THE feud between Surrey County Council (SCC) and Waverley Borough Council (WBC) surrounding decriminalised parking enforcement (DPE) looks set to continue.

At their executive meeting last Thursday, WBC councillors reacted with ire to a perceived lack of response from SCC surrounding the provision of wardens in the borough.

WBC's chief executive Christine Pointer contacted her SCC counterpart, Richard Shaw, expressing her concern at the game of "ping pong", before requesting that the issue went before SCC's executive committee.

To police the problem effectively within the borough, WBC requested two more full-time parking attendants, bolstering the workforce to four.

Mr Shaw's response, which did not agree with WBC's requirement for four parking attendants, he remarked that he would not propose what is an "operational matter" before SCC's executive committee.

Gill Ferguson, leader of the WBC, said: "We are still not getting anywhere with this, are we?" Widespread agreement ensued with Christine Pointer adding to the debate: "As things stand, one member covers Farnham and the other is for the rest of the borough."

"I have written twice and have had no response from SCC, so at 5 pm this evening, I discussed this with the chief executive of SCC, who said they have not proposed to put this before council. I do not agree with that view."

John Robini continued in the same vein: "I am disheartened by the negative response from SCC. It is SCC's responsibility to enforce decriminalised car parking in Surrey."

After proposing to make further contact with Mr Shaw, Miss Ferguson agreed to raise a question on this matter in the open public session at the next meeting of the county council's executive meeting.

"We are in a ridiculous situation. Taking it to the SCC executive is a good idea," remarked Victor Scrivens.

Meanwhile, speaking after the meeting, Chris Mansell could barely contain his dissatisfaction at the situation.

He said: "It's high time people realised what a mess SCC is making of the new car parking controls. They are insisting that just two wardens would be sufficient for the whole of Waverley – that includes Cranleigh, Haslemere, Godalming, as well as Farnham. It strikes me as blindingly obvious that there needs to be one warden for each town and its surrounding area.

"Surrey County Council's principal officer has told Waverley officers that he's not prepared to refer the matter to the Surrey members' executive. Negotiations are at an impasse.

"Good parking enforcement is an essential feature of the proposals for dealing with Farnham's town centre traffic problems. Surrey says it is signing up to these – how perverse can you get?

"For Waverley, and Farnham especially, it is an absurd position. The extra cost for providing an effective service in Waverley has been quoted at £60,000. Action is required now from our county council members in Farnham, and elsewhere in the borough, to get sense into Surrey.

Meanwhile, a statement from SCC remarked: "In each borough, a financial assessment has been produced for DPE and the other boroughs have accepted the numbers of parking attendants to be funded by Surrey County Council.

"Experience in the boroughs where the agency arrangements have already come on stream shows the estimated level of cover is proving to be adequate. If the borough council so wishes, it can employ more parking attendants, funded either from the parking ticket income or from its own budget.

"In addition to the two new parking attendants, the six existing off-street parking attendants will be brought into the picture, so there will be eight parking attendants, all able to enforce restrictions. This will provide considerable economies in terms of the areas patrolled and distances attendants have to travel in between them.

"We also do not lose sight of the need to minimise the cost to council tax payers and the cost assessments seek to balance the whole account by estimating the right level of cover.

"To increase this cost would be not be of benefit to the public both in terms of cost and level of parking enforcement."