Notices issued, clear
information on the procedures for making representations, speed
of responding to representations, and the number of appeals made
to the Adjudicator which are uncontested by the council. Where
enforcement is contracted out to the private sector, the same
suite of indicators should be embedded within the contract. (Paragraph
78)
The Government's longer term vision for local government
involves councils reporting less to central government and more
to their local communities. We will consider the potential for
additional standard performance indicators for parking services,
in the context of the Government's consideration of the overall
performance framework for local government in the context of the
forthcoming White Paper. The overall direction of travel is likely
to be towards fewer indicators
A PARKING REGULATOR
19. The existing institutional framework for parking
enforcement should, if correctly managed and extended, provide
adequate scrutiny of local authority parking management without
the establishment of a 'parking regulator'. But the local authorities,
the Government, the parking adjudication services, and the private
sector need to cooperate now to drive up the standards of performance.
If they cannot manage to demonstrate real progress within a reasonable
time scale then alternatives will need to be found. In those circumstances,
the advantages of a 'parking regulator' might need to be considered
further. (Paragraph 81)
Councillors are accountable to the electorate for
the actions of their local authority and the Government agrees
that there is little attraction in the idea of a new regulator
at present.
Representations
Timeframes
WAITING FOR THE 'NOTICE TO OWNER'
20. There is an important and urgent job to be
done by the Department for Transport and the local authorities
in raising awareness amongst motorists of the steps involved in
making representations against Penalty Charge Notices. (Paragraph
85)
The draft regulations under the TMA 2004 set out
the matters that must be included on a PCN. These include that
representations against the penalty charge may be made by the
registered keeper, who will receive the notice to owner. The draft
regulations also provide that, where a PCN is served by post,
it must state that representations may be made, the grounds on
which this may be done and that, if such representations are rejected,
an appeal may be made to the adjudicator. The guidance recommends
that a PCN also gives details of how and where to make an informal
challenge. Many local authorities produce very good leaflets that
set out the procedures for informal challenges, formal representations
and appeals against PCNs and the Department is working with stakeholders
to produce a communications toolkit for authorities to use.
21. Although local authorities are not obliged
to consider representations before the 'Notice to Owner' has been
issued, it is good practice for local authority officials to deal
with any representations and challenges as soon as they are received.
The Department needs to emphasize this in its statutory guidance.
(Paragraph 87)
The Government agrees and commends this in the guidance.
LOCAL AUTHORITIES' RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS
22. At present there is no requirement on local
authorities to deal with challenges to Penalty Charge Notices
within a set time framework. This is extremely poor administrative
practice. It is also plainly unfair as the motorist appealing
must adhere to a strict deadline of 28 days when making a challenge.
(Paragraph 89)
23. We suggest that the statutory guidance from
the Department should require local authorities to resolve most
representations within an established time limit. We suggest that
the starting point for identifying a sensible target time for
all representations should be 28 days. Members of the public have
28 days in which to lodge their representations once they have
received the 'Notice to Owner'. It seems reasonable that the local
authority should work to the same standards. It should be possible
for councils to resolve the vast majority of representations within
that period. Where a dispute is exceptionally complex then a correspondingly
exceptional extension of time might be allowed. The vital point
is to establish administrative clarity, so that the complainant
and the local authority have precise deadlines for exchanging
correspondence, and expectations about what the procedures should
deliver are managed properly. (Paragraph 90)
The difficulty with time limits is that an authority
may not give some representations proper consideration and may
reject them in order to achieve the target. This would not achieve
the aim we all share that motorists should have the proper opportunity
to make their case if a PCN is not merited, for whatever reason.
The consultation document seeks views on setting targets for dealing
with informal and formal challenges and proposes that authorities
must respond to representations about vehicle clamping or removal
within 56 days of the PCN issue.
The draft guidance states that local authorities
should consider representations made outside the 28 days where
there has been a justifiable reason for the delay.
Grounds for considering representations
24. We heard evidence from local authority representatives
of the importance of those who have challenged a Penalty Charge
Notice receiving high quality responses to their representations.
Local authorities cannot contract out their statutory responsibility
to consider representations. Councils must therefore make a proper
investment in staff training and management processes to ensure
that this statutory responsibility is discharged satisfactorily.
In order to deal thoroughly with representations, councils will
need to employ appropriate numbers of well-trained administrative
staff and legal specialists to advise swiftly and authoritatively
on parking enforcement matters. (Paragraph 93)
The Government agrees and the draft guidance makes
this point.
EXERCISING DISCRETION
25. It is a serious failing that some local authorities
are not properly discharging their responsibility to use discretion
in considering representations. Councils must take this responsibility
seriously in order that a just outcome is reached on each occasion
that a Penalty Charge Notice is challenged. (Paragraph 95)
The Government agrees and the draft guidance makes
this point.
DESIGN OF NOTICES
26. Despite the clear recommendation of the Local
Government Ombudsmen in 2004, a lack of clear information to motorists
on the representations stage of the parking process continues
to be a problem. This is reprehensible on the part of the local
authorities concerned, and steps need to be taken straightaway
by them to ensure that the documents they issue are drafted fairly,
clearly and accurately. Local authorities must attend to the recommendations
of the Local Government Ombudsmen. (Paragraph 98)
There is considerable variation in the performance
of local authorities. Many provide excellent information to the
public about the process. The Government agrees that the Local
Ombudsman's 2004 report contains much helpful advice and good
practice guidance that local authorities who are performing less
well should heed. The Government hopes that the statutory guidance
and the operational guidance will help all local authorities achieve
a good standard of parking activities, and that Councils will
also learn from other authorities.
27. Omitting information on 'Notice to Owner'
forms about appeals, while including information on the required
payments, leaves local authorities open to charges of sharp practice.
Motorists are entitled to be told of their right to challenge
a Penalty Charge Notice and of their subsequent right of appeal
to the independent adjudicators. This is not always the case at
present, and it must change. (Paragraph 99)
It is currently a legal requirement that a notice
to owner must state, among other things, "that the person
on whom the notice is served ("the recipient") may be
entitled to make representations". Circular 1/95 adds that
the NtO must include a statement of the recipient's right to appeal
to a parking adjudicator if the authority rejects his or her representations.
Government hears allegations that local authorities are not complying
with legal requirements but none of these have, to date, been
substantiated with written proof. If the Committee has evidence
of such failures, Government would be grateful to receive them
so it can follow them up with the relevant Chief Executive.
28. The Department should issue revised statutory
guidance to local authorities setting out the content to be included
in the Penalty Charge Notice and 'Notice to Owner'. This must,
as a minimum, convey to the public how the process operates, the
right to challenge the penalty and how to do so, and the grounds
on which mitigation will be considered. There is currently lack
of clarity, consistency, and completeness in the information councils
provide. (Paragraph 100)
The draft regulations set out the matters that must
be included on a PCN and on an NtO. The draft guidance recommends
that a PCN should also give the vehicle make and colour, the detailed
location of the vehicle, the description and code of the parking
contravention, observation start and finish times, the PCN number,
the CEO's identification number, the vehicle's tax disc number,
and details of how and where to make an informal challenge.
THE 'PAY OR CHALLENGE' APPROACH
29. The Department's statutory guidance should
require local authorities to make it clear on the Penalty Charge
Notice and on the 'Notice to Owner' that payment of the charge
will preclude the driver from challenging the penalty at a later
stage. Unless this aspect of the system is made clear, motorists
may be misled as to the course of action they wish to follow.
Because there is the attractive incentive of a discount for early
payment, it is of particular importance that the 'pay or challenge'
principle is clearly communicated to motorists at the first opportunity.
(Paragraph 102)
This proposal has a lot of merit but there are situations
- such as wheelclamping - where it would not apply and we will
need to consider whether such a general principle would confuse
the public.
Fourteen day discount
30. In order to ensure that no motorist is deterred
from challenging a Penalty Charge Notice which they believe to
be incorrect because they do not want to risk losing the 50 per
cent discount, local authorities should be statutorily required
to re-offer the 14 day, 50 per cent discount from the time of
the 'Notice to Owner' and for a further 14 days after representations
have been rejected. We expect the Department to ensure that the
new statutory guidance embodies this point. (Paragraph 106)
The objective of the discount is to encourage people
who accept that they have parked illegally to pay up quickly -
a principle that is used in many commercial areas. The Government
does not wish to foster a culture in which motorists automatically
challenge a PCN, irrespective of the merits of the case, and is
currently of the view that it is for the local authority to decide
whether or not to re-offer the discount. The Consultation Document
seeks views on whether authorities should re-offer the discount
after rejection of an informal representation.
Professional service, costs, compensation
31. If and when mistakes are made by enforcement
staff, the errors must be corrected swiftly and professionally.
It is most important that councils have good calibre and appropriately
trained staff in the parking departments to deal competently with
representations against Penalty Charge Notices, and to deal efficiently
and effectively with any mistakes that arise. The Department for
Transport should monitor the local authorities' ability to appoint,
train, and retain such essential staff. (Paragraph 108)
The Government agrees with the first two sentences.
The Government does not, however, have the resources to judge
the ability of a local authority to appoint, train and retain
these essential staff in this, or other, areas of local authority
activity.
32. We encourage parking adjudicators to be fully
alert to their powers to award costs. Where motorists have been
unduly inconvenienced by poor council performance some financial
award can help to alleviate the sense of injustice. The definition
of 'wholly unreasonably' as a criterion for the award of costs
should be interpreted by adjudicators with this in mind, particularly
in cases where frustration and inconvenience is caused unnecessarily
to innocent parties. (Paragraph 110)
33. Further, the Department for Transport should
give consideration to extending the powers of the adjudicators
to award costs, particularly where the administration of representations
against Penalty Charge Notices has been deficient, and where Traffic
Regulation Orders have not been updated. By doing so, the reach
of the adjudicators will be extended, the accountability of councils
sharpened, and councils also stimulated to raise their overall
performance. (Paragraph 111)
An adjudicator has the power to award costs against
either party if s/he considers that they have acted frivolously,
vexatiously or unreasonably during the appeal process. The adjudicator
may award costs against the authority if s/he considers that the
decision appealed against was wholly unreasonable. The Government
understands that these powers to award costs are seldom used and
has no plans to extend them.
Appeals to the parking adjudicators
ARE DRIVERS DETERRED FROM CHALLENGING PENALTY CHARGE
NOTICES?
34. The adjudication service provides an important
function in a suitably independent, professional and customer-oriented
manner. But it may not be used as often as it should. Only 0.37
per cent of Penalty Charge Notices issued end up with the parking
adjudicators for decision, a very small proportion indeed. The
right to independent adjudication is central to the proper functioning
of decriminalised parking enforcement. Information on this right
needs to reach all motorists, and to be widely understood by the
public at large. We suspect that the very small number of appeals
is partly at least related to the relative obscurity of the service.
(Paragraph 127)
The proportion of PCNs appealed in the whole of England
and Wales was 0.84% in 2004. The figure of 0.37% appears to be
the figure outside London, where less than 30% of PCNs are issued.
The Government will be producing a communications toolkit for
local authorities, to seek to ensure that the public are aware
of all aspects of the parking enforcement process.
35. Technical barriers to seeking justice through
independent adjudication must be removed. The 14-day 50 per cent
discount should be automatically re-offered to motorists whose
appeals to the adjudicators are rejected, except in cases of deliberate
abuse of the system. (Paragraph 128)
See response to recommendation 30 above.
Powers of the adjudicators
36. It appears disproportionate to have to take
a dispute over a parking 'ticket' to Judicial Review at the High
Court in order to enforce the adjudicator's advice on proper consideration
of discretion. Where councils have failed to exercise discretion,
the adjudicators should have the powers to instruct local authorities
to reconsider. We were pleased to learn that the Department for
Transport is considering including these powers in the regulations
under section 80(3) of the Traffic Management Act 2004. (Paragraph
132)
As the Committee has noted, section 80(3) of the
Traffic Management Act 2004 enables the Lord Chancellor to make
regulations to give the adjudicators this power, and this is proposed
in the draft regulations and statutory guidance.
INVESTIGATING MALADMINISTRATION
37. We understand the potential for confusion
between the roles of the parking adjudication services and the
Local Government Ombudsman over parking appeals. But these roles
are quite separate. Investigating systematic maladministration
is distinct from deciding whether a correct decision has been
reached in individual cases of disputed Penalty Charge Notices.
The responsibility for investigating maladministration by local
government parking teams should continue to be a matter for the
Local Government Ombudsman and not for the parking adjudicators.
(Paragraph 136)
The Government agrees.
38. We note the concern expressed by the Chief
Adjudicator for England and Wales that some cases appear to be
falling between these two tribunals. We recommend therefore that
the Government considers this issue to ensure that where there
appear to be implications for the parking adjudication services
in the work of the Local Government Ombudsman, and vice versa,
there are agreed procedures to ensure that confusion is avoided.
We expect the two tribunals to work well together so that the
public is not inconvenienced. (Paragraph 137)
The Government has not received any correspondence
from members of the public or their MPs who have been unable to
get their case considered by either the Local Government Ombudsman
or the Parking Adjudicator.
THE IMPORTANCE OF DEVELOPING THE ADJUDICATION SERVICE
39. The Government needs to unlock the full potential
of the parking adjudication service. The independence of the service
needs to be emphasized in its funding arrangements. At present
participating local authorities fund the service. This projects
an unfortunate appearance that the service may be under the control
of the councils. It certainly does not convey the impression of
independence that is the basis for raising its status and profile.
The Government should review the funding of the service and propose
arrangements that emphasize its separate judicial status and its
independence from the councils. (Paragraph 139)
The Government is currently reviewing which independent
tribunals, including NPAS, should transfer to the Tribunals Service.
40. We expect councils to make much greater efforts
to support the adjudication process by improving their cooperation
and their parking administration throughout the adjudication process.
By doing so they will contribute to raising the overall professionalism
of the parking system and improving the service to the public.
We have encouraged adjudicators to use their powers to award costs
against councils whose performance is unacceptable. We expect
the Government to review these powers, take a view on whether
they are an effective means of ensuring council compliance, and
consider what more could be done to provide the adjudicators with
powers to ensure good council cooperation. (Paragraph 140)
Government took the opportunity to do this in the
Traffic Management Act 2004 and sees no need for further review.
41. Local authorities have a responsibility to
make sure that all motorists who receive a 'Notice to Owner' about
a parking contravention are made aware of their eventual right
to appeal to the parking adjudicator if their representations
to the council are rejected. The initial Penalty Charge Notice
and the 'Notice to Owner' should make this clear. In the correspondence
rejecting a challenge, local authorities should explain the reasons
for the rejection, in order that the motorist can make an informed
decision about whether to proceed to the adjudicator. Information
on the process and the role of the parking adjudication services
in particular, should be presented invariably to the public on
council websites. (Paragraph 141)
The regulations currently state that a Notice to
Owner must include a statement about the recipient's right to
appeal to a parking adjudicator if the authority rejects his/her
representation. The new draft regulations repeat this duty. The
Government does not consider that it would be appropriate to put
this information in a PCN which is left on the vehicle or given
to the person who appears to be in charge of the vehicle because
an appeal cannot be made until a formal representation has been
made to and rejected by the issuing authority and the vehicle
owner may get confused and try to make an appeal before s/he has
made a representation.
42. We urge the parking adjudicators themselves
to consider what, as a body, they can do to raise the professional
profile of their service. They should ensure that the Government
is fully aware of their views. The service performed by the adjudicators
is a most important one. Motorists are frequently frustrated by
what appear, and frequently are, unresponsive local authority
processes. The knowledge that there is a 'court of appeal' where
they will receive a fair and speedy hearing is a significant factor
in balancing the administration of justice, improving the professionalism
of the parking system, and reducing individual stress. (Paragraph
142)
Proportionality
43. The Government needs to give consideration
to making penalties proportionate to the seriousness of the contravention.
This would result in a more finely calibrated, but still practical,
scale of penalties than exist at present. Illegal parking acts
which clearly create danger for other road users, those which
result in disruption to traffic flow, and those which contribute
to congestion, should attract penalties at the severe end of the
scale. This is likely to have a welcome deterrent effect. For
parking contraventions which do not have these consequences a
relatively lesser penalty may be more reasonable. (Paragraph 145)
44. It would not be feasible to vary the penalty
applied according to the duration of each parking contravention.
It should however be perfectly possible to base penalties on the
straightforward distinction between contraventions of 'prohibited
parking', for example, resting on double yellow lines, and 'permitted
parking', for example, overstaying in car parking spaces. This
would help dispel the crudities of the present system, allow penalties
to be better aligned with people's sense of natural justice, and
at the same time provide a stronger deterrent against more serious
contraventions. It should also contribute to fostering a greater
public acceptance of civil parking enforcement. (Paragraph 147)
The Government has sought views on this issue in
the consultation.
'Wheel clamping' and vehicle removal
THE LOCAL AUTHORITY VIEW OF CLAMPING
45. Wheel clamping is a powerful and visible deterrent
to illegal parking and can influence the behaviour of those who
would disregard a Penalty Charge Notice. It is a severe penalty
however. Care must therefore be taken to ensure that wheel clamping
is applied proportionately. The Government should consider restricting
the use of wheel clamping to persistent offenders and unregistered
vehicles. (Paragraph 153)
The Government's consultation makes clear that it
does not see a role for wheelclamping in parking enforcement unless
the driver has a history of ignoring PCNs. We have consulted on
the proposal that it should not be possible to clamp a vehicle
until 60 minutes have elapsed after the issue of a PCN, other
than where the vehicle belongs to a persistent evader. Section
79 (1)(b) of the Traffic Management Act 2004 gives the Secretary
of State and the NAW power to make regulations that a vehicle
may only be released from an immobilisation device (usually a
wheelclamp) until, inter alia, such unpaid earlier penalty charges
relating to the vehicle have been paid. The draft regulations
provide that the owner of a vehicle that has been issued with
3 or more PCNs that have been neither paid nor challenged shall
be considered a "persistent evader" and that it will
be possible to recoup the debts due to all English local authorities
that have issued an unpaid and unchallenged PCN to the vehicle.
We believe that this will go a long way towards reducing the bad
example set to law-abiding motorists by persistent evaders of
parking regulations.
VEHICLE REMOVAL
46. The removal of a vehicle by a local authority
on the grounds that it is parked illegally is a very serious matter.
The Chief Adjudicator for England and Wales has concerns that
vehicle removal may be incompatible with human rights legislation.
The Government needs to examine this issue carefully and take
a view about whether or not it is within the law. The resulting
Departmental guidance will need to be legally robust and clear
if it is to be of use. (Paragraph 156)
It is ultimately a matter for the courts to determine
whether or not a statutory provision is compatible with convention
rights. But the view of the Department is that the powers which
provide for the removal of vehicles in specified circumstances
are proportionate in respect of balancing convention
rights with the need to protect the safety of other road
users and the general public interest.
Penalties for persistent offenders
47. The Government needs to consider penalties
for those who offend persistently against the parking and road
use rules, and for those who treat the Penalty Charge Notice system
with contempt. The Department needs to consider extending the
powers available to local authorities in taking action against
this minority of drivers that persistently and wilfully contravene
parking regulations, evade penalties, and flout the law. (Paragraph
159)
See response to recommendation 45 above.
Foreign-registered vehicles
48. Many foreign-registered vehicles flaunt UK
parking regulations with impunity. This is because co-operation
between national enforcement agencies is ineffective. One relevant
factor is that access to relevant data is often not readily available
to the local authorities here. This is not good enough. The Department
for Transport needs to address this problem with some sense of
urgency. The Government needs to ensure that the UK's decriminalised
parking enforcement regimes are included in international co-operation
agreements. It must support local authorities vigorously in pursuing
penalties for parking contraventions by foreign-registered vehicles.
In its response to this report the Department should explain what
action it will take (including legislative action if required)
to ensure that the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is able
to assist fully local authorities in pursuing civil enforcement
action against owners of foreign-registered vehicles, particularly
for those vehicles registered in other European countries. (Paragraph
164)
It is intended that the provisions in the draft regulations
to implement the TMA 2004 will enable LAs to recoup all unpaid
and unchallenged PCNs when a persistent evader is clamped or removed.
These would go a considerable way to recover these debts and hopefully,
change the behaviour of the drivers.
The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency already provides
data to local authorities for the enforcement of car parking fines
and congestion charge. This information is taken from the vehicle
register. The Agency is unable to provide data for overseas vehicles
as it does not currently have access to the registers of other
authorities. We are considering how DVLA might be permitted to
share this information.
Clamping on private land
49. Having a separate system of parking enforcement
for private land (including car parks on private land) increases
the possibility of confusion on the part of the motorist. It also
blurs the lines of accountability. Clamping on private land should
be governed by the same framework of restrictions and codes of
practice as public on-street clamping. The Government should ensure
an equable legal framework including public roads and private
land used by the public for parking which will stamp out these
abuses. (Paragraph 166)
The Private Security Industry Act 2001 regulates
the vehicle immobilising industry on private land to protect the
public from abuses within this sector not covered by the Department
for Transport's parking legislation. The 2001 Act does not cover
public land to avoid any confusion of legal accountability between
private vehicle immobilisers and operators employed by local authorities.
The Act requires individual vehicle immobilisers to be licensed
by the Security Industry Authority (SIA) and to wear their licence
when carrying out their professional activities of attaching or
removing a clamp, blocking in, towing away or charging a release
fee. These activities are regulated under criminal law. It is
the firm employing them that is accountable for issues about signage
or fees rather than the licensed individuals. Members of the public
who may have concerns about a wheel-clamping firm can report them
to Trading Standards and may have a case in civil law.
Bailiffs
50. Local authorities need an effective means
for collecting unpaid penalty charges from drivers. Bailiffs may
be appropriate in a small number of cases. The use of bailiffs
must be carefully regulated by the local authority however. Their
use in collecting unpaid fines can easily undermine further public
confidence in decriminalised parking enforcement. Local authorities
must take the greatest care to ensure they use only reputable
bailiffs. Bailiff's charges and operational practices must be
transparent and subject to prior approval and close monitoring
as part of any contractual agreement. These charges must be as
widely publicised as possible and freely available to the public.
(Paragraph 171)
Bailiff action represents an efficient and cost effective
method for collecting unpaid penalty charges, and will often be
the most appropriate method of enforcement available. Certainly
the local authority concerned should ensure that they contract
with reputable bailiff companies to enforce these debts on their
behalf. To help local authorities ensure that the bailiffs they
contract with are reputable, and also to ensure that fees and
operating practises are legal and transparent, DCA is publishing
a draft Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill. This will contain,
amongst other things, proposals for an enhanced and extended certification
process, aimed at improving regulation of bailiffs in the private
sector. It will also contain a new unified single piece of bailiff
law, including a simplified fee structure, which will ensure that
actions taken are legal and proportionate, and that fees charged
are clearly laid out.
Staff
51. The
current reputation of civil parking enforcement staff is generally
low. The parking service must demonstrate substantial and sustained
improvement. To achieve this, it will be essential to raise the
professionalism of those who are responsible for applying the
rules - the attendants and 'back room' parking department staff
- in parallel with improving the quality of the rules themselves.
If this does not happen then the effort to improve parking enforcement
will fail. (Paragraph 173)
The draft statutory guidance emphasises the importance
of training for staff at all levels in this growing industry and
the recent launch of the British Parking Association's Sector
Skills Strategy will, the Government hopes, go a long way to achieving
a substantial and sustained improvement over the years in professionalism,
self-esteem and public image of the hard-working people in the
parking industry.
ASSAULTS ON STAFF
52. The function of parking attendants means that
they are the public face of the parking service. Because the parking
enforcement service is widely unpopular, parking attendants are
frequently the focus of confrontation and the targets of abuse.
Many are assaulted. This is completely unacceptable. Parking attendants
carry out the rules of the regime. Inadequacies in the regime
should be addressed vigorously and within the law to those directly
responsible, the local authorities and the Department for Transport.
(Paragraph 176)
All assaults are wrong, whether on a parking attendant
or indeed any member of the public. But the Government are not
currently persuaded that there is a need to introduce specific
offences for attacks on workers in specific sectors. There are
a large number of "at risk groups" and specific offences
for each would make for complicated law.
The criminal law already contains a wide range of
powers to deal with violent behaviour. There is a hierarchy of
offences against the person where injury results, this goes from
grievous bodily harm (GBH) through actual bodily harm (ABH) to
common law offences of assault and battery, depending on the injuries
inflicted. Penalties range from 6 months for common assault to
life imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent.
It is already open to courts to take a serious view of an attack
on a public servant. Both the magistrates' court sentencing guidelines
and the Sentencing Guidelines Council guidelines make it clear
that if an attack is committed against those providing a service
to the public, or if the victim is particularly vulnerable, those
are aggravating factors that a court must take into account when
sentencing.
Training and recruitment
53. All councils and contractors must pursue recruitment
and training practices that ensure a professional approach to
parking enforcement work. Rigorous recruitment processes should
be applied to ensure that all those appointed can be trusted to
work with integrity. Parking attendants need to be appropriately
trained to ensure high levels of understanding of the parking
regulations in force, and what constitutes best practice in their
enforcement. In addition to technical knowledge, the training
needs to include inter-personal skills, and techniques of minimising
conflict in carrying out their duty. As front line staff, it is
important that parking attendants have good communication skills
and an ability to relate well to members of the public. (Paragraph
180)
See reply to paragraph 51 above.
REMUNERATION
54. Parking attendants should be paid salaries
that match equivalently responsible roles within other fields
of local government. It is in local authorities' interests, and
the interests of motorists, pedestrians and all those who use
the streets, to employ, and require their contractors to employ,
high calibre, professional, and personable staff, capable of enforcing
traffic regulations calmly and without error. (Paragraph 184)
55. We warmly support the introduction of the
British Parking Association's national structured programme of
training for parking attendants; and national qualifications in
parking enforcement. This is a key to raising the quality of parking
enforcement. Attainment of appropriate standards by parking attendants
and administrative staff, through a rigorous and uniform training
and testing process throughout the country, should be a fundamental
requirement to work in this area. The Department's statutory guidance
should mandate such training for staff. (Paragraph 186)
The draft statutory guidance is a high level document
that emphasises the importance of training. It does not set out
the details of what is available and what should be undertaken.
This is properly a matter for local authorities and the operational
guidance will suggest what might be appropriate.
RETENTION OF STAFF
56. A key objective in making the parking regime
better will be to develop the present highly unstable parking
attendant workforce into a stable and experienced body with a
well grounded and deepening sense of its own potential to exert
a positive influence on the streets. There is some way to go before
that is achieved. (Paragraph 189)
57. It will be essential to reduce the high rate
of 'churn' in the profession. Such a reduction will itself be
an index of success in applying the measures necessary to raise
the status and professionalism of the attendants' role. If the
standard of enforcement activity is to be raised, local authorities
and contractors must work hard to achieve stability. (Paragraph
190)
The Government agrees with the overall spirit of
these recommendations but has seen no evidence that the workforce
is unstable. It is inevitable that in a new industry that is growing
as rapidly as parking, there will be a number of employees who
have come in from other areas and who need to familiarise themselves
with a broad range of transport and of legal issues. This will
take time but the foundations are in place for it to be achieved.
58. The move to include street management and
neighbourhood 'ambassadorial' roles within parking attendants'
duties seem a generally positive development. Care will be needed
however to ensure that these broader responsibilities do not deflect
local authorities and the Department from the central objective
of improving parking enforcement activity. (Paragraph 191)
The Government agrees that prime role of a civil
enforcement officer is and should remain the operation of the
authority's parking enforcement. This is set out clearly in Circular
1/95 and is repeated in the draft statutory guidance. It is our
intention that the draft operational guidance will also set this
out.
'ON-STREET DISCRETION'
59. We do not dismiss the counsel of those who
warn that giving parking attendants discretion when issuing Penalty
Charge Notices could lead to problems of assaults and corruption.
This has not happened however in the case of Manchester City Council
which allows its attendants such discretion. There, the introduction
of discretion has been accompanied by a substantial fall in the
number of Penalty Charge Notices issued and a drastic fall in
the number of appeals. (Paragraph 195)
60. It is too early to say whether the Manchester
experiment should set a pattern for parking enforcement throughout
the country. But there is clearly a case on empirical grounds
for the Department for Transport and local authorities to look
seriously at allowing parking attendants, in addition to back-office
staff, to exercise the discretion that is a responsibility of
each council in law. Any such move must be accompanied by systemic
improvements in recruitment, training and management to inspire
confidence in the public that all staff understand the need to
exercise such a duty with diligence and expertise. Excellent monitoring
will be necessary to ensure that incidences of abuse, intimidation,
and corruption do not rise. (Paragraph 196)
The draft statutory guidance makes clear that the
Government believes that, generally, the place for discretion
to be exercised is the back-office. Where there is scope for CEOs
to exercise discretion they should have clear guidance - which
is published - about the circumstances in which they may use their
discretion. For instance, it may be more appropriate for a CEO
to suggest to a returning motorist that s/he moves the vehicle
out of contravention than to issue a PCN. The use of general discretion
could make CEOs vulnerable to physical threats and accusations
of corruption. It could also have the potential to undermine rather
than support the Government's objective of making the parking
system fairer.
Traffic Regulation Orders
CHECKING TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS BEFORE TAKING
ON CIVIL ENFORCEMENT
61. The state of Traffic Regulation Orders varies
widely throughout the country. The Chief Parking Adjudicator for
England and Wales is concerned, rightly, that some local authorities
have failed to consolidate their Traffic Regulation Orders. This
matters because the officials of the council need to have a clear
legal basis for their traffic management work, and the public
too needs to be able to see and understand the rules in a simple
and straightforward text. The present position is most unsatisfactory,
and those local authorities who are guilty of this maladministration
need to remedy the position without delay. We expect to see prompt
improvements reflected in future reports of the Chief Parking
Adjudicator. (Paragraph 201)
62. The Department for Transport appears not to
regulate the state of Traffic Regulation Orders and their application
systematically. We accept that the Department cannot be responsible
for all Orders and signs throughout the country on a daily basis.
But in a case where serious deficiencies are drawn to its attention
we do expect the Department to be alert and to take vigorous action
to ensure that corrections are made. The Department appears to
have effectively ignored the concerns of the Chief Parking Adjudicator
about Traffic Regulation Orders. (Paragraph 202)
The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Local
Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations
1996 (SI 1996 no 2489) set out the framework within which local
authorities make Traffic Regulation Orders. The procedure is wholly
a matter for local authorities, except where a trunk road is involved.
The Secretary of State also has a reserve power to intervene if
he considers that the local authority is failing to exercise properly
its function in accordance with the duty set out in section 122
of the RTRA 1984 to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe
movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians)
and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities
on and off the highway. The Secretary of State has not, to date,
had any serious deficiencies brought to his attention but should
this happen, he would consider the appropriate course of action
in accordance with these powers.
63. The Department must get much more actively
involved in verifying that local authorities have compliant Traffic
Regulation Orders before transferring enforcement powers to them
from the police. The Department has a duty to be satisfied that
the Traffic Regulation Orders and signage are adequate before
approving schemes for implementation. It needs to discharge this
duty properly. The foundation for a professional civil parking
enforcement system, and its development into a force which commands
the respect of the majority of road users, is attention to detail
in sound administration. This is not 'headline grabbing' work,
but it is essential. The Department has a crucial role here which
it needs to discharge properly. (Paragraph 203)
The Department has no specific statutory duty in
this area. However local authorities are now asked to confirm
in writing before the Order designating a permitted or special
parking area that all their current TROs are legally compliant
and that their signs and road markings are laid out in accordance
with their TRO(s) and Traffic Signs Regulations General Directions
(TSRGD) or have specific approval from DfT. The Department does
not have the resources or skills to check that this undertaking
is correct.
ACCURATE AND LEGAL TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS
64. Local authorities need to attend much more
carefully to the parking adjudicators' rulings. Enforcement should
be suspended at any site where a material flaw in the Traffic
Regulation Order is identified, until such time as the problem
is remedied. Where a council continues to enforce illegal Traffic
Regulation Orders, the relevant parking adjudicator should give
serious consideration to awarding costs against the council. In
circumstances where a council has continually enforced an illegal
Order, and has ignored the representations of the adjudicator,
the local authority should be investigated for maladministration.
(Paragraph 206)
This is a matter for the independent Parking Adjudicators
and the Local Government Ombudsmen. It is likely that should there
be a complaint against the local authority and the Ombudsman became
involved, s/he would seek the views of the Adjudicator as part
of the process. Therefore, any advice given by the Adjudicators
to the Local Government Ombudsman would be considered as part
of their investigations.
PUBLICISING TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS
65. Details of Traffic Regulation Orders in force,
and their purposes, must be routinely available on all local authority
websites and in written form. The Department for Transport needs
to do more to encourage and support local authorities in making
this information more widely available. The Department must set
out how its forthcoming statutory guidance will ensure that Traffic
Regulation Orders receive sufficient publicity. (Paragraph 209)
The draft statutory guidance makes this point.
REVIEWING TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS
66. Traffic Regulation Orders need to be properly
maintained. We had evidence that this was not so. There are no
consistent arrangements to review the appropriateness and effectiveness
of Traffic Regulation Orders. This is not acceptable. Local authorities
which have Orders that are deficient now need to take remedial
action without delay. Thereafter, authorities should check the
Orders annually and certify in the annual parking report that
they are fit for purpose. Where significant changes in the locality
are taking place, or where performance needs to be raised, action
to amend the Orders should not be overlooked. Reviews should also
cover the parking infrastructure of signs and lines which notify
the public about the requirements of each Order. (Paragraph 212)
The draft statutory guidance makes this point.
SIGNS AND LINES
67. Signs and lines must be legally compliant,
well-maintained and regularly checked. A revision of signage regulations
is long overdue. Two years ago the Department for Transport commissioned
the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) to report on how signage
could be improved. But no action appears to have been taken. This
is poor, and when the Government replies to this report we wish
to be told why there has been no action so far. (Paragraph 215)
68. The Department needs to produce good practice
guidance on signage taking into account the TRL work. Good quality
guidance on best practice in signage should be available to the
local authority practitioners. The majority of motorists want
to obey the rules. The signage should be made clear, and as well
sited as possible, to enable them to do so. (Paragraph 216)
The Government agrees that signs and lines must be
legally compliant, well-maintained and regularly checked, and
the draft Statutory Guidance says so (paragraph 29). The Traffic
Signs Regulations were updated in 2002 to provide more flexibility
to local authorities in signing parking controls, and the working
drawings for signs have been published on the DfT website, as
has the updated guidance in Chapter 5 of the Traffic Signs Manual
(TSM) on use of yellow lines and bay markings. We expect to consult
at the end of this year on an update of Chapter 3 of TSM, on use
of regulatory signs generally including signing for parking controls.
The TRL research identified problems arising from
increasingly complex restrictions, particularly in busy urban
centres, but did not identify robust solutions for dealing with
them.
SIGNAGE IN CONTROLLED PARKING ZONES
69. The Department for Transport and the local
authorities need to review the use of Controlled Parking Zones.
These Zones need to be signed taking full account of the requirement
of the motorist for clear and helpful signage at the point of
parking. This is not the case at present where the relevant regulations
can be out of sight. This leads to confusion and frequently unintended
breaches of the rules. Much more signage should be provided within
and throughout Controlled Parking Zones, and not just on the boundaries.
Drivers must have the best opportunity possible to understand
what restrictions are in force before, and as, they park their
vehicles. They should not need to walk half a mile to find the
regulations. In the Government's response to this report, the
Department should confirm that it will cover the treatment of
Controlled Parking Zones in its forthcoming guidance. (Paragraph
218)
Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) were introduced in
1964 to minimise sign clutter in areas of uniform parking controls.
For over 40 years CPZs have operated on the premise that yellow
line restrictions are only signed within zones where they are
different from the zonal restrictions indicated on entry signs.
This worked well in smaller CPZs but as the area covered by CPZs
has increased, especially in London, the problems identified by
the Committee have emerged.
The current Traffic Signs Regulations (TSRGD 2002)
provide two options for reminding drivers of the times of operation
of yellow line restrictions - one is to split zones up into smaller
zones, which may be named on entry signs, and the other is to
provide time plates on all stretches of single yellow line, at
the distances advised in Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual.
(Time plates are no longer required with double yellow lines unless
the restriction is seasonal, because they always indicate a prohibition
of waiting at any time.)
The TRL research did not provide a basis for providing
good practice advice on the appropriate size for CPZs. We intend
to invite views on this when we consult on the operational guidance
for Civil Parking Enforcement.
Loading and unloading
DEFINITIONS
70. There is a pressing need to clarify the rules
surrounding loading issues in the forthcoming statutory guidance.
The Minister told us that the Department for Transport had decided
not to undertake a consultation on the definition of loading in
developing the new guidance on parking. There are currently no
universally accepted definitions of 'loading' and 'unloading'
however, and such definitions are required. The Department should
therefore reverse its position and take the lead on clearing up
the confusion through consultation with the haulage industry,
police, residents, and local authorities. That definition must
elucidate precisely what activities are covered. Once arrived
at it should be widely publicised in the Department's guidance
and by local authorities, and applied consistently across the
country. Clearer guidance on a standardised 'observation period'
(used by parking attendants to confirm loading and unloading activity)
would also be helpful. (Paragraph 229)
Loading/unloading is not defined in primary legislation
but there is a good deal of case law. Loading and unloading should
be a continuous operation and it should be obvious to a CEO that
the vehicle is engaged in legitimate loading and unloading and
that the goods are either too big or too heavy to be carried for
any distance.
There is guidance on loading and unloading in the
Highway Code and Know Your Traffic Signs.
Provision of loading capacity
71. Traffic management is difficult where space
is constrained and deliveries must be made. The demands of vehicles
arriving to load and unload, the pressing need to keep the traffic
flowing freely, guarding the quality of life for local residents,
and the overriding objective of maintaining a safe environment
for all road users, can seem daunting. Planning decisions should
reflect a redoubled effort to ensure that the decisions on parking
are able to be as realistic as possible. Adequate time must be
given for vehicles to load and unload where this is essential.
At the same time, those who abuse realistic rules by overstaying
or delivering at prohibited times should be penalised heavily.
Development control decisions on planning applications must be
consistent with decisions taken on traffic and kerbside management.
Local authorities should anticipate how planning policies will
affect transport policies, and vice versa. (Paragraph 232)
Planning Policy Statement 11 Regional Spatial
Strategies (PPS 11) and Planning Policy Statement 12 Local
Development Frameworks (PPS 12) make clear that Regional Planning
Bodies and LPAs should ensure that transport policies and land
use policies are integrated and consistent with each other. Planning
Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport (PPG 13) also emphasises
the need for the co-ordination of transport and planning. Traffic
and kerbside management issues are material considerations in
planning terms and planning authorities need to take account of
these when they prepare their planning policies ad determine planning
applications. In respect of new development, or change of use
of existing development, where 'loading' and 'unloading' relate
to deliveries to or removals from a site, existing guidance in
PPG 13 advises that local authorities can impose conditions on
any planning permission to cover the design of delivery areas
and specifications for lorry parking and turning spaces. Full
advice on the use of planning conditions in planning permissions
is set out in DoE Circular 11/95. There is guidance in Planning
Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres (PPS 6) on
the ability to use planning conditions to resolve issues about
the timing of the delivery of goods to shops. Existing businesses
need to work with the local authority to discuss how their needs
might be met without significant inconvenience to other road users
at an early stage in the planning process.
There will be advice on this matter in the operational
guidance. It will seek to foster a responsible approach from businesses
and local authorities.
'CASH AND VALUABLES IN TRANSIT'
72. The 'cash and valuables in transit' sector
poses particularly acute safety risks, which can be exacerbated
by some parking regulations. The then Minister's response that
she was unaware of these particular problems did not reassure
us that the Department for Transport has engaged fully with local
authorities and the industry on this issue. The Department's new
guidance must take account of the special problems of the security
delivery sector. Local authorities must exercise discretion in
considering how parking restrictions should be applied to bullion
vehicles. (Paragraph 235)
This is an issue that can only be resolved at the
local level. All that department guidance could say is that any
difficulties should be discussed with the relevant local authority.
PARTNERSHIP WORKING BETWEEN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
BUSINESSES
73. Vehicle deliveries are essential to the economy.
Provision for loading and unloading must be reviewed carefully
by councils as part of their preparation for the adoption of civil
parking enforcement. Thereafter there should be regular reviews
at no more than five yearly intervals to ensure that the restrictions
remain up-to-date and relevant. Strong communications and a partnership
approach to loading problems between businesses, local authorities,
residents and other users, has been shown to be helpful in resolving
loading disputes. Not every problem can be resolved neatly; but
more can be done to integrate vehicle deliveries better into the
street environment. The Department for Transport's guidance should
however encourage consultation and constructive relationships
between different road users, residents, and local authorities
in arriving at loading policies to suit local needs. (Paragraph
238)
The ever increasing demand for kerb space means that
for many local authorities it is not possible to meet all the
many and varying needs of the public, including shops and businesses.
The draft statutory guidance advises local authorities to review
all their parking policies, CPE regimes and associated regulatory
framework when reviewing their Local Transport Plan.
Parking Strategies
MAKING THE LINKS BETWEEN PARKING POLICIES AND WIDER
TRANSPORT POLICIES
74. Parking
is neither primarily a source of finance to the local authority,
nor is it an 'add on' to transport management. Parking management
has the potential to help to enable us to manage our road system
with sophistication, balancing a complex number of demands, reducing
urban stresses, and mitigating congestion and the intrusion of
traffic for local residents. But this vision is not yet being
realised widely. In order to maximise the positive impact of parking
policies and enforcement regimes on a council's transport objectives,
it is essential that parking be properly planned and integrated
into a comprehensive, clear, and local transport policy framework.
(Paragraph 242)
The Department's guidance about second local transport
plans encourages just this, as does the draft statutory guidance.
The Department assesses the quality of Local Transport Plans,
with some funding dependent on the assessments, to encourage councils
to plan and deliver effectively.
PARKING AS A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TOOL
75. Parking policies have for decades been one
of the few immediately available and proven ways of controlling
traffic and influencing travel behaviour. The gap in implementation
of workplace parking levies by local authorities is disappointing.
(Paragraph 244)
76. We hope that parking schemes will benefit
from Transport Innovation Fund resources. Such schemes may be
less novel than road pricing schemes, but their potential to yield
positive traffic management results immediately means that they
should be encouraged. (Paragraph 246)
The Government has said that it will make up to £200
million per year, or more if suitable schemes emerge, from the
Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) to support packages of schemes
that tackle local congestion problems through demand management
and better public transport. However, given the Government's objectives
for a national road pricing scheme and its focus on local pilot
or pathfinder schemes, for these "congestion" schemes
we are most likely to fund packages involving road pricing although
we may, by exception, consider bids involving a workplace parking
levy. This was made clear in the guidance on the operation of
the TIF published in January 2006.[1]
All of the seven authorities awarded "pump-priming"
in November 2005 to develop business cases for the TIF are examining
road pricing, although a number of these are also examining other
forms of demand management. Bidding for the second round of pump-priming
closed on 31 July 2006 and the results will be announced in the
autumn
Guidance for local transport planning
MAYOR OF LONDON'S GUIDANCE ON PARKING STRATEGIES
77. Local authorities should concentrate enforcement
activity on congestion hotspots, bus routes, and locations where
offences increase road risk. Transport for London achieves this
through an 'enforcement demand matrix'. We recommend other authorities
examine this approach. (Paragraph 251)
It is for an individual local authority to determine
its enforcement priorities in the light of where parking contraventions
cause the greatest road safety and congestion problems.
GOOD PRACTICE GUIDANCE ON PARKING STRATEGIES
78. We recommend to all local authorities, and
in particular to those considering the introduction of a civil
enforcement scheme, the use of the Institution of Highways and
Transportation's 'best practice guidelines'. These can be used
either to develop parking strategies for inclusion in local authorities'
Local Transport Plans, or as 'stand alone' parking strategies.
(Paragraph 253)
Government officials were involved in the production
of this document and the Committee will recall that it was commended
to them in the Department's memorandum. We welcome the Committee's
endorsement of this valuable publication.
79. We are concerned that present guidance from
the Department for Transport on Local Transport Plans has effectively
down-graded the priority of parking schemes. Future Local Transport
Plan guidance from central Government should make it clear there
is a need for detailed parking plans. It is not enough for the
Department for Transport to rely on general statements. (Paragraph
254)
The guidance on second local transport plans issued
by the Department in December 2004 focuses on four key outcomes,
one of which is tackling congestion. The guidance indicates that
parking policies are part of the toolkit to tackle congestion.
The guidance has not down-graded the priority of parking schemes.
The guidance on the second plans includes less material
about thematic strategies than its counterpart for the first plans,
which set out more detail about 27 strategy areas, one of which
was parking. The earlier guidance was more detailed because local
transport plans were a new policy then. The guidance for second
plans rests on the work done locally over the last few years,
which has integrated parking strategies into local transport plans.
The Government will consider whether the statutory
guidance on parking needs to be supplemented by local transport
plan guidance in the future. Government has reduced the numbers
of plans it requires from councils during the last few years -
to allow them greater discretion.
80. The Plans should include testing performance
indicators for parking which focus on actual compliance and high
quality administration of parking enforcement, as recommended
earlier in this report. It is not appropriate, given the creaking
and inconsistent parking arrangements to be found throughout the
country, that the Department appears to be slackening its grip
instead of demanding higher standards, enhanced consistency, and
more uniformity in this area. (Paragraph 255)
See response to recommendations 17 and 18.
Parking accessibility
Pavement parking
81. We accept that the problem of vehicles obstructing
footpaths country-wide is a large one and a major effort would
be required to enforce the law. But the 'do-nothing' response
of the Department is no longer a credible option. To periodically
examine what is widely accepted as a problem and then fail to
take any positive measures is not the quality of response that
the general public has a right to expect from the Department.
(Paragraph 261)
82. The Government must grip the problem of pavement
parking once and for all and ensure that it is outlawed throughout
the country, and not just in London. Councils should have the
option of an 'opt-out' of a national pavement parking ban where
this is vital, rather than relying on the use of individual Traffic
Regulation Orders on specific streets and local Acts to impose
a ban. That such an initiative will initially require additional
resources to enforce is no excuse for allowing some pavements
to continue to be swamped by cars and made inaccessible to large
numbers of pedestrians. (Paragraph 262)
The Highway Code
makes clear "do not park partially or wholly on the pavement
unless signs permit it" and explains that this is because
it can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people
in wheelchairs, the visually impaired and people with prams or
pushchairs. If this is inadequate a local authority can easily
introduce a ban on pavement parking using a Traffic Regulation
Order either across the area of the authority as a whole or targeted
where pavement parking is a particular problem. The TRO procedure
means that restrictions are consulted on and local needs and views
can be addressed. A further advantage of using a TRO is that the
restriction is signed and so drivers are aware of it. It would
be difficult to sign a wholesale ban on pavement parking which
could lead to many drivers contravening inadvertently - a problem
that is regularly brought to the Government's attention.
Road safety
83. Parking on pedestrian crossings, 'zig-zag'
lines, and outside school and hospital entrances, directly compromises
the safety of some of the most vulnerable road users. Parking
at corners, junctions and bus stops can similarly cause havoc
and compromise public safety. Such parking contraventions are
extremely serious and any enforcement regime needs to address
them firmly. Parking strategies and enforcement operations must
prioritise the safety of all road users. (Paragraph 263)
The Government agrees and the operational guidance
will cover this. Part 6 of the TMA 2004, when enacted, will enable
local authorities outside London to enforce certain contraventions
that remained the responsibility of the police, such as stopping
on pedestrian crossings and 'zig-zag' lines, which should help
to improve road safety. The new powers to local authorities outside
London to use devices certified by the Secretary of State to enforce
parking restrictions will make this enforcement feasible.
84. Our objective must be to enhance the overall
quality of our streets. Viewing parking as an important tool to
achieve this - which includes both safety and environmental aspects
- will help increase the chances of success. This is not a question
of imposing arbitrary rules on neighbourhoods. The benefits to
all need to be spelled out, and then followed through with sound
and consistent enforcement policies. Without real leadership from
the Department and commitment from local authorities, this will
not be achieved. We need a more active and coordinated approach
from the Department on this issue than we have detected to date.
A 'zero tolerance' approach must be adopted towards those who
through thoughtlessness or wilfulness seek to reduce the quality
of the street environment. (Paragraph 265)
The Government recognises that the quality of the
local environment affects and reflects the well-being of the people
living there. Local authorities have many objectives and many
stakeholders competing for action, and a difficult balance has
to be struck between them. Whether and how parking is managed
in a particular street has a key influence on many aspects of
its quality, including visual quality, street activity, interaction
between residents, and safety.
The forthcoming Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing
will encourage local planning authorities to develop parking policies
for their plan area with local stakeholders and local communities
having regard to expected car ownership for planned housing in
different locations, the efficient use of land and the importance
of promoting good design. DCLG aims to publish PPS3 later this
year.
'Blue Badge' scheme
85. There is widespread misuse of the 'Blue Badge'
scheme which provides a range of parking benefits for people with
certain disabilities. We congratulate those, including Liverpool
City Council, whose efforts have revealed this abuse. The 'Blue
Badge' scheme is a valuable initiative which must be preserved.
But it must continue on a much sounder administrative footing.
A national database of 'Blue Badge' holders would assist with
delivering concessions, would enable proper enforcement of the
scheme, and reduce the misuse of 'Blue Badges'. We recommend that
the Department establish a national database of 'Blue Badge' holders.
In its reply to this report the Department should indicate what
assessment it has made of the cost of providing such a database.
(Paragraph 269)
The Government welcomes the Committee's view that
the Blue Badge scheme is a valuable initiative and we support
the view that misuse of the scheme should be tackled. We note
the Committee's support for a national database. Following a recommendation
from the Disabled Person's Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC)
we have commissioned consultants to investigate the feasibility
(including the cost) of a national database. A draft final report
including recommendations is being finalised and will be considered
by the Department shortly. We expect to make an announcement on
the matter and publish the final report in 2007.
In order to tackle abuses of the Blue Badge system
from 29 September 2006, the police, traffic wardens, local authority
parking attendants and civil enforcement officers will be able
to inspect blue badges as part of their other parking enforcement
functions. It will be an offence if a person refuses, without
reasonable excuse, to produce a badge for inspection - punishable
on conviction by a fine of up to £1,000
Parking space: capacity and demand
RESIDENTS' PERMIT SCHEMES
86. We were astonished that less than half of
available garages in the UK are used to park vehicles overnight.
Discounting cars which are driven away from home at night and
are parked legitimately elsewhere, many garages are clearly not
being used for their proper purpose. Using garages would relieve
on-street space pressures in local communities. (Paragraph 274)
87. It will not be possible in all residential
areas to meet the demand for parking. In these circumstances,
resident permit schemes and waiting lists are important techniques
local authorities can use to ration on-street parking and these
should be pursued vigorously where there is a mismatch between
capacity and demand. We also welcome the use of more innovative
demand measures such as allowing car clubs priority parking. (Paragraph
275)
The Government recognises the importance of parking
restraint as a means of reducing car use and encourages local
authorities to consider using it in appropriate circumstances.
We have funded the promotion and development of car clubs for
several years. We have also advised local authorities on how they
can use car management schemes such as car clubs, in their transport
plans and how they can benefit from such schemes.
PLANNING POLICY GUIDANCE
88. We did not receive sufficient evidence to
make specific recommendations about planning policies in relation
to parking provision. Controlling the overall provision of parking
spaces is however clearly an important component of traffic management
and land-use policy. It is also a tool in meeting Departmental
aims to promote sustainable transport and to reduce reliance on
the private car, and it must be given full weight by the Government
in its overall transport policy. The Department for Transport
should consider whether it is time for the Government to evaluate
the success of the guidance on parking provision (contained in
document PPG 13) and to assess how well it has been implemented
in practice. (Paragraph 280)
The Government agrees that planning for the overall
provision of parking spaces is an important component of traffic
management and planning policy. It is for planning authorities
to set their own policies on parking within the framework in Planning
Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport (PPG13). Annex D of PPG13 sets
out national maximum parking standards for certain types of non
residential development above set thresholds. Planning authorities
may, where appropriate, adopt more rigorous standards in their
development plans. Development control decisions have to be consistent
with the standards in the development plans and so there is no
need for a study to assess the implementation of these standards
at this stage. Government has no plans at present to revise PPG13.
The approach to planning for residential car parking
provision is set out in Planning Policy Guidance note 3: Housing
(PPG3). This is currently under review and draft Planning Policy
Statement 3: Housing (draft PPS3) makes clear that local planning
authorities should develop parking policies for their plan area
with local stakeholders and communities, having regard to expected
car ownership for planned housing in different locations, the
efficient use of land, and the importance of promoting good design.
PARKING PROVISION FOR 'BLUE BADGE' HOLDERS
89. Local authorities must have regard to the
needs of disabled people when planning parking provision. Customer
satisfaction surveys with 'Blue Badge' holders should be undertaken
to monitor how well provision meets requirements. Where significant
changes to parking provision are proposed, access arrangements
for people with disabilities must invariably receive full consideration.
We look to the Department for Transport to see that the interests
of people with disabilities are upheld strongly in all aspects
of parking policy at national and local levels. (Paragraph 282)
The provision of disabled person's parking bays is
a matter for individual local authorities to determine. Their
decision is normally influenced by the width of the road, local
traffic conditions, existing parking provision, safety conditions
and resources.
The Department does provide detailed advice on a
range of parking needs for disabled people in Traffic Advisory
Leaflet 5/95. These needs are suitably reflected in Planning Policy
Guidance notes (PPG13) and through British Standard 8300 (Code
of practice on design of buildings and their approaches to meet
the needs of disabled people), which are kept under review.
Given the implications of the Disability Discrimination
Act 1995 (DDA 1995), as amended by the Disability Discrimination
Act 2005 (DDA 2005), public bodies including local authorities
may be required to make reasonable adjustments to their plans,
policies and procedures to ensure that disabled people are not
discriminated against. This includes the provision of parking
facilities.
Publicity and consultation
THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPLYING WITH PARKING REGULATIONS
90. Non-compliance with parking controls is endemic
in the UK. We had evidence that only about a tenth of parking
contraventions result in a Penalty Charge Notice being issued.
(Paragraph 283)
RAISING AWARENESS
91. Many people see the point of sensible parking
constraints without which management of our streets would be impossible.
There are good grounds for believing that compliance with parking
rules would be higher however if more people understood the reasons
for having parking controls and associated enforcement. There
is strong support in the transport sector for information strategies
to achieve this result. All councils which embark on civil parking
enforcement must undertake (and review subsequently) a thorough
publicity campaign to raise levels of understanding about parking
regulation and to promote public debate as to why compliance is
important. Embarking on such a campaign only when public confidence
in the enforcement regime is in tatters is not good enough. The
Department for Transport must support public communications exercises,
and should make appropriate publicity material available on a
national basis. (Paragraph 288)
The draft statutory guidance emphasises to local
authorities the importance of this matter and the Government is
working with stakeholders to produce a communications toolkit
when the regulations and guidance are ready for publication.
92. When people are learning how to drive the
importance of parking regulations should be an integral part of
their instruction. The Department for Transport must explore whether
more can be done to reinforce the message of responsible compliance
as a part of driving instruction and the driving examination.
Consideration should be given by the Department about whether
there is scope for fuller advice on parking to be provided in
the Highway Code. (Paragraph 289)
The Government
is currently considering
major revisions to The Highway Code, following the public consultation
which ended on 12 May 2006. We intend to publish the new edition
of the Code in Spring 2007, subject to Parliamentary approval.
We will consider the views of the Committee and all other comments
received on the section of the Code that covers parking as part
of this process.
Learning to be a safe and considerate driver goes
wider than the Highway Code and the Government produces a number
of documents to improve the knowledge of newly qualified drivers
of issues such as parking. Parking is a key area to be assessed
as part of the learning to drive syllabus set out in the Driving
Standards Agency's Driver's Record which is made available
to all learner drivers and their instructors. The Official
DSA Guide to Driving - the essential skills is a recommended
teaching resource for all those involved in driving instruction.
This includes advice about controlled parking zones, clearways,
loading restrictions and Red Routes.
The question bank for the car and motorcycle theory
test includes questions covering most aspects of parking. The
number of questions in the theory test is fixed by regulation
and the competing demands of different topics for inclusion limit
the scope for adding more questions. During the practical driving
test the examiner will, on more than one occasion, ask the candidate
to pull up at a convenient place which requires the candidate
to select a place which is safe, legal and convenient. The 'normal
stop' exercises may, in certain locations, involve double yellow
lines or other restrictions on stopping and parking. In those
circumstances the candidate will be expected to recognise the
need to comply and act accordingly.
Consultation, consent, engagement
93. The point of consultation about parking controls
is that it should be a process and not a single event. This is
because the needs of localities will change over time and controls
will require updating. Consultation is not only a process of engagement
with local people, but involves gaining continuing consent. Regular
local consultation and evaluation are essential to achieve such
a high level of legitimacy in parking regimes. The Department
for Transport should ensure at the least that a commitment to
consultation is made mandatory prior to the adoption of civil
parking enforcement powers. It should promote a sophisticated
approach to local consultations on parking. The success or failure
of local authorities' parking measures depends upon a high level
of local acceptance and active cooperation. (Paragraph 293)
Existing Departmental guidance emphasises the need
for all local authorities to consult the public about the introduction
of new traffic regulations and to ensure that the public are informed
when decriminalised parking enforcement powers are taken on so
that the public is aware of changes to the enforcement regime.
The Government is of the view that it is vital to consult when
new policies are introduced.
Technology and databases
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) register
CONTINUOUS VEHICLE REGISTRATION
94. Parking enforcement is not possible without
accurate records held by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority
(DVLA). The DVLA is striving to improve the quality of its records
through the 'continuous registration' programme in which vehicles
are either taxed or registered as being 'off road'. We strongly
support this initiative and expect to see the Department for Transport
provide it with the resources required to succeed. In its reply
to this report the Department should confirm whether the DVLA's
target to improve its vehicle record keeping records from 92 per
cent to 97 per cent by 2007 will be met. (Paragraph 298)
The 2005 survey established that the accuracy
of DVLA's vehicle records in respect of the ability to trace vehicle
keepers had improved from 90% to 97.4%. The 97% target has therefore
been met. The remaining 2.6% relate largely to hard VED evaders.
Further improvements in record accuracy can only be obtained by
rigorous on road enforcement in partnership with local police
forces and local authorities. We are contributing to these joint
exercises by doubling our wheelclamping activities from 50,000
to 100,000 vehicles per year for the unregistered vehicles.
ACCESS TO DVLA DATA
95. We support the Government's consultation on
the release of data from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.
The Department for Transport should confirm that the result of
the consultation will be made public. So far as parking policy
and enforcement is concerned, there must be no access to the Agency's
register on the part of third parties that would result in activities
which run counter to improving the overall quality of the parking
regime in force in this country. This means, for example, that
those who are seeking the information to operate 'cowboy' clamping
operations on private land must be denied information from the
register. The Department must guarantee that the public are properly
protected from abuse of this information, and that any loopholes
allowing unscrupulous parking enforcement activity will be closed.
(Paragraph 301)
The Government announced on 24 July 2006 its new
measures to govern the release of vehicle keeper information from
the UK vehicle registers. These are designed to protect people
from misuse of their information, provide clear and robust complaint
and audit procedures where misuse is alleged, while allowing those
who do have reasonable cause to get the data they need.
The new measures include:
1. Detailed guidance on what constitutes reasonable
cause to receive information;
2. Requirement for organisations to be members
of an accredited trade association in order to be able to make
requests electronically - with tough standards attached;
3. Organisations that fail to meet these standards
have to make requests in detail on a case by case basis;
4. If an organisation uses information improperly,
further requests may be refused on the basis that the abuse indicates
that the organisation does not have reasonable cause for seeking
the information;
5. Regular checks on recipients of the information
and targeting those who are the subject of complaints;
6. New evidence requirements where data is sought
to enforce parking restrictions; and
7. Robust complaints procedures for people who
believe their data has been misused.
A full update on progress in delivering these new
measures will be available in the autumn. The new measures will
be monitored closely to ensure that the new system is working
effectively. As is the Department's usual practise, a summary
of the results of the consutlation will be placed on the DfT website.
New technologies for parking
TECHNOLOGY FOR ENFORCEMENT
96. The use of digital cameras to provide photographic
evidence of parking offences is a step in the right direction.
Provision by councils of such evidence to motorists at the first
opportunity when a challenge has been made, will save time and
costs associated with subsequent correspondence and possible appeals.
(Paragraph 305)
97. We support applying civil enforcement measures
to moving traffic offences throughout the country, for example,
stopping in bus lanes. These measures are designed to improve
traffic management on congested streets and keep the traffic moving.
Councils must ensure however that, as is particularly important
with fresh initiatives in street and road traffic management,
the regulations in force are carefully and clearly communicated
to drivers. The new measures must also be carefully evaluated
for success or failure. (Paragraph 307)
The Government agrees with these recommendations.
The Department's guidance to English local authorities outside
London about enforcing bus lanes advises that photographic evidence
be sent with the PCN to help reduce inquiries and representations.
The guidance adds that as an alternative, or in addition, a local
authority should make images available on their website. However,
this may cause some drivers concern about privacy and may not
be accessible to everyone and local authorities have to bear this
in mind in developing their policy. The operational guidance for
parking is likely to give similar advice for contraventions enforced
using approved devices.
The Department's guidance to English local authorities
outside London about enforcing bus lanes recommends a publicity
campaign before enforcement commences and the issuing of warning
letters rather than PCNs for a limited period after enforcement
commences. Decisions have yet to be taken about the guidance requirements
for regulations under the TMA 2004 about bus lanes and certain
moving traffic offences, but it is likely to give advice on these
issues similar to that in the provisional bus lane guidance.
TECHNOLOGY FOR PROCESSING TICKETS
98. A number of technologies designed to improve
the quality of parking operations were brought to our attention.
We welcome these initiatives and wish to see more use being made
of technology. Extensive use of effective and well trialled technology
will bring benefits to motorists, local communities, and council
enforcement activities. Local authorities should be encouraged
by the Department for Transport to invest in the new technologies.
(Paragraph 309)
99. We wish to know from the Department how the
research for technologies to aid parking enforcement is organised;
what role the Department has in identifying and trialling potentially
useful new technologies; and what guidance there will be to local
authorities to ensure that practice over the country in the use
of technology to support parking is uniform where possible, economies
of scale are achieved, best practice is shared, and the repetition
of mistakes avoided. (Paragraph 310)
The Government is keen to support innovation in transport
and welcomes the deployment of new technologies that deliver real
benefits to both service providers and users. Rather than endorse
particular products or processes the Department is placing emphasis
on enabling solutions that can help Local Authorities specify
and deliver integrated and interoperable applications to support
congestion, safety and public transport choice objectives. For
example, the Department is preparing a national framework to provide
the technical interfaces between different systems. This framework
will flow from the policies described in the document "Intelligent
Transport Systems (ITS) - The policy framework for the roads sector"
(published November 2005). Particular attention is also being
paid to systems, based on smartcard technology, for payment of
public transport, parking charges, tolls, and a range of other
local services. This work has been carried out in close liaison
with industry and LAs through the ITSO organisation and has a
range of potential benefits for parking operations. The Department
has also published (February 2005) a range of guidance on understanding
the befits and costs of Intelligent Transport Systems.
1 
