Letter: No One Was Asking for Things to be Done on a “Whim”

Published on: 24 Oct, 2019
Updated on: 24 Oct, 2019

From George Potter

Lib Dem borough councillor for Burpham

The Sutherland Memorial Park petitioners were not asking for parking restrictions to be changed on a “whim”, as R4GV’s John Rigg claims.

They were simply exercising their statutory right to challenge parking policies under the Traffic Management Act 2004. This legislation, and the relevant statutory guidance, provides a clear mechanism for residents to challenge parking policies via a petition which attracts sufficient public support.

Given that 546 people signed the petition asking for the parking restrictions to be suspended, the threshold, under the council’s own petition scheme, for a decision to be reconsidered was clearly met.

The petition was then considered by the full council, who recommended suspension of the restrictions, before the petition went to the Executive to make the final decision.

When one also considers the parking restrictions were first introduced in July, and it is now almost November, I struggle to understand how Mr Rigg can suggest, with a straight face, that anyone wanted the restrictions to be changed on a “whim”.

In reality, residents were patiently expressing their serious concerns about the safety issues caused by the restrictions and by the threat such restrictions posed to such local institutions as the Bowling Club.

But on Tuesday, the GBC Executive were clearly advised by officers that there was no legal mechanism by which the parking restrictions could be suspended.

Given the following, I have to question the veracity of this advice:

• The written reports by officers to the full council and the Executive meeting discussed suspension of the restrictions as being a valid option and neither report raised concerns about the legality of a suspension;

• Section 10 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 allows local authorities to issue experimental traffic orders, which can suspend or modify any existing traffic orders, for a period of up to 18 months. Presumably, such an experimental order could have been used to suspend the restrictions at Sutherland Memorial Park; and

• Other councils have acted to suspend parking charges and restrictions in response to public petitions. A quick search on the internet turns up examples such as Wiltshire in 2018 and Telford & Wrekin in 2004. Councils such as Central Bedfordshire publish their procedures for suspending parking restrictions. If those councils can suspend parking restrictions why can’t Guildford?

One cannot blame Executive members for trusting the advice given by officers, so their decision in this case is understandable. But, that the advice given by the officers went unchallenged is disappointing and I, for one, am concerned the advice may have been wrong.

As such, I will be asking the petitioner to exercise his right to have the council’s decision examined by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

This would allow councillors to properly study the advice given by the officers, as well as the entire process which led to the council’s original consultation failing to pick up on the obvious fact that local residents do not want, and do not see the need for these parking restrictions.

Share This Post