§ 2.38 p.m.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people, during the last six months, have complained to the borough treasurers within the London area that the fines imposed upon them for the unauthorised use of a parking, place, where meters are in operation, are not justifiable, and in what proportion of these cases has the decision been made that the fines should be waived.]
§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD CHESHAM)My Lords, fines imposed for parking meter offences are the responsibility of the magistrates' courts and it is not within the jurisdiction of local authorities to waive them. Local authorities are, however, responsible for collecting the excess charge which becomes payable after the period of time purchased by putting a coin into a meter has expired, and I think perhaps it is this excess charge that the noble Lady has in mind. It covers a further period of two hours before it becomes an offence to leave the parked vehicle in a parking bay.
385 The administration of parking meter schemes is entirely a matter for the local authorities concerned. My right honourable friend has been in touch with them, but understands that the information asked for about the number of people who have complained about the imposition of the excess charge, and in how many of such cases the charge has been waived, is not readily available. There is no reason to suppose that the authorities are exercising their discretion in this matter unwisely.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, the information for which I ask involves only the collection of a few numbers, and I would remind the noble Lord that a week has elapsed since I put the Question down. Borough treasurers are easily available, and it is a question of simple arithmetic to add together the number of people who have been charged and the number of people who have finally had the fine waived. So may I ask why this information is not easily available?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I am informed that the figures could be obtained only by a detailed analysis of records covering a large number of cases, and I understand that the authorities concerned are not very eager to undertake what they regard as quite a large task. That, my Lords, is the reason—unless I have somehow misunderstood the noble Lady's Question.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, I think the noble Lord has rather proved my point. He has now said that this would be rather a large task, which means, in fact, that there are a large number of names to be collected, and that certain borough treasurers have not kept these names. If this problem and the injustices did not exist, then this large task would not exist. May I ask the noble Lord, if he is not anxious to give me this answer publicly, whether he would write to me about it? I am quite prepared to give him another week or two to collect this information.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I cannot entirely agree with the noble Lady that because it is a large task it means 386 there are many cases, and that they involve injustice. But it surely does mean that the councils concerned would have to go through all the cases involving excess charges which they have on their books, taking out of those names the ones where any complaint had been made, and seeing what happened to them. I think that would require a good deal of work, although it does not necessarily mean that there are a large number of cases where complaints have been made. However, I am anxious, as I hoped I had proved by my original Answer, to help the noble Lady in any way I can. I do not want to make difficulties and to play upon words, but my difficulty is that I was not quite sure what the noble Lady meant by "not justifiable". I took it to mean that it was some reason other than mechanical defect (or something like that); that the charge had been unfairly imposed, and on that basis it gave rise to the difficulty. On the other hand, I shall be very glad, if I can, to have another go and see if there is something more I can find out which will help the noble Lady.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, may I put this question finally? Could the noble Lord say whether the Minister of Transport is satisfied that these machines are entirely accurate, and, furthermore, whether this arbitrary method of collecting funds does not deprive an individual from ventilating what might be a miscarriage of justice?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I do not want to start a debate on this with the noble Lady, but it is a question whether or not you are going to call an "excess charge" a "fine". I thought it was clearly laid down that this amount of money was payable for a further period of two hours over the original period and as such is not a fine: it is an excess charge. I do not think it can be said, when a charge is payable on a further period, that this is an arbitrary decision. My right honourable friend has no reason to think that this system is being applied unwisely in any way. I agree that it is not unknown for a meter to go wrong, but on the whole, so far as I am aware the system is a satisfactory one.