Thinking outside the box for transport solutions

Maybe we could have a requete to reverse the decision to close St Andrew's School? Attempts to overturn a decision costs taxpayers' money whether or not they are successful and one must question the motives of those bringing them.

I would like to make some radical comments on Guernsey's transport strategy. It seems taken for granted that our harbours can be used as car parks, paid or otherwise. I believe that plans for the future use of the harbours also take this for granted. It would be interesting to see how they could be developed were parking there to be abolished. The harbour surrounds (and for St Peter Port, I include the Salerie and North Beach, the Crown and Albert Piers and the Castle Emplacement) are part of our harbours and some of the most valuable real estate owned by the States. What right have motorists to use them for parking? Why not make them available for the marine trade to service visiting commercial vessels and yachts? Why not make an attractive reception area for both cruise liner passengers and visiting yachtsmen? The present visitors' marina is unattractive because it is surrounded by parked cars.

Indeed, the whole appearance of our waterfront is totally spoiled by hundreds of parked cars. Would parts not required at present for marine purposes be better turned into recreation areas for the benefit of the public and visitors?

The suggestion that the North Beach car park becomes two- or multi-storey is ludicrous. I do not think any commercial developer would find it a financially viable proposition short of charging high sums for parking, even if permitted to spoil the landscape still further. To provide such a facility for motorists would preclude its future use for harbour purposes. The fundamental question is whether the harbours are harbours or car parks.

Secondly, should we permit on-street parking except perhaps in little used residential streets? Some routes out of Town have become 'wing-mirror alleys' as private vehicles become wider because of safety considerations. For example, it is difficult to drive up Victoria Road without mounting the pavement. We should ask ourselves seriously whether traffic flows on roads maintained at public expense should be impeded by on-street parking.

Thirdly, I question whether the provision of a free bus service will entice people to use it. I suspect that just as increasing the price of alcohol has had little effect on sales, so also paid parking and free bus services will do little to move people out of their cars. They will pay more and continue to use their cars.

The States must have at its disposal a sizeable number of buses to move children to and from school. That is the basic reason for needing a fleet of buses in Guernsey. If more buses are required to provide a frequent and reliable service at peak times, we will end up with a considerable number of buses unused or underused for much of the time and paid for by the taxpayer. It is evident that the present fleet will need replacing and enlarging, but at whose cost?

There is a suggestion that £20 million is needed for a new bus depot. Is this a better use of public money than improved healthcare or schools?

The provision of an enhanced bus service will be at an increased and unknown cost to the taxpayer and any profit made by the operator will, as likely as not, be sent out of the island without any tax being paid here.

Maybe the way to encourage people to use a free or a paid bus service is to abolish parking on any part of the harbours or on-street.

If private developers then make off-street car parks, I suspect the cost of so doing will result in such high fees that most people will use the buses.

Should horse tax be reintroduced? It was abolished soon after the last world war. Horses use roads and can slow down traffic, leading to increased fuel consumption.

For some inexplicable reason, land used for grazing horses is classed as agricultural rather than recreational.

Agriculture is generally considered as the production of food or other necessities such as fibre for humans. Grazing horses can only be considered as agricultural usage if they are working farm animals or being raised to provide meat for beef burgers. The upsurge of recreational horses has inflated the price of agricultural land and some farmers have lost the use of land so that a spoilt little girl can have a field for her pet pony.

Horses are a luxury item, damaging to sustainable agriculture, and a substantial tax should be reintroduced. It is shameful that people now have to pay taxes on their homes, a most basic necessity of life, whereas luxuries like horses or expensive pleasure boats remain untaxed.

Finally, should we reintroduce cycle tax? It was abolished at the same time as horse tax. Cyclists use the roads and may expect the roads to be kept safe for their use. For many, their cycles are luxury items costing some thousands of pounds.

At the time of its abolition, cycle tax was an hour or two's pay for a working man. Something like £50 a year would not be unreasonable and could be collected annually by the parishes. A displayed tax disc would go some way to assisting tracing of the ownership of lost or stolen cycles.

These comments are intended to provoke discussion and may produce some violent reaction. I do not like to hide in anonymity, but I do fear the lynch mob and for that reason alone, I ask that my name and address be withheld.

Name and address withheld.