Nuxx:MPG.278b1b3f7a0e823f989840@news.zen.co.uk

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.201.147.84.MISMATCH!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!reader02.news.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.driving,uk.rec.cycling Subject: End to Whitehall's 'war on motorists': Slash your parking charges, Pickles tells councils Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 23:50:12 -0000 Lines: 119 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.9.14 Organization: Zen Internet NNTP-Posting-Host: 02a7e928.news.zen.co.uk X-Trace: DXC=`U>5UVci7<_5kOkBni[M:_YjZGX^207P[`35Y>X X-Complaints-To: abuse@zen.co.uk Bytes: 6284 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:795422

More good news. It certainly does feel that since this much people- friendlier, more competent, less patronising and less authoritarian government took over from the Worst Government Ever, there have been a series of developments which have lessened the war on the motorist. I think we have seen a peak in the level of state-sanctioned bullying of drivers, which of course is a welcome thing. Fanatical, irrational and dishonest nastiness towards motorists is once again being confined to the loony bins where it once solely dwelled and where it solely belongs (the likes of uk.rec.cycling[.moderated], Brake and Friends of the Earth, rather than those who have power).

I note that train fares are soaring in the new year. That's the way to get people out of their cars. The car-haters seem to consistently miss the point that there's no point in merrily trying to make motoring as unpleasant as possible if you don't provide an adequate, reasonably- priced alternative for people to use. You would have thought that was pretty obvious.

(Let's see if anyone tries to divert from the real point of the discussion by complaining about which publication is being cited....)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343550/End-Whitehalls-war- motorists-Slash-parking-charges-Pickles-tells-councils.html

End to Whitehall's 'war on motorists': Slash your parking charges, Pickles tells councils

By Daniel Martin Last updated at 11:04 PM on 2nd January 2011

Parking fees could be dramatically cut after the Coalition scrapped red tape introduced by Labour.

Town halls will no longer have to follow Whitehall regulations that encourage excessive parking fees, designed to get residents to choose public transport over their cars.

And they will no longer be obliged to obey environmental rules which restrict the number of parking spaces when new homes are built.

Ministers say the move is part of a plan to reverse a decade-long ?war on motorists?.

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has told councils he expects them to slash parking charges which shot up by as much as tenfold in some areas under Labour ? causing damage to town centres as drivers stopped frequenting local shops.

But success is by no means guaranteed ? only two months ago, councils banded together to lobby the Government to allow them to put up parking fines.

Unveiling the changes, Mr Pickles said: ?Whitehall?s addiction to micromanagement has created a parking nightmare with stressed-out drivers running a gauntlet of unfair fines, soaring charges and a total lack of residential parking.

?The result is our pavements and verges crammed with cars on kerbs endangering drivers, cyclists and pedestrians, increased public resentment of overzealous parking wardens and escalating charges and fines.

?Today the Government is calling off Whitehall?s war on the motorist by scrapping the national policy restricting residential parking spaces and instructing councils to push up charges.

'We expect councils to follow suit. From now on, communities have the freedom to set competitive local charges that bring shoppers to the high street, proportionate enforcement and the right number of spaces for new development.

?We?re getting out of the way and it?s up to councils to set the right parking for their area.?

Mr Pickles scrapped national planning restrictions imposed in 2001 that required councils to limit the number of parking spaces allowed in new residential developments, and set high parking charges to encourage the use of alternative modes of transport.

The Government believes these rules unfairly penalised drivers, led to over-zealous parking enforcement.

Parking problems on new developments can also spread to surrounding neighbourhoods.

The spill-over of cars from the new development creates a knock-on effect of street congestion in other areas nearby.

This can cause blind spots for pedestrians, and potentially even hinder emergency vehicles.

Research conducted by motor insurer Direct Line found that between 2000 and 2007, average parking charges jumped 40 per cent from 86p for two hours to £1.21.

But in some areas the charges rose even more steeply. In parts of Hertfordshire they went up from 10p for two hours to £1.08.

From now on, councils will be free to set parking policies that are right for their areas.

This will include taking into account the effect of parking charges on the vitality of their local economy and local shops.

Councils that want to attract shoppers through low parking charges in town centres will now be able to do so without interference from Whitehall.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said: ?This is a key step in ending the war on the motorist.

?For years politicians peddled the pessimistic, outdated attitude that they could only cut carbon emissions by forcing people out of their cars.

?But this Government recognises that cars are a lifeline for many people ? and that by supporting the next generation of ultra-low emission vehicles, it can enable sustainable green motoring to be a long-term part of Britain?s future transport planning.?