Is Government passing the buck on a national problem?

Glenn Lyons is disappointed, but not surprised, that the Government has avoided introducing a nationwide ban to pavement parking

Five years after the consultation on Managing Pavement Parking in England closed, we finally have a response from Government.

Let’s put aside the shocking length of time it’s taken to get here - a time within which cars have continued getting bigger and vulnerable road users lives have been blighted by (ab)use of pavements (walkways) for parking.

We now know there were over 15,000 responses. “92% of local authorities, 80% of commercial businesses, 96% of other organisations and 82% of individuals that responded to the consultation said that pavement parking was a problem in their  area.”

It sounds like a national problem to me. Yet Government has chosen not to take the step to introduce “a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemption” (Option 3 in the consultation).

At first glance I am disappointed but not surprised. In my response to the consultation, I expressed concern that falling short of pursuing this option would largely perpetuate existing norms and ‘abuse’ of the pavement by pavement parkers  at the expense of those who walk or wheel on the pavement. It would continue to send a clear message that pavements are ‘mixed use’ for motor vehicles as well as walkers/wheelers. As such it would be fundamentally out of line with any policy focus on a modal  hierarchy.

The Government has, however, “developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3”. So, what does this mean?

In the ‘Pavement parking: options for change’ document, the DfT said it “will proceed with Option 2, providing local authorities with the power to enforce against unnecessary obstruction of the pavement”. Meanwhile, the aim is to “bring  forward a regulatory framework which is national in scope and local in implementation” that “will enable local transport authorities to prohibit pavement parking in their areas”.

So, I think this means Option 2+, where the + becomes critical and for which the DfT has commissioned more research. My understanding is that a local transport authority could decide to introduce a default (enforcible) ban on pavement parking,  and perhaps allow exceptions for particular locations and circumstances. If I’m right, then the questions on my mind are:

1. Is this national government passing the buck on a national problem because it is a political hot potato, or is it truly in the spirit of devolution?

2. Given we waited over five years to hear back from one consultation, how quickly will we see Option 2+ in play?

3. How straightforward will national government make it for local transport authorities to “prohibit pavement parking in their areas”.

On balance, I’m still p*ssed off we had to wait this long, but I’m perhaps now mildly optimistic that we will see some constructive movement on this important matter. If we don’t then I consider it laughable that any Government can truly  say it prioritises active travel (especially when being at pains to stress it is on the side of the motorist).

Glenn Lyons is the Mott MacDonald Professor of Future Mobility at UWE Bristol.