I could talk about how much money the Scottish Government is spending on spin doctors, or how much it’s spending on the NHS. I could even talk about the deal the SNP has done with the Greens. But I’m not going to. I’m going to talk about that other issue of great importance: how hard it is to find a free parking place and I’m going to talk about it because in a small but vital way, it’s part of the big question we should be asking ourselves post-virus. Yes, we have to put the pieces back together again, but do we have to put them back in quite the same way?
What I’m referring to specifically is the way we do cities. Cities like Inverness, where I was at the weekend. The main thing that struck me about being there (and it was the first time I’d been in the centre of any city for 18 months) is that Leakey’s of Inverness is still one of the best bookshops in the world – words piled on words piled on words. But the other impression I got was how much everything has stayed the same. The city was busy. And expensive. And crowded. And I couldn’t find a free parking place.
Eventually, I solved the problem by parking in a lane and calling up the company that hands out fines and convincing them to keep the wardens away for an hour. But my problem – and my efforts to negotiate the Mobius Strip of a one-way system, round and round we go – reminded me that the issue of cities hasn’t gone away. The big plan before the pandemic was to discourage cars by making city centres difficult and expensive but that was before businesses were forced to close down. Should the anti-car plan still be the plan?
In a small way, there may be signs of hope. You may remember that in March last year many cities, including Glasgow, suspended their parking charges. Charges were also dropped at hospitals with the stated intention of helping key workers, but there was undoubtedly a benefit for city businesses as well. That’s why many appealed for the council to think again when they reintroduced the city charges in the summer. But no. They didn’t listen and why would they? The council makes about £5million a year from tickets.
However, one piece of good news this week was that the suspension of the hospital parking charges is to be made permanent after the Government effectively bought out PFI car parks. The Health Secretary Humza Yousaf said it was about phasing out the legacy of PFI (in other words, he was having a pop at the “Red Tories”) but John Paterson, of NHS Tayside, put his finger on the real benefit. The suspension of charges, said Mr Paterson, had benefited patients, staff and visitors alike.
So why can’t the same be done on the high street? Why can’t it be made easier to park for free and have a spot of browsing in Leakey’s of Inverness or any other shop for that matter? Before the pandemic, the model that operated was that councils and landlords earned millions in parking fees, business rates, and rent. But after the pandemic, the model is no longer viable or desirable. Not only are there fewer businesses to screw for money, they need the customers to come to them more than ever.
The answer – or at least one of them – is to permanently suspend parking charges in the centre of towns and cities to encourage people in. And if you have any doubt about whether it would work, look at how out-of-town shopping (where the parking is free) has thrived while city-centre shopping (where the parking is extortionate) has declined. Free parking, especially in places where public transport is limited, also doesn’t have to be a great environmental problem as we move to electric vehicles.
I realise all of this might sound selfish – why can’t I park outside my favourite shop for free? – but remember that every customer is a customer who might come back. The next time I’m in Inverness, I would like to go into town. I would like to go to Leakey’s and browse through the words piled on words piled on words. But the truth is that city centres aren’t an invitation. They should say ‘come on in’. But instead they say ‘pay up or keep out’.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of the Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel