Sunday, November 19, 2006

Council admits parking fines are about "income generation"

The next time you hear or read the Council tell you that parking enforcement is about reinvestment in transport and law enforcement rather than generating revenue, remember this story.

In Appendix 2 of the Council's final budget report there is a page entitled "Income Generation" which proposes an increase in traffic wardens and gives details of how much it intends to make out of different areas in the Borough from parking tickets and other enforcement charges over the coming year.

It is clear from the document that the Council will require traffic wardens to hit required targets for the tickets they issue in order to meet the revenue demands. Why can't they collect Council Tax with the same vigour.

Labels: ,


Anonymous John said...

When are authorities going to realise that people use their cars to get about in. Not just to drive around for the sake of it.

If someone has parked somewhere they are probably going to a shop or doing some other business. This then helps local businesses, who then make more money and so give more in tax.

8:08 pm  
Anonymous andrew said...

I can't agree with you, John. I think this is a good news story for Greenwich residents. It's absolutely right that the Council should seek to find alternative sources of income with which to reduce the overall burden of Council tax on its residents.

And why shouldn't people who park illegally pay for it? For every person who is "just nipping into the shops" or "just stopping at the cash machine" there will be tens, if not hundreds, of other motorists (and people using public transport in the case of cretins stopped at the start of a bus lane) who have to wait as a result of their selfishness.

If there's a complaint to be made, it's that the Council isn't going far enough. Let's also start levying heavy fines on those who think it's okay to use our residential streets as rat-runs to cheat other drivers stuck on the Trafalgar/Woolwich Road. Let's crush the illegal motorbikes that speed up and down our streets and fine those (ir)responsible. And let's bring in the congestion charge to kickstart proper investment in public transport in this area.

And - finally - let's bring a halt to the inexorable year-on-year rise in our Council tax. Let's have a cut for a change. That needs Ken Livingstone to stop gouging his own constituents.

12:57 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This focus on making money leads to traffic wardens hanging around issuing easy tickets on back roads. The focus should be on keeping main arteries going, but that doesn't seem to be enough of a money spinner. Plumstead high street always had idiots blocking it, yet i never saw one traffic warden there while commuting by bus, over 2 years.

2:58 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think is is important that the traffic wardens do their job to ease conjestion, I completely agree with the blogger re plumstead high street, its terrible. I also think it would be an idea to place wardens outside schools at home time to prevent the parents from blocking the roads. Anyone who has tried to get up plum lane at home time will know what i mean!

4:48 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greenwich as far as I know don't use CCTV enforcement, so no bus lanes are being kept clear by their enforcement. Real hotpots of illegal parking and illegal traffic contraventions can also be dealt with via CCTV yet Greenwich don't use this.

Expansion of wardens can only be justified to increase compliance and that is nothing to do with rat runs.

Charlton Village is regularly blocked by illegally parked cars causing buses and cars to back up causing no end of pollution, yet I never see a PA there or better still a sign saying traffic enforcement cameras.

If they hadn't put 10 plus sets of traffic lights between east and west greenwich locals like myself who no my way round wouldn't NEED to do it.

9:56 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home