Hansard

I speak in support of the motion in Paul Martin's name. I have also supported the local petition that he organised. More than 300 of the signatures on the petition have come from people whom I represent—his constituency borders mine—because many of my constituents work at Stobhill or attend either as patients or visitors. It is fair to say that the introduction of car parking charges has raised a lot of concern and anger.

The issue was discussed at the most recent meeting of the north Glasgow monitoring group, of which both Mr Martin and I are members. We were told by management that the policy is to try to encourage staff, patients and visitors—staff in particular—to make more use of public transport: indeed, we were told that the board was introducing interest-free loans to allow staff to buy bikes. However, the gentleman who told us about the scheme—I will not embarrass him by naming him—did not look as if he had seen a bike saddle for many a year.

The introduction of charges is to discourage staff from using their cars to come to work in order to free up car parking spaces for people who visit the hospital for appointments. At present, such visitors can find themselves touring the hospital grounds looking for somewhere to leave their cars. However, the main reason for the current shortage of car parking space at Stobhill is the construction of the new day hospital, which was topped out only recently by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing. As she will have seen when she visited Stobhill, a large number of vehicles are used by those who are involved in the building work and a large amount of ground is taken up by the construction site. As Patricia Ferguson said, there will be plenty of space for car parking at Stobhill once the new hospital is finished next year. However, as NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde wants car parking charges to be implemented at all its sites, those who use Stobhill will still have to pay.

Let us be blunt: the charges are a direct assault on the most disadvantaged citizens in our society. Many of those who regularly use the out-patient services at Stobhill already suffer from debilitating illnesses and the parking charges will merely exacerbate their difficulties and the distress of many sick Scots, whose ordinary lives already pose extraordinary problems. People who suffer from some of the most serious conditions who regularly use hospital services will be punished most by the charges. It seems to be an absurd decision to place further financial restrictions on the sick.

Furthermore, I agree with Bill Kidd—I never thought that I would say that in Parliament—that it is scandalous to impose such charges on hospital staff. Medical workers at all our hospitals are on the front line in combating Scotland's serious health problems. Such individuals do exceedingly important work at all times of the day and night, as Stuart McMillan said. The charges also disproportionately affect staff on lower wages. Not content with targeting the sick, the proposals go after people who are on low incomes.

In response to claims that introducing charges will simply promote greater use of public transport, I echo other members' views in pointing out that not all hospitals are served by accessible public transport. For example, one of my constituents lives in Torrance but works at Southern general hospital, where car parking charges will also apply. He told me that, to reach his work by public transport, he would need to leave the night before. It is simply ludicrous to suggest that that is a tenable option. It is even more ludicrous to ask him to get on his bike rather than use his car. Another constituent of mine has been rewarded with a £25 per month parking permit, which allows parking in the designated staff car park but does not guarantee a car parking space. If he cannot find a space, the cost of car parking outside could be as much as £35 a week.

Strathclyde Partnership for Transport has proposals to produce a green transport plan but, as Paul Martin said, it is not yet in place. When it is, it may encourage staff and visitors to use public transport, but until then people will still want to use their cars. The car parking charges are simply a crude attempt to reap financial benefits from people who visit the facilities frequently. They should be opposed until proper public transport provision is available.