Workplace Parking Levy - Boots put a spanner in Nottingham's plans

[johnpidge]

This is just another council "stealth tax" just like Richmond and Twickenham who have (Lunny Lib Dems!) introduced a CO2 related CPZ scale and now CO2 related parking meter scale - in the middle of the worst recession for 40+ years - the CPZ concept is massively flawed as 1) Parked cars emit no Co2 as far as I can see 2) We are directly under Heathrow flight paths and large increase in traffic/ new runway 3) Doesn't affect people with garages who usually are richer and can affort larger cars (supposing more Co2 output of course)

So if you are poorer with an older car and no garage you pay more! That's fair. When the council did a survey into the parking Co2 charge 95% said no - surprise surprise its still going ahead.

Workplace parking - easy target as usual - car drivers!

 

[stevieb15]

Although very young at the time I seem to recall Harold Wilsons government of 1964( the one to undo 13 years of Tory misrule) introduced the SET, Selective Employment Tax, I believe the WPL is a similar device introduced for reasons which I cannot really work out given the logical outcome which will be a reduction in jobs or withdrawal of staff parking privleges.

 

[davidjpowell]

Of course once enough houses and commercial property are sold the goverment database of energy assessments will have quite a lot of data about how individual property's are rated. Anyone up for a bet as to how long it will take for a tax to be developed based on this?

 

[johnpidge]

Of course once enough houses and commercial property are sold the goverment database of energy assessments will have quite a lot of data about how individual property's are rated. Anyone up for a bet as to how long it will take for a tax to be developed based on this?

Pretty sure they're working on it now! Why else would they want to "know" the energy efficiency of your house!!!! Its a bit like speed scameras (Ok don't go down this one) but who really thinks they are there to save lifes and not raise revenue (and to those who say the Government is not getting much out of it I say NOT YET!!!!!!)

Or am I just old and bitter???

 

[Satch]

It is just a form of local stealth tax and indeed my own local authority has engaged a "Business Manager" whose sole job is to seek out and develop ways to screw more money out of the local community.

Their latest trick was to withdraw car parking concessionary rates for employees working in a local shopping centre. The concessionary rates for council employees who use the same parking complex remained unchanged.

Net result is that parking for a normal working day, even on season ticket rates, works out at £12.50. And that is for people who may not be on a great deal more than minimum wage and may well be on Tax Credits and Benefits, where the economic work/sponge off the state decision can be a pretty marginal one anyway.

So what has happened?

Some shops have taken on the parking charge but it becomes a benefit in kind for the employees. Other have not & suffered staff turnover but right now no problems in filling the jobs. A number of people no longer use their cars.

And the gross parking revenues have decreased.


Parking Spaces For Rent - Garage Space, Car Parking & Driveways to Rent, UK

Currently possible to pick up a town centre parking place in secure area (usually under the huge number of flat developments) for £70 per month, versus £250.

 

[st13phil]

Some good points made already in this thread

The trouble with these sorts of "social engineering" schemes is that they are in general devised by those who have very little experience of the consequences for the ordinary person. Satch, for example, makes a completely valid point about the very marginal nature of the work or draw benefit economic decision for a surprisingly (and equally depressingly) large proportion of the populace. Decisions such as these emanate from Westminster where public transport is plentiful, relatively reliable and distances travelled are often quite small because people live cheek by jowl. Now translate the policy to somewhere in the country where population density is much lower, distances travelled much higher and public transport is sporadic at best. It doesn't work. But as the problems it cause are a long way from the Bright Spark who devised the policy it doesn't matter much because they don't see or hear the pain.

WPL in Nottingham simply has to be defeated. If it is not then the floodgates will open and it will spread like wildfire around the country as local authorities scramble to tap into a new source of revenue. Boots and other larger companies who are making very understandable threats need our support. They also need to follow through with their threats if necessary, as small businesses are easily "picked off" by the local authority and the very public loss of a major employer in a region has much more instant effect on policy makers than the slow departure over time of many smaller ones.

 

[davidjpowell]

Although form what I read Boots are not going to move out of Nottingham. They are on a site which is part in Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire. It reads that they are going to relocate the car parking to Nottinghamshire parts of their site, out of reach of grubby Nottingham City Council mitts. Others will obviously not have that option.

 

[Colin_b]

Some good points made already in this thread

The trouble with these sorts of "social engineering" schemes is that they are in general devised by those who have very little experience of the consequences for the ordinary person. Satch, for example, makes a completely valid point about the very marginal nature of the work or draw benefit economic decision for a surprisingly (and equally depressingly) large proportion of the populace. Decisions such as these emanate from Westminster where public transport is plentiful, relatively reliable and distances travelled are often quite small because people live cheek by jowl. Now translate the policy to somewhere in the country where population density is much lower, distances travelled much higher and public transport is sporadic at best. It doesn't work. But as the problems it cause are a long way from the Bright Spark who devised the policy it doesn't matter much because they don't see or hear the pain.

WPL in Nottingham simply has to be defeated. If it is not then the floodgates will open and it will spread like wildfire around the country as local authorities scramble to tap into a new source of revenue. Boots and other larger companies who are making very understandable threats need our support. They also need to follow through with their threats if necessary, as small businesses are easily "picked off" by the local authority and the very public loss of a major employer in a region has much more instant effect on policy makers than the slow departure over time of many smaller ones.

The bit that is missing from this is that the people who make these decisions are elected, or appointed by elected officials.

If the parking proposals were actually that unpopular, why do they get re-elected?

I think the majority don't actually care, and just associate governance with increased taxation.

It does rather irritate me. I'm chairman of my parish council. I looked at income/expenditure and decided that spending money rather more carefully than had been done we could decrease the parish precept by between 5% and 8% without too much effort.

Except we can't. You are not allowed to decrease the tax, at best a 0% increase. So that is what happened. That will give us a surplus at the end of the year, which is bad, and will reduce our income in the following year from the district council, meaning there is no point in reducing spending as much as we could. Madness.

 

[neilrr]

Why aren't you allowed to decrease the tax?

 

[Dryce]

The bit that is missing from this is that the people who make these decisions are elected, or appointed by elected officials.

If the parking proposals were actually that unpopular, why do they get re-elected?

I think the majority don't actually care, and just associate governance with increased taxation.

The average turnout for council elections answers your question, I think.

 

[LimitedSlip]

There'll be more of this creative stuff coming as the place slides further downhill.

Tudor window tax anyone? (since a tax on pleasant views has already been mooted).

Pure theft, simple as that.

 

[johnpidge]

There'll be more of this creative stuff coming as the place slides further downhill.

Tudor window tax anyone? (since a tax on pleasant views has already been mooted).

Pure theft, simple as that.

Brown overspending just slightly (much with OUR money!) = think of new ways to tax the populace = cars (in every respect an easy moral target) or nice views from your bedroom window or the energy efficiency of your house or the contents of your trash - call me old - call me cynical..................

 

[Seamster15]

You have got to love the Council. In Guildford they have removed the parking restrictions next to their offices on Stoke Park (was 4 hours) but have left the restrictions further out of the town! So basically all of the Council staff get free on road parking and if the get to work early enough!

 

[renault12ts]

In Belfast there are double yellow lines outside the front doors of certain Gov.buildings. These are for the use of personnel visiting in Crown cars etc. The drivers are regularly seen chatting to wardens, but never moved on.

 

[janner]

Surely there will be some creative ways around it too.

What if the company sold the carpark to an overseas shell company? Council solicitors are private sector rejects who have enough trouble taking locals to court.

Or, what if the company erases all the parking space lines and creates one really large parking space?

Or, what if the company made the carpark a pay-and-display but never had the machines working or charged anyone for not displaying a ticket?

Probably the worst that would happen is they would be made to pay the tax eventually but just think of the publicity.

*If you work for a council legal department and feel my comment is defamatory please sue me (ask an adult to help you look up the word defamatory!)

 

[st13phil]

The bit that is missing from this is that the people who make these decisions are elected, or appointed by elected officials.

If the parking proposals were actually that unpopular, why do they get re-elected?

First let me congratulate you on being someone wh is prepared to actually do something for the local community by chairing your local Parish Council. However, the bit about why are people who create unpopular proposals re-elected, with the implication that this indicates tacit acceptance is a politician's stock response to this sort of issue.

The reality is that in a democracy those who do actually bother to exercise their franchise (see Dryce's post) will vote for a set of policies, and rarely decide their vote on a single issue. A voter may absolutely loathe and detest one particular policy of the recipient of their vote but decide on balance that the whole manifesto package is more acceptable to them than that offered by an alternative candidate or party. Claims that voters have then willingly given a politician carte-blanche to dream up and/or implement policies that are deeply unpopular are, frankly, bogus and the electorate need not just accept the unpopular policy and is at liberty to challenge and/or obstruct it. That the WPL "consultation" in Nottingham is considered by many to have been rigged and thus fatally flawed is just an indication of the cynicism with which some politicians, both local and national, treat the electorate.

 

[davidjpowell]

That the WPL "consultation" in Nottingham is considered by many to have been rigged and thus fatally flawed is just an indication of the cynicism with which some politicians, both local and national, treat the electorate.

I fear that consultation is a very loose term nowadays. When involved in a bigger business than now I have seen numerous Consultations. The policies that follow have in some instances actually been announced before the end of the consultation period, or at the most after only an indecent period where views really cannot have been considered properly.

 

[MrT]

I fear that consultation is a very loose term nowadays. When involved in a bigger business than now I have seen numerous Consultations. The policies that follow have in some instances actually been announced before the end of the consultation period, or at the most after only an indecent period where views really cannot have been considered properly.

Consultation; to ask the public and interested bodies what their opinion is, and then for the statutory body to do what it likes anyway.

 

[Colin_b]

Why aren't you allowed to decrease the tax?

There is some regulation that prohibits it, due to some frauds in the 1950s. It can be over ridden by an act of parliament, apparently. So we'll stick with a 0% rise as long as possible.