Agenda item

To consider the attached motion and officer response.

The Chairman reported receipt of the above mentioned motion from Councillors Terry Chivers and Jeff Osborn. Accordingly, Councillor Terry Chivers moved the following motion which was duly seconded by Councillor Jeff Osborn:

‘Road Safety Minster Andrew Jones recently stated it was up to local Councils to introduce bye laws, to ban pavement parking. Within the County of Wiltshire pavement parking is becoming a menace, often forcing vulnerable pedestrians, the blind, disabled and parents with children and pushchairs to walk on busy roads.

It is also worth noting the damage parking often caused to local footways. This Council investigates making pavement parking a ticketable offence as soon as possible’.

In moving his motion, Councillor Terry Chivers explained that this was a cause of considerable public concern.

The Chairman invited Councillor Philip Whitehead, Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, to respond to the motion. Councillor Whitehead explained that he too received a considerable amount of correspondence on this issue,, but that he could not support the motion as it would require a significant amount of resource to implement a new bylaw.

He noted that the parking on pavements was already an offence enforceable by the Police . An alternative approach would be  to seek a change to the law to allow Councils’ own parking enforcement officers to be able to issue fixed penalty notices rather than the Council seeking to establish and enforce its own bylaw. The latter would not allow the imposition of fixed penalty notices and would be prohibitively expensive to progress through the magistrates courts.

The Chairman then proposed, subsequently seconded by Councillor Bucknell that the motion be debated and on being put to the vote, it was;

Resolved:

That the motion be debated.

The Chairman invited the Group Leaders to comment before opening the matter up for wider debate.

The Baroness Scott of Bybrook, OBE, stated that she could not support the motion and agreed with Councillor Whitehead that the way forward would be to lobby the government to seek a change in the law.

Councillor Glenis Ansell highlighted the importance of educating the public to enable them to assist the police in enforcing this issue.

Councillor Ricky Rogers stated that he supported the motion.

Councillor Ernie Clark, speaking as an individual Councillor rather than group leader, stated that he believed there were alternative solutions to addressing this issue other than those proposed in the motion.

Councillor Alan Hill stated that he agreed with Councillor Whitehead and gave examples of how pavement parking had been successfully addressed under the current legal framework.

Councillor Peter Edge stated that he could not support the motion.

Councillor Jon Hubbard stated that he also received a large number of complaints on this matter, but did not agree that further legislation was practical. He thanked officers for the information provided in the written response to the motion which he considered would be useful when discussing appropriate enforcement action with the local constabulary. He also agreed with Councillor Ansell that some additional effort to inform the public was appropriate.

Councillor Magnus MacDonald asked if any consideration could be given to utilising volunteers to aid enforcement as takes place in Speedwatch and Lorrywatch schemes.

Councillor Paul Oatway stated that he considered the matter is best left with  the police for enforcement.

Councillor Brian Dalton asked if better technology could be utilised to aid in enforcement.

Councillor Richard Clewer made reference to the myriad reasons for parking complaints, stating that sometimes it was a matter of neighbour dispute. As such, he considered a bylaw was could not address this.

Councillor Bill Moss highlighted the effect on disabled drivers.

Councillor Fred Westmoreland stated that a bylaw would not be an efficient use of financial or temporal resources.

Councillor Jerry Wickham stated that he believed that a bylaw would be an unwanted and unnecessary bureaucratic burden.

Having been put to the vote, the motion was LOST and it was thefore

Resolved:

That motion no. 29 be not adopted.