Lib Dem Councillors have expressed their disappointment that the scrutiny call-in, which had been organised to look into the increases in parking costs in Bath, has been dismissed.

The panel voted, by four votes to three, to dismiss the call-in, with Conservative Councillors from outside of Bath backing the original decision taken by their Conservative Cabinet colleague. The Cabinet member will now be free to go ahead and implement the decision to apply increases of up to 60% to residents’ permit costs across the city, as well as a number of other changes to parking costs and arrangements.

The call-in panel raised a number of issues around poor consultation and excessive increases to permit costs. Although all Councillors agreed that consultation on this decision had been inadequate, Conservative Councillors appeared more concerned with the state of the Council’s finances than the issue of engaging with those who will be affected.

Councillor Ian Gilchrist (Widcombe), who led the call-in signatories commented:

“I am disappointed that the Conservative and Independent members of the panel did not recognise the merits of the case made to uphold the call-in.

“I thought that the arguments outlining the damaging effects of extending charged times in the city centre to 8pm were pretty compelling, and if they don’t listen to Nod Knowles (Director of Bath Festivals) who will they listen to?

“I am slightly mollified by the apparent concession that Cllr Gerrish has made in the direction of Sunday evening parking, but this still has to be confirmed. If we have achieved even this small bit of good then that is a good thing. Residents will not be pleased at a 60% increase in their annual charges, but I do draw comfort from the thought that we at least did our best to oppose this.”

Cllr Steve Hedges (Odd Down), who sat on the panel, said:

“This really is a kick in the teeth for the democratic process; this decision has been made with complete disregard for best practice in decision-making such as engaging with hard-to-reach groups and the elderly who are often on fixed incomes. The Cabinet member also refused to address the issues raised in the call-in notice, including my concerns around costs of permits for traders, most of whom are small independent businesses who can not afford such huge increases.”

Concerns raised by Nod Knowles as to the impact on the night time economy, were supported by Cllr Roger Symonds (Combe Down), who said:

“Extending car park charging from 6pm to 8pm will have a knock-on effect for all evening and night time businesses in the city centre. How long before this money grabbing administration extends charging until 8pm for kerbside parking as well? It is significant that none of the four councillors who voted to dismiss the call-in live in Bath.”

The Council met on the 27th March to discuss issues relating to the forthcoming review of secondary school provision. The Cabinet will have to make a decision on schools in May, and last night’s meeting was a chance for issues to be aired and discussed in public by parents, school governors and Councillors. However, as was made clear at the start of the meeting, no decision was taken at this Council meeting.

The motion which was voted upon was not the one published in the Council papers on 17 March, and the unanimous adoption of the motion did not represent a specific endorsement of any particular strategy or plan for secondary school provision in Bath and North East Somerset. The vote served to officially thank the O&S panel for the preparatory work which had already been done and to formally request that Cabinet take account of the points of view raised at Council when making its decision.

Speaking after the Council meeting, Councillor Paul Crossley said:

I was very pleased that the Cabinet member for children gave a commitment to go over the recording of the meeting and ensure that all the points which had been raised will be dealt with. We will be looking closely at the forthcoming consultation and decision process to ensure this is the case.

A number of Liberal Democrat Councillors spoke in the debate to raise issues which should be considered by the Cabinet. Several spoke of the importance of ensuring the consultation on changes was honest, open and thorough.

Councillor Marian McNeir called for the consultations to be done “in a sensitive way”. Councillor Nigel Roberts called on the Cabinet to make an effort to contact groups “we don’t traditionally get in touch with” and to consider co-location of community facilities, such as libraries, in new schools.

Councillor David Dixon has been involved in a campaign run by parents for better travel to school provision in the area. He spoke of the need to consider transport and that schools provision should be “underpinned by a sound, effective school transport system”.

Councillor Andy Furse focussed on the issue of co-educational schools in Bath, and welcomed an expression of willingness on the part of Oldfield school to go co-ed given that co-ed schools are preferred by 60% of families. He called on the Cabinet to “reconsider its view on Oldfield school in light of the commitment on co-ed given tonight [by the Chair of Governors]”.

Councillor Caroline Roberts also spoke about Oldfield school and the dozens of communications she, and Councillor Loraine Brinkhurst, had received from parents who were worried and confused about the decision making process. She said “many parents feel the decision has already been made and they have missed their chance to speak out”; she also called on the Cabinet to reach out to parents during the consultations and “don’t just expect them to come to you”.

Co-ed is also an important issue for Culverhay school and this was brought to the Cabinet’s attention by Councillor Gerry Curran, who spoke of the length of time for which this had been an aspiration for the school. He asked the Cabinet to “bring forward a package of support for the school to enable a smooth transition to co-ed status”.