Debate contribution: Hospital Parking Charges Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Alan Chambers on 24 March 2026.

MLA: Mr Alan Chambers
Party at the time: Ulster Unionist Party
Date: 24 March 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Hospital Parking Charges Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5463569

Text

As has been said, the decision to defer the implementation of the 2022 Act was not taken lightly but was rooted in the financial realities that face health and social care. I am confident about that. In that context, it is essential that we proceed with caution where decisions could have unintended consequences for front-line care. As was discussed during the Second Stage debate, the income generated from hospital car parking charges is not surplus funding that is sitting idle; it is being used to support the day-to-day operations of hospital sites. Removing that income without a fully costed and sustainable replacement would simply shift the burden elsewhere within the system. Ultimately, that would risk impacting front-line patient services. In the spirit of needing to concentrate minds and resources on the areas that matter most, I will say that I sometimes question the benefit of, or value added by, amendments such as those that are before the House. A report for a report's sake would do little to improve the position for patients or staff. Overall, however, in this circumstance, the proposal to require an initial report on the costs associated with the delayed implementation of the Act, followed by annual reporting, is a reasonable step that aligns with the principles of transparency and accountability. While it has been made clear that the core costs associated with operating hospital car parks, such as the cost of rates, maintenance and the automatic number plate recognition technology (ANPR) systems, will remain broadly unchanged regardless of whether charges are in place, there is, nonetheless, value in setting out the information in a clear and accessible way. Doing so will allow Members and the public to better understand the financial implications of the Act and its deferral.
Sorry, I want to make progress. It is important not to introduce administrative burdens or processes just for the sake of it. That is why we must ensure that efforts to enhance transparency do not inadvertently divert resources from the services that we are seeking to protect. It is worth acknowledging that the amendment reflects a wider concern among Members about ensuring that decisions in this area are evidence-based and subject to appropriate scrutiny. That is a legitimate and important role for the Assembly — a role that should be welcomed rather than resisted. If all Ministers and political parties were prepared to listen to evidence, we could have avoided this morning's statement on minimum unit pricing. In conclusion, I believe that supporting the amendment is a reasonable balance between recognising the financial necessity of the deferral and embracing the need for openness and accountability.

438 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification