One thing which is sure to enrage people, is having to pay for something which has previously been enjoyed free. I was recently contacted by a constituent who had received a letter informing her of the Council’s new ‘Residents Only’ permit parking scheme proposed for her area. Such schemes have been in existence for years to protect the rights of residents with no parking facilities of their own, to park outside or near their homes in preference to others. Under the new scheme, if residents want a guaranteed minimum enforcement by the Council, they must pay £20 per year. In return, they will receive a minimum of one visit per week to enforce the law. If they refuse to pay and opt to keep the present system, they are not even guaranteed that. What sort of enforcement is that? Furthermore, in order to obtain the luxury of one random visit per week, residents have to organise a petition and obtain 51% approval of the residents of their street. Often a ‘Residents Only’ scheme is required in a very small, localised area, for example, near shops. For a long road, do petitioners have to canvass the whole length of the road to produce a majority of 51% in favour? What happens if some people are away or hard to contact? Does the petition fail? This is another badly thought out scheme produced by the ruling Liberal-Democrats to go alongside their  roll out of recycling bins to people in terraced houses who have no space to store them, which has been opposed so strongly by Stockport’s Conservative Parliamentary candidate, Stephen Holland. Conservatives believe in consulting people, listening to what they say and acting on it, not dictating to them from on high.

This article, by Councillor Anthony O'Neill, was first publishedby the Stockport Express on 14.10.09.