MPs demand greater transparency from councils on parking revenues

Local authorities should publish an annual report showing where their parking revenues have come from and how the income is used, MPs have said.

In a report the Transport Committee said local authorities had a collective parking surplus “in the hundreds of millions of pounds”, although it admitted that the exact amount was “subject to debate”.

According to the Local Government Association, the surplus from on and off street parking was £411m in 2011/12. However, the RAC Foundation claimed the surplus was £565m for the same year.

The Department for Communities and Local Government said net income on parking services was £601m in 2012/13 and was expected to rise to £635m for 2013/14.

The Transport Committee argued that stringent transparency would help rebut a deep-rooted perception that councils used parking enforcement as a ‘cash cow’. It is currently thought that less than one in three local authorities outside London publish an annual report.

The committee also recommended in its report that:

• The Department for Transport’s (DfT’s) Operational Guidance to Local Authorities on Parking Policy and Enforcement be clarified and updated, “particularly in relation to rules for loading and unloading”.
• Local authority parking enforcement activities should in general do no more than cover costs. “Where high demand for parking gives rise to unintentional surpluses these must be clearly explained.”
• The ring fence around parking revenues should not be removed.
• Local authorities must work with local businesses to develop innovative parking solutions that work for their area while the Government should consider developing business rates relief for businesses that invest in affordable town centre parking solutions.
• The workplace parking levy (WPL) scheme in Nottingham must be carefully evaluated before it is rolled out elsewhere. “The guidance, regulations and legislation for WPL should be simplified and made fairer to introduce.”
• The Government should hold a roundtable discussion with road hauliers and local authorities to identify and then disseminate innovative ways of dealing with conflicts between delivery needs and parking controls.
• The UK Government should initiate discussions at a European level on the feasibility of introducing EU-wide powers for the cross-border enforcement of parking penalty charges in a cost effective way.

Louise Ellman MP, chair of the committee, said: “Parking enforcement is necessary for managing demand on the roads, however, the use of parking charges and fines specifically to raise revenue by local authorities is neither acceptable nor legal.

“Annual parking accounts would allow the public to see how much local revenue is derived from the enforcement of fines, and what proportion of this come from on or off street parking charges.”

Ellman added: “It’s right that parking charges be determined locally, but hard to justify fines that substantially exceed penalties for more serious offences like speeding. Central Government should freeze the maximum penalty charge and develop differential fines for less serious parking violations.
”

The committee chair added that common sense suggested the DfT’s statutory guidance should stipulate that local authorities implement a ‘grace period’ of five minutes after the expiry of paid-for time on any paid parking before enforcement officers issue a penalty charge notice (PCN).
 

Ellman said a 25% penalty charge discount should also be introduced for motorists who pay within seven days of losing any appeal to a parking tribunal. Local authorities offer a 50% discount if motorists pay their penalty charge within 14 days, but remove this from motorists who appeal to a tribunal.



“Motorists should also not have to appeal against PCNs where tribunal adjudicators have repeatedly identified a problem such as poor signage,” Ellman said. “Local authorities must resolve these sorts of problems and Government must impose a statutory requirement on them to refund monies received from invalid PCNs of this kind.

”

Ellman suggested that adjudicators should be given powers to allow appeals where local authorities failed to follow statutory guidance concerning the use of cameras or issue PCNs in settings where exemptions – such as resident permits or Blue Badges – are not visible to such camera equipment.

The committee chair said: “It is also unacceptable that enforcement regimes effectively force some companies to incur penalty charge notices costing hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for carrying out their business. While businesses cannot be completely exempt from parking restrictions, local authorities must ensure that the need to restrict parking and manage congestion does not stifle the ability of businesses to trade and help grow the economy.”

Responding to the committee’s report, Cllr Peter Box, chair of the LGA’s Economy and Transport Board, said: “As this report recognises, parking controls are not being used by councils to raise revenue.They are essential for keeping motorists and pedestrians safe, traffic flowing and ensure people can park near their homes and local shops.

“Councils always look to be open and transparent with residents on their parking policies. Many already publish annual reports and adopt a common-sense approach to regulation that includes grace periods for motorists.”

Cllr Box added: “Local authorities are working hard to try and boost trade and keep high streets vibrant through parking incentives such as free short-stay, cheaper evenings and free Sundays. Any income they make from charges and fines is spent on running parking services, fixing potholes and providing subsidised travel to children and the elderly.”

The LGA also backed the committee’s call for a greater understanding of parking finance issues. In the report the MPs said: “The nuances between parking finances such as the difference between income from enforcement of fines and income from legitimate on or off street parking charges are often glossed over in the media and by government.”

In July a local resident won a High Court challenge over Barnet Council’s bid to increase the charges for residents’ parking permits and visitor vouchers in controlled parking zones.

It was thought to be the first successful challenge against the level of parking charges set by a local authority.

Barnet initially announced plans to appeal but subsequently accepted the ruling.