SURREY Police have been accused by a Waverley councillor of "abrogating their responsibilities" in connection with the parking fiasco that has beset Waverley borough. Waverley officers were this week hoping to organise an urgent meeting with police and Surrey County Council, in a bid to resolve the situation that has resulted from the borough's traffic wardens being made redundant as of last Saturday. With Surrey Police insisting it would only enforce the on-street parking regulations where there is a risk to life or property, motorists have been handed virtual free rein on the borough's streets. That situation could continue until early 2007 - the projected time when the process will have been completed by which on-street parking offences are decriminalised and become civil offences in Waverley. This requires the borough council to have the specific approval of the Secretary of State for Transport to take on enforcement responsibilities on behalf of Surrey County Council. In a statement this week, the police made it clear that the decision to make the two traffic wardens redundant had been taken after four years of protracted discussions. "During this time, Surrey Police was hoping to reach a decision regarding the terms on which parking enforcement would be transferred to Waverley and Surrey councils while the wardens were still employed. "In addition, Surrey Police had the welfare of two members of staff to consider, who did not know from month to month what their future held. "It reached the stage, from a policing perspective, that key operational decisions needed to be made about where to employ police resources in 2006. Under DPE legislation, it was clear that responsibility for parking would transfer from the police to the county and borough councils. "It needs to be understood that Waverley is the last borough to make this transition in the county. The 10 other boroughs and districts within Surrey have all agreed terms with the county council and, in some cases, have been operating the enhanced service for up to two years." In Waverley's executive meeting on Tuesday, however, there were complaints that the police had taken the redundancy decision without consultation with Waverley or Surrey. "I don't understand how the police can abrogate their responsibilities," Farnham councillor Victor Scrivens declared, going on to criticise the police as an unelected body with no accountability to the electorate. The councillor went on to claim that the Chief Constable had told Waverley at a recent meeting that there would not be redundancies. Waverley's environmental director, Peter Maudsley, said the decision had not been taken for financial reasons. The wardens were employed by the police, but paid for by Surrey County Council, which had made budgetary provision for the costs. Council leader Gillian Ferguson stressed that, although Waverley bore no responsibility "technically, financially or practically", it was trying to put pressure on the county council and the police to work out a means of bridging the gap until Waverley was granted the necessary authority. In the meantime, only the police could employ wardens or community police to take on the task, she explained. Miss Ferguson revealed that official agreement had been reached between Waverley and Surrey on the terms on which Waverley would take on the new responsibilities only on March 25. But she reiterated that the council had understood that the police would maintain the traffic wardens until the new arrangements were in place. Speaking after the meeting, John Robini, Waverley's portfolio holder for car parks, said: "Waverley has always been committed to resolving the issue of parking enforcement throughout the borough with Surrey County Council. "We are now in the unacceptable situation that, until on-street parking offences are decriminalised to become civil offences in Waverley, neither we nor Surrey County Council is able to enforce parking regulations without the specific approval of the Secretary of State for Transport. "The power to enforce what are currently criminal offences rests exclusively with the police. They are the only authority able to prosecute offenders, and regrettably they have declined Surrey County Council's proposals to continue enforcing parking regulations in the interim." Mr Robini said that Waverley was working with Surrey to prepare an application to attain the Secretary of State's approval for the decriminalisation. "This process will unfortunately take some time," he said, urging all motorists to "act responsibly and reasonably and give thought to local residents, pedestrians and other road users". The police statement ended on a similar note. "Motorists still have a legal obligation to obey traffic and parking restrictions, " it said.
