Parking charges to rise by over 70% for residents: email the Cabinet and your ward councillors before Thursday’s vote

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I object to the size of the rise for residents. For example, two hours on-street would go from £3.30 to £5.70 for HillingdonFirst cardholders (+73%), but from £5.50 to £6.30 for non-residents (+15%). I ask the Cabinet not to approve a rise on this scale for residents.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The report says resident discounts will be 'maintained', but the HillingdonFirst discount would shrink from about 40% to about 10%. I do not think that is putting residents first, as the Council's own priorities promise. I ask the Cabinet to keep a meaningful resident discount.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I understand this follows an earlier increase this year, so charges would have risen steeply in a short time. I ask the Cabinet to say what the cumulative increase is and to consider phasing any rise.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I can find no public consultation on the parking increases. The Council's priorities include 'listening to your views to shape what we do', yet residents and traders are being asked nothing before the decision. I ask the Cabinet to defer until they have been consulted.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The report marks 'Being open for business' as not applicable, although the Council's priorities include revitalising town centres, and I can find no footfall or town-centre analysis behind these charges. I ask the Cabinet to defer until the effect on our high streets has been assessed.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The report says the proposals do not adversely affect any protected group, but I can see no published equality impact assessment. Older people, disabled people and carers are among those most likely to be affected. I ask for that assessment to be completed and published before any decision.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The report estimates £3.3 million across all fees and charges, but does not say how much comes from parking or over what period, and some parking income may be restricted to transport spending. I ask the Cabinet to publish the parking estimate and its assumptions before deciding.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The report says increases will not go ahead where they would reduce income, yet I can find no analysis of how many fewer people will park at these prices. If visits fall, the Council may raise less than it expects. I ask the Cabinet to publish its assumptions about lost use.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

Higher parking costs mean fewer and shorter visits, and more spending at retail parks with free parking or online. Small independent shops will feel it first, and empty units help nobody. I ask the Cabinet to protect our high streets by not approving these rises.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

In council car parks such as those in Eastcote, a nine-hour working day would cost £12.70 for a resident and £14.10 for anyone else. Staff in shops and salons on modest wages cannot absorb that, and wages are not rising by 70%. I ask the Cabinet to protect local workers.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The first 30 minutes stay free for cardholders, but a haircut, an appointment, or a meal and some shopping takes an hour or two, which is exactly where the 73% rise falls. I ask the Cabinet to consider a longer free period for high streets instead.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

If town-centre parking becomes too expensive, drivers will use nearby residential roads, adding pressure on residents who already pay for permits. I ask the Cabinet to assess that displacement before deciding.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The report benchmarks Hillingdon against London boroughs. Our high streets also compete with retail parks, online shopping and nearby centres with free or cheaper parking. I ask the Cabinet to compare against those before deciding.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

The first resident permit would rise from £92.40 to £106.30, ten visitor vouchers from £15.60 to £17.90, and the business permit from £735 to £845.20. Residents and traders have little alternative to these charges, and they land on top of the other increases.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

Some journeys cannot be avoided, moved online or made by public transport: medical appointments, caring duties, shopping for older or disabled relatives. A steep rise falls hardest on people on fixed incomes, and sits badly with the Council's Age Friendly plan.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

Households are already stretched. A rise of about 70% for residents is far above inflation, and parking is a cost many cannot avoid. I ask the Cabinet to think again.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

At the Lido, a stay of more than three hours would cost up to £19.30, and leisure centre car parks also rise. That discourages families and young people from using the facilities the Council says it wants to promote.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

Parking at Mondial Way, Nobel Drive and Bath Road would go from £0.80 to £1.80 per 20 minutes for residents (+125%), one of the largest rises in the schedule. I can find no explanation for it in the report.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

I recognise the Council faces a serious budget gap, but residents are being asked to pay more before seeing what savings in management, procurement and other spending have been tried. I ask the Cabinet to set that out before deciding.

Suggested wording - edit if you wish:

If the Cabinet is minded to proceed, I ask that the resident rise is phased, a meaningful resident discount is kept, a longer free period for high streets is considered, and the charges are reviewed after six months with a commitment to reverse them if use or trade falls.