PAPER B

 

Isle of Wight Council

Policy Commission for Safer Communities

Enquiry: Decriminalisation of Parking Enforcement

 

Evidence for the Commission:

 

Personal Background

 

I am Norman Downie, a consultant from RTA Associates Ltd, a company which specialises in advising local authorities on the management of parked vehicles, and in decriminalised parking enforcement (DPE) in particular.  We have worked with your officers to assess the full financial and operational implications of these powers.

What is DPE?

DPE is the term applied for the transfer of responsibility for on-street parking enforcement from the Police to the local authority.  Parking tickets are issued by the Council, and unlike the present system, the income derived accrues to the Council, not the Exchequer.  However, all on-street income is ring fenced as to its use.

Will it generate surpluses?

It is very unlikely that it would generate significant surpluses in the longer term, and in the shorter term, there will be capital costs to set up the scheme and deficits in the early year or two of operation.  Consultants predict a broadly cash neutral position after the start up period.  The consultant recommends the use of the £60 penalty charge level, which is the highest of the 3 options available from Government; this is the standard across the country, outside of London.

Does the Council have to do this?

Not yet, although Government have now reserved powers to require authorities to take on the powers.  However, the Police are running down the traffic warden service, at a time when vehicle numbers are growing, traffic is increasing, and Traffic Orders are extending.  If the Council does not decide to manage parked vehicles, then the Police will not certainly not be in a position to do so.

What are the advantages of the Council doing this?

·       Better traffic management;

·       Reduced accident risks;

·       Less illegal parking;

·       Less abuse of special bays e.g. for disabled drivers;

·       Encouragement to use the Council (and other..) car parks;

·       Better turnover on permitted on-street spaces;

·       Easier traffic flow for public transport;

·       Police resources freed up for more important matters;

·       Penalty income retained locally;

·       Member control on parking enforcement policy;

·       Council can implement new schemes e.g. resident parking and enforce them;

·       Council priorities are different from Police priorities;

What are the disadvantages?

Financial risk – it is not guaranteed it will break even – it needs good management;

Parking enforcement is not always popular;

It costs quite a lot to implement;

How long does it take to introduce?

It depends upon the methods chosen – at least a year, and it can take 2 years.

What about our car parks?

They have to come into the same enforcement scheme, with the same staff carrying out the enforcement and the resulting administration.  There is a need to merge the new responsibilities with the old ones for the car parks, and to provide a single, integrated service.

What happens to the Police wardens?

They would normally transfer under TUPE to the Council or its contractor, and be merged into the service delivery team.

Should we also take on the powers to clamp and remove illegally parked vehicles?

You will, as an automatic part of the application for the powers, also get the powers to clamp and remove illegally parked vehicles; you should take these powers, but it is recommended that they are not actively introduced without specific approval of Council.

What is the biggest job in all of this?

You are required to ensure that your traffic regulation orders (TROs) are full enforceable; evidence in other places is that there is a historical build up of inaccurate orders with worn signs and lines; these must be remedied, in order to confirm to DfT that you are ready.  The opportunity should be taken to create new consolidated TROs, with map based schedules, and to get rid of “no waiting at any time” plates.

Are other Councils doing this?

Yes – about 130 of them plus all of London have done so thus far.  Virtually all of Hampshire have done so, as have Portsmouth, Southampton, all of Dorset, Bournemouth, Poole and Weymouth.

Should we contract it out?

Consultant advice would be to contract out the enforcement work, but retain the administration in-house.  This allows the Council to get the benefits of contractor provided labour supply, and to have some of the capital required provided under contract, but to keep the issue of dealing with sensitive correspondence, payments etc in-house.  You are prevented by law from contracting out the consideration of appeals and representations.

Is there a service market?

Yes, there is an active market of companies such as NCP and Vinci who will compete strongly for contracts.  It will require an EU procurement, but in a shortened form (Part “B”).

Do we need a new IT system?

No – your officers have the basis for this already in place; all that will be necessary will be a significant upgrade.

Who else within the Council will be affected by this?

As well as Traffic & Transportation officers, IT officers, Legal, Public Relations, Human Resources, cash management, accountancy, Internal Audit, and perhaps accommodation will all have a role to play.

When would we introduce the powers?

Given that the biggest element is the review of your TROs, consultant advice would be to aim to start in autumn 2006 or spring 2007.

What if we decide not to do this?

Police resources for traffic are declining, so expect enforcement to reduce, or even stop. Towns would suffer illegal parking, and you would lose car parking income.  Eventually, you would be required to do it by Government.

 

Presentation