(The conversation refers to Annexe 2 that was presented to the meeting. Click here to read Annexe 2.)
Cllr Byham: Thank you. Well, many of us have said it already but I’ll say it again, I think it is totally disingenuous to actually not consider and look at the very long list of people who are objecting strongly because of the possibility of charging. It’s bound to, once charging is introduced, to displace those people who don’t wish to pay any form of car parking at all and they will go onto the roads around as they have been doing for some considerable period of time. I think probably it is the wrong time to be doing something like this. It’s a lot of money to be spending. If we do spend it without going to put a P&D element into it, and we’ve got to go through another process again so I’m not supportive of this process at all, I’m afraid. The officers are in a very difficult position of having to put forward a case where they are basically misleading the public.
This is the transcription for the 12th March 2013 Joint Community and Corporate Overview & Scrutiny Committees, Service Plans where the Wey Hill (Fairground ) car park was discussed. The agenda and service plans for this meeting are currently not available on WBC’s website.
Cllr Vorley: With reference to ES 5.1, and the Wey Hill car park, you may or may not be aware that this is the subject of some discussion amongst the residents of Haslemere. And also that I think at the last O&S that I attended, I think the words “disingenuous” were used by fellow councillors, where you seem to be misleading the councillors on this subject. I have heard that indeed, and this is only informal that one of the officers of this council did actually put it to Jeremy Hunt that indeed this had already been submitted when in fact it hadn’t. But, that’s hearsay. But clearly I think the disingenuous nature of this seems to be confirmed by the fact that it is already in your service plan as a done deal, despite the fact that the last time we discussed this you talked about it wasn’t being done on an income based model. And yet, clearly, you are stating anticipated annual income of £100K to £120K per annum. So, it strikes me that it is a done deal and yet you are telling councillors in other meetings that it is not a done deal and I put it to you that you are again being somewhat disingenuous.