[katex]

Asked my son, who is a Transport Planning Consultant ... came back with this, which helped me see another side to this scheme:-

"Feelings towards Workplace Parking Levies (WPL) are mixed. On the plus
side, they do target the core group of trips that contribute most heavily
to congestion - work based commuters on typical work patterns. The
charges also encourage employers to take a pro-active approach to
promoting changes in travel behaviour ie. revised working patterns,
promoting cycling/walking, subsidised public transport etc. Residual
benefits also exist to business, for instance, the volume of high value
land that is wasted through the supply of free employee car parking is
huge. By instituting an additional cost to the employer for the supply
of car parking, it encourages removal of car parking and opens up the
potential for development of that land. This has revenue implications
for the City Council (tax, rise in land value etc) and business
(expansion, sale etc). Importantly for businesses, this has no impact
on a key group for them - goods and HGV deliveries. A zone or cordon
based congestion charge (which is often sold as the alternative to WPL)
does not discriminate against the type of traffic entering the zone, a
WPL does.

However, there is the risk that the employer may just transfer the cost
of the parking levy onto employees. Although not necessarily fair, it
might get commuters to reconsider their travel choices - I cycle to work
and my commuting costs are zero (besides extra toast in the morning!).
There may be cases where employees need to drive (disability etc) so
provision should be made for these employees. There is a large initial
capital cost to the Local Authorities to ensure that the local Traffic
Regulation Orders and on-street lining and signing is correct and
appropriate - to discourage the displacement of parking onto on-street
locations. This is accompanied by an additional operations cost through
the enforcement of these parking restrictions.

These are not the only issues with WPL but I'm broadly in favour of the
scheme. Whilst I agree that the Chamber of Commerce and other business
interests have the right to Judicial Review - this is ultimately very
costly for the Government. What is more annoying is that it is highly
probable that the Chamber has been involved in developing this scheme
from its inception. Congestion is borne from economic success and the
clustered location of inter-linked business/social activities, which
attract demand at specific times of day, causing acute breakdown in the
flow of traffic. Congestion is therefore a key indicator of a thriving
economy. However, without a pro-active stance on congestion reduction
the cost to businesses (time lost, delivery delays, wasted time etc)
will only rise.

Whilst charging people for the use of the car may seem unequitable and
unfair, attitudes towards the 'right to drive' need to change over the
next twenty years. Even if you exclude the environmental arguments
(damage caused to the environment by industry is far greater, it
accounts for 58% of all CO2 emissions in the UK; transport 24%) the
time/cost to business will grow and that will have an impact on all
persons."