Businesses to face levy on parking

Published on Thursday 26 January 2012 12:00

Businesses would be charged for parking spaces they provide to their staff under proposals being considered by the Labour Party.

The Labour group in Edinburgh, which is currently the second-largest party in the City Chambers, would look into the possibility of a “workplace parking levy” to raise money for transport improvements and reduce congestion if it came into power after May’s local elections.

Nottingham is the only city in the UK to have such a levy in place already and it charges £288 to businesses for every parking space they make available for staff, which will raise £100 million in a decade.

But road users have branded the proposal a “tax on work” and urged politicians not to pursue the plans.

Councillor Lesley Hinds, the transport spokeswoman for the Labour group on the council, said: “We would like to look at places like Nottingham, where they have done it and where the revenue goes direct to transport projects. We won’t consider it at this moment but it is an idea that we will consider further down the line.

“I’m a great believer in learning from other cities and rather than just announcing something it is worth learning first about how it has worked elsewhere. It is about looking at other options of where resources can come from. In the next few years it will be very difficult to have any capital and you need to look at other ways of raising money.”

The idea is to be considered after being raised at a consultation meeting held by the party ahead of publication of its manifesto for the local elections.

However, a study by motoring group the AA found that 84 per cent of people believed that such a parking levy is another way of taxing work.

A spokesman for the AA said: “It is perceived by businesses and commuters as a tax on work because it targets people who are trying to earn an honest wage but having to use the car because public transport is not always feasible.

“Although Edinburgh has a very good transport system, to get flexibility in the 21st century, the car offers the best way of doing it.

“To force companies to pay for their parking spaces undermines their ability for them to get back on their feet at a time of economic recession – so this is not only discriminating against the motorist but it is also the wrong time.”

The previous Labour administration, which controlled the council until 2007, had looked into the introduction of a congestion charge but the proposal was rejected in a 2005 referendum.

Councillor Allan Jackson, transport spokesman for the Tory group on the council, said: “I do not think there is harm in looking at this but my concern would be that there may be overflow parking on residential streets, which is already a problem in some areas of the city.”

Comments

There are 36 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 3

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next >
• Show all

36

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head

Monday, January 30, 2012 at 02:40 PM

Sarah: Apologies, I don't mean to be impolite but this tram nonsense just winds me up. It should never have been started because it was clearly such a stupid idea that would be tremendously expensive. That was clear from the outset. They had the chance to scrap it last year but decided to continue. Why???? There are so many far more worthwhile things to sped that money on.... Or even just not spend it at all and save our city from this horrendous debt. It should be scr@pped immediately, regardless of any contract that might or might not exist. Politicians lied about the comparative costs for scr@pping it during the on-going debate last year. The truth is that scr@pping it is (and still is) the cheapest option. If nothing else it will save the city £2m per year in covering the loss it will make if it ever gets up and running..............Just scrap it now and have done with it.

• Report Unsuitable

35

TRUTHSLEUTH

Friday, January 27, 2012 at 09:01 PM

Glaxo Smith Klein did a study on howMuch provision use of car parking cost the business. They arrived at a figure of nearly £10,000 per employee who used it. In effect those who travel to work by public transport cost company £10,000 per employee less OR Car users are paid £6hour more than public transport users. It is only right this 'payment in kind' should be taxed either locally and or nationally. Once more road users are found to be 'externalising' their costs yet to hear their RANTS anyone would think they are hard done by. If only 200,000 motorists use FREE workplace parking thats a massive £2000,000,000 per annum taxed at 20% = £400millionA. Enough to pay for tram system every year Just like Forth Bridge motorists AND Hauliers live at OUR expense

• Report Unsuitable

34

Sally Longlegs

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 06:47 PM

It will bankrupt the city what with Cardownie and his private space.

• Report Unsuitable

33

The Diplomat

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 03:15 PM

Good old Lesley Hinds - her banality will put a few thousand crosses in the SNP camp as readers complete their referendum consultaiton paper.

• Report Unsuitable

32

Xena - Warrior Princess

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 03:15 PM

This has happened in Edinburgh already, Napier Uni at Craiglockhart had to agree to charge employees and students to park in order to get planning permission from the Council. In fairness all the other campuses have to pay as well.

• Report Unsuitable

31

Incandescent

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:54 PM

#29 steading - I imagine the "defined boundary" will start at, say, Barnton to the west, Portobello to the East and Fairmilehead to the south.

• Report Unsuitable

30

Incandescent

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:52 PM

#20 "minimum £10 per litre" -- Ah, I see "big - whatever your name was" has popped up again under a new name, with the same monotonous rant.

• Report Unsuitable

29

steading3

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:41 PM

This factual extract is from the Nottingham CC website_ In September 2009 Nottingham City Council voted to introduce the Workplace Parking Levy scheme in October 2011. Employers inside the Nottingham City Council administrative boundary that provide any workplace parking places will be legally required to get a WPL licence by 1st October 2011. Employers that provide 11 or more workplace parking places (excluding registered Disabled Blue Badge Holders) will need to pay a WPL charge from 1st April 2012. Employers within this boundary will be entitled, if they wish, to re-charge employees for the use of the car park. This an extract from the Nottingham Post of 13th August 2011 -"NOTTINGHAM COUNCIL employees could have to pay up to £200 more than other city workers to use staff car parks. Plans to charge city council staff for their parking places are being brought in this November, ahead of the workplace parking levy (WPL) which begins in April." Whether this has gone ahead is unkown. I would think that Edinburgh HQ based Council staff and Councillors will be displeased as staff located outside any defined boundary will pay no charge to park eg school playgrounds, sorry, now teacher's car parks! .

• Report Unsuitable

28

searchanddestroy

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:32 PM

"look into the possibility of a “workplace parking levy” to raise money for transport improvement" ............... note to all the public sector : - the way to free up taxpayers money to sort out these appalling shambles situations that you have allowed to happen is to SCRAP FINAL SALARY PENSIONS FOR ALL PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYEES sorted.

• Report Unsuitable

27

Hearthammer

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:32 PM

Labour, (or as they are now known, Tory-lite) really cannot grasp reality, can they? It's time these tartan tories were consigned to the dustbin of history!

• Report Unsuitable

26

SarahB

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:13 PM

Jack Hobbs (17) - I am not "faithful" to any political party but, for the reasons outlined at No. 24, I think it perfectly reasonable, in the circumstances, to consider raising money from business - not least because "business" has been allowed to influence significantly transport policy in this city without ever having to contribute a dime towards its demands. Perhaps if it were contributing directly in future, then it may be a little more rational in its demands and be obliged to consider antiquated notions like "best value for money". A payroll tax, which seems to work extremely well in France, seems a fairer way to me than a parking levy as it would protect smaller businesses and still provide parking for people such as poster no. 14.

• Report Unsuitable

25

Dragonlord

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:09 PM

Loony Liebour strikes again, The country faces a double dip recession and they want to tax businesses. The hard hit mottorists are an easy target but I am glad they have come out with it now. Plenty of time to stack up the rubbish ensuring everyone votes for someone else.

• Report Unsuitable

24

SarahB

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:07 PM

Fuel Head (6) - not used to you being so impolite but the reality is that the Council has signed a contract to build the tram and, whether we like it or not, a tram we are going to get. We have no choice but to make the best of a bad situation and choose whether we want to see any transport improvements in the city over the coming years, or whether we would rather just spend nothing on transport at all. If it is the former, then money will have to come from somewhere. Will it be borrowing (we are already £1.5 billion in debt and over 10% of the council's budget services that); will it be an increase in Council tax; will it be a direct tax on road users (public and private); will we have to look to the private sector; or what? If it is the latter and no money should be spent on transport, then I doubt that we have a politician or official who could countenance doing nothing.

• Report Unsuitable

23

Rugal

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 02:02 PM

This may be New Labours idea but make no mistake Cardownie and Buchanan will back this proposal if it means they get to become Lord Provost and council leader after the next election. When it comes to securing the top jobs the SNP will do what they did last time and sell their voters out.. Of course councillors who park in the quad will be exempt.

• Report Unsuitable

22

judgedredd777

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 01:51 PM

The Lost City of Edinburgh, how would you sink a city. Have it governed by a bunch of shark councillors now that they are backed into the "Money Vortex" and the pennies have run out of town.

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 3

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next >
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.