There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of pecuniary interest.

The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed.

The Director of Environment and Regeneration introduced the report on the emissions based charging proposals.

In response to Panel Members questions the Director of Environment and Regeneration and the Environmental Health Manager provided responses;

·         We received 1600 responses to the consultation which is a small proportion of motorists in the borough. We are seeking to balance the views of residents alongside the overriding policy objectives.

·         The difference is that season tickets for those motorists who visit locations which isn’t entirely comparable to resident’s permits which are used 365 days a year near their home. We are also seeking to nudge behaviours towards active/sustainable travel.

·         It’s too early to tell how successful Emissions Based Charging has been in other boroughs and difficult to separate from other initiatives such as ULEZ.

·         Currently there are 33 Air Quality monitoring stations that break legal limits, these are mainly around busy town centres. All the data is publically available on the Merton website.

·         50 carer permits issued per month.

·         ACTION: Head of Parking Services to feedback on how many other London Boroughs have EBC consultations in the pipeline.

The Chair invited representations from public speakers;

Dr Mfanwy Morgan – Residents Association of West Wimbledon:

·         The consultation survey showed ¾ of respondents disagreed with the proposal.

·         Owners of older cars will need to pay £500 plus a national emission rate of £275 – This is a totally inappropriate increase. Those in lower incomes groups will struggle.

·         Emission does not always correlate with AQ’s. Cars do not pollute when parked. Not considering mileage only gives a partial view.

·         Nudge theory assumes free choice however choices are often constrained by finances. Older people and lower incomes groups adversely affected.

Chris Larkman - Apostles Residents Association:

·         Agree with environmental aspects and happy to pay more for privilege of running a car. But the reason the consultation hits so hard against proposals is simply the unfairness of it.

·         The feelings are – If you have a driveway, you pay nothing. Others are hard done by. If everyone was paying that would be equal.

·         Please look at visitor parking. Differential charges will make it impossible for builders, friends with diesel cars etc.

·         Town centres have been hit really hard with the impacts of Covid, please look at 20 minutes free parking so town centres have some hope to survive.

In response to Panel Members questions the Director of Environment and Regeneration and the Parking Services Manager provided responses;

·         The uptake of e-vouchers is growing and there are no immediate plans to phase out scratch cards.

·         There has been significant investment in the electric vehicle infrastructure which provides an incentive for residents to shift to a lower polluting vehicle.

·         We receive a huge amount of feedback through the parking teams and the boroughs community forums which we utilise. We are more than happy to take that further and wider.

The Panel moved to discuss recommendations;

Councillor Daniel Holden raised a motion that recommended to Cabinet “This panel calls upon the Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

This item was not taken.

The work programme was agreed.