• AN email from the council informs me it is proposing to “make changes to resident permit prices to contribute to discouraging inessential car ownership and use in Camden”. In my case, the increase would be over £70, for others, an eye-watering £250 a year.

While recognising the need to tackle poor air quality, I do not think these proposals have been adequately thought through.

Imposing a blanket increase in permit prices falls disproportionately on lower income families, the same families who have experienced declining living standards due to years of austerity. Simply put, Camden’s proposals are unfair on residents who are just about keeping themselves financially afloat.

Regarding “inessential car ownership” I pay for a resident’s permit and am classified by my employer as an essential car user. One neighbour uses her car to take her partner to hospital appointments. Another uses her car for work. In what way is this inessential? It seems to me the council’s definition of essential simply rests on “who can afford to pay!”

And what about the thousands of cars, vans, HGV’s and motorbikes that pass through Camden? Will raising the price of permits make any difference to air quality or will it just generate income for the Town Hall? How much money are these proposals expected to raise and what will it actually be spent on?

Camden claims that it wants to “enable more sustainable travel” in the borough and yet largely unopposed Transport for London’s recent drastic cuts to local bus routes and timetables despite a campaign by local people to oppose the cuts in public transport.

Make your views known by March 29 to: Parking Policy, Transport Strategy Service, 5th Floor, 5PS, Freepost RSLT-RJBR-TXAA, London Borough of Camden, Town Hall, Judd Street, London, WC1.

TRACEY OAKLEY
NW1