Official Report 714KB pdf
Parking Prohibitions (Enforcement and Accounts) (Scotland) Regulations 2023 [Draft]
Our next item of business is consideration of a draft statutory instrument. I am pleased to welcome the Minister for Transport, Fiona Hyslop, who is joined by two Scottish Government officials: Elise McIntyre, a principal legal officer at the Scottish Government legal directorate, and Fred O’Hara, head of road policy for Transport Scotland. I thank them for joining us today.
The instrument is laid under the affirmative procedure, which means that it cannot come into force unless the Parliament approves it. Following this evidence session, under the next agenda item, the committee will be invited to consider a motion that the committee recommends that the instrument be approved. I remind everyone that officials can speak during this item but not during the debate that follows.
I invite the minister to make a brief opening statement.
Thank you for inviting me to provide evidence on the Parking Prohibitions (Enforcements and Accounts) (Scotland) Regulations 2023.
As members are aware, the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 prohibits pavement parking, double parking and parking at dropped kerbs and provides for penalty charges to apply where those prohibitions are contravened. To support that, the regulations laid in Parliament last month provide local authorities with the procedure to follow when enforcing the parking prohibitions. That will enable them to issue penalty charge notices to those in contravention of those prohibitions of £100, reducing to £50 if paid within 14 days.
That brings to a conclusion a significant package of work that was progressed following the implementation of the act, including regulations that were brought into force in December 2022 that gave local authorities a procedure to follow to exempt areas of footway in their areas from the pavement parking prohibitions. We have also progressed commencement regulations to bring the relevant provisions of the act into force. Passing these regulations will be the final part of enabling those important parking prohibitions to come into effective operation.
Earlier this year, as part of the development of the regulations, a public consultation was carried out. Almost 500 responses were received from a mix of individuals, local authorities and community councils. The feedback from the consultation showed that the public are overwhelmingly in support of the regulations to improve accessibility on our roads and pavements.
My officials have been working closely with local authorities across Scotland to assist them in preparing for the regulations coming into force. The input received was vital in shaping the regulations that are now under discussion. In addition, my officials continue to work closely with local authorities and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to identify what further funding will be required to facilitate the implementation of the regulations and provide support to authorities in setting up back-office functions to enforce the regulations effectively.
The regulations and the subsequent parking standards guidance, which will go hand in hand with the regulations, are needed to provide local authorities with a procedure to follow when enforcing the parking prohibitions and will be in line with the powers that are provided in the 2019 act. They also set out the procedures to be followed in relation to the appeals process and the circumstances in which a penalty charge notice may be appealed. The regulations also lay out the procedures to be followed in respect of the keeping of accounts and the purposes for which any financial surplus can be used.
It is important to stress that inconsiderate, obstructive or dangerous parking can and does cause serious problems for everyone and puts the safety of pedestrians and other motorists in jeopardy. The parking prohibitions are aimed at promoting, supporting and advancing the rights of pavement users, to ensure that our pavements and roads are accessible for all. Transport Scotland will also launch an awareness campaign in the coming days to ensure that the public are aware of the new regulations and the fact that local authorities will have the power to issue and enforce penalty charge notices from 11 December, should the regulations be approved by Parliament.
The campaign will focus on changing the behaviour of drivers who park inconsiderately and on raising awareness of the impact that that can have on all pavement users. I am happy to answer any questions that the committee might have on the content of the regulations.
Thank you very much, minister. I followed the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 through the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee at stages 1 and 2, and then through Parliament. Pavement parking was probably one of the most contentious issues. Agreement was reached, but the issue was refining the details, so I will just drill into some of the details, if I may.
The bill gives ministers the ability to give councils directions on exemptions. Have you issued such directions and do you think that those are sufficient?
As the convener will know, I was deputy convener of this committee when it studied the exemptions regulations as they passed through Parliament. Some local authorities have identified the roads that they want to exempt, but many are still in the process of doing that. Therefore, there is on-going engagement between my officials and different local authorities, but it is up to local authorities to identify which of their roads they want to be exempt.
How far down the line are you? Have you issued any exemptions or is there enough time between now and December to issue the exemptions that are needed?
It is an on-going relationship. It is important that it is done in a co-operative way between central Government and local authorities, and that engagement continues. It has been done in a very co-operative way.
Perhaps Fred O’Hara can give an indication of the level of engagement, but I would prefer not to be issuing directions, if that is the invitation. It is better that it is done in co-operation.
My understanding is that local authorities can request exemptions in certain areas. I am asking whether any local authorities have requested exemptions and whether you have indicated that you will accede to them.
They are in the process of doing that. Some will have done so and some will not, as yet, have done so, but they are in the process of doing that.
Perhaps Fred O’Hara can give the committee more information about that engagement.
I am happy to come in on that.
The exemptions were in front of the committee last year, so the exemption procedures are now through Parliament and in statute. The ministerial directions for those at that time were issued in December last year, and those were the guidelines as to where a local authority could potentially exempt a street. We are in discussions with COSLA and the Scottish Collaboration of Transportation Specialists—SCOTS—to look at how many exemptions are being brought in. The process is for local authorities to follow, which they have been doing.
We are actively trying to figure out how many are coming through, but it is still in process. We will, in fact, issue a questionnaire to all local authorities later this week to find out exactly where each one of them is and how many exemptions they are potentially bringing in. We are trying to get more of that information out of the local authorities.
It strikes me that time is marching on. If you do not have an exemption, you are not exempt, and the areas where there are problems and bottlenecks might fall within the legislation.
It is for the local authorities to ascertain where those are. We fully funded the exemption order process two years ago. We issued £2.4 million of funding for local authorities to go and look at the streets that they think they need to exempt. Some are further forward than others on that. We are pushing to ensure that they use the funding that we have already given them to go and assess the streets.
Okay. I will crack on with a few questions that I have.
There are slots, or bays, where drivers are allowed to park on pavements. There are some exemptions to allow them to do that. Are you happy that those are sufficiently regulated to ensure that they do not multiply or are not lost?
It would be a commonsense approach for a local authority to determine in its own local area whether it has such bays and what it needs. It is important to understand that you have in front of you the regulations for the enforcement and the penalties and so on. It will be a matter for local authorities to establish in their own local areas how, and the degree to which, the regulations are enforced and how the exemptions—as opposed to the areas that are already designated for parking—are treated.
This is a technical question. The fine is issued to the person who owns the vehicle that gets the parking ticket, although they may not be the operator of the vehicle. Is there an ability to pass the fine on to the person who was operating the vehicle, or is it up to the owner of the vehicle to pay the fine and try to get the money back?
I will ask Elise McIntyre to come in on that.
The penalty charge is payable by the registered keeper of the vehicle except in certain defined circumstances that are set out in the regulations. Those include, for example, circumstances in which the registered keeper had sold or transferred the vehicle before the contravention occurred; then, the fine would be for the person who was the keeper of, or who was in charge of, the vehicle at that time.
There are various other possibilities. For example, if it was a hire car, the registered keeper would be the hire company.
I am sorry—I am going into too much detail.
I understand that, if you hire a car, you are responsible for it. However, there are lots of other situations. For example, within a family, if the registered keeper was a parent but it was their child who was racking up the fines, the parent would be the one who would cop it. Are you happy with that?
I think that that is normal practice for these things.
Is it?
The registered keeper has the responsibility for fines. There is an awareness issue, and we are going to try to raise awareness among everybody. However, if I were in a family in that situation, I think I would be telling my children not to pavement park, because there should not be pavement parking anyway and because I would not want them to make me liable for fines.
Okay. I have a final question, which I know other committee members have, too. In some loading bays, for very good reason, there are dropped kerbs to allow people to move stuff from lorries up on to pavements. As I understand it, if a dropped kerb is not being used by or is not designated for wheelchair users, it will not be caught under this legislation. It would help to have clarity on whether that is the case.
I think that that is correct. If a dropped kerb is outside commercial or residential premises, it will not be caught by the prohibition.
Thank you. Monica, do you have a question that you want to ask?
Yes. Good morning, minister and colleagues. Convener, you have touched on some of the questions that I had about the work that is being done to survey the streets and see which ones should be exempt. I think that Fred O’Hara said that £2.4 million in funding has already been allocated to local government. It would be good to get more detail, after today’s session, of how that money has been used over the past two years to resource this exercise and to get an update on which streets, if any, will be exempt.
I also have a question on the attitude to enforcement. I appreciate that it is for the local authorities to carry out enforcement, but I wonder whether the minister has a view on the approach that should be taken. We know what the procedures are. Some might call them intelligence led, but sometimes there is a lot of discretion, which leads to a lot of variation. For example, my office has been asked to look at enforcement around engine idling. We did some freedom of information requests on that and found that most local authorities take a non-enforcement approach to engine idling and try to identify teachable moments to educate on it. Does the minister anticipate that councils will take a similar approach to pavement parking, or will there be a more robust approach?
There are a number of things to say on that. I think that the committee has looked at clean air enforcement issues more generally and has reflected on the fact that local authorities use their discretion. In some circumstances, however, they have taken a stronger enforcement line when they have been trying to persuade people to understand the issue.
It is clear that local authorities have powers in this area. Normally, the Government gets criticised for being overzealous in telling local authorities what to do, but this is an issue on which we have to respect local authorities, who know their communities, their towns and their areas, and so they know the level of enforcement that they want to carry out. That is why they have discretion in the extent to which they carry out that enforcement. We are giving them the powers to enable that, and the penalties will be, we hope, a diversionary implement.
The use of “teachable moments”—if that is the term that you used—is really important. We all know that there are many behaviours in relation to cars—such as not wearing seat belts and drink driving—that, over many years, have changed in line with changes in what is acceptable. In recent years, coming through the pandemic, people have walked their streets more, they own their places more and they want to be able to do that in comfort. All of us who have children have probably been in a situation with pavement parking—I was reflecting that I had two children in a double buggy. The most frustrating thing when someone is pavement parking is that they are, by and large, forcing women with young children on to the streets. We are saying, “Do you know that that isn’t acceptable? Why don’t we just agree that we don’t do that?” There is a behavioural aspect, which is why there will be a marketing campaign to persuade people to change that behaviour.
On enforcement, local authorities have the tools, they have the legislation and they now have the opportunity to use penalty notices as well. We are providing the tools so that, if they want to use the stick, they can. However, why do we, as a country, not just say, “Let’s stop pavement parking and allow people to use the pavements with freedom”? Whether we are talking about people with guide dogs or in wheelchairs, elderly people walking their dogs in narrow spaces or parents or grandparents with buggies, we should let people use the pavements.
09:45
In your opening remarks, you talked about public support for the legislation and its aim of reducing the impact on people of pavement parking. You also mentioned that it is important that back-office functions are resourced properly to ensure effective enforcement. Can you give an update on the funding picture for the measure?
We have some estimates, but again we are working with SCOTS—that is, the transportation officers—and with local authorities on what they think that they will need. Obviously, it is part of the on-going discussion that we are having with COSLA and local authorities.
Thank you.
We have a whole heap of questions to get through. I call Douglas Lumsden, to be followed by Bob Doris.
I remind the committee of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that I was a councillor at the start of the current session.
As far as inconsiderate parking is concerned, minister, I think that we are all behind you with regard to the situation that you have described of buggies and wheelchairs trying to get down the pavement. Indeed, I would say that other areas, such as hedges overgrowing pavements, need to be tackled, too.
Sticking with pavement parking, though, I can think of streets in some of our bigger cities that have tenement buildings on either side of quite narrow roads. As a result, people park on the pavement to ensure that there is still space down the middle. I guess that, come 11 December, people who live in one of those areas could get a ticket every day. Is there anywhere that residents can go to see whether the council considers their street to be an exemption zone? Is there some process by which residents can lobby the council to make their street an exemption zone—as long, of course, as the pavement is wide enough to cope with wheelchairs, buggies et cetera?
The committee looked at the exemptions process in the regulations last year. That is the process to enable local authorities to identify such exemptions, and part of that is consultation that the authorities carry out. I do not know what has happened in each of the 32 local authorities, but that is the process for identifying streets where there might be issues. My understanding is that local authorities are able to advertise whether an area is eligible for pavement parking. Some authorities have done that work, and some are in the process of doing it. Again, though, they will need to take a commonsense view as to what is practical. At the same time, this is, as you have said, about how we make sure that our streets are accessible.
I am concerned about the issue, as we are not that far away from 11 December. Given that we do not know how many applications there have been for exemptions, how will residents know whether they will still be able to park outside their house in a month’s time?
I will bring in Fred O’Hara to give you some information, but I would have thought that the sensible thing would be for local authorities to identify and publicise that on their websites. However, they will also want to go through a process with their committees on how to enforce the measure. We know that that discussion has just started in Edinburgh, where the council thinks that it will be the first to put the measure in place. There might be a period of time before local authorities know that they are ready to enforce the penalties that we are providing them with the powers to enforce, should the committee and the Parliament agree to the instrument.
The local authority has the power to introduce exemption zones but, in doing so, it has to sign and line where people are allowed to park on the pavement. This is a national ban, and it applies unless one of those sign-and-lines areas is on the pavement outside your house.
It is for local authorities to advertise the process, which is what the committee looked at last time. The exemption order process is there for them to follow, and it includes advertising the orders and putting them on their websites—and even in the local press, if they so wish. The process is very similar to, for example, the traffic regulation order process that already exists for double yellow lines. A local authority’s website should have a list of the exemption orders that it is already putting through as well as any potential orders.
I come back, then, to the convener’s original question: have you seen them?
We have seen some from certain local authorities. We have seen some movement from Dundee and Inverclyde, for example, and they have things up and running and are looking at what they need to put in. I have not seen any that are complete or which are on the ground yet, but that is certainly how they are going, and most of the other local authorities are following this through, too.
Would you expect local authorities to have a bit of leeway to start with—maybe to issue tickets that will not be enforced, just to make people aware that they cannot carry on with their behaviours until an exemption order is in place or they can ask for an exemption order?
We have been through the process with local authorities and talked about how they would handle this in the initial period. Some of them are going with a soft launch campaign, in which they will put leaflets, as opposed to tickets, on windscreens. They are looking at raising awareness first; then, once their exemption orders are in place, they will start ticketing.
Minister, you said that there is still quite a lot of work to be done in the background—I think that you said that it is some admin. Will that all be done before 11 December?
Again, it is up to local authorities to decide what they need to do when it comes to their own processes. Some are further ahead than others, but we are providing the powers for them to carry out enforcement using penalty notices if they choose to do that. It is up to them to work out their level of enforcement. Clearly, some local authorities might want to take a heavier hand sooner rather than later, but the more commonsense point of view, which has just been illustrated, is to give people notice in some shape or form to raise awareness—it is about saying, “Look, this is coming in now,” whether that is through leaflets or whatever, in the relevant streets.
I had no interest to declare but, as I was listening to the questions, I thought that perhaps I should mention that I am patron of the Glasgow Access Panel, which is based in Maryhill in my constituency, and that there is a crossover in some of the work. Although that is not formally declarable, I put it on the record for the sake of transparency.
I have a couple of questions. My first relates to the education and awareness campaign. Most people accept that pavement parking is pretty inconsiderate—drivers know what they are doing, but they are a bit inconsiderate. We have to change that culture. However, drivers are often oblivious to dropped kerbs. That is an unintended consequence, which is due not to wilful ignorance but to a lack of awareness. Will the education campaign take that on board? There is a difference in where drivers are in relation to those things.
I was keen to bring forward the marketing campaign because, although there was a lot of awareness at the time that the Government adopted Sandra White’s member’s bill into the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, which was passed at the end of that year, time has passed since the ban was brought in on double parking, dropped kerb parking and pavement parking. That is why it is important to remind people that the Parliament passed that law in 2019, and that what is happening now is the delivery, the operation and the final elements of bringing it into force by providing the enforcement and the penalty notice process.
There has to be action on awareness, because of the passage of time. There is a duty and responsibility on us all to help in making sure that people are aware—because, I suspect, they might not be aware. Although they might be aware of pavement parking as an issue, they are not necessarily aware of the dropped kerb issue. That is a challenge because, as you said, people might not be sighted on dropped kerbs. Again, it is for local authorities and their enforcement officers to identify what is reasonable or unreasonable, and what a commonsense approach would be in such a situation.
I want to ask about enforcement and the guidance on that.
Glasgow City Council—certainly in my constituency—is very good. I have constituents who use wheelchairs and mobility scooters and who had no access to local services. The council had a direct conversation with them about their lived experience and put in dropped kerbs to allow them to go about their lives.
However, when it comes to enforcement, there are breaches from drivers. I get that enforcement has to be intelligence led, practical and cost effective. That might lead to enforcement in areas where other enforcement is already taking place—where there are clusters of potential driver breaches. In addition, it might not be in their local communities that those on a mobility scooter or in a wheelchair have their lives devastated by not being able to cross the road. A constituent of mine has had to travel an alternative route of almost one mile because of breaches involving dropped kerbs.
What guidance is there that local authorities should not focus their enforcement only on clusters of potential breaches or on areas where enforcement is cost effective, but should carry out enforcement where there are individual breaches that could absolutely devastate the lives of those with mobility issues?
That is an important point. Again, it is a decision to be made by local authorities, but local authorities should be informed by local communities. The continuous dialogue that is helping to inform the guidance on parking standards will come out at the same time as we commence the regulations, should they be agreed to when the committee and the Parliament vote.
On the responsibility of individuals, councillors will no doubt be approached by people who have individual circumstances. They can take that up with the local authority. Similarly, MSPs will no doubt be contacted. Local authorities increasingly have access panels of the type that the member spoke about, and the Government consults the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland to get its advice. That is proper and responsible community engagement. Any individual issue can be addressed with representation, but I cannot make local authorities do that; they have to do it themselves.
That is all positive, and I get it and have sympathy for local authorities. They are on tight budgets, and they need to be practical and realistic about where enforcement will take place, but is there guidance to ensure that they do not focus only on areas where they can get the largest amount of income or have the biggest impact in enforcing breaches, rather than individual cases such as those that I highlighted, where enforcement might have a much bigger impact in changing the quality of a person’s life?
The guidance is being prepared and finalised. Mr Doris makes a very good point, and I am sure that, if it is not already shaped in the guidance, we could consider putting it in. It is a very good point; it is not about whether the regulations have either a mass impact or an impact on the quality of life for one individual, because both are important.
Good morning. I welcome the fact that the regulations are being put in place to implement these important aspects in the 2019 act.
Quite understandably, during the process of the 2019 act, the needs of businesses for deliveries and unloading were considered, and exemptions were made in section 55(6) to allow pavement parking in reasonable circumstances as long as there is a gap of 1.5m at the edge of the pavement and the parking does not take place for more than 20 minutes. Unfortunately, in my constituency and others in urban Scotland, deliveries take place in an unreasonable way, which means that there is not adequate space left at the side, and delivery vehicles are parked for longer than 20 minutes.
We do not want to punish people; we want to change attitudes and practices—as the minister said—so, as part of the delivery of the enforcement of the regulations, as well as a public marketing campaign, will there be significant engagement with businesses, organisations, the large supermarkets and the prominent delivery companies—of which there is a long list—such as Parcelforce, DPD and UPS? It will be important to inform the drivers that change is coming.
Engagement with key delivery companies has been continuous. It has been part of the process of drawing up the regulations. Marketing will be general, but communications can be done nationally, and I am keen that that takes place. However, I also expect local authorities, along with their local Chamber of Commerce, to actively engage with businesses on particular streets where they will want to enforce the measure. I reassure you that ensuring that drivers are aware is part of an on-going process.
In reflecting on the issues with parking, we have recognised that, although some deliveries take place in branded vans and white vans, so we know who they are, increasingly, they are done by people in their own vehicles. However, if someone is making deliveries for a business purpose, as long as they abide by the regulations that the member referred to, they will not be subject to a penalty notice.
10:00
Those were all the questions that we had; there was quite a lengthy list this morning.
The next agenda item is a debate on the motion calling for the committee to recommend approval of the draft Parking Prohibitions (Enforcement and Accounts) (Scotland) Regulations 2023.
Minister, would you like to speak to the motion and move it, or just move it?
I am happy to just move it.
I move,
That the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee recommends that the Parking Prohibitions (Enforcement and Accounts) (Scotland) Regulations 2023 be approved.
Do any members want to make a contribution?
It is not a contribution but, given the nature of what has just been discussed, I refer to my entry in the register of interests, under the voluntary section, as I am a patron of Disability Equality Scotland. I want to be transparent about that.
That is noted. As no other members have any comments, minister, can I ask you to sum up and respond to the debate?
I thank the committee for its questions and contributions, and I hope that there is support for this important final part of the regulations.
The question is, that motion S6M-10704, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, be approved. Are we agreed?
Motion agreed to.
The committee will report on the outcome of the instrument in due course. I invite the committee to delegate authority to me, as convener, to finalise the report for publication. Are we agreed?
Jackie, you look nervous about that. Are you happy about it?
Yes, I am delighted.
Members indicated agreement.
10:01 Meeting suspended.Air adhart
Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1