[Update 14/11/2024: To have your say, you must email the council at traffic.orders@haringey.gov.uk by 20 November 2024 quoting reference 2024-T35 and including your name and address.  See here for a submission kindly shared by another resident, in case anyone is looking for inspiration.]

Haringey council are proposing to remove daily visitor permits and restrict the availability of visitor permits to 40 hourly permits per resident per year, as set out in their consultation document which you can find here.

[Update 25/10/2024: a revised version has since replaced the one linked above.  See here for the revised version.  Please also see the update further below regarding the 40-permit limit.]

Under the current system, a daily visitor permit currently costs £5, and an hourly visitor permit currently costs £1.20.  So, in any Controlled Parking Zone which is operational more than 4 hours a day, the proposals will make it more expensive to buy a day's parking for a visitor.  And the longer the hours of operation, the greater that increase in expense will be.  

CPZs in the west of Haringey are typically in operation two hours a day, five days a week.  CPZs in the east of the borough, however, are typically in operation 10.5 hours a day, six days a week, and even longer on event days.  These changes will therefore have minimal effect on the cost of visitors' parking in the most affluent parts of the borough, but will significantly increase cost in the poorest areas.  For example, a day's parking for a visitor in Highgate will still be £2.40, the cost of two hourly permits.  However, a day's parking for a visitor in Seven Sisters will rise from £5 to £13.20 (11 hourly permits).

It is objectionable that the council is seeking to increase the cost of parking at all, at a time when residents are still suffering the effects of a cost of living crisis.  It is much worse that the council is proposing to increase costs disproportionately in the least-well off areas.

Haringey are also proposing to introduce a limit of 40 visitors' permits per resident per year.  That's 40 hourly visitor permits, because this sits alongside the other changes to discontinue the daily voucher.   

This proposed change will cause massive problems, especially for residents in less affluent areas, where the CPZs are in operation over more hours of the day, and more days of the week.  To follow the example above, a resident in Highgate with two hours a day controlled parking would be entitled to 20 days' visitors parking over a single year.  A resident in Seven Sisters, on the other hand, could only have visitors for less than four days a year.  That is grossly unfair.  

Haringey say that these changes are being made because "circumstantial evidence suggests daily visitor permits are open to being used for purposes other than intended – typically by commuters using permits to park for the day, or by those residing in properties without entitlement to resident permits.  The proposal is to discontinue the option for daily visitor permits for residents, who retain hourly visitor permits as an option to provide parking for visitors."

Haringey don't say what this "circumstantial evidence" is, but it doesn't sound strong.  And the suggestion that residents can just use hourly permits instead ignores the fact that the proposal also limits those to just 40 a year - which amounts to less than four days in many CPZs.

The proposed discontinuation of the daily visitor permit and the proposed 40 permit limit should both be removed from the proposed TMO.  Further work should be done to establish if it is really necessary to act against the alleged misuse of the current system or, if such work has already been done, it should be published.  If there really is a problem that warrants further action, then any such action should be directed at those who are misusing the system, rather than punishing residents who rely on visitor permits and will lose out under the current proposals.

[Update 25/10/2024: there have been reports that the 40-permit annual limit has been removed. Although there does not seem to have been any official communication from the council on this, some reference to the annual limit does appear to have quietly disappeared from the published proposal. That’s a great result, and shows that the scrutiny the proposals are receiving is having an effect.  But, at the time of writing, the proposed TMO still gives the council discretion to introduce a limit on the number of permits residents can apply for per year.  So, even if the council is no longer trying to set an annual limit now, they could easily introduce one later. This petition therefore continues to call for the council to amend the TMO so as not to envisage a yearly maximum at all.]