Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): I welcome Glyn Roberts and Adrian Farrell. I apologise for our timings today, Glyn. You will understand that the subject of the previous session has received a bit of media attention, so we had to hear it out this morning. I apologise for taking so long. You are here now, so I will not waste any more time. Do you want to go straight into your presentation?

Mr Glyn Roberts (Northern Ireland Independent Retail Trade Association): Thank you, Chair, and congratulations on your elevation. We welcomed the opportunity to send to members our brief and copies of our programme for local government, which touches on some of the wider car parking issues in town centres.

You are familiar with who we are and what we do. We represent independent retailers, wholesalers and suppliers in the sector. A number of Chambers of Commerce are affiliated to us. My colleague Adrian is from Portadown Chamber of Commerce, which is one of them. He will talk about a local case study in Portadown on off-street car parking. On car parking, we are committed to a vision of 21st-century town centres that are centres not just of retail but of hospitality excellence. Therefore, affordable and accessible car parking for shoppers and consumers is an essential element of modern and vibrant town centres.

As I mentioned, we have produced a very detailed programme for local government, 'Local First', which sets out a number of policy priorities for the 11 new councils in car parking and many other issues. We have been very active on the whole question of car parking, working with our colleagues in Chambers of Commerce. We led the successful campaign to prevent the introduction of on-street car parking charges. We successfully lobbied the Minister for Regional Development to introduce the five-hours-for-one-pound discount scheme for off-street car-parking and the freezing of car park charges. We have also been working with the private-sector car park owners, principally in Belfast city centre. We were successful in getting National Car Parks (NCP) to reduce the cost in its Montgomery Street car park in Belfast city centre, which was one of the most expensive car parks in Northern Ireland, so that it is now probably one of the cheapest, over the Christmas and new year period. We hope to have that same scheme in place this year as well.

We believe that the new system of 11 super-councils with enhanced powers offers a real opportunity to make a difference for local communities, the economy and town centres. It is about refreshing local government and giving councils greater freedom to ensure that they fulfil the ambitions of their local communities. We have been conscious that the whole debate on the reform of local government has been a very process-orientated one. We want to move it from process to policy. That is what we hope to do with our programme for local government.

I move now to the specific issues in the Bill. We are more than content for the current Bill to pass without amendment. I think it essential that the 11 councils are able to take the lead in regenerating their town centres and that they have powers over their off-street car parking. We are disappointed that, despite the best efforts of the Minister for Social Development, it was not possible to get regeneration powers over the line by 1 April 2015. I am disappointed that that will not take place until 2016. However, it is vital that off-street car parking passes to the councils by 1 April 2015.

We are aware of concerns raised about the possibility of local councils selling off their car parks. We are clear that, unless there is a sound economic reason that is beneficial to the local town centre in question, we will be very much opposed to such a sale. We are also keen to support the blue badge initiative in which disabled drivers will be given free car parking in the off-street car parks. The very least we expect the new super-councils to do is to continue the five-hours-for-a-pound discount scheme for off-street car parking, which has been working for a number of months. We understand that it may well continue until the end of March. It has worked very well: it levelled the playing field between the large out-of-town retailers, which have free car parking, and town centres. Five hours for a pound is the minimum that we would like the 11 super-councils to provide for off-street car parking. It may well be that they will have free car parking at different times of the year, whether it is Small Business Saturday, which is 6 December, or Christmas. My colleague from Portadown will talk more about that. It gives that extra flexibility to super-councils.

I spent most of the summer talking to nearly all council chief executives about a lot of these issues. They raised with us the issue that the revenue from car parks will fund their future maintenance, but the revenue surplus is being top-sliced by DFP before transfer, leaving the councils to foot the bill for future maintenance. They also said that the money that DRD receives from monitoring rounds to resurface off-street car parks needs to be available to councils as well.

I will touch briefly on some wider points. By 2020, we would like on-street parking transferred to local councils as well. I know that that is slightly trickier to do, but, surely, if you are giving them one half of car parking, you should give them the other half. This will probably be touched on in relation to the ongoing rates revaluation by the Finance Minister, but we also need large out-of-town supermarkets to start to pay their way on rates. They have a competitive advantage with free car parking, and they pay lower rates per square foot than many of our members in town centres. We understand that the Finance Minister is looking at that. We also want councils, working in conjunction with DRD, to introduce a time-disc system for delivery and service vehicles. Ultimately, we would like responsibility for local roads transferred to the councils by 2020. We recognise that the transfer of on-street parking and local roads may well be a second-term priority for the new super-councils, but, if they are to make an economic difference and be the local leader in regenerating town centres, they need the tools to do the job.

I will hand over to Adrian, who will give a local case study.

Mr Adrian Farrell (Portadown Chamber of Commerce): This past year, we have been very encouraged by, for example, the five-hours-for-a-pound scheme and the fact that our members decided to put cash behind a marketing campaign for it. I have some examples. In May, the Portadown Chamber of Commerce ran a campaign supporting the DRD initiative of five hours for a pound. That worked very well, to the extent that, in August, Craigavon Borough Council came on board with us, and we had a second campaign to support the strategy. The feedback from retailer surveys has been very positive.

They would not have put money behind the second campaign if the first had not worked. We are hopeful that this will continue in the months to come. It is a very strong tool for us. It has worked for the traders, as can be seen in their figures, and we wish it to continue. As an extension to it, and where we see the working relationship with super-councils in the months and years to come, is the fact that Craigavon Borough Council supported us on the initiative. Last December, we were delighted that Craigavon Borough Council helped in securing a free car parking day on the last Saturday before Christmas. We are enthusiastic about the fact that Craigavon Borough Council is, again, supporting a free car parking day on the first Saturday in December, which coincides with small business Saturday. Our members are already gearing up for activities in conjunction with the free car parking day. Those are examples of where council and traders can work together for the betterment of the town, and the figures back that up.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): Thank you. Glyn, when you were going through your list, I thought you were looking at the Clerk beside me, and, since he has a beard, had decided to come with your Santa list. You and I have had differing opinions over the years. Adrian, I came from local government. I am supportive of the direction you are taking, and I am supportive of what NIIRTA has done. The five-hours-for-a-pound car parking was a great idea, but, to my mind — and I am speaking as an individual, albeit I am in the Chair — some of the things may be unrealistic. Glyn, I will take your first two points. On the one hand, you say that you want the Bill to go forward without amendment, but, on the other, you have concerns about councils selling off car parks. The reason why members of the Committee are minded towards that amendment is so that there is protection there. So, it would be difficult for us to deliver your first and your second wishes. If you look back at the Minister's statement to the House, while we have not had clarity around it, you will see that he said that some key sites had already been identified for regeneration. I am paraphrasing there. Like yourself, I am supportive of our town centres, and I fear that some council officers would have very ambitious plans, but forget about providing adequate car parking to bring people into the town centres. For that reason, and that reason only, I know some members will be minded towards an amendment. We are not saying, "Don't sell these off; don't regenerate"; I have not heard any member say that. Town centres need regeneration, and they need a degree of life pumped back into them. We are mindful that we are gifting something. In return, we want protection for our town centres. We do not want over-zealous council officials deciding, "This is very good; we're going to sell this off. We'll bring in additional coffers to our council but not actually do anything about the problem for parking." So, I think that we are singing from the same hymn sheet on this.

Mr Roberts: I think that we are very clear. There needs to be a very good reason for them to be selling off. If they are just selling off to make a couple of quid to boost their finances, it would be absolutely unacceptable to sell. We have to see what type of amendment the Committee is putting forward, but it is not something that we are going to die in the ditch over or fall out over in any serious way. Ultimately, on balance, it is about giving the new super-councils a large amount of flexibility. Obviously, they will be accountable, and they will have substantial new powers. If any of them were to do that, members of our very strong chamber network would be on their tail straight away. If, for instance, a new development in a town centre meant that they had to move a car park, or anything like that, we would be very clear. If it was a case of selling off to make a couple of quid for the council, that would be absolutely unacceptable. If you can have an amendment that gives the council flexibility, but which sets out some conditions, we would have no objection.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): The members will speak for themselves when they get the opportunity, but I cannot see any reason why we would want to have the amendment, other than that. It is to protect our town centres and to ensure that we do not have officials in officialdom deciding that it would be good as a revenue boost for their council. In my time on Antrim Borough Council, we lobbied DRD to try to reduce the Castle centre car park costs, but, unfortunately, to no avail. It is interesting that the campaign you have cited has resulted in an increase in car park numbers and in revenue by reducing the costs. It took them a long time to listen, but it is useful. The councils will have the power to drive their town centres, and that is important.

Mr Ó hOisín: Thanks for your presentation. I echo the prioritisation thing that was mentioned in the Minister's last statement on the issue. In many town centres now across the board, much of the parking is on sites that are derelict more than anything else. We hope that that situation will be addressed at some point in the future, and those will come back into use. That is the issue that we have to safeguard. We have to make sure that there is adequate parking. Development is all well and good, and we see, particularly in the city here, some of the areas where development is proposed to go ahead, but there has been no consideration of parking. I am thinking particularly of the north of the city and around the proposed university development. I think that that has to be a guarantee.

I am interested in the fact that you are also advocating devolving on-street parking to the local councils. Do you see any issues with that, as, particularly in the past, you have been very supportive of the Living over the Shop (LOTS) scheme in order to regenerate town centres? People are actually back living in town centres again. Do you see any problems there?

Mr Roberts: First, we fought that campaign because it was crucial. In towns like Limavady, to use your example, people would drive in, do a quick shop and go away again. They do not have to footer with any change, and the first hour or two being free means that you have the churn of traffic, so it is not being hogged all day. Likewise, the five-hours-for-a-pound parking means that you have ample time to do a shop, have a decent meal and go away again. Workers and commuters cannot abuse that, and it means that you have the churn there.

One of the things that we would like to see straight away is for the new super-councils to do an effective audit of their vacant shops, and it is disappointing that there will be a delay in the regeneration powers. We have not just the highest shop vacancy rate in the UK, but we have twice the UK national average when it comes to shop vacancies. The councils need to audit their vacant shops and to sit down and think about what they are going to do and whether it is going to be more retail, whether it could be retail incubator units, whether it could be for community use or whether it could be used for another type of business. However, the proviso in all of that is to ensure that whatever business, group or service is located in those empty shops or buildings, it produces and builds footfall for the town centre in question. It is about trying to get as many different types of business into the town centre as possible.

You referred to LOTS, and it is crucial that we have that. If you look at large parts of Belfast city centre, you will see that there is a huge opportunity for that. Obviously, a lot of that may be driven by the University of Ulster campus moving into the Cathedral Quarter. Our town centres have to be living communities as well as a vibrant mix of retail and hospitality. It is important that we remember that town centres are also community hubs, and the people whom we represent see themselves as providing a community service alongside the doctor, the chemist and the dentist.

Mr Ó hOisín: How do you see the funding for resurfacing and maintenance working out between the Department and the new councils?

Mr Roberts: I have met nine of the 11 chief executives over the last few months, and that subject has been raised. I am pleased to see that the DOE managed to get the partnership panel established, which will hopefully be the link between the 11 councils and the Executive. I think that those issues could be resolved within that. There needs to be a new sense of partnership between the 11 councils and the Executive but also with a host of other bodies as well. We have put forward the idea that the new 11 councils should establish growth partnerships that take in representatives from the private sector, chambers of commerce and the FE colleges, so that they are very focused on economic growth, but, at the same time, if they have issues in and around maintenance and such things, they can raise that. Obviously, the Regional Development Minister will still be there and the Department will have a policy role. I am under no illusion; it is a big job to get the 11 councils ready by 1 April. In one sense, while it is disappointing, it is understandable that the regeneration side could not be done in time. We are moving from 26 councils to 11 and, at the same time, giving them extra powers, and I have not even touched on planning.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): We are on the wrong Committee for both of those subjects.

Mr Dallat: Glyn mentioned Limavady. Does he agree with me that the influence of car parks varies widely from town to town? What might be right for one town is not right for another. In Pompeii, there was a graduated form of parking there 2,000 years ago. It may well be that if this legislation is too tightly tied up, local councils may not have the flexibility to address an issue in Ballycastle, for example, which would need particular flexibility. Over time, car parking changes in towns and moves from one area to another, so legislation that is too tight about the ability to sell car parks may not be a good thing if the business centre has moved through time. How do we provide for that in the Bill to make sure that we do not tie every council's hands up their back?

Mr Roberts: That is why we said that we were not really pushing any specific amendment. The amendment that the Chairman has referred to is on the proviso that it gives the flexibility. Let us not forget that the centrepiece of all this is putting locally elected councillors in the driving seat in their communities to effect the change that they represent. That is why we said that, in the future, they should look at the cabinet system. That may be a longer term objective for the council, but you put councillors in that decision-making role rather than council officials. I think that it is important that we do that. That is a big culture change. Let us not forget that, in nearly all the main towns, there are very active chambers. We also want to see them given an enhanced role in all this because they will really come into their own. People that Adrian works with in Portadown are the ones who will be driving a lot of the change. We are there to support, enhance and empower communities and chambers of commerce and councils. That is why we are ambitious and want to see them, through time, being given extra powers, but let us get them over the line by 1 April, and let us see how we can build on that.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): There is also a danger in that. I am thinking from a local government background. You work with traders. Councils have not always been that generous to traders in towns, and they have been disadvantaged. I am speaking from my experience of where traders were to dispose of their own waste. So, let us not think that this is the golden bullet and that councils will help all these traders, because the experience to date has been somewhat different. I have to say that hard campaigns were fought in our area to support traders in the disposal of waste, but the council officials always stopped it. So, from that point of view, I do not think that we have people who are brave enough to take on the task that you suggested of putting councillors in that role as opposed to council officials. That is why I keep harping back. We need to protect our businesses and our towns. My personal opinion is that we cannot give councils a free run at what they want to do. That is where the protection model has to be built in. I take John's point that we cannot tie their hands, but we need to be sure that they are going to provide equivalent spaces somewhere in that particular town or location.

Mr McNarry: You are very welcome. I wish all your members a profitable Christmas. They deserve it this year.

As the Chairman said, there is going to be a battle on flogging off car parks. To my horror, the Minister is going full steam ahead in identifying sites. Whether that is more money to finance Translink remains to be seen, but I have suggested a five-year timescale before anyone flogs off a car park under this legislation to give it time to bed in. What do you think would be the best use of revenue for car parks being put into towns now that councils have the responsibility? I support what you are saying about regeneration — I think that we all do — but are you concerned that, as the Chairman was saying, where there are two Departments, there is more likelihood of cooperation in regeneration, whereas the councils may not be so cooperative? Are you clear that the councils see a defining role for themselves in regeneration? I can illustrate that using the town of Comber, which you know, where there is a public realm programme going on, but even the Department will not resurface the road. So, we will have lovely new footpaths, lighting, trees and the whole lot and — is this being recorded for Hansard? — a dreadful looking road surface and car park. What is your view on that?

Mr Roberts: It has always been a big frustration that, essentially, four Departments have responsibility for town centres here. We have DRD, which has responsibility for transport car parking, DOE, which does the planning, DSD, which does the core town centre regeneration and public realm stuff, and the Department of Finance and Personnel, which has a role through rates. You can add another one to that, because DARD has responsibility for village development. I think that it has always been a by-product of having too many Departments here that has made it very difficult to get a joined-up approach to town centres. That is why giving the councils a lot of those powers from those Departments potentially means that they could be the change makers. So, instead of having to manoeuvre around four or five different private offices and Ministers, we would, in theory, speak to a relevant councillor or chairman of a committee or a council official with responsibility for getting those things done. We were very conscious that, over the years, it has been a very process-orientated debate, and that is why we produced our programme for local government, setting out our ideas and bringing solutions forward rather than just bringing problems. That is why we have been proactively trying to get round a lot of the shadow councils to say, "These are our ideas that you might want to look at".

On your earlier point, if a council were just selling them off to make a bit of money, that would be unacceptable. I think that there are issues around maintenance, and that is an issue that the councils need to have with DRD and DFP. Also, I think that five hours for a pound is the minimum that we would expect them to do. That has worked out very well and has brought increased revenue into the majority of those car parks. As long as that money is able to be put forward to maintain those car parks and make sure that they are up to scratch, I think that we will be very happy. It is never something that councils will make a huge amount of money out of, but it works as long as it is viable and well maintained and there is proper enforcement.

You also have the situation where you could have two different sets of parking attendants. I do not know what colours they would wear. Maybe one set would be blue and the others would be red. I do not know.

Mr McNarry: For God's sake not red. We are frightened of red. Anything red will give us a penalty.

Mr Roberts: That issue will be resolved, but, obviously, giving the councils responsibility for on-street parking at some point in the future makes a certain amount of sense.

Mr Moutray: Adrian has outlined the potential of what can be done, and it has been done by the chamber in Portadown with Craigavon Borough Council, which is a very proactive local council. Chair, it is a council where councillors take decisions, not council officials like in Antrim, as you alluded to a minute ago.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): Are you not still building Craigavon?

Mr Moutray: No, we are long since arrived. Come and visit us some time.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): It is an unfinished town.

Mr Moutray: It is just a pity that Dolores Kelly is not on the Committee.

There is a lot more detail in this than ever was thought at the start. The Minister wanted to push it through. There is a lot more detail, and we do need safeguarding measures because not all councils might react the same way as some like Craigavon. We need to put in some safeguards to protect so that councils cannot sell off sites within a period of time.

Mr McNarry: Can we see that poster? If you were to put a wee bit more yellow in that, it would be absolutely brilliant for me.

Mr Farrell: A lot of it was to do with the relationship that we had with council officials and our local councillors on the ground. That is what pushed this through. I have to say that the development committee in Craigavon is very much pro supporting the town centres. This is proof of the pudding.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): The whole thing about supporting town centres is a no-brainer. It is just that not everybody has bought into it. That has been the difficulty for years. The more vibrant our town centres are, the more revenue our councils generate. We are all on the same page on that.

Mr Roberts: The Belfast situation is completely different; the five-hours-for-a-pound scheme does not apply to its off-street car parks. In the same sense, we have to have a balance. We recognise that there is a park-and-ride and a well-funded Metro system in Belfast. People also walk and cycle. Those are serious options that need to be considered as well. We have covered that in our programme for local government. We very much support the work that Sustrans does as well. Obviously, that is alongside making sure that consumers and shoppers have the choice of whether to take their car, use the bus, walk, cycle or whatever. We very much want to see that choice. Obviously, there are issues of traffic congestion in many town centres, so we have to get more people using public transport.

The Chairperson (Mr Clarke): I am sorry to rush you; we are close to being no longer quorate. I think that you will detect that we are generally supportive in terms of the part of the Bill that we can talk about today. There are other parts that you talk about in your paper that are outside our control or are outside the Bill and are not part of DRD. We are generally supportive of the principle of what you are saying. We are maybe slightly different in the detail of how we get there, but the consensus is that we want to drive towards getting the Bill through, with, possibly, some minor amendments. Thanks for coming today. I am sure that we will work together in future, as we have done in the past.

Mr Roberts: Thank you, Chair.