Deputy vows to bring paid parking back before States

PROPOSALS in favour of paid parking will be taken to the States in March despite the majority of Environment board members being against it.


PROPOSALS in favour of paid parking will be taken to the States in March despite the majority of Environment board members being against it.

Deputy Yvonne Burford believes the debate on paid parking is one be had by the whole Assembly.

This comes after deputy minister for Environment, Tony Spruce, revealed the issue would not be included in the Road Transport Strategy because three of the five members of the board were not in favour.

‘I will be bringing proposals to the States in some form at the same time as the department’s report to enable the debate to be had in the open forum of the States,’ Deputy Burford said.

‘I believe that a form of paid parking would benefit the island, but it must be introduced in conjunction with other measures such as much improved public transport.’

Comments for: "Deputy vows to bring paid parking back before States"

Could be Wrong

I'm a little confused, aren't we already paying for parking?

I thought that the last time that this was brought up, that instead of introducing paid parking, the States added charges to each litre of petrol we buy and that this was to be used for the maintenance of parking areas on the island?

If paid parking is introduced, will the price of petrol come down?

Yvonne Burford

Yes, I consider that if the States do vote to introduce any form of paid parking that the 1.2p levy on fuel introduced as a result of the Brouard amendment in lieu of a paid parking clock should be rescinded. Any proposals I take to the States on paid parking will include a recommendation to rescind the levy.


I trust you will remember to increase that by the percentages fuel duty has gone up each year since it was introduced?

Yvonne Burford

Hi fr,

I will certainly ask T&R how they account for it and if this hypothecated amount has been adjusted for inflation each year then that is the figure I would seek to have rescinded.

Yvonne Burford

(or the duty increase if not coincident with RPIX)


It is about time we caught up with the rest of the developed world, everywhere I travel seems to charge me to park. I regularly drive to work, I also use he bus, but I remain supportive of the need for paid parking. Well done Yvonne.


Whats CAPITAS cut the normal 6% ?

Could be Wrong

Would the scheme include residents parking?

I currently live on a busy road and have a residents parking permit. Whilst this is nice to have, it does not guarentee that I am able to park my car in a space near my home.

There was talk of charging for residents permits, will this too be part of your plans?

Yvonne Burford

Residents permits are already charged for at £25 per annum. (£75 for a 3-year permit).

My view is that the residents scheme would need to be expanded to prevent migration of commuter parking into residential areas. I do not see any argument to charge any more than at present.

Could be Wrong

I have a permit and have not made any payment for it...perhaps I should just keep quiet!

Besides I also have an issue with the residents permit.

As I understand it, you pay £75 for a three year permit? What happens if you move and no longer require the permit, do you receive a refund for the years it was not used?

Wouldn't a yearly charge of £25 be better?

Yvonne Burford

As I understand it you receive a refund for whole unused years if you move. The idea is to keep admin to a minimum by not making it an annual permit.

Roy Gueno

The thing about hip-hop today is it's smart, its insightful. The way they can communicate a complex message in a very short space is remarkable..


Ok, so would she like to timeshare her free parking space at Frossard house that us plebs (the public to her) pay for?

I vote she can have it Saturdays and Sundays. I will have it Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday and she can pay out of her own pocket for her parking elsewhere!!!

half a cup

Why should you get that Space? I don't understand your logic


Not only does public transport need to be fixed before considering paid parking, but it eeds to be run for a specified period to prove it is up to the task.

Paid parking shouldn't be used purely to fill an empty pot!


Its depressing that any debate around transport in Guernsey ends up mired in the paid parking debate. Its worth pointing out that:

1. Parking isn't free at the moment- it has a cost to the taxpayer in the form of maintenance, opportunity (not being used for anything else) and health.

2. The debate isn't about whether we have or don't have paid parking, its about whether the states even get to debate an integrated strategy which MAY feature some sensibly applied and well thought through bit of paid parking.

3. Guernsey hasn't had a fit for purpose transport strategy which genuinely addrsses the problems and usuanstainability of the staus quo for a long time...

We need to get the hard work and thought that went into the excellent consulataion earlier in the year in front of the states. If I remeber correctly, paid parking was a consideration in that...

Its an emotive issue, but we must not let our emotions rule us on this one.


Agree Rollo. I think its a shame that the focus on paid parking is going to take the focus off other areas of concern regarding transport in Guernsey.

We already have the fuel levy instead of paid parking- why undo this with all the associated management costs which would go with this move and for what? The same cost just sourced from elsewhere with little or no impact on town traffic or other. So instead of faffing around with paid parking again, it should be put to the side and give other areas in the integrated strategy the spotlight and consideration that they deserve.

Perhaps it would help if you were to highlight the other aspects of the transport strategy?



The levy on fuel goes straight into general revenue. Paid parking would not be a tax but a charge for the use of a service. Therefore, if the States wanted to, they could ring-fence this charge and put it towards the public transport system so helping the under-funded service become one that actually could proved an alternative way of traveling for more people, thus reducing demand on parking and traffic on the roads. Yvonne Burford has said on one of her posts (34), that having looked at what has and hasn’t worked in other places, no alternative can compete fairly while there is free parking.


Thanks Rosie for explaining that as was unaware. Could the states not 'ring fence' the fuel levy and put it towards public transport if it wanted to?



Theoretically, they could. However they make a big thing about never 'hypothecating' taxes because it is said to be the thin end of the wedge. All the departments would want to do it which would leave some departments that can't raise revenue short of funds. So generally, it's just not done.

Having said that, I seem to remember that there was an occasion earlier this year when something was hypothecated- can't remember what it was now, but a precedence has been set.

I don't necessarily agree with removing the tax from fuel. I can see that there is a rational in those who use most fuel paying more tax, provided that there are inexpensive, viable, and frequent alternatives to driving.

However I still think that paid parking is necessary as a discouragement to using the car every day and to provide the funding for a better public transport service and improved infrastructure to encourage more cycling and walking.


I have no issue with paid parking assuming that a major investment is made to ensure that there are sufficient parking spaces created.

Also this should not be used as another revenue stream but should be priced to maintain parking.

Yvonne Burford


I would partly agree in that the money raised through paid parking should be used to fund improvements to the transport system generally.


"Partly Agree" ?


Can someone put me straight? I thought the States met a few months back and approved paid parking? (confused)

Yvonne Burford

I know it seems like it keeps coming up, but the last time paid parking was discussed by the States was in 2009.


It will become money making venture to help the States with it’s over spending on un-necessary projects, like most towns and cities in the UK Paid parking is getting out of hand there’s just too much money to be made from it ….The next step will be speeding cameras, they are nice little earners too.


Its a yes from me

Needs to be sorted paid parking is the way forward




Imposter = Walker

Or words to that effect

Paid Proteus Parking has a ring to it.


you can bring in paid parking if you like but it will not solve the parking in town,it will just be another way of making money for the states to wile away on something else.every place in the world where workers are concentrated in one spot will create parking problems and you will still find it hard to park your car.i hope the deputies will pay to park at LUCAS HOUSE as well.get a reliable bus service for commuters who stay all day and you might get some out of their cars.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Milly,

I absolutely agree with you that we need a much more frequent, more reliable bus service that people can have confidence in and that meets their needs.

I also agree that deputies should pay to park at Lukis House on States meetings days. I discussed the matter with the chair of the States Assembly and Constitution Committee a while back and I will be including it as a recommendation in any proposals I take to the States on parking.

Matt Fallaize

The chairman of the States Assembly and Constitution Committee has proposed it to T&R in the past.


Are you referring to yourself in the third person Matt?

Matt Fallaize


Yes, ironically and in response to YB.


Paid parking for everyone at Frossard house too please. That would include States employees. If that were to happen Yvonne, it may add a little credibility to your proposal !!!

Yvonne Burford

Hi Damo,

There is an aspect to my proposals that would seek to address this.


Stop jumping the gun, and just leave it to Environment who will deal with it after the Road Transport Strategy is approved.

Anyway, we neither want nor need pay parking.

Yvonne Burford

Hi pyre,

I am not really jumping the gun as I have been one of the two members of the Environment Board tasked to work on this for the last year or so. The other three members did not like some aspects of the report that was presented and are now putting together their own report.

Matt Fallaize

What an odd state of affairs.

Paid parking was in your manifesto, was it not? And Deputy Brehaut has consistently voted for paid parking in the past.

So five deputies were elected to the Environment Committee, two of whom were known supporters of paid parking and three of whom were known opponents. The Committee then set up a road transport working party containing just two deputies and put onto it the two who happen to support paid parking, knowing the other three on the Committee - the majority - would oppose it once all the policy development had been done.

Even the Policy Council couldn't manage to do something quite so daft with one of its many sub-committees.

Election Issues

Deputy Fallaize

"What an odd state of affairs" and

"Paid parking was in your manifesto, was it not"

With the greatest of respect to you and forgive me for bringing this subject up on this thread but....

..Manifesto? Education Department?

..Deputy Sillars?

Manifesto pledges...are they worth the paper they are written on?

So now many of us feel that it is a waste of time to vote but then to cap it all, politicians never ever listen to the public's views on any given issue once in power....

Yvonne Burford

Election Issues,


So Deputy Sillars is wrong for changing his manifesto pledge and I am wrong for sticking to mine?

The way I see it, a Deputy has an obligation to stick to their pledges unless they subsequently are persuaded by rational arguments or new information that their position needs revision. To quote Keynes who (reputedly) said "When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do?"

That being said, I still think Deputy Sillars was wrong to think closing schools was the best course of action, but the majority of my colleagues disagreed with me. As they may or may not do on paid parking.

Election Issues

Deputy Burford @ 10.05

With the greatest respect, I never actually said you were wrong for sticking to your election pledge.

In such a small island, perhaps in certain cases a Deputy may be persuaded to change their mind if new information is presented to them.

However, Deputy Sillars was not just a Deputy, he was Minister of Education both before Election 2012 and afterwards. Surely the Minister of Education is a very responsible position?

"Elections determine who is in power, but they do not determine how power is used"

Paul Collier.


The majority of people don't want paid parking but do they ever listen to us?

Like many issues they keep coming back to it till they get their way.


The majority of people don't want to pay income tax but accept that it is necessary.

Paid parking may not be wanted but eventually we will have to accept that it is necessary.

Yvonne Burford

The majority of respondents to the various consultations carried out by the Transport Strategy Working Group were in favour of paid parking by a small margin. It is a divisive issue and I think it is best decided by 47 States Members in an open forum rather than by the 5 members of Environment.

Dave Jones

The other member pushing for this is Deputy Barry Brehaut so Deputy Burford is not alone.

Matt Fallaize


And I suspect we might find that a majority of the Policy Council are quite sympathetic to paid parking. I wonder whether we could see the senior committee of the States backing a minority report? If so, it would be the first time for many, many years.


One of that small majority in favour was me - because I won't be affected by it ;-)



Stop one hundred people randomly around the island and ask them if they support paid parking? My guess is around 90% will say no. 5% will say yes and 5% won't care either way.

Why on earth will you not listen to what the people of this island want!

Were the respondents to the 'various consultations' the commoner on the street? That will be a no !

I will always listen to someone's opinion and see reason in it. I will very rarely tell someone they are wrong, However, this is one of those very rare occasions where i can simply say. YOU ARE WRONG !

Yvonne Burford

Hi Damo,

The responses that you get depend on what type of paid parking is being proposed.

Virtually no-one wants paid parking at the beaches. I certainly don't

A reasonable minority are happy with paid short-term parking.

More people are happy with long stay parking.

Many people qualify their responses by saying that they would be supportive if there was a better bus service, or other improvements to the alternatives.

Some people are keen because it would mean they would not have to move their car at lunchtime or because it will cost them less than they spend on parking tickets.

It is not black and white, but I can tell you with all due respect and with certainty that it is wrong to state that 90% of people are against it.


Yvonne with all due respect , do you not understand that this will affect Town trade ?

It may increase use of Bus routes to town, but this can not be guaranteed .

As I would take a guess and say people may just utilize online shopping even more ?

What is your long term strategy to protect the Town Traders if they respond to you after 6-12 months and say "We are in Trouble, paid parking has reduces footfall into the shops" ?


Sack her right now.

Nice One

Not this again, no-one wants paid parking.

If half her own board does not want why bother bringing it to the States?

Yvonne Burford

Nice One,

Because I think this is an issue that should be decided by 47 people, not by 5. The States may vote against any or all proposals on paid parking and if they do, fine. But I believe they should have the opportunity.

Alex Cross

Well if every single comment on this article is anything to go by the argument is moot. Give it up, nobody wants it.


"I Think" what a very Tzarist statement Yvonne . I think the reason is you were blocked by 3 to 2 and wouldn't accept defeat , so now you want to utilize the whole floor to get your way ?

Time for Manifesto reading time on this one. See who votes where.


Are there any statistics or records to back up your claim that no-one wants paid parking ?


Quite frankly, if this were to be put to a popular vote in the form of a referendum, and the question was simply "Do you want paid parking", the answer would be too close to call either way.

But if the question was "Would you accept a limited form of paid parking on, for example, States-owned land", then quite possibly the answer would be a yes.

And if the question is "Would you accept a limited form of paid-parking in conjunction with improved and cheaper bus services", then the yes majority would be further increased.

For the record, Deputy Burford was elected to the States, with, it would appear, one of her promises in her manifesto, to raise again the subject of paid parking. The same goes for Deputy Brehaut. Therefore, it stands to reason, that not everyone is against some form of paid parking.

I have been highly critical of the Environment Department in the past on their handling of the bus service and I hope they take steps to redress the matter and improve public transportation on the island as, like it or not, it is the only way forward.

The island is simply not big enough to continuously construct more and more car-parking spaces and devote more and more of its resources to supporting the private motor car.

Alex Cross

No, no, no, no, no!!!

I'm a cycle commuter so parking doesn't massively bother me, but i would be really upset to see this coming in.

Free parking is one of the few things Guernsey still had that's unique from the mainland, and i love it.

It won't get more people onto bikes or car sharing, the only thing it will do is tax the motorist.

As i say, being a cyclist i won't be massively affected, but i would still hate to see this come in.

Matt Fallaize

Mr Cross,

There are some good arguments against paid parking, but surely "it's not the Guernsey way" is the poorest.

Of all the characteristics we might wish for Guernsey to be known by - lovely beaches, a beautiful Town, low unemployment, the economy, public services, our history or whatever - surely one of the least exciting is that we provide free parking on some piers in the middle of Town.

Do you not think that not doing something simply because it happens in some other places is as absurd as doing something simply because it happens in some other places?

Alex Cross

While i agree with your points entirely (to the extent they didn't really need to be made), you would be surprised how many people from the mainland have said how exciting it is to not have to pay for parking - i kid you not.

Terry Langlois

they would probably be the very same people who are amazed at the number of short journeys taken by car on this island.

Yvonne Burford


Very few visitors park their car in 10 hour spaces unless perhaps visiting the other islands. And in that instance would a choice between a free bus service or paid parking be so unreasonable?

I fully agree that we must make the island more attractive for visitors. Don't you think that free buses and reducing St Peter Port's resemblance to a giant car park would go some way towards that objective?


There are quite a few towns on the mainland where you don't pay for parking either.

Mostly it's free because they're the sort of towns you wouldn't want to go to otherwise!


Mr Cross, reading your comments, I think you could try to understand the notion of what's called paying your way. There is no such thing as a free lunch for anyone.


Yvonne Burford

I do apologise about my choice words. I shouldn't have got so excitable. However, you have contradicted yourself like you do on a regular basis. You words above:

"I fully agree that we must make the island more attractive for visitors. Don’t you think that free buses and reducing St Peter Port’s resemblance to a giant car park would go some way towards that objective?"

Ironically, you are the one who championed the decision to charge visitors double the price for bus fares compared to locals. Your track record is not the greatest. Look at the bus service now. It was decent enough but has now been reduced to shambolic waste of time and money.

If this proposal goes through I will simply avoid town altogether. Not a single penny will ever be raised from my back pocket. If I had a need to frequent areas where paid parking's in place then I'd do so with somebody who can drive my car around until I'm ready to be collected again.

I'm sure others will feel similarly and it will ultimately add to more congestion to the already overcrowded roads.


Deputy Jones you are correct there is no such thing as a free lunch that is why all those driving to park are helping fill the coffers through fuel duty that is until they get a FREE lift from the free bus service. which as you correctly state will have to be paid for but by who?

So not only are people getting free lifts which has to be paid for but there will be a loss of revenue to boot.

What would happen if every (or even most)car driver took up the offer of the free bus service (rosie`s dream) with very little income coming from paid parking result in? how long do you thing the free bus service would last for?.


Sorry my post was in response to Jones not deputy Jones

Neil Forman


GST maybe?

Sorry for swearing;-))

I don't agree with paid parking it is another tax and is discriminatory. It will not affect me but totally against it.

So much for a board making a united decision!

Yvonne Burford

Hi John,

Thank you for your apology.

I don't think I have ever been a champion of the £2 bus fare! I recall explaining CTplus' rationale (that the 'local' fare was a discount) on the radio when asked, when it was first brought in. And I agree that it was a bad idea. Indeed I was of the opinion that bus fares should not have gone up from 50p to 60p to £1 even before that.

But until we have an integrated Transport Strategy there will be no money in the pot to do anything really positive with the bus service.

I don't see people driving round in circles while someone shops as being any real risk, especially when short stay shopper parking will be available.



I have to agree with Matt here. There are many better things for Guernsey to be well known for than free parking.

Look at what free parking has done to the island. Historically, along with cheap petrol, it was what made motoring so cheap to the user (not to the island) in Guernsey and that has led us to become a car dependent community with all the considerable negative effects that comes with that.

Now the island positively crawls with motorised transport- we have one of the highest (if not the highest) rates of car ownership per capita than anywhere in the world …. is that really something to be proud of? I don't think so.

Now if we had a free and frequent bus service, that would be something to be proud of. And visitors would love it too.

Dave Jones


I filled up in France last time I went away because it was actuly slightly cheaper for diesel at one of the big supermarket filling stations, so I don't know where you get the cheap fuel idea from.?

Also people have cars because they have good jobs and they can afford to buy them and why not. It is only some of you who view owning and using the car as a sin.

I am sure you will be happy when Guernsey is just like everywhere else and will be rememberd for being just another part of England.



With alI due respect, I find this latest post of yours almost unbelievable!

If you re read my post, you will see I used the past tense, plus the word ‘historical’ to give you a clue. Petrol ‘was’ extremely cheap here in comparison to the UK, 20, 30, 40 years ago which is when the use of cars started to become the default mode of transport for every trip. Combined with a free-for-all attitude to parking, a belief grew that driving was dirt cheap and convenient- and so it was to the user, but not to the island which has paid the price.

It was a stupid idea then and it’s a stupid idea now as it has always been blindingly obvious that the resulting proliferation of cars would do nothing to enhance the island and would eventually end up causing a problem that would be more difficult to deal with, the longer it was ignored. Far from making Guernsey a nicer place to live, it’s done the opposite and over the years has been one of the factors that has eroded much of what was once beautiful about the island.

Amazingly, judging by your last sentence, you seem to think that having one of the highest (if not the highest) rates of car ownership per capita in the world is what makes Guernsey special and that being a car dependent community is admirable and desirable. Really?

Well I have to agree that there is obviously a clear difference between us because I see those characteristics as the very things that have robbed Guernsey of its character and made us like everywhere else, just another community infested with excessive traffic and consequently having the same battles as everywhere else trying to figure out how to manage it.

I have no problem with people owning cars. To suggest that I think it is ‘sinful’ is just plain silly and undermines any rational argument you might have. It is the level to which cars are used, as the default mode of transport for every journey whatever the distance that I have a problem with. Many will say that they ‘have’ to drive because there are no suitable alternatives and THAT is what I would like changed so that there is a better balance of transport options with us all using the appropriate transport for each journey.

Neil Forman


Actually it is one of the 'quirky' things about Guernsey that visitors remark on. Why should we follow everybody else? This is Guernsey, not little Britain.

Have you ever thought that the increase in traffic is also down to prices for home ownership? Most families now have two working parents in order to pay for a mortgage and some do a school run before parking. You cannot do that on a push bike. Not all schools have a school bus.

Have you noticed the difference in traffic volume when schools are closed?



Since the plan is to keep short term parking free, those visitors can go on thinking that its ‘quirky’ can’t they! I wonder what they would think of a very cheap or free bus service? I also wonder if all the people who no longer holiday here since finding the island increasingly spoilt by excessive traffic found the free parking ‘quirky’ or foolish!

I don’t think we should follow anybody else just for the sake of following them. But tell me Neil. If we want to reduce traffic, would you think it a good idea to look at other places, not just in the UK but round the world, to see where they have succeeded in doing that to learn which of their ideas worked and which didn’t? And having done that, what would you suggest doing then? Ignore all the evidence anyway?

I gave this link about reducing traffic to bcb to read. Of course it hasn’t made any difference to his opinion but here is a quote from it: ‘The coordination of on-street parking supply with off-street parking supply through pricing structures is essential.’


Who parked the yellow Fiat in the above and shame :0)


Clearly the white lines have been painted at an angle, and all the other cars are badly parked.

Besides, those Seicentos have got absolutely zero visibility in a parking situation!

les pets

How many times has this been rejected? If it does get in will we be given the opportunity to try to get rid of it every year .NO. Surely if a motion isn't passed after a couple of tries this should be forgotten. Stealth tax.

Matt Fallaize

les pets,

You have a point. In the week that it has been revealed that the States are to debate island-wide voting and paid parking again, I am half expecting to open the Press tomorrow and read about a requete for a mass burn incinerator.

Of all such debates, paid parking must surely be the one that has arisen most often. We even had the famous States (2000-04 I think it was) which agreed to introduce paid parking and then refused to agree to any of the hourly rates proposed.


Can someone set me straight? I thought paid parking had already gone through the states 3-4 months ago and been approved? (confused)

Matt Fallaize


I don't recall paid parking featuring in the States since the 2012 general election.


Pardon? What was that? Paid Parking!? AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

I don't care either way on pay parking itself BUT it's not right to constantly bring it to the states for debate.

I'm now taking bets on an incinerator of some sort sneaking in for discussion before the end of 2014.

(With an optional accumulator bet of Paid Parking, the civil service pension and our long term rubbish disposal all not being sorted out by 2016)


Do you remember the movie Groundhog Day?

All that's needed is a rendition of "I got you babe" and we're living it.

Election Issues


I like your style! ;-)

On Sunday 2nd February 2014 there will be a brand new car tax introduced 'again' for all Guernsey motorists!

This will be like "Back to the Future"........

Can you sing "Back in TIme" I can hum it! :-)


The states decided not to go for paid parking years ago instead they taxed fuel, so they now want to bring back paid parking how much money do they want from me shall i just give them my wage packet, the public are being robbed and i wish the people of Guernsey would stand up and ask whats going on, where is all are tax money going.


Will this irritating deputy be giving up her parking space?

Yvonne Burford

Hi concerned,

I do not have a parking space except at Lukis House for States Meetings. I believe States Members should pay for this privilege.

Island Wide Voting


Paying for a dedicated space at Lukis House is not quite the same as hunting around and hoping to find a space to pay for

Yvonne Burford

Agreed, although it is only 36 days a year. However I would be equally happy for the facility to be withdrawn as I don't see why States Members should have it actually.

damo assigned parking and it is used 36 out of 365 days,

Can i have it when you are not there?

BTW - if you feel overly privileged please feel free to pay for it now...

Island Wide Voting

damo @ 4.55am

I believe that Lukis House is reserved for HSSD staff for the rest of the year .. possibly also many of the Directors,Assistant Directors and Acting Assistant Directors from Education further up the road?

A nice little perk but they get turfed out on Assembly days so that YB and all the other Deputies, who for some unfathomable reason don't walk,cycle or bus in on those days, can roll up a few minutes before the States meeting into a free reserved space

That must make them feel like the thousand or so well paid Finance staff who swell the traffic queues as they head for their own reserved underground spaces

I wonder who decided to concentrate so many labour intensive offices in such a small area of the island?

Yvonne Burford

Hi Damo,

It isn't left vacant for the rest of the year, but nevertheless I have never felt particularly comfortable with the longstanding arrangement and as mentioned I sought advice from SACC who suggested that the best way or dealing with the issue was as part of the Transport Strategy rather than as a stand-alone item.

St Saviours Bob

Yvonne on your way out, can you hold the door open for the last of the St Peter Port traders to leave as well.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Bob,

There are many variations of paid parking and I think the one matter everyone is agreed upon is that retail businesses should not suffer as a result of any scheme.


And the lower paid who are already struggling?



The most expensive sort of transport system you could have is one that forces everyone to be dependent on private cars. Why would you want a system like that if you are concerned about the lower paid?


Well lets have a good public transport system in place and those that choose to use it can if they wish. If those such as yourself, claim it will reduce traffic then there is no need for paid parking is there.

If paid parking is found to be reducing the traffic further then that suggests to me that those are the ones being priced out of their cars.

Rosie why do you want to see paid parking if a good transport system will work?

This paid parking nonsense is nothing more than the government holding a gun to your head.

Yes you have a choice but rest assured we will be dipping our hands in your pockets if you dare park your care.


One of the arguments against paid parking in any format is that it will penalize the poor.

On the contrary, the poor often can not afford cars and are forced to use the bus, the bike or walk.

And for those who use the bus, not only have they had to face dramatic bus fare increases this year, but they also have to, as tax-payers, to subsidize the building and maintenance of car-parks for the more affluent members of society.



Sorry bcb. only just seen your post.

I don’t think that you will find that I have said anywhere that a good public transport system in isolation would reduce traffic to any great extent, any more than paid parking would reduce congestion working on its own. Its been said a million times that you need both elements to work together to get any significant change in traffic volumes. Unfortunately, as long as there is convenient and free parking, the demand will fill the supply whatever transport alternatives you put out there.

This paid parking issue has got nothing to do with the ‘government holding a gun to your head’ as you rather dramatically put it. Guernsey has become extremely car dependent and there are huge financial and environmental costs to that. If you don’t believe me, then google it and do some research. You and all these other posters who are up in arms about the concept of paid parking seem to be quite happy to ignore all the evidence and just want Guernsey to plough on providing for and encouraging even more driving so that we get deeper and deeper into the quagmire of car dependency and blighting more and more of the island. I find it illogical and quite frankly, depressing. Can you honestly not see what all the excessive traffic is doing to the island or is it just that you don’t want to see.

Island Wide Voting


Will the 'not suffering' include not having to fight off pay rise demands to meet the £1,000+ p.a.? cost of commuter parking for their staff

Will the 'not suffering' include not having to put up with the internal disputes between staff having this £1,000 + p.a.? stealth tax foisted upon them while those working in the firm's out of Town branches won't? (Think banks ,Co-Op,Guernsey Press,Advocates etc)

Will this stealth tax coincide with the extra demands on the States workers pension payments?



Perhaps this is a new strategy to just bore the population into submission with the same discussion round and round and round.

Surely Yvonne Burford must remember the outcome of the last time that this came to the States? There isn't even a cohesive traffic management policy of any description in place at the moment so surely this shouldn't even feature on the radar until we have one.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Karen,

I absolutely believe that paid parking should be a part of a cohesive, integrated strategy.

The last time a Transport Strategy came to the States was in 2012 and it was not debated due to what was happening with the bus service.

Prior to that, it was 2006, which remains the extant Strategy.

Deputy Fallaize laid an amendment in 2010 instructing Environment to return with an integrated Transport Strategy.


We don't want it. Move on or get on your bike elsewhere.

We are already being taxed for the bus company. That was added to the cost of fuel. Now you want to tax us on top of that tax. Do you propose abolishing the fuel tax in favour of paid parking then? Don't bother answering that. I already know what your response will be and I would rather avoid having to engage with you.

Transport Strategies are an area which any idiot can dream up ways to make some extra money to fritter away elsewhere. Getting those ideas to actually work and make money is another thing altogether. Paid parking makes next to no revenue for governments at all. It simply costs so much to enforce efficiently.

Read Dave Jones' down to earth comments and then get some perspective. I believe my feelings are shared by the masses.

Matt Fallaize


You put some good arguments against paid parking, but don't you think you rather spoil their impact by wrapping them in such personal invective?

I believe that Deputy Burford said at the time of the general election that she was in favour of paid parking in Town and she was elected on her manifesto, unseating two incumbent deputies in the process. She is now going to convert that part of her manifesto into a proposition to put before the States, who remain sovereign and will not approve the proposition unless a majority of other deputies agree with her.

I respect that you think she is incorrect in her arguments, but phrases like "we don't want you" and "ridiculous woman" hardly help to take the argument forward much.


Yvonne .. can you tell me/us why you think paid parking is needed.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Mark,

Sorry, I seem to have missed responding to your question before now.

However since then many posters on this thread have outlined reasons in favour of paid parking.

The results of the many consultations that Environment did highlighted lots of things that people would like to achieve. When taken together, one of the keys to achieving them, tipping the balance towards the alternatives (walking, cycling,motorcycling, buses, car sharing) is paid parking.

In any report I bring I will outline all my arguments in detail. It is a shame that paid parking gets pounced upon because it makes much more sense in the context of an integrated strategy rather than a stand alone argument.

What I would say however is that all five members of Environment recognise that the private car plays a crucial part in the transport needs of islanders and will continue to do so. There are however many journeys that could be made by alternative means if these were facilitated and the outcome of that would be fewer vehicles on the roads for those who are driving, less pollution, less congestion, health benefits (and savings to HSSD) from walking and cycling - the list goes on.

Matt Fallaize


The last time paid parking was debated by the States was in 2009. On that occasion the Environment Committee - unanimously, if I recall correctly - was opposed to paid parking, which was introduced by an amendment proposed by Mrs Steere and seconded by Mr Parkinson, which lost by (I think) two or perhaps three votes.

Terry Langlois

If I recall correctly, the particular proposal was so crazy that it was designed to fail. Even supporters of paid parking would have voted against it.

I seem to recall that it involved buying a season ticket, which effectively would have encouraged people to drive more so as to get value for money for the parking that they had already paid for.

My recollection may be confused though, as the debate had so many twists and turns.

Matt Fallaize

Mr Langlois,

No, that wasn't the 2009 debate.

The best-supported amendment for paid parking in 2009 read as follows: "To direct the Environment Department to report back to the States by no later than their October 2009 meeting, with firm proposals for implementing a scheme of paid parking, including the setting of charges at levels sufficient to cover the costs of collection, and administration of the scheme, and to implement the States Road Transport Strategy."

Dave Jones

Paid Parking

You have to ask why paid parking should be introduced.

Firstly if its revenues are to help run a public transport system, then all motor vehicle users are already doing that through the increase in fuel taxes introduced by an amendment from myself and Deputy Brouard put forward in the last debate on the subject.

That is on top of the 2 million plus that goes to the bus service out of general revenue to which they also contribute through their income taxes. In addition motorists swell the Islands coffers through a whopping 49 pence per litre in fuel tax, together with parking fines and other road traffic penalties. So I would suggest that the motorist is paying is already paying a hefty price for the personal ownership of their cars and the upkeep of the island car parks.

If however its purpose is to reduce commuter traffic coming into town and urban congestion, then it is discriminatory against all those who work in town who don’t have their own underground or dedicated parking spaces and of course the low paid. Nor will it do anything to discourage car use by the hundreds of civil servants who have the benefit of free parking spaces at their place of work, so as a policy it will have failed the first test simply on the grounds that it doesn’t apply to everyone.

The Town shops which have already suffered a loss of trade due to out of town stores that have sprung up over the last 50 years and the considerable increase in customers shopping on line, could also be severely affected by the introduction of paid parking, which will undoubtedly reduce the number of people willing to shop in the town area where they will be charged for parking..

This is as apposed to shopping in out of town supermarkets where they will enjoy free parking. Supermarkets sell just about everything now from stationary and clothes, to toasters and TV sets, we also have out of town pharmacies and Post offices and Garage/shops, so there is not much left to go into town for at the best of times.

Put that together with all other goods obtained through internet shopping and off island shopping trips which are now an all year round event for many families and there is no doubt in my mind that paid parking will spell the death of the town retail sector.

Parking charges in town would in essence be an additional tax on the poorer members of our community, many who will have jobs in St Peter Port and who will be forced to pay it, or be forced to walk or commute by bike, or on a pretty primitive bus service, that may or may not go anywhere near where they live.

In any event you will have those on really good salaries who could afford to pay for parking whatever the charge and you will have others that work in town on fixed incomes who would struggle with daily parking charges.

If as I say you are reasonably well paid then you won’t use the buses anyway and the cost of running your car will seem insignificant compared to the convenience of using your own vehicle for daily transport. If you are on a low wage then it will be a fairly substantial additional expense to your weekly bills. It will without doubt create a car owning apartheid between the rich and the poor. It is also likely to cost more to collect these parking charges than it will provide in revenue, unless of course the charges are to be substantial.

It is absolutely pointless having paid parking if the lion’s share of the revenue it generates is swallowed up administering the system. If you have ticket machines you will need people to service and replenish them with tickets and empty the cash. If you have a barrier system you will still need several machines in order for the motorist to pay the parking fee in order to get out of the car park.

You will also need an increased number of parking controllers to make sure the cars are displaying tickets and to see if they have run out of time. In addition those cash ticket machines will soon become a target for thieves. I also suspect the barriers will have to be constantly replaced as they will become targets for drunken revellers or damaged by people forcing them upwards in order to release their cars after a night out.

One other reason that worries me about paid parking, is that I don’t believe that the States can be trusted with this kind of revenue raising scheme, simply because the motorist will be seen as a convenient cash cow at every budget and parking rates will increase either on environmental grounds or some other spurious reason for putting them up every year. It is for this same reason I won’t support a GST.

My prediction that Jersey would use this more and more for raising revenue instead of cutting government spending has come to pass and I have absolutely no doubt that it would happen here if we were ever dumb enough to go down that route.

Jersey is also a good example of why paid parking doesn’t work, it has built several multi storey car parks which are very expensive to use, and they now need further millions spent on them as their age is beginning to tell. There are several other paid parking areas in and around the town and yet still St Helier is gridlocked everyday at certain times. (Recent Channel TV report made this point) so just a quick glance across the water shows you that trying to price people out of their cars by parking charges simply doesn’t work and certainly doesn’t do anything to ease traffic congestion. They also have a much better bus service than ours.

I am also sick to death of hearing that we have to have paid parking because that’s what happens elsewhere, that is not an argument it is just an observation, they have and do lots of things in other countries that we don’t do here and we are a better place for it in my view. People have to go about their daily lives and failure to recognise that personal transport plays a big part in that daily routine is simply not living in the real world.

If the Environment department wanted to do something really useful to help with parking they could ban the sale of cars and commercial vehicles from disc parking zones.

Half a Plan

Have to agree with Mr Jones.

How many different ways can we tax the motorist.

This would ne another nail in the coffin for local shops. Amazon is already doing well and is really easy. I thought we are looking to support buying local not destroy it.

Paid parking would not reduce traffic no more than congestion charges did in London. We need to think bigger than just the revenue stream provided and balance it against lost commerce and potentially lost jobs.

Matt Fallaize

Half a Plan,

An economic impact assessment is a very good suggestion.


excellent post Dave.


Somebody who actually talks sense. We should have made you Chief Minister years ago.

Yvonne Burford, we don't want paid parking. If you carry on with trying your luck with the old chestnut "perseverance wins over pressure" routine the general public will start demanding your resignation. Either this stops, here and now, or I will start a campaign to demand for your resignation. You are like an annoying scratched record. Geez!


WOW 2 millón plus going into the bus service, makes Aurgny look good value for money!


it would be interesting to see how many people on this forum have a vested interest in maintaining the free parking status quo, the majority most likely. At least Deputy Burford is trying to do something positive even though she's getting an ear bashing. Peter Roffey also talks sense. Deputy Jones keeps banging out the same tune. It's not about copying what other places do, it's about Guernsey solving problems. Traffic and parking is a problem to resolve so stop spending time appeasing us car owners and try spending more time solving problems for the greater good of Guernsey and specifically St Peter Port in this case.


An excellent and comprehensive post Dave. Yvonne, you should take Daves post in if you would like to know what the vast majority of the population want?


Dave - excellent as ever.

Obviously we don't know what Ms Burford's plans are but whatever it is it will be apartheid for many.

Thing is, if the States introduce paid parking it will have to be for everyone who uses states owned (actually the taxpayer!) spaces.

So that's fishermen, port workers, civil servants, States members, policemen, fire fighters, shoppers, commuters, town residents, beach goers, blah blah etc.

Matt Fallaize


But that is not how charges are levied. They are levied to pay for something or to discourage something.

Why should a scheme which may be designed to discourage single car journeys into the centre of Town on weekdays inevitably require the levying of charges on a family which wants to park at L'Ancresse to have a Sunday afternoon on the beach?

That would be as absurd as levying the same duty on bread as is levied on cigarettes, would it not?


Matt - so it's ok for a fisherman to drive a single journey to work and get free parking but not the shop worker who sells him his gear.

Utter nonesense.

Again, your analogy is flawed. So it's wrong to drive to work but ok to drive to the beach. Which I would argue is less necessary - mes non?

Matt this will be apartheid pure and simple

Terry Langlois

Dave - a good post and I agree with much of what you say and the concerns that you raise.

But, in my view, paid parking could work on the following basis:

1. its objective should be to encourage people to drive less, not to raise revenue.

2. proceeds should go towards a co-ordinated transport strategy, providing alternatives for current motorists.

3. paid parking should be for long-stay parking in Town only. We should only be seeking to discourage commuters from driving, not making it harder for people to shop in Town.

4. stricter enforcement of parking restrictions in Town to reduce abuse of short stay spaces (changing the clock, etc)

5. to avoid discriminating against those who are not fortunate enough to get a parking space with their job, all employer-provided parking within Town should be taxed as a benefit in kind - again, with the proceeds being ringfenced for the transport strategy.

6. proper residents permits (at a notional cost, but restricted to genuine residents of local streets) should be introduced throughout Town so that commuters do not take up on-street parking spaces in residential areas. This also helps the residents as they will be assured a space at all times and (for those currently needing to put up clocks) will be saved the aggravation of moving their car on a regular basis.


Dave, you have to pack in the constant reference to the poorer members of society.

Its an additional tax on everyone.

I park in north beach all day in order that i can go to work & run my business, so that I & other staff can make money which then pays taxes & states insurance (which i notice will also be increasing again next year).

If I & my staff have to find another £1k plus per annum, per person just to be able to come to work, then I will need to make savings elsewhere, such as local products, shops & services.

The states need to realise that the taxpayer is not a botomless pit.

The States have failed to offer an alternitive with the bus service & chucking another £10-£20 million at it (as Mr Luxon has mooted) is not going to sort the issue.

There is a lack of long term parking in town. Fact.

There is not enough long term parking for those that need to be in town to ensure shops & offices are open when shoppers arrive. Fact.

The states have repeatedly failed to address the need to create additional long term parking for the islands needs & instead is seeking the easy option of financial deterrent. Fact.

Deputies, keep on pushing & taxing, & making Guernsey a less attractive place to live & work in, you'll also be solving the population problem too.


Excellent post Portland.

I (thankfully) no longer work in town (used to start at 7am so that I could park easily) but because of this, my visits into town for shopping etc. are even more inhibited than they used to be because of the lack of reasonable parking.

When I now come into town, I want to have a really good browse to see what has changed, have lunch/coffee and a chat with friends and browse some more. The 2 or 3 hour spaces that are free just aren't enough for me to do this so typically, I don't now tend to bother (other than a quick dash to Boots and the few shops that I am familiar with) and go online or when I am in the UK.

I never get a chance to get as far as the Old Quarter (which is a shame because I would love to spend my hard earned up there)as just the walk there and back takes up to 1/3 of my parking time if I feel rushed then I don't end up browsing and exploring new shops. I'm sure I'm not alone.

I won't do this on the bus as typically, on a good shopping session, I end up lugging a load of bags around that I really don't want to try dragging onto a bus, especially if the kids are in tow.

Dave Jones


I hear what you say but it is the poorer members of our community who suffer most when threse schemes are forced upon people.

Neil Forman


Excellent post.


Quite frankly Deputy Jones this sob-story that poor people will suffer is pure nonsense.

The poor people on the island can not afford cars but have to walk, cycle and take the bus and so having paid parking or not will not make the slightest difference to them - except that their taxes will go towards the building of more and more car-parks as Guernsey fills up with more and more cars.

If you want to help the poor people then get the States to provide a free and better bus service !

And whilst you are at it... Solve the problem of affordable housing !

Then you talk about the demise of the retail trade in Town. That trade has been dieing since decades. The States have not helped in the past by allowing the Market to be turned into a sterile shopping zone housing big branded retailers. Nor did the States help by allowing large sites outside of Town to be used up for the large retail outlets with their car-parks; lower cost housing might have been more worthwhile.

Look again at the proposals on paid-parking - it would not mean all parking in the parish of St Peter Port would be made payable, just the large car-parks along the front, and maybe the Odeon site, that would have paid parking for long term parking, and believe me, it would make money and more than cover the costs of operating the system. There are many easy, even cash-free, cost-effective ticketing systems that could be used.

The on-road smaller spaces near the main shopping areas would be only for short term parking, and that, in fact, could help the retail trade.


Thank you Dave Jones.

I absolutely agree with all of the above. The argument that 'Everywhere else does it, therefore we should.' is idiotic.


But KG. no-body IS saying that for goodness sake. Loads of places have traffic problems like us. That is where we are like so many other places. More and more place tho' are starting to tackle it and some places more successfully than others. Obviously it would be intelligent to look at those places where they have been successful and reaped the benefit of reduced traffic levels and to find out how they got there. And the minute you do that you discover that managing and controlling the supply of parking is key to reducing traffic since it is simply a matter of 'supply and demand'.

What is 'idiotic' is posting without attempting to get even a vague understanding of what is being said.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Damo,

Deputies don't get specific free parking spaces at Frossard House (nor should they). I use the same public spaces available to all people visiting SCFH.


If introduced I will avoid going into town...


Just like the majority will do. Yvonne Burford will continue to enjoy her free parking space, provided by us tax paying idiots, whilst the electorate are forced to pay to park, numerous times over, just so they can be robbed blind by the extortionate prices charged in town for most products and services provided within.

Prices locally are at an all time high for pretty much everything. Deputies looking to increase the burden further need to think long and hard before attempting such a move.

Our economy can only be inflated so much before it bursts. We have reached that point already. That's clearly evident with cutbacks being announced everywhere apart from conveniently using us as a way to balance the books as per usual. Our books also need balancing. The truth is people can't take any more penalties without there being big consequences. This is likely to suffocate most town businesses unless she comes to her senses quick smart.

Matt Fallaize


You claim that paid parking "is likely to suffocate most town businesses".

You may or may not be right and as I have stated above an economic impact assessment would appear to provide the States with the best chance of making an evidence-based decision.

Nonetheless, your emphatic association of paid parking with business failures in Town appears not to be supported by the very organisation established to represent the interests of such businesses, the Chamber of Commerce, whose website states:

"The principle of paid parking on States owned car parking areas is reluctantly supported to ensure that traffic can move freely and efficiently in built up areas, and to enable adequate parking to be made available for commuters and shoppers, and to provide funding to ensure an excellent public transport system is achieved."


Go to Jersey Matt and see what a monster paid parking has made of Town, people parking all over the place to pop in to a shop for a news paper etc. without having to pay parking. It certainly has not reduced traffic in anyway.

Election Issues

Deputy Fallaize

Sorry to keep replying to you...but..

Chamber of Commerce states.." paid ensure that traffic can move freely and efficiently"... exactly? How will paid parking ensure that traffic will move freely and efficiently... .....all the cars will be parked in exactly the same places but car drivers will have to is a more no less.

Paid parking will not relieve congestion of rush hour traffic in St Peter Port twice a day at all.

The reason there is congestion is that many people work in offices in St Peter Port,many people shop in St Peter Port, there are 7 schools in St Peter Port, there are hairdressers, hotels, restaurants, dentists etc. St Peter Port is full of places where people work.

St Helier, Jersey has paid parking and still has rush hour traffic twice a day as Guernsey does, so it can be seen that paid parking does not alleviate congestion at all.

Paid parking is a tax.

Shane Langlois

Election Issues

No, paid parking is not a tax, it is a contribution by the user towards a service funded through taxes. Such charges might be zero for services provided ‘free at the point of use’, such as primary education, or meet some proportion of the costs as at Beau Sejour. Whether commuter parking should be ranked with education and healthcare, that is provided ‘free at the point of use’, or whether users should make a contribution towards costs is at the heart of the debate. It is not really about the Road Transport Strategy though of course that provides a context.

What should be of greater concern is a government’s ability to load charges so that they more than meet the cost of providing the service, in other words generate a surplus. The surplus inevitably is not expended as transparently as general revenues, there is not the same degree of political scrutiny. A classic example is the huge surpluses generated by the gate fees at Mont Cuet which give the PSD a freedom of action not available to other Departments.

Matt Fallaize

markB and Election Issues,

I did not say that I agreed with the Chamber of Commerce. I was simply pointing out that the views of the Chamber of Commerce - which I see are reported in today's Press - appear to be in conflict with the views of John and others that all forms of paid parking would inevitably be detrimental to Town traders.

As I wrote above, I don't know the answer to what is a good question and I would support an economic impact assessment to provide a better base of evidence upon which to make a decision.

Yvonne Burford


I admire your ability to effortlessly shoehorn in reference to the waste strategy in any debate :-)

Election Issues

SL @ 1.49

Whether paid parking is a tax by stealth or a contribution by the user towards a service funded through taxes.....the motorist will have to pay for the privilige of parking on States land.

As the Road Transport Strategy seems to be looking to reduce congestion of traffic at peak rush hour times (which happens twice a day only), how is paid parking (a contribution by the user towards the service funded through taxes)

actually going to make this happen?

The situation will be exactly the same as it is now but with the motorist having to make a contribution towards a service funded through taxes.

Isn't this a tax by stealth?

The fuel tax from motorists brings in a very significant figure. The bus service is chronic. Not everybody can or wants to cycle or any case why should they?

People have extremely busy lives, with both parents working due to astronomical housing costs. They have not got time to cycle or walk when they have to be in about three places at once. Life is frenetic.

So many people work in St Peter Port as there are a huge number of offices, banks, advocates, dentists,

shops, hotels,restaurants,opticians,

7 schools, supermarkets,doctor etc. Surely more parking in whatever form it takes would be the answer. There are too many people needing to park in our main town.Perhaps more offices and shops should be built out of town to reduce the pressure of parking in St Peter Port.

Then there are so many people living in town who do not have parking with their houses or flats...where will they park?

Yes, it is great if people want to cycle or walk but many people simply do not have the time to do this in their busy schedules.

If the contribution by the user towards a service funded through taxes does not prevent congestion of traffic at rush hours then it seems that money will be taken from the motorist at the same time as when they are already paying significantly in fuel tax. How many times does the motorist have to pay?

Shane Langlois

Election Issues

You ask “ Isn’t this a tax by stealth?”

As I tried to show with the Mont Cuet gate fees analogy there are two elements to the debate on paid parking or indeed any charge the States makes for services;

1. What proportion of the costs should be met by user charges and what proportion by general revenues? General revenues can meet anything from 0% to 100% of the costs with charges covering the remainder. To date user charges for commuter parking have met 0% of the costs.

2. Over and above any ‘cost of funding’ charge should there be a surcharge to raise revenues and/or influence behaviour?

You could describe the second element as ‘tax by stealth’ but it might not be necessary if simply reducing the subsidy from general revenues released sufficient funds for the Transport Strategy and encouraged car commuters to use another means of transport one day a week.

Election Issues

SL @ 6.03

The Mont Cuet gate fees analogy show me that there are 2 elements to the debate on paid parking (the charge the States make for services.)

This is governments ability to charge in a certain way so that the service is provided but there is also surplus revenue. The huge surpluses generated by the gate fees at Mont Cuet have allowed PSD to use GBP 2.4million to roll out a 2 year trial period for kerbside recycling..but we still have to recycle glass!

If States Departments actually got together..things might be better. If PSD and Environment talked together then some of the surplus revenue from the gate fees at Mont Cuet could be used to fund a bus service!!!!

Firstly, we need to know what the objectives Environment have for introducing paid parking or the charge the States makes for services.

1/ Is the objective to reduce congestion of traffic at rush hour times twice a day?

Living Streets support paid parking for the 10 hour spaces only. They feel that the commuters driving into town early in the morning and going home later in the day are causing all of the congestion problems, as during the rest of the day the traffic congestion is not the problem.

They believe that a small charge on long term parking will be sufficient to get people out of their cars and on to the buses....which should be free.

How will this work?

The only reason that commuters drive and park in town is because they have jobs to go to. St Peter Port is full of places where people work...but especially offices, banks, finance and insurance offices..some of which have their own parking spaces.

If we are looking at the congestion issue alone then paid parking will not ease congestion of traffic coming into town at rush hour can't possibly because there are far too many people working in St Peter Port. Those commuters who have their own car spaces are fine..they wont have to pay. It will only hit those people who are forced to park on States land and now they will have to pay for that service. These are shop workers, office workers, finance workers, hairdressers, opticians, library workers etc etc.

Increasing the amount of parking (in whatever form) will help ease congestion.

2/ Is the objective to raise revenue for a free bus service?

I have to ask..why should a bus service be completely free?

The Chamber of Commerce feel it is justifiable to have paid parking for long term parking. They see this as a "tool" to help encourage a change in people's behaviour.

They believe that a frequent and free bus service would be of enormous assistance....and say it would benefit car users as there would be less traffic on the road. Chamber of Commerce support paid parking as they benefit everyone rather than benefit a few.

Why should those people who commute into town for their jobs(office, shop etc) be singled out because their particular place of work is physically in St Peter Port?

Why should those people who commute into town for their jobs be singled out and have to pay to park so that a 'free' bus service will be funded for everybody else??

Isn't this all very discriminatory and not well thought through??

Why use paid parking as a "tool" to get people out of their cars?

May be people can't walk or cycle for various reasons. May be people don't want to cycle or walk.

At the moment they are hardly likely to use the bus.....there was a perfectly good bus service not long ago but Island Coachways were forced to leave. Which Deputy forced their hand?

So now we are left with the chronic service of today....but now Environment want the those people who have to commute to town for their jobs to pay to park (the charge the States makes for services) so that a new free bus service can be funded. How bizarre is this?

Rather than battering the commuter or the motorist over the head with a massive stick and "tools" of enforcement to get out of their would be so much more pleasant if Environment could think outside of the box and come up with a completely new initiative that 'may' encourage people to do just that.



I think by the time we come out of this winter there will be far more unemployment on the Island and in the build up to the summer I think we will see it remaining the same if we are lucky, it may increase, looking at house prices they are starting to fall, some by £100k and still they don't sell, our government telling us we are unaffected by the worldwide recession, its now knocking on the door and about to make a big entrance, we haven't prepared for it at all.

Many States members have second houses in France so they can quickly relocate and avoid the fall out.

Shanks Pony

I'm all for it.............for Herm & Sark only tho. :-\

Yvonne Burford

Dear John,

As I have mentioned up thread there are many variants of paid parking.

I stated clearly in my manifesto that I was in favour of paid parking but with alleviation for shoppers to protect our town centre.

Therefore, those who kindly voted for me would have been aware of my view on this matter.

A western voter

I didn't vote for you and you certainly are NOT representing my or my households views on this issue.

Perhaps you could spend a little bit of time checking if the people you represent (which isn't necessarily those who voted for you) back you on this before you charge in on your white horse?


This is exactly why I'd like island wide voting so we can rid the states of deputies like yourself - I can afford to pay as a shopper but I really feel for those shop workers who are hardly earning much above the minimum wage who would have to pay to park in order to work - come on! Just listen for once! We do not want paid parking! We are already paying! Listen! Please!

Matt Fallaize


You have now referred to the deputy as a "foolish woman" and a "ridiculous woman". The way you write, one assumes that in both cases you intend the second word to be the greater insult?


An out of control States Govt, that needs reigning in. Seems some just can not help themselves to fleece the people more and more. I wont be paying it thank you.

Mon Vie

Thank God for that, I don't think they give out computers at Les Nicolles and we won't have to put up with your endlessly uneducated rants.


This will destroy what is left of the Town business. No insight no forward thinking , just get more revenue , how can we do it.

Capital crunch must be painful.

Tell you what why dont you look at scrutinizing HSSD out of whack spending regime on A and E STATES! Paying for how many Dr's that do not work at A and E exactly ??


Paid parking would be a backward step in my opinion. One of the delights of shopping in St Peter Port is the fact that you don't hunt around looking for change, then queue at a ticket machine, etc, etc.

If you need to raise revenue then do it another way. Shopkeepers are battling the internet already, they do not need this added to their challenges.

This is another poorly thought through idea.


Could you image what all the barrier systems would do to the already congested streets? Would they be in keeping and make the island a nicer place to live, work, or visit?


Rush hours would turn into gridlocks for most of the town traders working days. This is one sure way of adding massive problems to an issue which needs careful thought put into it.

I will be keeping my ear out for every suggestion made by her in future. She's a loose cannon that will do lots of damage. I'm almost at the stage to make a start on placards demanding her resignation.

Yvonne Burford


Whatever my views on paid parking, nothing can be put in place without at least 23 members of the States agreeing with me.

I agree with you that barrier systems would not be appropriate for Guernsey.

Island Wide Voting

I think YB has hinted that short term shopper parking will will not be included in the paid parking thinking

Perhaps she is not in a position to confirm that fact outright at present but it would certainly reduce some of the flack she is taking

Note that her tax and spend co-conspirator is keeping his head down.Where are you Barry Brehaut?

Matt Fallaize


In respect of the other ways you mention, what would be your view of funding a road transport policy in part by levying an annual charge on parking clocks?

I'm not proposing such a thing. I ask only out of interest because in the past it has been put forward as one alternative idea, albeit that it does not carry the behavioural disincentive in which one-half of the supporters of paid parking have always believed.


That would be more administration so no I would not be in favour. I appreciate everything has to be paid for but I don't think some people are realizing how good a system the clock one is. I live some of the time in the UK and paid parking is not a happy experience, believe me the clock system in Guernsey is far better.

If the aim is to reduce congestion then introducing paid parking is not the answer, that is just beating people over the head with a stick. You either need to find more parking spaces (which would have a set up cost I grant you) or better incentives for whatever alternative you propose.


So is it delightful, as part of the St Peter Port shopping experience, to hunt around for a parking space ?

Paid parking anyway should really be in the larger car-parks and not for on-road parking spaces that should be assigned for free of charge short term parking, ideal for shoppers.

If all those on-road park spaces close to the shops were assigned to short term parking would that not help, not hinder, the retail trade in Town ?

The long-term car-parks would be those larger car-parks on States owned sites such as North Beach, and would not need the old fashioned system of individual meters but would use modern technology that goes with cash-free payment systems.


I may be getting totally the wrong end of the stick here but I've got a teeny weeny sneaky suspicion you don't like Deputy Burford or her plans very much.... ;-)

Matt Fallaize


TiG seems to have removed some of his posts!


So it seems Matt....and now both of us look like we're going a little doolally talking to imaginary people! ;-)

Matt Fallaize

Yes, I thought that! After airbrushing history, it's always difficult to make the loose ends tie up.


Oh, but you are!


Matt - What has Trade It Guernsey got to do with postings? Heeee!


Stop making wild shooting from the hip accusations Paul, what evidence do you have to support such nonsense? :-)

Medium G

I suspect that some people are not reading Yvonne Burford's posts, or have missed them due to the timing of the posts going on air, so to speak.

Anyway, the paid parking issue is to reduce congestion, whilst what the transport strategy should be aiming towards is a lower carbon footprint economy, ie, just using less fuel going forward as an island.

This will not be easy, as using fuel makes our lives easier, and indeed, the availability of cars has shaped the development of the islands infrastructure for 50 years (although the legacy of horses and carts live on - think of the narrowness of the roads). But bearing these issues in mind now may well help in however many years or decades time.

I hope that strategic thinking along these lines forms part of the debate that the deputies are having.

As for the congestion, get one of the States Departments like housing to require St Peter Port employers to acquire permits for their employees.


One argument for not introducing paid parking is that it is not a way of life for Guernsey...

But there is paid parking !!

Airport Car Park Charges

Charge Band Current

Up to 1 Hour FREE

1 - 2 Hours £ 3.00

2 - 6 Hours £ 4.00

6 - 12 Hours £ 6.00

12 - 18 Hours £ 8.00

18 - 24 Hours £ 10.00

24 - 48 Hours £ 20.00

48 - 72 Hours £ 30.00

Over 72 Hours £ 10.00 per day or part thereof

So why does one have to pay for parking at the airport when car-parks in town are funded by all tax payers, ( not just the 1000 persons every day who use them ) ?

I would not advocate charging such high rates as at the airport, ( these actually should be reduced ), but charge by all means for those who park in Town for a minimum of 3 hours between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Mondays to Saturdays.

Maybe a fiver a day ?

Reserve the large specially made car-parks that have appeared in Town for long-term paid parking and the smaller, on-road parking spots, closest to the shops, for short-term parking as they are on the road and thus paid for by the duty on petrol.

Tax payers money subsidizes the bus service - but it does not pay for it completely. So why should tax-payers pay for all these big expensive car-parks to be made on land that could be otherwise used, ( i.e. rented out ).

If you wish the tax-payer to subsidize fully the construction of more and more car-parks, then fine, fair enough, but then let the tax-payer pay for the bus-service in full... i.e. a totally free bus service ! Now that would add a feather in Guernsey's way-of-life cap !!


I am sure there are more important things for the states to debate. Why keep going over the same ground such as paid parking. Things are fine as they are. Yes having less traffic on the roads would be good but then you would have the garages complaining.

Perhaps encouraging electric vehicles with a subsidy would be more beneficial

Yvonne Burford

The States were directed by an amendment to bring an integrated Transport Strategy to the States. Paid parking will form part of that debate, if not by the majority report then by minority report or by amendment. If I do not bring such a report/amendment, there are quite a few others who probably would. It is almost inconceivable that it would not be part of the debate. Whether it becomes policy or not is another matter.

Paid parking is one small part of the overall strategy but as ever it is the part pounced on by the media and something that almost everyone has a view on.

Therefore I think that ensuring it is debated by all the States Members is a reasonable idea.

Election Issues

Deputy Burford

"The States were directed by an amendment to bring an integrated Transport Strategy to the States"


"Therefore I think that ensuring it is debated by all States Members is a reasonable idea"

With respect...47 elected States Members will decide purely because they were voted into government in Election 2012.

47 people.

There are more than 47 people out here in the public domain that do not want paid parking for various and significant reasons.

Why are we constantly having to review and debate the same old thing time and time again....

Did Deputy Fallaize specifically instruct Environment that paid parking had to be included in the Transport Strategy when he laid the amendment??

Before any sort of paid parking is rushed through and passed....perhaps it would be helpful if some more parking spaces could be built to make it easier for all of those people who actually work in town in a huge number of offices, many shops, hairdressers, dentists,advocates, hotels, restaurants etc etc...

How will paid parking really ease traffic congestion in St Peter Port? The same number of cars will be parked in the car parks but the driver will now have to pay. This is a TAX.

Matt Fallaize

Election Issues,

No, the amendment contained no such specific direction. It merely required Environment to propose an integrated road transport strategy.


Whether it is a tax or a fee is beside the point.

And, sadly to say, by implementing a small parking fee per day at the North Beach Car Park and other States owned sites, ( but not on on-road parking spaces which would be reserved just for short term parking ), the number of car drivers commuting every day to work will probably not go down that much, even if the bus service is greatly improved and has lower fares.

But tax-payers money should not be wasted on creating more car parks on land that could have been rented out or put to better use.

And please do not say that the increased fuel duty covers that cost because it is such a pitiful amount that it barely covers the road maintenance let alone more car-park construction, and, anyway, cars do not use fuel when they are parked down at the North Beach for the whole day !

I am in favour of subsidizing more the bus service as sooner or later Guernsey will have run out of space for any more car-parks !


Thank you for stating your views in this public forum Yvonne and hopefully people respect that you actually want to engage with the public over this divisive issue.

You state that "Paid parking is one small part of the overall strategy but as ever it is the part pounced on by the media and something that almost everyone has a view on." How about we speak about the other parts of the strategy then? I would like to hear about the rest of the strategy. Thank you.

Yvonne Burford

Thanks Rachel,

So would I. The remaining three members of the Department are working on it at present. When that is finalised and I see it I will decide if I wish to present alternative proposals to the States to debate.

like a kid

paid parking (with other incentives such as cheaper bus fares) is the only way to go, despite the howls of the spoilt brat 10 hours for free parking commuters (these are NOT shoppers). deps burford and brehaut have guts and reason. paint is a dinosaur, spruce an ex-utilities bottom line merchant and domaille probably too weak to do what he knows in his heart is right - all kowtowing to the lazy lazy parasites parking all day on my paid taxes! you probably pay more for your in-car luxuries than you would for a year's parking.


don't always agree with you but abso-bloody-lutely right on this occasion. It's the ONLY way forward.


Yvonne Burford, you seem intent on hammering town workers with this tax, which I'm against, but what about town residents. What parish will they be able to park in so they can avoid this extra cost of living in town? Will they be compensated for the fall in value of their homes because no one is going to want to buy a property in town if it doesn't have its own parking space?

Yvonne Burford

Hi Blogger,

An extension of the residents parking scheme would need to go hand-in-hand with paid parking to prevent migration of commuter parking to the detriment of town residents.


Why not get a decent bus service in place first then decide if paid parking is even necessary? the last thing government should be doing is dipping there hands in peoples pockets when other measures may work.

Yvonne Burford

Its a good point bcb and it was something we considered.

As much as people often instinctively don't like looking at what has happened elsewhere, we would be fools not to at least try and learn from other peoples triumphs and disasters.

And the lessons would seem to show that no alternatives, no matter how good, will be sufficiently effective when they are competing with the ability to park all day long for nothing.


But their not parking all day long for nothing are they. According to Rosie it is cheaper to use the buss service and if its a good one then thats the incentive we need surely?

And in any city or main hub there is traffic congestion at certain times of the day paid parking or not so i`m not sure which model your looking at that says we need it here.

Basically you want to force people out of their cars by making it so bloody expensive they have little choice but to use another method of transport no matter how good or bad (thats real choice for you eh)and it doesn`t take a genius to work out who will suffer most from that. But those with deeper pockets will rejoice with the traffic being reduced allowing them to maneuver more freely while us plebs watch in envy.

Matt Fallaize


I agree to the extent that persuading motorists to transfer to public transport must be infintely harder while our bus service remains in the rather shambolic state of the past couple of years. I implored Environment to address the bus service before producing a road transport policy - alas to no avail.

Dave Jones


I have made the same point before, we have thrown tens of millions at this poorly structured bus service and that needs to be sorted first. You never know you might get people to use it voluntarily instead of the Socalist aproch of pricing people out of their cars.

I am afraid that is where we are with this, the left wing of the States is never happier than when it is finding more creative ways to relieve the public of their hard earned income.

I don't believe they care whether these measures work or not, it's about squeezing the motorist untill the pips squeak.

The rest of this stradedgy I am sure will include lots of other ways of fleecing the car owner, probably an emissions tax , much higher fuel prices and if paid parking is voted in, you can look forward to two things, one it being introduced right across the island including the Hospital and Beau Sesjour, including the coastal,car parks.

And the second, the parking charges being raised every year in the budget. There will be no going back once it is here and Guersey will change irrevocably as a result.

The left have to try and inflict their vision of the world on the rest of us, Get your anoraks out and your bikes and invest in some good walking shoes because you are going to need them if this lot get their way., whether it is a bog standard education system or the tax and spend ethos of all failed Socalist regimes they know what is best for all of us.

Election Issues

Deputy Jones @ 7.07

I am so pleased that you posted has made me feel much better!

I have been feeling morose of late. :-))

Neil Forman

Dave Jones

Well said!

You will not price people out of their cars, they will make sacrifices if needed to pay. I agree that once this comes in it will be a cash cow.

I didn't agree with the closure of schools but at least the Education board were united.


Yvonne Burford,

In the face of such a standard off with your colleagues, why don't you set up your manifesto Transport 2020 or 2030 or whatever and state it on a website or blog for everyone to see. Not difficult or expensive.

Yvonne Burford


Any proposals I take to the States will be published ahead of time in the normal manner. But I can of course look at putting them on a website.

The current debate here was triggered by Deputy Spruce saying on the radio that 3 members of Environment are against paid parking and have decided not to keep it in the Strategy that Deputy Brehaut and I have been working on.

When I know better how the proposed majority States Report will look I can decide how to respond to it.

Yvonne Burford


At present you can pay to catch a bus or you can park for nothing. I think we should reverse that. But I absolutely agree that the bus service has to be more frequent, more friendly, more comprehensive and more reliable.


Has anyone ever worked out how much it would cost to make all bus jourmeys free with the current "service"?

Yvonne Burford


Depending how you configure it, the revenue from paid parking would be sufficient to make the service free and enhance it.


If your trying to get everyone on the bus then where is the revenue coming from to fund the bus service making it free? have you worked out the reduction in car use and how many paid parking drivers there will be to fund the free bus service? would you not need the fee pay car parks to be full to pay for this?

I repeat get the buses up to scratch then see if paid parking needs addressing.

Those who complain about free parking dont seem to mind the fee paying driver subsiding the bus users, so they complain about the car driver but dont mind them getting free bus journeys at their expense.

Neil Forman


Where are the funds for the many extra buses that you are going to need to see this dream going to come from, you also need to think about replacing the existing fleet soon too.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Neil,

If I bring proposals to the States, then under rule 15 (2) I will be obliged to identify funding.

In addition, as you may know, the States recently identified bus fleet replacement as a Category B project in the 2014 to 2017 Capital Prioritisation programme.

Neil Forman


Yes there is agreement to replace the existing fleet, to carry out what you are proposing you will probably need to double the current fleet. Where is that funding going to come from?


Why would it make their property values drop ?

If parking was to be made more expensive and thus commuting to work also more expensive then would that not drive up demand for properties in Town so people could avoid having need of a car ?

And which Town residents park their cars outside down at the North Beach ?

And if they do and they live opposite in one of those fancy new apartments, why has tax-payer money been used to increase the value of their properties ?

Sorry, but your arguments are groundless.

Island Wide Voting


Are you really convinced that people who live in Town can avoid the need of having a car?


Sorry IWV... Tried posting this before... but it did not appear after your comment but way down the thread...

"Not everybody needs a car, regardless of where they live, and not everybody who has a car real needs it.

But that is beside the point. My proposal is that certain States owned car-parks such as North Beach and Crown Pier would have paid parking and on-road parking spaces near the centre of Town would have free short term spaces to facilitate visiting the shops there.

Other areas of St Peter Port would remain as before, though some on-road spaces could be allocated to residents using a free residents permit system.

My aim would only be to target those large sites that could have been used for other uses or to generate more income.

Any reduction in car usage on the island can only be achieved, amongst other things, by an improvement in bus services, ( including the bus station which is a miserable place to wait for a bus in the middle of winter ), and lower fares. On this point the Environment Department has been a total failure !!"


no free parking for civil servants then? and deputies, free airport permits I could go on,

hit the poor shop people and the working guern


Unbelievable.... Or is it??? Here we go again, the States of Guernsey yet again making money out of its Islanders. Hmm, now then let's see what we can get them for next??? Ah I know, let's hit those workers/shoppers that park in town, will the Bridge be next? Maybe St Martin's (think about it) is nothing sacred left in this Island. The current states members (although let's face it most of them are your usual old rubbish (being polite) are just as bad as whom they supposedly took over!!!


Well done YB. So much nonsense is talked about paid parking. We have the precedent already at the States Airport. It works brilliantly and I'd love to see the same simple automated system employed at North Beach and La Salerie for starters. Two hours free for shoppers, then you pay if you want to stay for longer in the commuter spaces.

As things stand its a scandalous waste of a public resource letting all and sundry park there for free. if those two areas were owned by private enterprise damned right they be charging and nobody would bat an eyelid. It's high time the states started acting like Guernsey PLC. Shame on the spineless dinosaurs on Environment, Paint, Spruce and Domaille. Bring on pay parking now, in a limited, workable, admin free form. it's long, long overdue.

Dave Jones


They are not parking there for free, I repeat what I said in a previous post

"In addition motorists swell the Islands coffers through a whopping 49 pence per litre in fuel tax, together with parking fines and other road traffic penalties.

So I would suggest that the motorist is already paying a hefty price for the personal ownership and use of their cars and the upkeep of the island car parks".

That is on top of their personal taxation which also goes towards the roads and parking infrastructure.


A fatuous argument Dave. No part of the fuel duty is a designated payment for parking. If it was then thousands of motorists and commercial drivers would be paying for a service - free long term public parking on the North Beach and Salerie piers, which are tailor made for pay parking - that they do not even receive.

Nobody is saying that EVERY public parking space should be paid for. This is where your scaremongering argument falls completely to the ground.

Dave Jones


It all goes into general revenue, tell me which other sector of the community besides the motorist contribute as much to the islands treasury through indirect taxes?

If this principle is adopted it WILL be extended to every public car park around the island within a few years.

Also I might move an amendment to the traffic strategy that there is a £100 per year bike tax if the user pays principle is to be fair.

Matt Fallaize


The owners of property and the purchasers of property contribute more through indirect taxation.

Drinkers contribute almost all as much and drinkers and registered companies combined contribute more.

I agree that motorists also contribute a lot, but not quite as much proportionately as you suggest.

Dave Jones

The fact is Matt

That the majority of motorists pay all those taxes as well.


Dave Jones.

It IS free at the point of use and that is the point. As long as it appears free, it acts as an invitation to drivers to use it. If the aim of the transport strategy is to reduce the amount of private vehicles on the roads, then the opportunity costs have to be very visible. Free parking hides that cost.

However much we pay in fuel taxes, it will not be covering the externalised costs caused by driving and those costs are only going to get worse as our health bills increase.

Here’s a quote (& the link) to a Times article….. “Municipal authorities in Copenhagen added up the effect on health, productivity, congestion and time saved and found that society as a whole makes a profit of around 13 pence for every kilometer cycled on the roads. By the same criteria, society makes a net loss of 8 pence for every kilometre driven by car”


Rose, It won’t stop congestion at all, people will just pay up, and the lower earners will be hit the hardest …



Reducing congestion would not be paid parkings only aim According to what DepBurford has said, the money raised could be used to improve the public bus service to provide a viable, frequent and very cheap (or free) alternative to driving. Both these measure working together would I am quite certain, considerably reduce congestion.

Lower earners are proportionally more impacted by the costs of car dependency than those who are well off. It is I think, an important reason why we should wean ourselves of this dependence and create a more balanced transport mix where we can all choose to use alternative transport wherever possible, so saving ourselves money.


Rosie you still have`nt explained how you will fund a free bus service from paid parking when you want all those fee paying parkers on the free buses? or is the truth of the matter those paid parking spaces will just fill up as they do now? therefor no reduction in traffic? just like Jersey. Its just circular reasoning Rosie. You want the funding to come from the very people you want to see using the buses.

We can all see that every major city and town around the world has congestion at peak times and no amount of paid parking has has solved that theoretical "problem" you and some others seem to have.

I also think if the exit and entrances to the car parks were much more suitable the build up of traffic may reduce? esp the salarie.

Matt Fallaize


Your first paragraph at 5.39 hits upon the inherent contradiction at the heart of previous paid parking proposals which have gone before the States - logically it can't significantly reduce congestion and fund a free bus service unless it is levied at such a rate as to turn it from a charge into a tax - and which no doubt Deputy Burford and Deputy Brehaut will wish to address in their minority report.



No-where have I or anyone else as far as I can remember said that paid parking would ‘eliminate’ traffic. If you read any of my posts, you will see I talk about ‘reducing’ traffic volumes.

I imagine that what a lot of people would do, is still drive to town but not every day- maybe just 2 or 3 times a week- maybe more, maybe less. On the day(s) they drive, they could pack in all the errands that ‘have’ to be done by car leaving themselves free to bus or cycle on the other days. For some families, it would mean being able to manage with less cars so saving them money. Hopefully eventually, it will result in our being able to reduce the amount of land dedicated to parked cars so improving the ambience of town.

In jersey, they have repeatedly built more parking to accommodate more cars driving into town. That is why they still have congestion problems- nothing to do with paid parking which I don’t think they ever intended to use as a tool to reduce traffic. After all, no-one builds a car park with the intention of keeping it empty!


Rosie if Jersey has far more parking spaces than us and a good portion of there`s is paid parking and they are still filling up the spaces then doesn`t that tell us something? they have a large number of paid parking spaces and they still manage to fill them and you expect us who will i would imagine have a much smaller allocation to paid parking but you expect it to reduce traffic? where`s the logic in that?

Ok rosie if we do go down the paid parking route unlike Jersey where ours will solely be to reduce traffic and it fails do you agree they should reverse it.

So you want to fund the bus service from those that on certain days "have" to use their cars so in effect leaving them little choice but to use paid parking. Thats what i call discriminating between those who do have a choice and those who don`t.



Paid parking would NOT be implemented solely to reduce traffic. It would be to reduce traffic AND to generate the funds to provide an alternative to driving. Jersey has twice our population so I would expect them to have more parking than us. But its supply and demand. You supply the parking and the demand will rise to fill it, so it’s important not to increase the supply.

Because of past (foolish) policies that have encouraged the over use of cars, Guernsey has become a car dependent community. In car dependent communities it becomes hard to participate in life fully if you do not own a car. That means every adult over the age of 17 is encouraged to buy a car, whether they can afford it or not. There are lots of problems and costs associated with car dependent communities but if you don’t want to believe me, I suggest you google it and look it up for yourself. There is masses of information out there. Of course it is unfortunate that we have got ourselves into this position because it will be so much harder to undo the damage than it would have been to prevent it in the first place. But it isn’t because there has been a shortage of people trying to raise the alarm, but sadly because every time they speak up, they are shot down in flames by the chorus of ‘but in Guernsey we do what we want’.


Why do motorists who pay 49p in fuel tax and DON'T use the free car parks have to subsidise them others. Why is a majority paying for the minority who park on the North Beach for their daily work routine.

'Motorists paying a hefty charge for for personal ownership'..., that's just playing to the gallery Dave Jones. Try owning a Range Rover in central london; resident's Parking fee, congestion charge, emissions duty and Vat on top and more expensive fuel. Got to be easy car ownership on the old island.

Dave Jones


But we don't live in London and as I have said many times, I could care less what they do in other places, I am only interested in how we treat our people here in Guernsey.

Election Issues


Why should those people who have to work in St Peter Port...because that is where their job is located....have to pay to park in a parking space on States land? What choice do they have?

They have to go to work to make a living's just very unfortunate that their work is situated in town.

The only other alternative is to remove ALL of the long term car parking spaces....and then sit back to see what will happen.....


Very well said Martino.

Dave... The car owners do not pay any tax when they are parked for the whole day in Town unless the cars have been left with the engines running !

That 49 p goes to the road upkeep, policing, and whatever, not just for construction of more car parks on sites that are owned by the States and which could be put to better use, and so that 49 p is not sufficient if it has to also be topped up with other sources of taxes, as your post implies.


Deputy Burford

Thank you for all your replies, I've learnt a lot.

The fact that you stay calm and rational in the face of such blatant rudeness is a credit to you.

I really am ashamed of some of my fellow islanders sometimes. Sure, disagree, come up with alternatives, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But have some respect for someone who has the guts to actually try to deal with the island's issues.

I am also not impressed that This is Guernsey has stood back and allowed a States member (or anyone for that matter) to be repeatedly addressed in this way.

Island Wide Voting


Fair enough post but you forgot to list your own alternatives .. if you have any


Well said Kate !


This proposal is pure craziness. The associated furniture that comes as part of these initiatives would completely trash the look of the island. Guernsey is far too small and the roads too narrow to be cluttered with entry/exit barrier systems wherever they are considered to be needed. The traffic flow

would be hindered to the point where it would be lucky to flow at all for many hours at the start and finish of each working day. This needs to be scrapped once and for all.

It will create yet more division between the well off and those with less. Places to park will be decreased massively because the very places where people once could have parked, outside business and office hours, will be barricaded by control measures making the problems much worse than they currently are.

Those with private parking spaces will naturally become possessive and do everything within their power to keep them for themselves. Much of the goodwill and understanding will be lost between most people. I can't see this ever achieving anything good. It will make this island very ugly and will create no end of problems long into the future. It won't be long before cars will be towed away and the people responsible will look at that as something they want to maximise profits on to the best of their ability.

I hope the majority of the elected see sense over this. I will be keeping a close eye on who votes for and against. Some people can propose to do so much damage without seeing the bigger overall picture.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Realism,

I don't know where the idea of barriers everywhere has come from, it is certainly not from me. Any system must respect our beautiful town. One part of the rationale for paid parking is of course to reduce the demand for it and therefore reclaim some of the land given over to parking for better, more attractive uses that benefit more people.

I rather think there are not lots of free private spaces around the town that are available to all comers at the moment. Most of these spaces seem to be rented out for considerable sums by their owners.

One significant division between the better-off and less well-off is that many in the second group simply cannot afford to own and run a car at all. Income from paid parking can be ploughed into a much better public transport system, preferably one that is free at the point of use.

As cars which overstay their parking disc time are not routinely towed away at the moment, I don't see that draconian action taking place with paid parking either.


Barriers has come from me YB. Not everywhere, admittedly, but I think North Beach and Salerie would be perfectly suited to exactly the same system we have at the airport without compromising the environment.


Talk about realism...

So one argument for not implementing paid parking is to preserve the esthetic beauty of the island ?

I see nothing beautiful about the North Beach car park... A sea of gleaming car-roof tops and windows.

Yuks !

Great for visiting tourists as they come off their cruise ships... One big, ugly car-park !!


Paid parking or should it be Pay to Use Parking, Payable parking or Non gratis parking...?!

It's a shame Environment dept. has no leadership to speak of. What have they actually achieved with Transport, the square root of nothing it seems. If more deputies had a foot in the future, we might get somewhere. Why not cal it a Transport Strategy 2020 or 2030.

Some seem to like to keep their feet and minds stubbornly wedded to the past on a endless trip of nostalgia. The odd thing is some say they don't want to copy what other places do yet end up driving the same comodious 4 wheelers found in London, Berlin and the like. We are just 25 miles small.

Island Wide Voting

Are you one of the very few people aged between 17 and 70 who do not own a car Observer?

Or are you of the common opinion that everyone ELSE is the problem?

Yvonne Burford

Why only up to 70 Ray?

Island Wide Voting


17 to 70 just slips easily off the tongue :)

Here's a post I made earlier concerning the newly issued consultation booklet ..

"A good clear ‘no jargon-no civil service speak’ report

However Page 10 of the consultation document puts it all into perspective for me

Only in Guernsey would the government be fretting over the ‘problem’of a regular ten minute traffic jam

Taken from page 10 of the report …

Journey times from Bulwer Avenue to Weighbridge Roundabout:

Morning peak period Term Time: 15min 25sec average; 17min 48sec longest

Morning peak School Holidays: 5min 15sec average; 5min 49sec longest

(Source: Seafront Journey Time Surveys – Feb &Mar 2013)"

Is all this angst STILL about a regular ten minute traffic jam or were the official journey time figures completely out of kilter?

PS Nice to see that Barry Brehaut has belatedly come to the rescue


The obvious answer to reduce congestion is to close the schools completely tee hee...or perhaps, seriously all the children over 11 could go on the bus or heaven forbid, actually walk or cycle to school!!

I have been using the bus to get to and from work and the only time it gets delayed is when it gets near town, while all I see is cars with children that are old enough to make their own way to school.

The bus is a viable alternative, ok I wish it could be more frequent from my end of the Island, currently its every half hour so would be nice to have one every 15 mins or so, but it has been on time and the bus drivers have been nice

So, sort out the kids and viola, no need for paid parking, it would also make our kids healthier and reduce the trend for people getting porkier!

Yvonne Burford


The Department is well aware of the congestion caused by schools and better transport arrangements will be part of the plan.

Barry Brehaut


Deputy Burford and I were tasked with delivering a Transport Strategy. First a door to door survey, then meeting with over a dozen groups who had an interest in transport, taxi drivers, public service vehicle providers, hauliers, Chamber of Commerce, Town Centre Partnership, Cycle Groups etc. There was than an island wide consultation on-line and available in surgeries, Douzaine rooms, SCFH, and many other public spaces. That exercise demonstrated that the majority favoured a type of paid parking (not necessarily blanket SPP paid parking) but some incentive to ease congestion at least. This is not a campaign driven by Yvonne, but an evidenced based decision following extensive consultation. This workstream requires real leadership, excuse the pun but it has to be driven, led, argued with real committment.

I would not be surprised that following the consultation over the ports master plan, PSD could well be introducing PP on land they are responsible for.

On a personal note, Deputy Burford is an extremely capable, committed, conscientious workaholic, who is, after all, simply attempting to shape policy as directed by real engagement. It does her great credit that she continues to engage in the face of such abuse. BB.


Introduce a desent bus service before looking into paid parking.

Purchase buses that can go everywhere through all our narrow lanes with more bus stops in the rural areas of our island.

Fare stages this allowing those on a short journey paying less instead of all paying same price.

More park and rides on outskirts of town allowing more people to take advantage of this scheme.

Encourage delivery services before 8am.

Move bus terminus to north beach car park and allow more car spaces on bus terminus.

If you can improve the bus service you can then turn disc parking areas in town to 3 hour zones encouraging people who work in town to use the bus service.

Weekends free disc parking for everyone.

Yvonne Burford would you fancy a ride on our 24 seater purpose built bus through our narrow lanes with a friendly member of staff to pick you up at a bus stop outside your house and drop you off at your next states meeting and return you home promptly for your evening meal?

A good reliable bus service goes much further than PAYED PARKING.

Seeing buses driving around the island with one or two passengers is not the answer to your present system.


Some very interesting ideas...

The North Beach Bus Station concept would allow for a proper bus station to be built with indoor waiting areas, including a cafe and shops, as bus / train stations in other parts of Europe.

It would also be better located to serve passengers of incoming ferries from the UK and other islands as well as cruise-liners. I have suggested before that the White Rock should be included on bus routes.

I am not convinced in the viability of Park and Ride in Guernsey due to the small size of the island. Nor would I care for buses, even small ones, going through the smallest lanes - some areas simply can not be served by buses. But more one way streets should be introduced generally to avoid road blockages due to the size of some roads.

Smaller buses though for the future, lower, or even free, bus fares and generally a better bus service is needed.


Matt F (and others)

I've made this point time and again over the years and particularly relevant to whoever it was who talked in the press about not having to get to a car park at 7.45 and eat cornflakes in the car.

I'm afraid the alternative for many is to eat them on the bus. For living in the Western Parishes as I do, in order to get to work for 9am, I'd have to be at my stop (which is a 5 minute walk away) at around 7.45. I then get to the terminus just in time to get to work for a 9am start. To get the first bus home after 5pm, leaves town at 5.15pm so I'd have to be on my way to the terminus bang on 5pm. I'd get to my stop at 5.45pm and home by 5.50pm.

Now, that trip home isn't too bad, but in the finance sector, working 9-5 sharp is just not the way it's done. In at 8.30, leave 5.30 is about acceptable if you aim to show any commitment to your job.

Translate that into bus times, and I'm leaving home at 7am and getting back at 6.30pm.

Frankly, with all the other issues, such as flexibility, children, weather (when walking/waiting) and the current unreliability of the busses, there is no way I'd do that over using my car.

So the proposed charge becomes nothing more than a tax. It is for these reasons that paid parking should be opposed.

If there is so much demand for parking I'm sure a company would set up and build a lot???

Matt Fallaize


Good points.

In terms of a decent bus service, you are preaching to the converted, as you may recall from previous transport-related threads.


I have always favoured Paid Parking as part of an overall strategy, better buses and also more parking to. It is a bit silly that people currently arrive at 7.30 and eat their shreddies in their car, just park.

I would favour short term parking free for shoppers and those wanting to park all day to have to pay. How much is a difficult one, in a lot of UK cities you are looking at best part of £10 per day. Perhaps we should be looking at £5 per day?

One thing that does need looking at is how we do this, scratch cards are not the way forward. Jersey have been using cameras and a smart app I think, at least looking at this. But this is easier with multi-storey car parks, something that we really need to look at.

Tony Webber

I suggest Yvonne visits many parts of the UK where there is increasingly a trend towards free parking, particularly in out of town shopping centres.

We are also have our own equivalent of out of town shopping areas.

There is simply no argument for paid parking.

The only arguments I have read so far relate to trying to raise money and are nothing to do with improving our traffic problems.

They are also nothing to do with raising money fairly.

The only fair way of raising money is that which we use already, fuel taxation, the user pays principle. The user pays principle does not apply to paid parking because there will always be many people who have free parking spaces, and they tend to be those with more money, so Yvonne would be penalising the less well off.

Yvonne has been part of the team which has done so much to destroy our once well reputed bus service. I remember she didn't come to the first public meeting on proposed changes to the services, but then she and her colleagues paid little attention to the public feedback anyway.

Yvonne and her colleagues have caused hundreds of thousands of pounds of very bad publicity for Guernsey with their discriminatory two tier bus fares and the ending of the easy to understand circular routes. I recommend that she and her colleagues speak to those in the tourist industry to find out how much damage they have caused, as they still do not seem to have woken up to this.

Now Yvonne wants to contribute to further visitor economy damage by trying to end Guernsey's free parking policy. At least on this occasion her colleagues realise that this would be disastrous and is not what the people of Guernsey will tolerate.

I ask Yvonne not to put the States into further disrepute by trying to debate paid parking again. The vast majority of States Members made it clear at the election that they did not want it, and they will not change their minds, so it is all a pointless waste of time.

Yvonne, please focus on bus services for all schoolchildren ( school traffic is very unnecessary), and vastly improving commuter bus services. These are the things which will improve traffic and parking in Guernsey, not the stick. The Guernsey people respond as all Donkeys do, to the carrot !

As the former Chairman of the St. Peter Port Residents Parking Committee and who was responsible for Residents Parking Permits, we had a survey which said that residents did not want paid parking in town. However hard one tries, it is virtually impossible for a paid parking policy not to affect residents, with commuters parking in residential areas.

It would certainly require a lot of policing.

So please can we have positive user friendly policies, not negative police state type ones.


I would certainly agree that the Environment Department has been instrumental in the decline of the bus service and I am amazed that 60 % of the Environment Department are against the concept of paid parking, which could easily be applied on States-controlled sites such as North Beach and the Crown Pier, as it already is applied at the airport.

I can also imagine that residents of St Peter Port would indeed be against the concept of paid parking, if it was outside their houses, as would residents of other parishes.

But I do not agree to your claim that there is no argument for the concept of paid parking. There is already paid parking - at the airport, and it does not deter tourists from flying into Guernsey.

I do not think we are talking about a blanket paid parking system all over the parish of St Peter Port - but to assign the on-road parking spaces near the centre of Town for short term parking and the larger car-parks, such as North Beach, for long-term paid parking. A car parked for ten hours is not using any fuel and thus is not contributing in anyway to the cost of that car-park ! And those sites that I am talking about are sites in key locations in Town that could better used for other purposes which could generate more income for the island.

There is indeed a very valid argument for introducing a system of paid parking, on those sites that I mentioned, but also the bus service should be improved and, in my opinion, made more affordable. Guernsey can not carry on increasing its number of private motor cars and building more and more car-parks.

Finally, I do not agree to your call to Ms Burford to, as you put it, "not to put the States into further disrepute by trying to debate paid parking again".

This topic was indeed, it would seem, to have been in her election manifesto - so I would assume that a reasonable number of voters agreed with what she proposed in her manifesto and voted her in on that basis.

Yvonne Burford


I agree that the current bus pricing is dire - I would like to see free buses, that would be great for tourists and locals. But I cannot accept that debating paid parking 'puts the States into disrepute'. Sorry, that is nonsense.


Deputy Burford...

Whilst I salute you ( and Deputy Brehaut ) for your attempts to introduce the topic of paid parking to be included in the Traffic Strategy, I am appalled at the whole of the current ED for allowing the current bus operator to increase fares by so much and, at the same time, to cause such a serious decline in the quality of the service.


I'm against paid parking. It punishes those that are lesser paid and need to work in town.

If it comes in it needs to be across the board. All states parking not just town and no exceptions. So that includes parking at custard castle and no resident permits. Not sure why a resident should escape charges, surely they have equal right to park in the road as someone from Torteval. My house doesn't come with a right to park in a street and when you buy rent a property you know the parking situation.

Also if you want to raise revenue you could quite easily just issue daily tickets to the people who flout the rules by permanently leaving their cars in the Odeon or Beau Sejour hampering every elses lives (that s a commuter Gripe!)

Election Issues

Recently on another thread from November 11 2013 about exactly the same paid parking issue there was an excellent post from Busy motorist.

Busy motorist worked out that tax on fuel brings in GBP 30,451,200!

That is quite a significant amount of money that the motorist is already paying.

If I could see that paid parking would alleviate congestion in St Peter Port, I would think about it seriously as an option.

However...there is only congestion twice a day in rush hours to and from work.

This is because so many people work in town, shop in town. There are a huge number of offices, hotels, 7 schools..etc

If paid parking is introduced..there will be the same amount of cars coming into St Peter Port and parking in exactly the same car spaces at the same time every morning. It will not make a blind bit of difference to the number of cars on the road or congestion going into and out of St Peter Port.

It is only a TAX.

More parking is needed in what ever form to help those people who work and live in town.

Yvonne Burford

I think Busy Motorist's calculation was a touch amiss and the the true figure is closer to half that.


Whether it is 30 million or 15 million, what is the cost of providing the infrastructure to accommodate the motor car... the roads, the lighting, the regulation, the policing, etc etc .

The idea of having a cheaper, improved bus service with a limited form of paid parking, is to reduce the congestion on Guernsey's roads. The answer is not to keep on building more car-parks. I find it a shame that the North Beach site is used as one large free-to-use car-park when it could have been used for other purposes or at least have brought additional revenue into the States coffers.

I applaud Deputies Burford and Brehaut in their efforts to introduce a form of paid parking... but I condemn all of the Environment Department for their abysmal handling of the bus service.

Island Wide Voting

Until the Billet comes out before the March heated debate this is all guesswork but thinking about the income required to fully subsidise a free bus service from long term paid parking charges leaves a rather scary daily rate

Someone above said there are 1,000 long term spaces in the firing line (anyone know if that is that a correct number?)

More guessing but if it is intended to operate paid parking from Monday to Friday for 52 weeks, that's 260 days at 1,000 spaces .. that is 260,000 chargeable 'parking-space-days'per year

At £5 per day that will gross 1.3M and at £10 per day it will generate 2.6M

After deducting costs .. scratch cards ? .. extra staff? .. parking meters ? .. pay & display machines ? will a 2.6M gross income from a £10 per day charge ( £50 per week )be enough to subsidise a free bus service or will the daily charge have to be set higher than £50 per week? Scary stuff indeed

Matt Fallaize


That is not quite right because you have loaded the existing public transport subsidy onto paid parking.

I have no idea what Environment (by majority or minority report) is to propose, but if they have in mind using paid parking to raise the additional costs of making the bus service free at the point of use (i.e. the additional costs on top of the existing subsidy) I think you are looking at needing to raise in the region of £1.25-1.5m. a year.

Election Issues

Deputy Fallaize @ 3.06

I know you don't know what Environment will propose, but if paid parking is to raise additional costs to make the bus service free at the point of use...all additional costs on top of the existing subsidy....and that will need about GBP 1.5m a year...

...Have we not been here before as is like a never ending circle in a kaleidoscope..

A contribution by the user towards a service funded through taxes...

Why should the motorist pay for a free bus service?? The motorist

pays 49p per litre in fuel tax.....GBP 2million from general revenue from income much more should the motorist pay??

It is grossly unfair!

I agree with Deputy Dave Jones....lets have a bike tax!!


Election Issue.

Research into the societal costs of people who cycle their journeys found that the community benefits from approx 13p profit for every kilometre cycled. Using the same measure, it transpired that society makes a loss of 8p for every kilometre driven.

So to put such a hefty tax on bikes as Dave suggested (£100) would appear to be a rather spiteful way to cut your nose of your face.

Read the article here:

or a different one here:

Island Wide Voting


...and a typewriter tax

Matt Fallaize


...only if we can have one on mobile phones and iPads too!

Yvonne Burford


I am a great fan of the estimating method of calculation, but in this case I think you need a new fag packet.

As you have rightly inferred I am not ready to put every nuance of any proposal I might bring on the internet just yet, but I can assure you that your figures are not the ones I have in mind.

Neil Forman

Island Wide Voting

Lets assume an adult working 0900 - 17.30, 6 days a week with an hour lunch break.

Earnings = £6.50 x 7.5 hrs x 6 days x 52 weeks = Gross earnings = £15'210 per year BEFORE DEDUCTIONS.

Let's also assume parking fee at £5.00 per day.

5 x 6 x 52 = £1'560 parking fees

So take that away from GROSS EARNINGS = £13'650

Now put that back into an hourly rate = £5.82 per hour

That is £0.68 per hour worse off.

Would we be paying more in supplementary benefit?


If the bus service was improved and made less expensive, or even free, it will be cheaper to get to work than by having a private car.


Deputy Burford

Keep up the good work and do not mind the nonsense from the naysayers.

It is not you and Deputy Brehaut who should give way but your colleagues on Environment. How can they retain credibility putting up proposals for 'an integrated traffic strategy' without considering paid parking?

As for the torrent of 'we don't want it...' here, no one wants to pay taxes but it doesn't mean that's going away.

Stick to your guns and if your colleagues had any gumption, they would resign explaining they cannot carry out the wishes of the States in refusing to consider paid parking.


I can get a little enthusiastic and excitable at times. Especially after a few pints.



You are all missing the point. From the Bordage towards Trinity Square and where the former GFSC used to have its headquarters lie empty office spaces.... Paid parking will not help. Especially if there is more office space built as intended by developers in Admiral Park. Long term parking is intended for those working in town and they should not carry the weight or the burden of the entire island's transport strategy. We cannot imitate other jurisdictions, we do not have the roads or pavements nor the space. If this "strategy" by a few is accepted than a pole tax should be introduced in all areas where there is public parking, ie. Admiral Park, St Martin, L'Islet, Cobo, St Sampsons. This has to be an island wide burden not carried by a few. Mary Portas, a UK Government advisor and the recent star of a TV show ‘Mary Queen of Shops’, was commissioned to provide a report into Britain’s high streets and retail centres.

One of her key recommendations to save the ailing ‘high streets’ is the removal of paid parking, in order to ensure their ongoing role as retail destinations. In a recent survey by the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) it was found that 50% of members said the lack of affordable town centre parking had a detrimental effect on their business.



It has already been stated several times on here that if paid parking comes in, it would not be on the short term parking that shoppers use.

Island Wide Voting

It needs shouting Rosie or else a lot more ink ( electricity ?) is likely to be wasted on this thread



But what you don't 'get' either is that short term spaces (ie 2 or 3 hour) are not really sufficient time to make a good shopping trip into town that also involves using other. Half of the allotted time in a 2 hour space can be taken up just by the walk from one end of town to the other.

The serious shopper doesn't just 'pop' into town to get a few bits (that can be done perfectly easily out of town).

There are also hairdressers, beauty salons, dentists, coffee shops and restaurants, a library, Friday markets and a proper shopping trip involves taking your time, browsing and more likely than not, making a few more impulse buys that you wouldn't make when restricted in time. When you are constantly clockwatching to see if your time is running out, you will limit your visit (and spends)accordingly.


How is the status quo better? You can't get a long term space after 8am anyway!

If the spaces were all the same but it was simply first hour or two free, then a fixed rate per hour thereafter, then paid parking is actually better for the 'serious' shopper who doesn't want to be clockwatching.

And of all the fanciful excuses people have come up with so far for avoiding having to pay to park, having time for fine dining and 'impulse buys' is up there with the best of them. Is this what the 'right to park' is for - the right to have other taxpayers subsidise your social life and shopping habits? Not that I have anything against you having a nice time in Town, far from it, but I am uncomfortable about other people having to pay for it out of their taxes.


Calm down dear, a hardworking, tax-paying out of town bod, I was trying to point out that one of the things that does put people off making the most of what town has to offer (and thereby supporting local shops and services instead of going away or shopping online) is that the shorter term parking is too short.

2,3 or 10 hour - nothing in between. It would be nice to see some 5 hour allocations in there as well. Nowhere in my post do I object to paying for that but at the moment, with the system that we have right now, it is too biased to either commuters or short term spaces.


If you don't object to paying, then surely your whole point is moot - with paid parking, you can shop at your leisure, safe in the knowledge that you won't have to fork out for a parking ticket at the end of it?

Island Wide Voting


Are you advocating the Jersey system where a single unit costs 73p whether it be for 15 minutes or perhaps 2 hours depending on where you are parked.Apparently you are able to display as many paycards as you want

This must surely favour the driver with the fattest wallet.There are probably enough of them in our Town area to take up all the 2 hour slots all day just because they can

I'm sure paid parking will work ... for about 6 weeks .. after which all those enraged protesters who can't pay / won't pay will gradually succumb to the comfort and convenience of the car they have been walking passed in the driveway

So within a couple of months all the 10 minute queues we can't seem to put up with will be back.The only difference being that the States will have trousered a few more of the Town workers pounds to give away to the non-local bus company

The ONLY way to prevent those ten minute queues,as already mentioned elsewhere, would be to remove the long term parking altogether ... that is take a trip back to the fifties

With apologies to anyone about to have their evening meal PBFALLA in his pink lycra budgie smugglers would no doubt approve


I'm waiting to see what detail Deputy Burford comes up with. But in short, no, I'm not advocating paid parking without a raft of other measures as well, which have to be enough to mitigate the risk of ending up in the Jersey situation.

My preferred traffic strategy is still pretty much what it was three years ago:

Amongst other things, that would include pay/display or mobile phone payment for on-street parking, barrier car parks like St Malo/Gsy Airport for North Beach and so forth. Nothing that hasn't been done a million times elsewhere.

A free initial period would help out with short-term parking for shoppers, but actually I'm of the view that cars do more harm than good for the retail centre and shoppers and commuters alike should be using other modes of transport far more. Town would be a vastly more attractive destination if the mix of traffic was more diverse, and retailers would stand to benefit hugely. I certainly don't think paid parking is a panacea, but I do think free parking is an unjustifiable market distortion which has paralysed our ability to make any useful inroads into our transport problems.

I would also go a lot further now on the need for serious investment in segregated cycling/e-bike infrastructure a la Netherlands: an integrated network on which car through-traffic is discouraged or prohibited, and which (at the very least) children, mothers and pensioners can use with confidence. There is massive social, health and amenity benefit to be had here.

The car did deliver on its promise for many years, but we are at saturation point now, traffic has slowed to a crawl. The benefits of the car are outweighed by the social cost, the health cost, and the trashing of public amenity with cars and their infrastructure. We've invested a lot in the supremacy of the car, but at the same time we've rendered every other option impractical or useless, while the car's hopelessly inefficiency means it is just not a viable or desirable solution for the future. We need to have the vision to see a better way, and the guts to go through the pain of getting there. And we're lucky that Deputy Burford is prepared to stick her neck out and get on with the job of doing it.


ChrisJ for roads minister. Why don't you persuade your colleagues to co-opt him Yvonne?

Matt Fallaize

Chris J,

Of course it's worth pointing out that (the previous) Environment's dismissing of any link between increasing fares and falling numbers of passengers now looks like complacency. They have since admitted that passenger numbers did fall, and not insignificantly, following the increase in fares.

Yvonne Burford

Thanks Chris. I am inclined to agree with you from the considerable research and reading I have done that cars actually do more harm than good to retail centres. However I also know that there is no possibility whatsoever of getting short stay paid parking through the States. Nevertheless I think that with significantly improved public transport and pedestrian and cycle infrastructure that we can move in the right direction with the benefits including a much more usable and attractive public realm.

Election Issues

ChrisJ @ 6.09

St Malo has had paid parking for a long time....but is a town with a huge amount of traffic both local and tourist. In the summer months the car parks are full to overflowing all the time....this is not just commuter traffic obviously. However, people are not all riding around on bikes as they do in Amsterdam.

The St Malo car parks are on the quays and all around the walls of the town and all street parking is paid parking as well.

St Malo has invested heavily in a huge underground car park to help alleviate their car parking crisis.

There is one thing that St Malo has that is great......a really excellent bus service!

The buses are not free but the service is really good. The buses are always at the bus stops bang on the time that it says in the timetable.

It is very difficult to compare Guernsey with another town or city because Guernsey has it's own unique problems. One of the problems is that the finance industry is right at the very heart of St Peter Port and that's where so many people need to get to to go to work...alongside all those other people that work in shops etc.Offices are being built sometimes with no thought to where all employees will park.

Also there are huge numbers of town houses converted into flats and flats without parking which appear to be making the problem of parking in St Peter Port even worse. It must be a nightmare to live in town without parking and have to rely on on street parking.

I know it sounds mad but maybe we do need some form of underground car parking to help alleviate the present problem from all angles but then we also need an excellent bus service as well, one that is reliable, punctual and user friendly.

Just to bring in paid parking now to reduce congestion (which is highly questionable) or pay for a brilliant bus service is very, very unfair and discriminatory on those people who have to go to work in town just because that is where their place of work is situated.


I find the claim from car owners that they are too poorly paid to pay for parking illogical given they can afford to buy, insure and put petrol in their cars. If you were truly poor you wouldn't have a car in the first place. The cost for me to fill my car with petrol and drive to work every day is far greater than the cost to use public transport. I don't use public transport because it is inconvenient not because it is non-existent. The reality is that too many people are too lazy to walk or use other means of transport, you only have to visit Waitrose and see how many able bodied people park in the disabled spaces to prove the point.

What I'm looking for from deputies is for them to start making the tough choices, the unpopular choices, choices that are in the long term better for the Island and not necessarily in the best interests of their political careers. It’s about time that deputies developed a spine to go with their thick skin and for the public to appreciate that change is necessary.

george L W


there is no question there should be paid parking for the following reasons:

1. there are far too many cars on the road.

2. Too many lazy people heading somewhere in their car ( one person one car) - there are families who may own 4 or 5 cars ( a total joke ) and 4 seperate cars may head from home into towm of a morning.

3. Roads are becoming more dangerous - in the last year there have sadly been too many fatalities it is a matter of time( not long i fear) before the next

4. We need to put people off driving a car but we need good public transport, safe roads to cycle on and pavements to walk on ( not being driven on by unintelligent locals)



You set out four reasons - I will address each in turn:

1. In whose opinion are there too many cars? We have congestion at certain times, but what other successful jurisdiction doesn't (and many have paid parking).

With population policy being only very limited increases, the rate of cars on the road increasing will be slowing down so I feel we're near the apex.

2. What a crass statement to make - some people are single! Some people might be car sharing, or have children and have just dropped the other occupants off. My wife and I head off to town in separate cars - she finishes at 12 then picks children up - I work all day.

3. In whose opinion - you make a point about the large numbers of car journeys - given there are so many journeys, we do have relatively few fatalities. And those tragic ones that have been suffered have tended to be a result of inappropriate speed or other contributing factors, and not volume. Surely having lots of cars on the roads would imply a slower overall speed?

4. Why exactly do we need to put people off? And why are locals being singled out as unintelligent?

Looking forward to your response


Election Issues

George @ 6.21 pm

I do agree with Billythefish.

1. There may be too many cars heading into St Peter Port in the morning and coming out again later in the day. This is rush hour traffic. Rush hour traffic even occurs in St Helier, Jersey and they have paid parking.

The rush hour traffic is caused because everybody is trying to get to their jobs in St Peter Port....all at the same time!

There are many jobs in offices, banks, insurance, accountancy, advocates, shops, opticians, hairdressers etc etc.

2. The cars heading into town in the morning may first be going to one of the 7 schools in St Peter Port or elsewhere on the island. People lead very busy lives. Mostly both parents work to pay a mortgage because houses are too expensive!

3. The speed limit is 25mph or 35mph....or in rush hour traffic..5mph!

4. Why should people be put off using their cars because they pay for parking. They are essential to most people because they lead such busy lives and they cant use the bus,walk or cycle. There must be a much better way to 'encourage' people not to use their cars...but paid parking is not it.

Why are 'locals' unintelligent?

Why should those people who commute to town every day for their jobs( in finance, insurance, shops, hairdressers etc) be singled out to pay for parking because their jobs are physically in St Peter Port..... ..perhaps some finance companies or banking institutions should relocate out into the country parishes so relieving the congestion of rush hour traffic??

Why should those people who commute into town for their jobs be singled out to pay for parking so a "free" bus service is funded for everybody else. This is discrimination is it not?


It is an opportune time for all deputies in favour to lay their cards on the table and air their views on what they believe their vision would be after implementing paid parking. At least it would then give some of us the chance to dissect their proposals.

Michael R

As one of the prime reasons for introducing paid parking would be to reduce the amount of vehicular traffic on our roads, there is an alternative: remove the large car parks.

Just imagine if North Beach and Salerie car parks were converted to green parkland, available for the whole population to enjoy rather than the 1000 or so privileged users.

St Peter Port needs more green areas. The motorist hasn't paid for these car parks and apparently has no desire to do so.

Trees, duck-ponds, quiet walking paths, perhaps a cafe or two....what's not to like?

Matt Fallaize

Mr R,

Did you hear an interview with the Minister on the BBC this lunchtime?

He said something to the effect that removing long-stay parking spaces would be a more straightforward - and possibly more effective - way of discouraging commuter traffic, if indeed that is the objective of those wishing to put paid parking before the States. I should point out that he said he did not favour such an approach, but suggested it presumably as an alternative for the consideration of those who are inclined to favour paid parking.


This is my way of thinking as well.

The anti-paid-parking lobby are crying for their free car-parks... but what I can not understand is why sites such as the North Beach are being wasted as a large, ugly car-park and are not being put to better use.


Dear Yvonne, I am interested in some data that I assume you have access to. Please can you let me know how many commuter journeys are made into St PP every day, and of that total what proportion are made by people using areas suggested for paid parking. With no facts I am assuming that the proportion will be a minority, which is why I am against paid parking as it will not disincentivise the majority of commuters, but I am happy for my assumption to be disproved.


Why is a car journey to the shops a good journey and a car journey to work a bad journey ?

I see no difference, it is all traffic on the roads.

Surely we should be encouraging shoppers to use the buses too ?

Yvonne Burford

The main difference is the length of time that the space is used for. A space on the Crown Pier is probably used by 8 or more people a day whereas a 10 hour space is occupied all day by just one person.

Some commuters come in to park in public car parks, some in private parking and some to drop people off.

As I have mentioned elsewhere on this very long thread, once I am aware of the proposals in the majority report I will consider what proposals I might wish to take to the States. This would then include the data and rationale you are seeking.

As a result of Deputy Spruce's statement on the radio on Sunday that paid parking will not form part of the majority report this subject has been given an airing before it would normally have done, which is on publication of the Billet, probably in February.


Thank you for your reply.

I do not follow the logic though, if we are trying to ease congestion surely that means that a 'shopping' space involves 16 car journeys a day whereas a 'commuter' space involves only 2 journeys a day.

On that basis would not a better target to reduce congestion actually be shopper traffic ?

Yvonne Burford

Hi Bronty,

One of the top responses in the public consultations was that there was too much congestion at peak times. Another popular refrain was that we must protect town which is already under threat from the Internet.

Most shoppers do not travel in and out of town at peak times.

If we provide a good public transport system some shoppers and some commuters will choose to use it. If we make streets safer and more welcoming and improve cycle infrastructure then more people may leave the car at home and walk or cycle, with the health benefits that brings.

I think it is important to say that any proposals I might bring will not be what I think it should be like, but rather a system designed to deliver what the majority of people have said they want to see happen. They also need to be proposals that stand some chance of gaining majority support in the States as otherwise it is a waste of everyone's time.

If it does happen that there are two reports placed before the States (and I have not made that decision yet) then that will give a wider choice which is a better thing.

Election Issues

Deputy Burford @ 9.22

"One of the top responses in public consultation was that there was too much congestion at peak times"

How many people responded to this point?

With the greatest you think it is because there is an awful lot of people working in St Peter Port...and they are all trying to get into work all at the same time?

Work includes finance, banks, insurance, accountants, shops, hairdressers, opticians, dentists, restaurants, library etc..

Guernsey is supposed to be a top 'finance centre' and yet Guernsey cannot provide enough parking spaces for all of its employees...let alone all of those people who work in shops trying to keep the economy afloat...

Yvonne Burford

Hi EI,

Of course you are right, there are lots of people all trying to get to work for 9am. But one thing is certain, if we provide more parking spaces there will be more congestion. Because people who don't drive to town now will start driving. And congestion is not linear. There comes a point, particularly when a road closure is involved, where congestion becomes gridlock.

When something is perceived to be in short supply there are two options: increase supply or reduce demand. I have outlined above what the result of increasing supply would be. Therefore I favour the reduce demand option.

(Of course one could reduce supply by just removing parking spaces, but this would be somewhat draconian. Providing attractive alternatives is a better way in my view)

Election Issues

Hi Deputy Burford

Why is it absolutely certain that if you provide more long term parking spaces ...that there will be more congestion?

It all depends how you provide those long term car parking spaces surely?

If you provide underground car parking...anything can be put on the top of them to make it attractive and no parked cars are seen.

We all know what will happen if you reduce the number of long term car parking spaces when people are trying to get into town for their jobs...lots of frustration and more congestion. Why should people walk or cycle especially as the bus service is shocking?

If you provide more long term car parking spaces in town for not only commuters but for those people who live in town who have to rely on on street must follow that there will be less congestion as more spaces have been provided.

BUT..if you provide these extra long term spaces with an excellent bus service, then you may very well be surprised to find that people will use the bus because they want to rather then be forced to do so.

Many towns in France have underground car parks...the brand new one in St Malo has a bus terminus on the top of it!


What is this assertion based on? Fact or opinion?

Election Issues

Dave @ 9.56

Are you replying to me?

It is only an opinion but surely it's common sense as well?.

It will not affect me as I don't need to park in town but lots of people do have to.

You get more with sugar than you do with is easier to get what you need to achieve by meeting people at least half way than making forceful demands to make them do something that they don't want to do.

St Peter Port has a lack of long term parking for commuters and people that live in town who do not have parking......we also have a terrible bus how can paid parking be introduced when these two things stand out like a sore thumb?

We seem to be going round and round in circles constantly....decent bus service (which we had not long ago..but unfortunately not any more)...then paid parking comes up again....then fuel tax will be increased....then a new car tax will be introduced...

Are any of these "tools" going to work? Will they solve any problems?



The congestion is not IN the car parks. It is on the roads! You can put the car parks where you like, under the ground, in a building, on a marina- wherever you want but the more car parking you provide, the more cars there are on the roads traveling to those parking spaces. We have a finite amount of road space and they are already gridlocked at times. Many people who would otherwise like to cycle, won’t because the roads are already too busy. Unless you are suggesting that we build dual carriageways all over the island, the idea that building additional parking will ease congestion is just plain daft!

No-one has suggested either reducing car parking spaces or introducing paid parking without improving the bus service and the facilities for cycling and walking. It has been shown elsewhere that free parking is too strong an attraction, however good the alternatives.

torteval voice of reason

Have I gone back in my time machine here at Torteval to find that "old paid parking chestnut" is back on the cards ?

I will only listen to this tosh if firstly Deputies undertake to pay to park on their taxpayer owned plum town centre spot up the Grange at a rate equivalent to whatever they will set for long stay parking for everyone else - well it being Christmas, Turkeys and all that, I can't see that happening ! - so they will still commute at no cost and park on taxpayer owned land and continue to pollute, congest etc

Most senior/middle ranking finance industry wallahs have their own private parking so they will still commute at no cost, congest etc

In reality paid long term parking will only hit the lower paid - shop workers, finance industry grunts - working mums who need their cars etc - unless the rate is so punitive - say £50 a day - most will simply have no option but to pay it so it will have little impact on traffic but it will hit those who can least afford it.

It is also disingenous and plain daft to imply that Mrs Torode of St Peters who "pops in for a spot of shopping" or Mrs Ok - Yah with her Chelsea Tractor who "meets a few friends for coffee, dahling" is somehow less of an environmental impact than a commuter - at the end of the day they will burn the same petrol, tootle around town and use a resource for free - just like Johnny Commuter

As usual with everything to do with cars it is always someone else who is the problem - oh I only popped into town to do some shopping - every one else causes the tailback ! - and curiously there are some major jams and tail backs at lots of odd times of day - try the Grange at about 4.00 pm - nothing to do with commuters - this time its the school run !

And we must not lose sight of the fact that the cost of introducing paid parking - meters, barriers, scratch cards, and a myriad of civil servants to administer it (gold plate pension please) - and of course the impact on shops, workers etc will negate any financial return it might generate

So is Torteval Voice of Reason a petrol head commuter ? - well oddly enough I ride my bike in everyday most weathers - now if I can do that age close to 50 from Torteval surely a few of you Deputies and others could follow suit ?- and I have a private car space available to me that I rarely use - so I have absolutely no axe to grind on this - but do feel strongly about the blunt weapon that is paid parking - forget the buses - they don't even seem to come to Torteval anymore and in any event only good for A to B when most of us go A to C then to D and then to B -often with a shed load of shopping - so please just forget the paid parking - if targeted just to hit one group (commuters) it is discriminatory - and if applied to all parking will be a complete bore for everyone - shopper, commuter States Deputy et al. Careful what you wish for folks


Yvonne Burford or Barry Brehaut can you guarantee that if paid parking was to come into play I could turn up at any town car park at 08:50 and get a space, so I can get into work for 09:00?

I don't think you could, and that's why paid parking is ridiculous and you should focus your efforts elsewhere.


Of course they can not if they do not know where you work.

Be reasonable.

If paid parking was introduced at North Beach for long term parking, and you work within five minutes walk from there, you may very well find less people parking there and so it could well be that it will become possible.

But in life nothing is guaranteed.


If I'm paying for the privilege of parking it bloody well should be guaranteed.

Terry Langlois

if you are paying for the privilege of parking in a paid parking space, I can pretty much guarantee that you DO have a space!

Island Wide Voting


I suppose it is guaranteed in a way ... in that if you can't find a space you don't pay


Well done Deputy Burford on pushing this forward, despite some of the vitriol on here (mainly Town commuters I would hazard a guess by the comments!)

I don't drive, don't work in Town and would support paid parking. Why should the likes of me be paying for the minority of people who commute into Town and leave their cars on a prime piece of land all day. Users should pay for long term parking, with short term remaining free for shoppers.

However I support on the following conditions:

- the income from paid parking further subsidises the bus service

- no more parking spaces are created

- cycling/walking infrastructure is significantly improved

- a raise in parking ticket fee to discourage 'clock changing' etc


Excellent ideas Steve. I think you are on the button with your post. There are more supporters of paid parking than the antis imagine, providing it's done properly and strategically and in a limited way, not affecting shoppers.


"Why should the likes of me be paying for the minority of people who commute into Town and leave their cars on a prime piece of land all day"

But you want a free ride on the bus paid for by who?



Very fair point however I still agree with the Mayor of Bogota

"A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation"

That is the kind of public transport development which Guernsey needs, something which caters for the wealthy and needy alike.


Heard that one before sparty. Im sure we can dig out other peoples quotes all day long :)

If you have a top notch public transport service which is a viable alternative to the car and saves you money then maybe there will be no need to charge for parking? or is that too simple.

Why not have a survey of those who currently use the car parks and find out how many would give up the car if we had a good bus service? (we might be suprised to find that is all is needed) but again i suppose thats too simple or maybe they are worried the result might negate any need for paid parking.

Yvonne Burford

Like this Sparty:

I am not saying this is transferable, but it is interesting...



I'm not asking for the buses to be free, but the total cost of a commuter (return) journey to Town by bus should be cheaper than going by car. Currently it is the opposite.


Yes Steve you are correct you didnt ask for free bus rides. Apologies.



I agree. The cost of a return journey to town should be very obviously and 'visibly' cheaper than going by car. As you say, at the moment it is the opposite and the externalised costs of using the car are completely invisible to most.


Very well said, Steve.

Totally agree.


Yvonne Burford, please answer me this the following:

Why do YOU feel paid parking is a good idea in Guernsey?

I really can't see what benefit it serves the community as a whole other than another stream of creaming revenue from the motorist. It won't free up spaces because people that work in town need to park there. It won't reduce traffic because the people that work in town will still park there.

What are your thoughts on certain countries that have introduced paid parking only to u-turn the decision and remove it again because IT DOESNT WORK AND CAUSES MORE HEADACHES THAN WITHOUT IT?

Why don't you want paid parking at beach car parks? Id prefer that as i don't use the beaches, but i do have to park in north beach 6 days a week. Is it true that you don't need to commute to north beach on a daily basis to earn a living hence the reason you don't mind grabbing money from the motorist that works in and around town - just so long as you can keep parking at the beach on your days off for free? It may not effect you but some of us have no choice but to park in north beach and parking charges would cripple us.

Have you really considered the cost to the average working person that uses public parking? In this economic climate where house prices have peaked due to uncertainty about what the next few years have in store for us do you really think it is a good idea to HAMMER the motorist once again?

Northbeach and other parking areas where paid for by the tax payer many years ago, why should they be made to pay again for it? You are just trying to get raise more funds for the government coffers. And what for? SO you can waste it on other hair brained ideas thats why. This island is a joke, money grabbing government, greed of the highest pedigree and its people like you that allow it to happen.


Island Wide Voting


You will have an opportunity to vent your spleen on YB in 2016 ... IF you live in the West mini district where you are permitted to vote for 13% of your government

Or you can have a pop at Barry Brehaut .. IF you live in St Peter Port South where you also have an opportunity to vote in 13% of those who make the rules

Unfortunately you will have absolutely no say in the make up of the remaining 87%.Still,we all matter eh?

( Am I on the right thread here? )


Pity the poor disenfranchised UK voters who only get to choose 1 out of 650 MPs ( that's 0.15 percent ) . And get to choose none of the House of Lords . ( so they actually only get to vote for 1 out of roughly 1,320 .... 0.075% of the Houses of Parliament )


Why should North Beach be provided free of charge for people to park their cars for ten hours a day when it could be used for better purposes or bring in additional revenue.

It was not originally intended to be a large car-park.

Yvonne Burford


I think paid parking is a good idea because it is a tool in the box of an integrated Transport Strategy that will lead to sufficient change to improve congestion, encourage more people to walk or cycle and release some of the public realm back to more inclusive, productive or community uses.

I would not advocate it at the beach because there is not a problem to solve and I don't see paid parking as merely a revenue raiser.

The argument that North Beach was paid for by the taxpayer does not really hold water. Beau Sejour was paid for by the taxpayer but you don't expect to have a free swim.


"I think paid parking is a good idea because it is a tool in the box of an integrated Transport Strategy that will lead to sufficient change to improve congestion, encourage more people to walk or cycle and release some of the public realm back to more inclusive, productive or community uses."

How exactly will it lead to 'sufficient change to improve congestion'?

If people have to travel to work and have to park in a carpark to do their work the same people will still be doing the same thing - but at extra expense!

Nothing will change other than travelling to work costing the motorist more money.

I persoanlly dont think there is a problem parking at north beach, this is proven by the reduction in 10 hr spaces now being used by the freight services, the disruption has actually been minimal to most users and as far as short term parking there always seems to plenty of 3 hour parking spaces for those that want to nip into town as well. So, like you say about beach parking I too would not advocate paid parking at north beach because there is no problem to solve, hence paid parking WOULD just be merely a revenue raiser.

Essentially - you are not effected by having to pay for parking so you are quite happy to bring these proposals forward. This being your claim to fame.

Sorry YB, i find your response to my questions quite lacking and generic, if this is the sort of reply you will be giving to those when the time comes then you will have a very hard time bringing paid parking in - No facts, no figures, no nothing, just a simple

"I think paid parking is a good idea because it is a tool in the box of an integrated Transport Strategy that will lead to sufficient change to improve congestion, encourage more people to walk or cycle and release some of the public realm back to more inclusive, productive or community uses"

Dave Jones


"I’m of the view that cars do more harm than good for the retail centre and shoppers"

That must be why the car parks of out of town retail outlets are full.

Sara Thompson

Thank you, Deputies Burford and Brehaut for replying so calmly, neither of you deserve the abuse you have been subjected to.

I do not agree with paid parking and if introduced, mistakenly in my view, I can't see it having any impact on the the amount of traffic heading into town during the two rush hours.

To me it is just a revenue raising tool, which would be fair enough if the bus service was up to standard.

In my view it is vastly inferior to the one of my youth, which was a long time ago!

If the strategy includes details of an improved, and by that I mean more regular and possibly cheaper, bus service, then I might think again about paid parking.

But I think you need to accept that people's lives have changed dramatically in recent years and the days of people just going to and from work without going shopping, to the gym, picking up children etc are a thing of the past.


The problem is, Sara, that sooner or later, there will be not be any space left to build any more car-parks.

Election Issues


Underground car parks are the way to in St Malo, Vannes, La Rochelle and Niort in France.

You can have anything you like on the top of these.....gardens, parkland area etc.

If more car parking is provided for commuters and people living in town....and introduce an excellent bus service....then everything else starts to fall into place as more people will use the bus and those that want to can cycle.

Introducing paid parking now with severe lack of long term parking and a dire bus service is like using a massive sledgehammer to crack a very tiny nut.......people will resent it and find it very discriminatory!


Election Issues

If you recall, we had a nice huge hole in which to put an underground car park when the North Beach was reclaimed. This idea was scuppered when some myopic, dimwitted States members started wringing their hands over perceived threats of muggers, drug dealers and other low life lurking in there.

It would have been easy to introduce payment for parking in there, if felt necessary, tunnels could have popped up near the White Hart and RBS building for people to get into town, and CCTV installed to watch for any criminal activity.

It would have allowed all sorts of possibilities for building or landscaping on top.

Election Issues

Gsyman @ 12.43

Yes, I remember...another missed opportunity. I also remember watching international power boat racing..and look what happened to that!

In Niort in France, the town has built a new underground car park, the top of which is planted with gardens and trees. The town's tourist office is situated at the top of it as well!

In France..the towns seem to take every and any opportunity to promote themselves with tourism, shopping, cafes etc.

In my honest opinion, Guernsey has really got to get its act together by promoting this island as a whole and St Peter Port for a good shopping doing so the economy.

Yvonne Burford

Hi Sara,

I agree completely about the bus service needing to be significantly improved hand-in-hand with any introduction of paid parking.

The main reasons people give for not using the bus are lack of frequency and reliability. Addressing those two issues, and adding more routes and smaller buses and making the whole thing free at the point of use will make it much more attractive.

I agree that many people make convoluted journeys, but not everyone does so all the time.


The free parking in St Peter Port (and elsewhere) has been provided by the States of Guernsey at the expense of the Guernsey taxpayer generally. This alone would be a good reason for the States to recover the cost from those benefiting from these parking spaces. If the proceeds were also to be used to improve the environment generally (by, for example, reducing the amount of car traffic in town and on the piers) it would be additional justification for paid parking.

Matt Fallaize

If you get 10 minutes, the video at the link below is interesting and thought-provoking, especially with Guernsey about to debate road transport policy again early in 2014.

Any thoughts, once watched?


Thanks a lot Matt. I wonder if IWV, Dave Jones etc have seen this? Their idea of hell, probably, but my idea of heaven.

Cher Eugene

There are two essential differences between Guernsey and Amsterdam; One, the latter is flat, the biggest hills being the bridges over the canals; Guernsey is very, very hilly. Two, the former has very narrow streets; the latter has wide major roads with room for three lanes of traffic in each direction - pedestrians, bicycles and cars.

Amsterdam is not a model for Guernsey to follow


This infrastructure is repeated all over the Netherlands. They do have hills, they certainly have narrow streets - they get on and deal with it. Guernsey is a tiny, densely populated place in comparison, with considerably milder weather. The idea that people don't cycle here because of hills is bunk. They don't cycle because they would rather not have to ascend a hill with Jimmy Range Rover revving his V8 within inches of their back wheel.

Yvonne Burford


This Newsnight clip is interesting. We are constrained for space here, but things can be done.

Island Wide Voting

I saw very flat terrain

I saw bike lanes as wide as some of our 'main' roads

I saw nice weather

I didn't see one safety helmet

I thought .... apples and pears


The pro paid parking would not see any of that :)

Election Issues


I thought .......

I'm not very good at hills on a bike, especially when it's raining and very windy and I've got 4 bags of grocery shopping dangling from the handlebars.


Thanks for making me laugh EI. I was thinking the same myself but added in the cars revving behind and my child in some sort of trailer into my vision, you think we lived in the Carribean the way some people have this rose tinted view of us all happily walking and cycling around with smiles on our faces in perfect weather.

The reality is our weather is not very conducive to all the alternative methods, take it from someone who is currently trying to walk to work and is battling rain and wind where you can't use an umbrella, being splashed by cars speeding past and in the past week alone has narrowly avoided 3 instances of being hit by a car with my child in tow for merely daring to cross the road on the way home or pass someone's driveway and yes, we did have right of way in each case.

But seriously there seems to have been no increase in parking in town for the last 20 odd years (that's as far back as I haved used the main car parks) and that to me is part of the problem. Could you not at least look at something like building an underground car park on the Odeon or some other such site and perhaps that could be financed by users. Surely some sort of private finance could be used to fund the build. It seems ridiculous that people have to sit in their cars eating their breakfast before 8 just to get a parking space for a job that starts at 9, it's not a great quality of life and it does not make Guernsey an attractive place to work and do business.

If St Peter Port is the main place of work for most islanders you need adequate parking for them in whatever form, they are after all making a hefty contribution to the States coffers and further funding it through fuel tax. I do not believe that a free bus service is cost effective to access all areas of Guernsey and in some cases the car is the only way to get to

work. I don't think the content of some of the current discussions reflects the current reality of multi purpose car journeys and just how busy people's lives are now. This is from someone who tries to cycle and walk whenever I can but recognises the usefulness and value of having a car in Guernsey.

Election Issues

Icarus @ 11.18

How can any of us walk and cycle everywhere, all of the time..... none of us have the time? We seem to have to be in 3 places at once and then fit work in as well!

Yes, you are right. There has been no increase in the amount of long term parking in Town for a very long time.

This seems ridiculous considering how the number of people who now need to work in Town, because their jobs are situated in town has dramatically increased.. ......and also the number of people who now live in Town especially those who rely on street parking has increased.

Their needs do not seem to be considered, but there must be several sites in St Peter Port that could be looked at carefully and thoughtfully for underground car parking option or any other type of parking options.

I presume that some sort of private finance would be needed but all of these ideas must be worth considering.



You really do seem to have trouble understanding what is being said. Can you point me to where anyone has said that you should “walk and cycle everywhere, all of the time”? Bit of an exaggeration don't you think?

If you build more car parking you will get more traffic and more congestion. Simple as.

You will not get anyone to put money into building a car park unless they can see a return on their investment. That will mean paid parking. And that neatly takes us back to the beginning of the discussion again!

Election Issues

Rosie @ 11.48

With respect, I am not having any trouble understanding what is being said at all.

I think you may not understand what I have been trying to say.

St Peter Port has a huge lack of long term car parking for those whose jobs are in town and for those unfortunate to live in homes and have to rely on on street parking.

Introducing paid parking now, when there is a lack of long term parking and a dire bus service is unacceptable. Expecting those people who have to work in town (in what ever capacity) just because their jobs are in pay for parking to fund a free bus service for everybody else is discrimination.

Congestion on roads into Town really only happens in the rush hour as people are trying to get to their jobs.....all at the same time! Surely it follows if car parking is increased..there will be less congestion, especially if you introduce a really good bus service at the same time.

If extra car parks are built to help those people who work or live in town with a good bus gives everyone a CHOICE. In fact many more people may use the bus because they want to instead of being forced to.

If the extra car parks are built with private financial help, then of course it will be paid parking.

(There may be some sites that could be developed that could remain free.)

If successful, there may well be a case to slowly remove some of the free parking from St Peter Port currently used.

This seems more of an evolutionary method for a Transport Strategy rather than the usual sledgehammer method.



The only part of your post that makes any sense is the comment that the bus service is unacceptable at the moment. And I think we have all agreed 1.0000000 times that that does need big improvements. But where to get the money from?

You keep saying that “it follows if car parking is increased... there will be less congestion”. I am struggling to figure out why you can’t see it would be the exact opposite. If there is provision for 100 cars to park in town and you increase that provision to 200 spaces, then you will have 200 cars on the roads instead of just 100. It is the roads that become congested and you can turn as many of them into dual carriageways as you want but there will still be pinch points / bottlenecks to deal with unless you are planning to knock buildings down as well. And let’s remember that the more cars there are on the roads, the more held up the buses become because they have to sit in the same congestion. And the more cars there on the roads, the less likely people are to cycle which means even more cars. Talk about an own goal!

It is not a shortage of long term spaces that we have but a shortage and inadequacy in the alternatives. As things stand, lots of people feel that they have no alternative to taking their car- that is what needs changing so that there are adequate alternatives. And of course there are loads of people who drive for no better reason than they ‘want’ to, and hey, there’s no incentive not to at the moment. I agree that everyone should have a ‘choice’ as to whether to drive in or not, but that choice should be between paying to park your car or traveling for free on a bus, bike or your legs- the opposite to how it is now.

We are only a small island. The majority of journeys are probably no more than 2 miles long. We have a budget deficit and we are relying on the most expensive transport system that we could have- expensive to the island economically and environmentally, and expensive to the individual. That can’t be sensible.

Island Wide Voting

EI @ 7.32am

If private enterprise were to build a multi storey car park somewhere in central St Peter Port they would possibly get a better return on their investment by renting out specific spaces to named individuals or companies

In that way the driver would know that his reserved space awaits him at 8am, 8.30am, 8.50am etc without the need to worry about searching around for an empty slot with the rest of the plebs ... very similar to the situation deputies enjoy at Lukis House

In fact why should it be down to private enterprise ? The States already own the Lukis House site,why don't THEY build a multi-storey there and rake in the profits for decades to come.The initial seed money could be taken from the slush fund being built up by PSD through their Chouet gate fees overcharging wheeze


IWV (10:59am)

More car parking = more cars on the road= more congestion= less people cycling=even more congestion. Fab..... not!

Why should the States use our money to build a multi story car park so that they can then charge for parking. They already have the car parks so it would be far more sensible to miss all the middle stages you suggest and just go straight to paid parking. Until you've done that you don't know what the demand really is for parking.

Election Issues

IWV @ 10.59

You are not taking any suggestion seriously are you???

The States COULD build a multi storey car park at Lukis House would be in an excellent central position for those that work in town and those who live in town.

It would probably be a very good plan to complement this multi storey car park with a huge underground car park underneath the Education Department in the Grange.

St Peter Port would then have a 'world class' selection of long term car parking right in the heart of Town!

Election Issues

Rosie @ 10.04

Yes, where are we going to get the money for a new bus service from?

It certainly should not be just from those people who have to park in Town for their jobs because that is discrimination.

Congestion arises because the long term car parks are at Salerie, North Beach, Castle Cornet, Bathing places and the all the town workers have to come through St Peter Port to reach these car parks all at the same time. If some parking was found in other areas of Town then congestion maybe eased.

Those people that commute have to get to work but is just unfortunate that their work is in town.On their way to work they may have to take children to school, go to a gym..etc.


1/ Persuade some banks and finance offices to move out into the country parishes to relieve car congestion in Town.

2/ Remove all long term car parking from St Peter Port

3/ Increase parking areas to different sites in St Peter Port.

The only other place Guernsey can really compare ourselves with is Jersey. They have paid parking but they still have congestion during rush hours.

St Peter Port as a town is in absolute desparate need of islanders to drive into Town and go into the shops and buy things. I think it was Lisbeth who said she would like to spend longer in Town to have a good shopping trip, to browse and buy things. This is exactly the sort of shopper that St Peter Port needs at this present time. Introducing any form of paid parking at the moment would not help at all.

Island Wide Voting

Rosie @12.37pm

I agree that the first step, if YB's minority report wins the day despite overwhelming odds, is to charge the public for the spaces our elected deputies administer on our behalf, and when that is found not to alter traffic levels one iota, YB ( or whoever has inherited her West seat)will need to go back to the Assembly and, despite overwhelming odds, attempt to kill off the twice daily commuter traffic by removing most of the long term parking so that this valuable real estate can be put to better use ... like having somewhere green and peaceful to eat your cheese sandwiches at lunchtime ... or perhaps a permanent French Market to take away business from the Town traders

I was probably jumping way ahead of myself with the Lukis House suggestion but it never hurts to be prepared in case the worst happens

Election Issues


Under the proposed Strategic Asset Management Plan the current Fire and Police Stations in Town could be sold off.............

........WOW..these two sites could provide the most excellent car parking areas!

What do you think?

Island Wide Voting

EI @ 3.39pm

Hmmm. The fire station might be just a little too close to the College.Can't have those subsidised toffs taking up all the spaces

The Police Station may have to revert to one of its original uses in order to care for those unfortunates who are broken by the final straw of paid parking on top of PBFalla's hoped for finance sector redundancies,rent,food and heating price hikes,600K first time buyers houses and having to work longer for a smaller and more costly pension

Terry Langlois

I know, the lack of helmets and the fact that cyclists feel able to wear normal clothes is great, isn't it?

It is a sign that cycling is fully integrated as just a normal activity, and cyclists are not made to feel like second class road users.

Central Amsterdam also has lots of cycling on its narrow streets. They make it work.

The Netherlands has pretty horendous weather at times. The wind, in particular, makes our wind feel like a breeze.



Increasing the number of cyclists on the roads has a greater effect on cycling safety than wearing a helmet..... known as ‘Safety in Numbers’. They don’t need to wear cycle helmets in Amsterdam because car drivers are used to seeing cyclists; they expect cyclists to be there; they know that cyclists have every bit as much right to be on the road as they do and crucially, they are most likely cyclists themselves when not in their car. Thus they don’t see cyclists as an irritation but as fellow human beings just like themselves.

As far as your ‘flat terrain’ observation goes, the last time I looked, the whole of the north of Guernsey looks pretty flat to me. And although the south is more hilly, they aren’t particularly big hills and I speak as someone who is (sadly) no spring chicken, and I manage them fine. 5 mins of moderate exertion and I’m at top of the Ruette Braye. Guernsey actually is a perfect bike sized island with most trips 3 miles or less.

What strikes me in the film, is how relaxed, friendly and laid back everyone looks. Looks really cool to me. But I am guessing IWV that you and bcb must look at it and think it looks horrible and how much nicer it would look if they were all in cars, jostling for every spare inch of space.


Thanks for that Rosie but i actually have no problem in trying to reduce traffic its just the way you want to go about it i dont approve of. I have never said i wouldnt like to see a reduction in traffic. I admit i dont see the issue of traffic as big of a problem as you do.

If not agreeing with the idea of paid parking gives you the impression i want to see more cars on the roads then that is your lack of understanding of my argument.

I like the way it works in Amsterdam but if that is anything to do with paid parking then i would be expecting that to work in other places that charge, so why doesn`t it?

I just think whenever Government starts raiding peoples pockets to get them to do something it just shows a lack of understanding and a failure to get to the root of the problem, it never works. Hasn`t worked with smoking and drinking and it wont work with paid parking either.

Island Wide Voting


I think we both know deep down that the only way to actually stop the morning and evening pain in the butt commute is to remove at least 75% of the long term parking

Paid parking won't affect me,I stopped commuting years ago. My objection is that it is nothing more than a thinly disguised cash gathering exercise to help plug a hole caused by other island circumstances ... a hole which resulted in the loss of a very good bus service which, despite being very good, actually did nothing to ease the twice daily traffic pain during its whole time in existence

Will a deputy try to remove 75% of the long term parking?

Not if they want to keep their 33K per year part time job



Paid Parking does not work as a stand alone policy so Amsterdam has got where they are by implementing it alongside a raft of measures including parking restrictions, reducing road space given to cars, increasing space given to bikes and buses, ensuring that alternatives are cheaper than driving and by being ambitious with what they wanted to achieve. Places that have paid parking but don’t restrict parking (ie Jersey) or don’t provide the alternatives don’t solve the problem.

I am sorry that you don’t see a problem with how we have flooded Guernsey with traffic. Is that because you don’t hold the islands' environment in very high regard or at least think that our wants are more important or is it because you see no problem with Guernsey being a car dependent community? Either way it’s pretty depressing.

You might find this short article re how to reduce traffic interesting, or at least informative.


Rosie i dont see the problem as big as you see it although i would welcome measures that help improve the traffic situation. I just dont agree with this hitting people in the pocket every time government want to "encourage" the public to act in a manner they see fit.

We could have those measures you suggest put in place without the paid parking and see how we get on. Whats wrong with that? A change in attitude is what is needed and a good transport strategy to encourage this im think will achieve the results.

Just as with smoking im sure the cost has very little or nothing to do with people quitting or people starting and is down to education also being more anti social although those that want to raid our pockets will have us believe different.

You just will not accept we could have a transport strategy unless paid parking is part of it and are not willing to give it a try.



I don’t know how many times it has to be said that the intention with paid parking is to use the money raised to fund the bus service. Deputy Burford has said so several times and I’m quite certain that you will have read that. To suggest that she & Dep Brehaut are simply trying to make some dosh for general revenue is so far fetched as to be ludicrous.

You are right to suggest that the other way to reduce traffic would be to reduce parking spaces. Copenhagen has had a policy over the last 30 years of removing 2% of the in-town parking every year, (along with paid parking). And it’s certainly worked for them. It’s apparently fabulous there now. Even petrol-head Jeremy Clarkson described their transport system which is similar to Amsterdams, as ‘fan-bloody-tastic”! But personally, I don’t want our Deputies slaving away on devising policies that haven’t a cat-in-hell’s chance of getting through the door of the States, let alone getting voted through! I think Deps Burford & Brehaut are right to go with paid parking although personally, I find it frustrating that we have to be so pussy footed about it.


bcb. (Dec7th 6.06 pm)

I am sorry that you don’t see traffic as being much of a problem and it makes me wonder in what way you see the problem. Is it the congestion on the roads? Is it the degradation that we have inflicted all over the island to accommodate the car and because of the car? Is it because of the huge costs to the community of car management and infrastructure? Is it because of the huge and increasing costs associated with car dependency both to the wider community but also to the individual? Is it that we have blighted the island with traffic thus damaging the brand we try to sell the island to tourists with so reducing out income?

Or is a traffic problem to you just about whether you can always get a parking space?

Evidence elsewhere has shown that a pricing structure for parking is crucial if you want to reduce traffic levels. Free parking is just too attractive however good the alternatives are. Or do you think we should just ignore the evidence of what has worked and what hasn’t worked to reduce traffic in other places? Do you really think that that would be the intelligent way to go forward?

The only other way of dealing with it would be to remove parking spaces. Would you prefer that? I think it would just make people come into town even earlier to grab the fewer spaces, probably still in their pajamas and bringing their duvets with them.

Island Wide Voting

Rosie @ 9.03am

Yes I am fully aware that if successful YB hopes to put the paid parking revenue towards heavily subsidising the non-local bus company but what I was trying to say ( not very clearly I admit) is that any such extra stealth tax is money that will not have to come out of the general tax pot thereby helping in a roundabout way to fill the black hole

I believe they did the same sort of thing in times of yore with a chimney tax and a window tax ( Matt will have the details on file)


Rosie i`m sorry the traffic issue doesn`t concern me as much as it does you but then there may be things that concern me more than it does you.

I have no objection to improving the situation we have. These other places you look to have they bothered to try an implement a good traffic system with good public transport without paid parking? i guess not so how do you know it wont work without it?

I just dont like government taxing the public to force them (you call it encourage?)to do things as we could speculate on a whole raft of other things we could tax for OUR benifit.

I actually agree with you on some things and applaud you for your concern for the environment but i find you just go too far on some issues.

You say we have to have paid parking for this to work well i simply dont believe it and am happy to at least see how we get on with a good transport system without paid parking first. Then "if" more needs to be done then that could be another debate.

By the way i don`t own a car only my work van which i use everyday so paid parking would most likely not effect me at all.


Ray your post re Matt @10.34am bloody awesome.

Island Wide Voting

bcb at 5.11pm

Spartacus at No 77 believes you should be driving a Smart car rather than a works van


Ray i`m getting a little worried about sparty`s more recent posts :) maybe the fall out from the pension fund/education debate?

But anyhow i`m not sure i could tow my van with a smart car not to mention my street cred.

She also wants a different way of life for EVERYONE ELSE.


Election Issues

IWV @ 10.34

Chimney tax? Window tax?

You be very, very careful what you say....

..even the Penny Farthing is making a comeback!

Island Wide Voting

Mrs S

Thank you for making me laugh out loud so early in the morning.That has really set me up for a good day ahead


Sparty please tell me you posted that in jest? ;-)


Very interesting.

I have not been in Amsterdam since the early 70s !

But one thing I noticed from the film... not a single shot taken during bad weather.

I would welcome an improved, cheaper bus service - and even a bus station with a proper shelter where people could wait inside and have a coffee or buy a paper or whatever, ( just like you get on the platforms of many major UK rail stations ).

In Brighton some of the buses have free wifi !

Matt Fallaize


I thought exactly the same thing about the weather.

Yvonne Burford

I'd be interested in the logistics of getting free wifi on the buses.


You can do it by having a wi-fi repeater on the ceiling with a 3G/4G (mobile network) uplink. Such a box is a couple of hundred quid (or less) from any old computer shop. You can probably get better performance than you can with a regular smartphone inside the bus by mounting the 3G aerial on the roof and contracting with the mobile supplier to get dedicated network bandwidth.

Island Wide Voting


Circa 1M I believe but that could be easily covered by adding another ten bob per hour on the parking charges



Modernise the bus fleet and these extras are included.

Something to play with on the bus yes?

Terry Langlois

believe me, it gets very wet in the Netherlands and if you think that it is windy here...

but people still cycle

Yvonne Burford

Just a quick post to say I will come back and respond to posts where people have specifically asked me questions later today or tomorrow but I am busy with Department stuff right now :-)

pips squeezed

I wish I was surprised by paid parking rearing its ugly head again. Unfortunately, it appears that the motorist is seen as an easy target with a bottomless wallet...

Dave Jones is right on the money when he identifies who this will affect. Town residents that have no parking of their own and commuters that don't have parking spaces provided for them. To add insult to injury, the motorist will be asked to pay to park on land that belongs to them after providing the states a huge sum of money in fuel taxes (yes that's right, states land belongs to the people of Guernsey).

Unfortunately, I have witnessed the effect of paid parking being introduced. It was introduced for official parking areas (like North Beach) and started with costing 20p for the first hour, increasing with time spent. What a good idea you say?

The first thing to happen was people parking in residential areas to avoid the parking charge. This will happen here too. People will move to short term parking and rotate (either their clocks or vehicles!).

The second thing to happen was people chose to shop at the out of town store that had free parking or to go to the closest town (about 20 minutes away) which also had free parking.

The third thing to happen was tourists stopping to visit in their usual volumes (it was quite a popular town to visit).

All the time, the charges to park were increasing. Over time, shops closed leaving premises vacant and the high street ended up with almost as many charity shops as regular shops.

The really interesting thing? The scheme never made a profit - purchase and upkeep of the ticket machines, pay for the small army of ticket wardens and changes in shopping habits etc saw to this. The true cost? Shops out of business, a town in decline and more. This was also before internet shopping had really kicked off so how do you think it will work here?! Also this town had far better public transport than Guernsey does!

Will it work to raise funds? Paid parking is most likely to be cost neutral at best (especially when you consider that there will have to be extra persons on "enforcement" duty - more civil servants to pay?!) - unless the fees are prohibitively high.

Will it improve traffic? The biggest improvement to traffic flow is when the schools are on holiday...!

Yvonne, you would be far better getting the mess that is our poor excuse for a bus service sorted out before you even bother with this!!!

Actually, here's a better idea - rather than the states decide, put it to an island wide vote - a yes/no vote. Find out what the people really want.


Not everybody needs a car, regardless of where they live, and not everybody who has a car real needs it.

But that is beside the point. My proposal is that certain States owned car-parks such as North Beach and Crown Pier would have paid parking and on-road parking spaces near the centre of Town would have free short term spaces to facilitate visiting the shops there.

Other areas of St Peter Port would remain as before, though some on-road spaces could be allocated to residents using a free residents permit system.

My aim would only be to target those large sites that could have been used for other uses or to generate more income.

Any reduction in car usage on the island can only be achieved, amongst other things, by an improvement in bus services, ( including the bus station which is a miserable place to wait for a bus in the middle of winter ), and lower fares. On this point the Environment Department has been a total failure !!


Very good comments on the TiG Comment page in yesterday's edition of the Press...


Dial a Bus Service for off scheduled routes?

Book 2 hours in advance from home to work[St Peter Port return].

On board movies for the passengers to enjoy getting onto the buses.Cartoons for school buses.

A buffet type bus for a replacement of the cellar at frossard house for deputies meetings.

No need for Payed Parking?


Yvonne, I have a couple of questions to ask you.

I have yet to see any proposals on how the public transport system is going to be substaintially improved. I assume these are forthcoming? After all, is it not the whole point of paid parking to raise capital to invest in public transport and reduce traffic on our roads? As it stands all I have seen proposed is an increase in the cost of motoring and no plans on how this extra revenue will be spent. So far this is only half a plan. When will the other half be revealed?

I can not support paid parking until it has been made clear how the extra revenue will be spent. If the answer is anything but fully on public transport, I will be against it as many others surely will be too.

Yvonne Burford

The reason that no other plans have been published is that the Strategy has not been published (or even finalised). Deputy Spruce, last Sunday, chose to mention that paid parking will not figure in the Strategy as three members of the Department are opposed to it. As ever paid parking creates much debate and media coverage. In my view this is a debate we should be having in a couple of months' time in the context of the entire strategy, rather than now.

But I agree with you that the money from paid parking should be put back into a much improved public transport system.

les pets

totally against this stupid recurring proposal but when it gets passed it needs to be island wide, Bridge ,st martins every states owned building with out exception so as to have a level playing field. Don't just target town....


Yet more of the usual hot air from Master Brehaut!


Dep. Brehaut has given us a little clue in that he suggests that PSD when revising the ports master plan COULD introduce paid parking on the land that is under their control. That includes all of the piers, Castle, Crown, Albert, White Rock and probably North Beach and Salarie although less clear on the last two. PSD introduced paid parking at the airport without consultation if memory serves me correctly and now use this as a profitable little golden goose. It is simple to operate, requires no staff and the capital cost of the gates would not appear too great. While everyone bangs on, for or against paid parking, the town as we know it is slowly dying and eventually the perceived parking problem will go away. Perhaps that is why the politicians have taken so long to address the "problem". The only shops that are going to survive will be coffee shops, sandwich bars, and fast food outlets that service the office workers who remain in St. Peter Port. Anyone who visits Town midmorning cannot help but notice the deserted streets and yes, even loads of short term parking. At lunchtime the workers emerge from their offices and shop for their lunches/something for tea, creating an impression of a busy shopping center then after 2.00 pm the High Street returns to being a ghost town. I know Jack Honeybill will be frothing at the mouth but his continual assertions that our town is a vibrant shopping area are becoming rather monotonous not to mention faintly ridiculous. The parking situation is the least of our worries.

Election Issues

Watcher @ 7.20

I agree!

Deputy Brehaut and 'Opinion' in Press of 5/12/13 suggest that it is the Public Services Department who COULD introduce paid parking on the land which is under their control!

In fact the Press 'Opinion' says:

"Environment merely pontificates about areas over which it has no control"


"If Environment wanted to improve parking it could not do so because it has no budget nor any ways of raising funds"

PSD raise funds.

PSD raise funds from the takings at the paid parking at the Airport

Could this money be used to improve parking in St Peter Port and help improve the bus service??

I agree that St Peter Port is slowly dying and we all need to support local shops. At the run up to Christmas, Thursday late night shopping is what about Sunday shopping on the lead up to Christmas for those shops who want to open if they feel they will increase their trade??


Paid parking can either raise revenue or deter car use .....

But logically it cannot do very much of both at the same time .....

St Marcouf

Yvonne Burford

Why don't you concentrate for the time being on tackling directly what makes vehicle use so bad in Guernsey, i.e. the size, the emissions and the noise?

These are what impact on the environment and people's quality of life - there is nothing wrong with the use of mechanically propelled machines and independence of travel per se.

Paid parking is an ineffective and avaricious concept which immediately detracts from any town or city, and your thinking for bringing it in is unoriginal and perverse.


Has it not occured to you while there is so much traffic on our island roads?.

House prices are so high that its come unaffordable to buy.People renting rooms or small apartments with no gardens or still living with their parents.

A vehicle is an escape route from bordom,essential for work.Can drive 24/7 more reliable and cheaper than any other public transport.

Paid parking on private sites should be encouraged to those that can afford this service.


Many postings in here seem to indicate support for paid parking provided the funds it raises are ploughed back into either a free or an enhanced bus service. What everyone is ignoring, or not aware of, is the fact that Treasury and Resources no longer allow Departments to stash away any funds that they acquire in some sort of Departmental rainy day fund. Any time we have to pay accounts with a States Department (except Water and Electricity) we have to make the cheques payable to "The States of Guernsey", bit of a clue there? Hypothecation of income is not permitted in these times and were Environment/PSD to collect vast sums of money from parking fees they could not simply spend it as it would go straight to T. & R. to be allocated at Budget time. That will ensure that any surplus funds will be made available for an initiative that meets with the approval of the majority of the States Members, it could even be for a better bus service but there are no guarantees.

Until Environment, or at least three fifths of it, unveil their master plan for transport on the Island everything is mere conjecture and the heated discussion this is generating on TIG will have to be repeated when everybody actually does know what is going on, or not.

Election Issues

Watcher @ 6.36

I'm not sure that it matters what Environment reveals as regards bus services or parking problems.

Paid parking is a revenue raising tool and these charges will be levied to put money into the States "pot".

Public Services Department seem exempt form this golden rule.

PSD are collecting huge surpluses generated by gate fees at Mont Cuet. PSD are spending GBP 2.4 million to roll out the 2 year trial of kerbside recycling using money generated straight from the gate fees at Mont Cuet.

PSD also collect revenue from the paid parking at the Airport.

The concern is ...the government's ability to load charges for services so they generate a surplus.

This surplus is not used as transparently as general revenue and there is not the same degree of political the huge surpluses generated by the gate fees at Mont Cuet give PSD a freedom of action that is not available to other Departments.


A bigger problem is this .....

If everyone carries on parking, and paying for it, yes there would be money for a free bus service ... but there would still be the same number of cars at rush hour, so the traffic problem will still be there.

If however it is successful in tempting people onto the bus and out of their cars, there will be less money to fund this increased demand ...

If you want a free bus service to tempt people out of their cars, then it has to be funded without a reliance on paid parking revenue ...

Election Issues

Guernsey Harbours (PSD) is actively looking to increase revenue from the port areas to generate capital in support of investment into ports and island infrastructure.

The existing function of North Beach car park is likely to result in a strong resistance to change of use!!!!!

Paid parking at North Beach car park...ideally the car park charges could be raised by the port for reinvestment in the port.

Public commuter parking...this is satisfactory from a user perspective and clearly has huge benefit to the town..

....BUT..from a visitor perspective, the density of parking along town waterfront detracts from visual attraction of harbour and marinas..

..initiative to reduce visual impact of parking through infrastructure investment and cultural change should be adopted!!

PSD will work with Environment and Commerce and Employment Depts..........


Free parking is a taxpayer funded private transport subsidy. I'm not happy about this.

If we, the taxpayers, invest in an excellent fit for purpose integrated public transport strategy offering viable alternatives to car use and which is attractive enough to be used by those for whom cost is no concern, then I could imagine it could become a self funding, even profitable venture.

At the moment, while we continue to subsidise private car use it undermines any alternative vision.

It's about the kind of environment we want to live in. I want to see more children walking to school, commuters cycling, corporate coaches, shuttles, shoppers using the bus, supermarkets delivering goods. I want lorries to go slowly. I want to see workmen operating from smart cars with permits instead of enormous white vans which seem to perpetually transport everything around the island including the kitchen sink.

I want a different way of life than what we are experiencing. I want people to be healthier and roads to be more clear and safer, more pleasant for everyone. The increase in size and number of vehicles is simple not sustainable.

Yvonne Burford has in my opinion demonstrated considerable tenacity and leadership on this issue. I hope she receives the support she deserves.


You don`t subsidise car use they pay a heavy price through fuel duty which more than covers the cost of the car parks and some.

Take all the revenue gained from car (driving and parking) use and you will see just how much they contribute along with all the business car use generates.

Dave Jones

The Bus Service

As for the buses, what we have now is a rubbish service simply because the buses are to big and don’t go where most of the people live, The States will never admit they got it wrong because that is not what they do “ever”.

They are hugely expensive to run and are subject because of their size to having to stick mostly to main roads, made worse by constant road closures. We have thrown millions at this bus service over the years, money wasted in the main because no one at the previous Environment departments would recognise what the problem or do anything about it.

What is needed are small 16 seater mini buses which can negotiate most of the lanes in our parishes, people are not going to walk a quarter of a mile or even further to a main bus route on a cold, wet winter morning with two kids, when their care is sitting in the drive a few feet away.

You could buy two or possibly even three mini buses for the cost of one of these grossly oversized buses that we have now.

They will be significantly cheaper to run in terms of fuel mileage and it will, also allow lots of Guernsey people to have part time jobs as bus drivers, I believe that there are many who will have driven delivery vans and other similar vehicles most of their lives but do not want to drive the large buses we have or the responsibility that goes with it. Local people with local knowledge operating a public service, it’s a win win.

The contract should be given to one of the larger local taxi firms to people who know the island and can operate a first class service

As for funding this public transport system, the service should be funded out of general revenue so everyone contributes with the bus users paying a small fare, not just the car owners.

People should be enticed onto the buses because it is a good service, not bludgeoned onto them by people who appear to have little understanding of people’s busy lives, of the need to get to work, to their children schools and do the shopping in the best way that suits them.

Many people do not want to ride bikes and to offer this up as a workable alternative to the car is laughable. They might be good for short trips around your local area but as an alternative when shopping or doing lots of other things families do with the car, it’s a joke.

I would also move all bus parking to the North beach in front of the toilets ( I am fed up with seeing boat passengers dragging their luggage to the other end of Town) and I would turn the old bus park into car parking except for Saturdays when I would have an open air market with other stalls inside the old slaughter house.

On the point of a possible 20% reduction in traffic that somebody mentioned, I suspect that will be born by all those in our community, who simply won’t be able to afford daily parking charges hence my comment in a previous post on motoring apartheid.


Dave Jones.

I think everyone is in agreement that the bus service needs improvement so I don’t know why you keep having to point it out. I think most people are also agreed on the idea of smaller buses although I think the big buses are absolutely fine on the main arterial routes and it would be silly to remove them altogether because of their larger carrying capacity. It is the smaller roads that would benefit hugely from a fleet of smaller buses. I agree with your comments re more people happy to drive smaller buses but not sure that you are right to suggest they would be cheaper. To carry the same amount of passengers you would have an increase in drivers that need paying, an increase in maintenance etc. Little electric buses would reduce the fuel bill or would it? Not sure about that.

It’s a lovely idea to think that you could entice people onto a good bus service while leaving parking free and plentiful but experience elsewhere seems to say it just won’t happen. Free parking is too big a draw however good the alternatives. At the moment, there is an economic driver that actively encourages people to take their cars. That has turned us into a car dependent community and who does that impact most negatively on? Those that are least well off that you claim to want to be able to help.

I know that as things stand, it is very difficult for many people to not use their car. Equally, there are many journeys made every day that could be made another way but aren’t because the alternatives are not available or people just don’t ‘want’ to. Either way, we are not doing ourselves any favours by not reducing our over-reliance on the car. To tackle that, we have to look at parking provision and create an environment that discourages unnecessary car journeys. That means reducing parking spaces or charging for them, or both.

Dave Jones


I keep pointing it out because people like you keep telling people that there are viable alternatives to them using their cars, when there are not.

Also on the costs of running the smaller buses, you tell me that it would probably not be cheaper to “carry the same amount of passengers” what passengers? Everyday I see buses travelling around with half a dozen people on them costing the taxpayers an absolute fortune.

You also talk about maintenance, how much has been spent in repairing accident damage to these buses because they are to big? Not to mention the payouts of the bus companies insures to car and property owners.

The point about the drivers is that for many it would be a part time job so you wouldn’t need to employ them full time with all the bells and whistle contracts that are there now.

Sorry you lost me on your point about a car dependant community affecting those who are less well off. They will be affected much more if long term parking charges are introduced, or will the car parks just become the preserve of the better paid and the wealthy in the finance sector?

I would also ask who are we to decide which car journeys are unnecessary. People know how to run their lives rather than the heavy handed approach of government deciding on which days they should drive or ride a bike or walk.

Paid parking will not solve the problem, it will simply be another reason why doing business in Guernsey is not worth the bother.


Dave Jones.

I totally agree that at present the alternatives to using the car are inadequate, particularly for some people. Can you please point me to where I have said the opposite as you suggest I have?

I have repeatedly said that the ‘alternatives’ need to be improved so that they become viable for more people. I have also repeatedly said that we have become a ‘car dependent’ community. It’s how we have (foolishly, IMHO) organised life in Guernsey,..... for many people it is now very hard to participate fully in island life without having and using a car for all journeys. People are saying it on here all the time, reconfirming my point. You are also saying it, so basically we are on the same page there.

The difference between us seems to be that you are happy to continue and facilitate that dependency and I would like the dependency reduced or even removed so that we don’t HAVE to use the car so much. Why do I think that? For several reasons but largely because having a community ‘dependent’ on having to travel by car is very costly to the individual and to the wider community and I don’t believe we can afford it. If you don’t want to believe me, why don’t you do a little research yourself into the costs associated with car dependent communities. then maybe you will understand what it is I am saying. You will also find out that the costs of car dependency disproportionally effect the less well of.

While for some, using the car is unavoidable, we all know of others that use the car because they can and its easy. That’s fine to a degree but if we all use our cars 100% of the time, that increases the congestion and all the negative knock on consequences including car dependency. Paid parking would act as a disincentive so people would think twice as to whether the car is really necessary for every journey. If combined with a very cheap or free bus service it would help to free up the roads and parking spaces for those who really do need them. Of course it would be nicer without paid parking, but evidence elsewhere shows that without it, you won’t be able to decrease traffic levels. If you don’t decrease traffic levels, then things continue to get worse and you end up in a perpetuating circle of needing to accommodate the increase in traffic which in turn encourages more traffic.. and on it goes.

In order to minimise the future escalating health costs, we are meant to be encouraging more journeys to be made by walking and cycling. Obviously, not every journey can be made like that... far from it. But there are plenty that could be if only there was more encouragement. However the encouragement is all the other way. We are encouraged to drive and discouraged to walk or cycle or get the bus. Those incentives need to be switched round for the benefit of us all.

Re the buses. I am very pro smaller buses and have said so for years and I didn’t ‘tell’ you anything about the cost. I said ‘I wasn’t sure’ meaning I really don’t know. My comments about passengers was referring to the buses running full. I thought that that was the aim. Bit horrified if it isn’t!


Rosie, I think we are going to have to accept the old adage that you can't reason a man out of a position he didn't reason himself into!


Rosie you say "While for some, using the car is unavoidable" you are correct and those will be the ones hit in the pocket (while everyone else gets a choice) through paid parking they will also be the ones who subsidise the free buses so in fact very little choice for them. And to make it worse it will most likely only be those who park near town, how is that fair? unless there is some kind of opt out for those where the car/work van is essential.


ChrisJ. You're right…. well put. It's also impossible to debate when you are constantly misquoted, misunderstood (either intentionally or not) and evidence ignored. There are better things to be getting on with.

Election Issues

rosie @ 11.02

The Environment Department have just given the go ahead for Comprop to build a petrol station, shop, offices, warehouse, car wash, lighting, illumination and parking at the former GT Cars site at Les Bas Courtils Road, St Sampsons.

This development will go ahead in the middle of a residential area where there are health and safety issues and environmental risks as the site is contaminated.

This is because the main commuter route between Town and the Bridge is currently poorly served by petrol filling stations.

Do you really think that the money raised in their paid parking inititive would have ever gone towards a free bus service?



Stick to recycling matters because you are failing badly with you ideas here. I often see you driving around in your car. You're hardly one to preach to others when you don't lead by example. I agree completely with Dave Jones. Parents could never rely on a bus service to take them to where they need to go and pick back up again in a timely manner if they have jobs and things to do in between like school runs ect.

To even attempt such a lifestyle would waste numerous hours each day and would make life very impractical and difficult. You may have your ideas of an ideal island but in practice it isn't workable. Most of what you say in either contradictory or just wishful thinking.

Find a hobby to spend some free time on. Maybe weaving mats out of recycled bottles? You choose.

Terry Langlois

why do you assume that reducing car dependence means that people should be expected to NEVER use their car?

cars will always be a significant means of transport. Rosie and many others (me included) are simply asking for the system to be adjusted so that it is easier for people to make journeys by alternative means when appropriate.

parents with children have good reasons to drive, as do tradesmen, as do many others. But lots of people do regular journeys from A to B and then from B to A, with only themselves in the car. Those journeys are prime candidates for alternative options. At present, there are few alternatives (aside from cycling, which does not appeal to everyone) and it is too easy to just drive and park.



Anyone who knows me knows that I am as often on my bike as in my car. I have never said that cars shouldn’t be used at all, but that their use should not be encouraged over and above other more benign forms of transport. And the alternatives modes of transport should be improved and facilitated so that we could have a better balance of transport options.

I agree that parents with young children need to use cars more than most. But if traffic was significantly reduced, at an appropriate age those children could enjoy the independence of cycling or walking themselves to school, activities, friends etc.

There are other communities that have taken steps to radically reduce the amount of traffic on their roads and are enjoying the benefits. They presumedly have just the same range of problems that we do but they make it work. No reason why we couldn’t if only the inclination was there.

Dave Jones

ChrisJ /Rosie

It is not a question of understanding, it is just that I refuse to be coerced or patronised into agreeing a strategy that I have absolutely zero faith in.

In fact there is NO strategy without a viable public transport system which we don’t have now and will not have by the time this so called strategy is presented to the States.

I also do not think that we should try and intimidate people on to bikes or walking when they have no wish to do either, it is true we have some traffic congestion at certain times of the day just like every other successful affluent jurisdiction.

We live in a democracy where people are free to chose what they do with their lives within the laws of the land, it is a right that cost the lives of millions and there is already far to much interference in my opinion from government and I might add well meaning interfering pressure groups trying desperately to inflict their will and their lifestyle on the rest of us.

Well I represent all those people who want to use their transport options as and when it suits THEM no you. All the mothers who struggle everyday to juggle their busy lives with shopping, buggies and collecting their children safely from school.

I represent all the men who just want to get on with their lives not waiting for non existent buses that are travelling on roads half a mile from their homes. The people who wish to travel to their jobs in the way they choose to do so and not be browbeaten be the tree huggers and others who believe that they know best and have some given right to dictate how they should all get to work.

I also represent all those people who are heartily fed up with those who keep lecturing us all on how we should behave, what we should say, what we can think, what I am allowed to see in terms of advertising and what we can do.

So there is no misunderstanding of your position or your argument. I simply don’t agree with you on paid parking and that is it.

Island Wide Voting

Dave Jones @ 2.47

Relax Dave,Rosie appears to have thrown in the towel!

At 11.02am she says " There are better things to be getting on with"



Dave’s post perfectly illustrates the point I made in my last post.

You cannot debate with someone who so happily mis-quotes, uses misleading comments and populist propaganda as an alternative to evidence based research or thought. It’s impossible. Ignoring the argument and instead focusing on the person discredits any argument he might have. And using insinuating comments to misrepresent others view points is in my mind, bullying. I have tried to keep all my posts factual and to use reasoned argument to make my point but it’s pointless if others do not engage in reasoned evidence based arguments but hide behind dogma.


Rosie sorry but to suggest those buses are fine on major roads and because of there large carrying capacity is ridiculous. They are far to big which is evident from the fact there mostly empty.

I agree 100% with DJ in if the buses were of a suitable size there would be many who would be happy to be part of a good buss service.

Dave Jones


I have neither quoted you nor mis-quoted you and my comments are not misleading as I am laying out my views and the views of many of the people I represent as expressed to me when the issue of paid parking comes up. You are unhappy with my post because I don’t agree with you, also having a different point of view on paid parking is not "populist propaganda" I have used reasoned arguments as to why we should not have paid parking which you just dismiss as dogma simply because any point of view that does not coincide with yours must be poorly researched and wrong.

Many people have no wish to walk, ride bikes or use a poorly structured bus service. They prefer to use their cars that they have bought and paid for and through which they contribute an enormous amount in fuel taxes and that is fine by me.

It is not for us to dictate how people conduct their daily lives, it is our job as government to help facilitate the way people actually live, not how some people wished they lived.


Fine idea have paid parking. I don't go into town now unless i have to, to many suits. If i had to pay, i would quite happily to make my trip once a year into town. walking and in the summer whilst on holiday. obviously not to buy anything as i wouldn't have a way to get it home.

I used to like shopping in town and meeting friends now my friends don't go in and neither do I.

Paid parking in town, towns just not worth it. wish it was.

Most of the past ideas to keep town alive have failed paid parking would be the nail.

and i would rather the states make money wringing the last drops rather than mucking up something else I do have to have or use.


A few days ago I did my Christmas shopping for "she who must be obeyed".

I bought three items on the internet and seven in town. Yes ,Yes she was spoiled but honestly if I had to pay a couple of quid more to park my car in town I don't think I would have bothered to shop in town at all.

Macaroni you really are in the minority.

Very few people in Guernsey give a fig about people who work in shops.


Hooray I found a parking place down at the harbour now that they have moved those horrible looking storage containers down to the power station.

I hope the container firms don`t want them back.

like a kid

i made a contribution to this thread about 350 posts back. i am increasingly depressed (more so than usual) that this forum has attracted 400 (!) posts about the members of a largely wealthy community being able, or otherwise, to park their cars on a rock of 30 odd square miles. are we really that spoilt? are we really that inadequate?

Election Issues

like a kid @ 10.11

In your contribution about 350 posts back,you said that paid parking (with other incentives such as cheaper bus fares) is the only way to go.

You ask if we are really that spoilt or inadequate...

..but why do those people who have to work in town (not necessarily wealthy) shops, hairdressers, banks, offices, advocates, estate agents, dentists, opticians, cafes, restaurants...have to pay to park in St Peter Port? If they worked in St Martins or St Sampsons they would not have to pay to park would they?

You say you are depressed....well I am angry.

Deputy Burford and Deputy Brehaut want us all to get out of our we walk and cycle more.They are not considering how busy our lives are at all....but not only that...

The Environment Department have just allowed Comprop to build a petrol station, shop, offices, warehouse, car wash, lighting, illumination and parking at former GT Cars site.

This development is in the middle of a residential area with health and safety concerns and environmental risks as the site is contaminated....because there are not enough petrol stations on the main commute between St Sampsons and Town.

Who is acting spoilt and inadequate?


There's a fault in your reasoning when you say 'why do those people who have to work in town [...] have to pay to park in St Peter Port?'

Those who work in town won't HAVE to pay, they have the alternative of finding a way of getting to town other than in a single-occupancy car.

Election Issues

ChrisJ @ 10.17

" Those who work in town won't have to pay, they have the alternative of finding a way of getting to town other than a single-occupancy car"

But why should they?

There is no fault in my reasoning at all. Those people who work in town may have to go somewhere else either before or after work. It may be a single-occupancy car when it parks in a space in St Peter Port BUT it very could have been a multi purpose trip on the way to that space.

Why should those people who work in town (because their job is in town) be discriminated against because they have to pay to park.

If these people have bought their cars, insured their cars and have actually bought fuel( with 49p per litre tax) to put in their cars...why should they leave them at home...why should they walk, cycle, use the bus if they don't want to.

Is there a law that they are breaking by driving their own car to work?


like a kid

I think it's time for you to grow up a bit. If you are feeling depressed you could try going out more and if that doesn't help you can get tablets that will.