Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Business

Canberra Video Production and Green Screen Studio

Wall to consult small business on paid parking

By Michael Reid - 12 May 2016 22

parking-sign-stock

The Liberal opposition would ditch the Barr government’s plan for paid parking in the Phillip commercial precinct, shadow minister for small business Andrew Wall said on Thursday.

“Unlike the government, the Canberra Liberals will be happy to consult with local businesses and look to accommodate their needs,” he said.

“There should be a fairer mix of short stay, long stay and permit parking in Phillip.

“Removing the government’s paid parking is a live option. As far as we’re concerned, everything is on the table for discussion.

“The government has failed to consult on parking changes, but the Canberra Liberals will.”

Mr Wall will address businesses on the matter at a meeting in Phillip this afternoon.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
22 Responses to
Wall to consult small business on paid parking
dungfungus 4:25 pm 16 May 16

HenryBG said :

Kalliste said :

Well they definitely didn’t consult the residents, i live across the road from the shopping centre district and I certainly didn’t get anything in the mail asking my opinion. I also know quite well the owner of a mechanic in phillip I go to he says his business was not consulted about the changes, and he is now looking at hundreds a week in parking for the cars between when they’re being worked on. So I can’t speak for other businesses in the area but if they did consult, they certainly missed some.

Stand by for that “decision” to be amended to a proposal.

As I said, it is now a “proposal”
http://the-riotact.com/fitzharris-seeks-feedback-on-phillip-paid-parking-scheme/175759

rommeldog56 12:54 pm 16 May 16

madelini said :

So this business is using government car parks to park customer cars between jobs? And is complaining he will be asked to pay for using those spots?.

In many ways this is the kind of thing the government is trying to ‘stamp’ out. Those parks are not there to keep his business costs down by leasing less land to do his business. Most mechanics shops I know accomodate customer cars between jobs on their own site why is this mechanic any different

Rubbish. Those car parks are so that customers can access the businesses – including mechanics. Its actually the way it was designed.

Observing 12:44 pm 16 May 16

Seems it is a choice between one party where we know their ‘consultation process’ is to tell you what they will be doing, or else the other party where they might be lying and do the same, but there is a chance that they won’t. If I were to play those odds, I know 0% chance of consultation will never beat a small chance that there actually may be some consultation.

The one definite is that we have had the current government in for many years so we know how they operate. If you like the way they do things, then go ahead, keep status quo.

dungfungus 9:38 am 16 May 16

madelini said :

Kalliste said :

Well they definitely didn’t consult the residents, i live across the road from the shopping centre district and I certainly didn’t get anything in the mail asking my opinion. I also know quite well the owner of a mechanic in phillip I go to he says his business was not consulted about the changes, and he is now looking at hundreds a week in parking for the cars between when they’re being worked on. So I can’t speak for other businesses in the area but if they did consult, they certainly missed some.

So this business is using government car parks to park customer cars between jobs? And is complaining he will be asked to pay for using those spots?.

In many ways this is the kind of thing the government is trying to ‘stamp’ out. Those parks are not there to keep his business costs down by leasing less land to do his business. Most mechanics shops I know accomodate customer cars between jobs on their own site why is this mechanic any different.

And and stated above I am generally opposed to pay parking in industrial areas but by the same token also very opposed to businesses using them in the manner that you indicated.

“So this business is using government car parks to park customer cars between jobs? And is complaining he will be asked to pay for using those spots?.”
But isn’t this the same principle as the sexy new “car share” schemes that our government is embracing where “free” government car parks are provided for “parking cars between jobs”?

dungfungus 12:10 pm 15 May 16

Kalliste said :

Well they definitely didn’t consult the residents, i live across the road from the shopping centre district and I certainly didn’t get anything in the mail asking my opinion. I also know quite well the owner of a mechanic in phillip I go to he says his business was not consulted about the changes, and he is now looking at hundreds a week in parking for the cars between when they’re being worked on. So I can’t speak for other businesses in the area but if they did consult, they certainly missed some.

Stand by for that “decision” to be amended to a proposal.

dungfungus 12:07 pm 15 May 16

Mordd said :

HenryBG said :

rosscoact said :

Garfield said :

bungers_boy said :

Does the territory opposition have a policy other than “opposing” anything the government proposes?

Strangely, that what an “opposition” does. However, in the ACT, there seems to be so much to “oppose”.

Well, of course there is a lot to oppose when a government is busy accomplishing instead of spending all its time tesring stuff down out ofmspite for former governments.

There is far more to opposition than simply opposing everything. The role of an opposition is as much about monitoring the process of government (“keeping the bastards honest”) as it is about presenting alternatives to Government policy. Being in opposition is not about saying “no” all the time.

Now there mist have been some consultation with businesses about changes to parking in Phillip, otherwise the protest would be about changed that have been made, rather than changes that are proposed. There must be some process of consultation under way otherwise the opposition wouldn’t be promising to be more consultative after the next election: the period of time involved implies that there is a long consultation process under way.

So in short, the Lieberals are lying again, and have no more competence in arguing than simply gainsaying whatever the other party has said.

Maybe you could supply details of the “consultations with businesses that must have taken place”.
I think the stage has been reached with the current government where the community accepts their decisions as nobody cares anymore.
Two examples of that are the total reversal of “no poker machines for the Casino policy” and the decision to move the proposed tram construction depot on London Circuit to the Civic swimming pool area.
Note the latter was done after consultation with businesses AFTER the decision had been made to close the car park on London Circuit.
There was hardly any comment made in the media and except what I raised, nothing on this blog.
See, nobody cares.
And we are looking forward to another four years of this.

It wasn’t a decision to close the London CCt carpark. It was a proposal and after consultation they changed it to elsewhere. What more you want.

A source?

JC 11:53 am 15 May 16

Kalliste said :

Well they definitely didn’t consult the residents, i live across the road from the shopping centre district and I certainly didn’t get anything in the mail asking my opinion. I also know quite well the owner of a mechanic in phillip I go to he says his business was not consulted about the changes, and he is now looking at hundreds a week in parking for the cars between when they’re being worked on. So I can’t speak for other businesses in the area but if they did consult, they certainly missed some.

So this business is using government car parks to park customer cars between jobs? And is complaining he will be asked to pay for using those spots?.

In many ways this is the kind of thing the government is trying to ‘stamp’ out. Those parks are not there to keep his business costs down by leasing less land to do his business. Most mechanics shops I know accomodate customer cars between jobs on their own site why is this mechanic any different.

And and stated above I am generally opposed to pay parking in industrial areas but by the same token also very opposed to businesses using them in the manner that you indicated.

JC 11:49 am 15 May 16

HenryBG said :

rosscoact said :

Garfield said :

bungers_boy said :

Does the territory opposition have a policy other than “opposing” anything the government proposes?

Strangely, that what an “opposition” does. However, in the ACT, there seems to be so much to “oppose”.

Well, of course there is a lot to oppose when a government is busy accomplishing instead of spending all its time tesring stuff down out ofmspite for former governments.

There is far more to opposition than simply opposing everything. The role of an opposition is as much about monitoring the process of government (“keeping the bastards honest”) as it is about presenting alternatives to Government policy. Being in opposition is not about saying “no” all the time.

Now there mist have been some consultation with businesses about changes to parking in Phillip, otherwise the protest would be about changed that have been made, rather than changes that are proposed. There must be some process of consultation under way otherwise the opposition wouldn’t be promising to be more consultative after the next election: the period of time involved implies that there is a long consultation process under way.

So in short, the Lieberals are lying again, and have no more competence in arguing than simply gainsaying whatever the other party has said.

Maybe you could supply details of the “consultations with businesses that must have taken place”.
I think the stage has been reached with the current government where the community accepts their decisions as nobody cares anymore.
Two examples of that are the total reversal of “no poker machines for the Casino policy” and the decision to move the proposed tram construction depot on London Circuit to the Civic swimming pool area.
Note the latter was done after consultation with businesses AFTER the decision had been made to close the car park on London Circuit.
There was hardly any comment made in the media and except what I raised, nothing on this blog.
See, nobody cares.
And we are looking forward to another four years of this.

It wasn’t a decision to close the London CCt carpark. It was a proposal and after consultation they changed it to elsewhere. What more you want.

Mordd 9:58 pm 14 May 16

Well they definitely didn’t consult the residents, i live across the road from the shopping centre district and I certainly didn’t get anything in the mail asking my opinion. I also know quite well the owner of a mechanic in phillip I go to he says his business was not consulted about the changes, and he is now looking at hundreds a week in parking for the cars between when they’re being worked on. So I can’t speak for other businesses in the area but if they did consult, they certainly missed some.

tooheys 9:11 pm 14 May 16

“Now there mist have been some consultation with businesses about changes to parking in Phillip, otherwise the protest would be about changed that have been made, rather than changes that are proposed. There must be some process of consultation under way otherwise the opposition wouldn’t be promising to be more consultative after the next election: the period of time involved implies that there is a long consultation process under way.”

As a business owner in the Phillip Business District, my only ‘consultation’ about the changes was a letter hand delivered to my business last week detailing the changes that will be made, and when they will happen. No If’s. Just wills and whens. Two ‘information sessions’ were detailed to attend if you wish to get more information on the changes. Thats it.

Thanks ACT Gov for making my customers not bother to stop…

dungfungus 10:29 am 14 May 16

rosscoact said :

Garfield said :

bungers_boy said :

Does the territory opposition have a policy other than “opposing” anything the government proposes?

Strangely, that what an “opposition” does. However, in the ACT, there seems to be so much to “oppose”.

Well, of course there is a lot to oppose when a government is busy accomplishing instead of spending all its time tesring stuff down out ofmspite for former governments.

There is far more to opposition than simply opposing everything. The role of an opposition is as much about monitoring the process of government (“keeping the bastards honest”) as it is about presenting alternatives to Government policy. Being in opposition is not about saying “no” all the time.

Now there mist have been some consultation with businesses about changes to parking in Phillip, otherwise the protest would be about changed that have been made, rather than changes that are proposed. There must be some process of consultation under way otherwise the opposition wouldn’t be promising to be more consultative after the next election: the period of time involved implies that there is a long consultation process under way.

So in short, the Lieberals are lying again, and have no more competence in arguing than simply gainsaying whatever the other party has said.

Maybe you could supply details of the “consultations with businesses that must have taken place”.
I think the stage has been reached with the current government where the community accepts their decisions as nobody cares anymore.
Two examples of that are the total reversal of “no poker machines for the Casino policy” and the decision to move the proposed tram construction depot on London Circuit to the Civic swimming pool area.
Note the latter was done after consultation with businesses AFTER the decision had been made to close the car park on London Circuit.
There was hardly any comment made in the media and except what I raised, nothing on this blog.
See, nobody cares.
And we are looking forward to another four years of this.

Grail 6:55 am 14 May 16

Garfield said :

bungers_boy said :

Does the territory opposition have a policy other than “opposing” anything the government proposes?

Strangely, that what an “opposition” does. However, in the ACT, there seems to be so much to “oppose”.

Well, of course there is a lot to oppose when a government is busy accomplishing instead of spending all its time tesring stuff down out ofmspite for former governments.

There is far more to opposition than simply opposing everything. The role of an opposition is as much about monitoring the process of government (“keeping the bastards honest”) as it is about presenting alternatives to Government policy. Being in opposition is not about saying “no” all the time.

Now there mist have been some consultation with businesses about changes to parking in Phillip, otherwise the protest would be about changed that have been made, rather than changes that are proposed. There must be some process of consultation under way otherwise the opposition wouldn’t be promising to be more consultative after the next election: the period of time involved implies that there is a long consultation process under way.

So in short, the Lieberals are lying again, and have no more competence in arguing than simply gainsaying whatever the other party has said.

HiddenDragon 5:31 pm 13 May 16

Aside from this announcement about Phillip, the Liberals might want to make clear their view about paid parking in other areas, such as Fyshwick, and the group centres, which would surely be likely future targets for “parking management” initiatives by a returned ACT Labor/Green Government.

rommeldog56 8:01 am 13 May 16

bungers_boy said :

Does the territory opposition have a policy other than “opposing” anything the government proposes?

Strangely, that what an “opposition” does. However, in the ACT, there seems to be so much to “oppose”.

Lurker2913 7:10 pm 12 May 16

Does the territory opposition have a policy other than “opposing” anything the government proposes?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site