Brent FoE and Emissions Based Parking

An anonymous commenter, who sounds as if they are from Brent Friends of the Earth, claims I was selective in quoting from their response to the Council consultation on emissions based based parking permits, so perhaps I should go through it in greater detail.

The Brent FoE response conceeds the principle of the scheme is good, but proceeds to make various objections that are politically and financially unrealistic and would effectively debar the Council from implementing the scheme at all.

The statement that really stands out is: "It is also the case that the scheme will have no effect whatsoever in the large proportion of the borough not covered by Controlled Parking Zones, as it only applies to CPZ schemes."  Obviously, the Council cannot not ask for a CPZ fee in areas that have not asked for a CPZ.  CPZs have always only been implemented with the consent of residents in Brent.  Areas which have them have opted to pay a fee in return for residents being given privileged parking rights over people from outside.  To impose fees on the whole Borough would destroy public consent by charging people who don't regard themselves as getting a commensurate beenfit in exchange. 

They also complain that it applies only to on street parking.  Indeed so, but the Council has no legal (or many would say moral) rights to charge people a fee for parking on their own properties.  Councils can restrict parking rights for private property through the control of crossover permissions, and in fact Brent has tightened its policies in this regard, but Brent Friends of the Earth seem to be demanding that the Council do something outside its legal powers.

Brent FoE also suggest that it is "unfair that only householders who presently have cars will be rewarded, rather than those who already use only public transport or bicycles."  I find it hard to work out what is envisaged here.  The Council offer is to people who give up their permits for a set period.  How would you extend the offer to people without permits to give up?  Is it being suggested that a payment be made to everyone?  If so, in what way does it incentivise behaviour. 

They are also objecting to the speed of implementation, and want a longer consultation period.  The proposals were decided by the Executive in August 2010, and, if passed, should come into effect in April 2011.  That is the best part of a year.   Personally, I am quite frustrated that things take so long to implement.  The FoE response also makes the entirely incorrect point that "Bringing the new scheme in very quickly (implementation next April), means that very few people are likely to be influenced by the incentives it puts forward." Surely, the longer you delay the introduction of the policy, the longer it will be before anyone can claim a benefit, and therefore the more you delay any influence it has.  As far as I can work out, whoever wrote the FoE response thinks that you can only claim the incentive in the run up to implementation (say 1 April) and not thereafter.  In fact, you would be able to claim the incentive on the day of implementation or at any time thereafter.

There is also some stuff about buying and selling cars, suggesting that buying newer, less polluting cars is has a higher lifecycle cost.  I don't believe that there is any evidence for that, but in any case the parking permit is a very small component in the cost of motoring.  The effect of the policy is likely to be more on people buying a car anyway, especially a highly polluting second hand car.

Finally, Brent FoE have the chutzpah to suggest that the scheme should be part of "an overall plan which makes it much easier to use other forms of transport," as if it were not already.  Of course, Brent Council, like every other local authority, has a range of policies and schemes in place to manage traffic issues.  These including pro active measures like cycle training, planning policies and fees and charges.  The fact that Brent FoE fail to understand this further diminishes their already dwindling credibility as an environmentalist group.