Edinburgh's controlled parking zone expansion looks set to continue regardless of what people actually want – Steve Cardownie

Three months ago, I wrote a column headlined “Edinburgh council continues to move by stealth, not by openness, over the issue of city parking”. Events have recently unfolded which have done nothing to disabuse me of that view.

A new controlled parking zone has been proposed for Portobello (Picture: Lisa Ferguson)

Writing about the expansion of controlled parking zones (CPZs) throughout the city, I said that, “despite many misgivings and 1003 objections”, the transport committee had given the go-ahead for the introduction of several more in the city. Just this Monday, this newspaper reported that “a controlled parking zone is set to be introduced in Portobello despite a majority of residents opposing the move”, highlighting yet another example where the views of the majority are ignored if they do not conform to the council’s transport strategy.

Only this time, instead of blithely carrying on regardless of the opposition, councillors have sought to justify their actions by effectively saying that they attach more importance to some comments made by residents in the consultation exercise than the figures showing that a majority of local people are against their plans – as if that was not enough!

Former city councillor Stephen Hawkins, vice-chair of the Portobello Amenity Society, had informed the council that his group opposed the introduction of a CPZ saying that “the proposals will introduce parking controls on streets where currently there is no parking pressure and a concern has been raised about visitor parking for guesthouses making them less attractive to tourists” – so the threat to small businesses is very real.

According to Councillor Christopher Cowdy, “in Portobello the most common theme was for no change, only 40 per cent thought there were parking issues, 80 per cent said ‘I don’t like this’ and 57 per cent voted against the proposals”. However, this is not good enough for transport convener, Councillor Scott Arthur, who seems prepared to carry on regardless. He said: “If you look purely at numbers, it doesn’t always give you the depth of understanding about what the issues are – we have to look at the comments as well.”

Councillor Arthur is obviously disappointed that the majority of residents did not support the proposal but has managed to introduce his own loophole, allowing him to dismiss the results (which does not bode well for the outcomes of future consultation exercises) by calling for a further report, only this time it is to look closely at the comments that were submitted. Once that comes back to committee, he said that “we can make a decision that suits the needs of the community and also the wider city”.

The mask has slipped already. It smacks of, we are not going to abandon the proposal just because the majority are against it, we will look at the comments but then consider the needs of the community or, ominously, “the wider city”. In other words, those that fit in with the council’s overall transport parking strategy.

I would be delighted and astonished if Scott Arthur proved me wrong but the words of The Who frontman, Roger Daltrey, spring to mind: “Meet the new boss. Same as the old Boss.” For, despite his protestations that he would do things differently from his predecessor, it looks like more of the same to me.