Debate contribution: Hospital Parking Charges Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on 24 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Mike Nesbitt

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

24 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Hospital Parking Charges Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5463583

Read the official Assembly record

Text

It is fair and reasonable to expect the trusts to review their policies in the light of what we appear to be about to legislate for. Absolutely. Mr Deputy Speaker, my officials wanted me to reflect on a number of points raised during the Second Stage debate, but that would incur your admonishment, so I will truncate my remarks pretty significantly. The amendment proposes two things: an initial report within six months outlining the costs arising from the delayed implementation of the 2022 Act; and annual reports thereafter on the costs associated with the Act in subsequent years. While the underlying cost base associated with operating car parks does not materially change as a result of the 2022 Act or the deferral of the Act coming into operation, I recognise that transparency is important. Therefore, to be clear, the main cost components are in respect of rates, staffing, maintenance and ongoing automatic number plate recognition system costs. Those costs will continue regardless of whether parking charges remain or are abolished. For example, around £5 million is paid annually in rates to Land and Property Services, and £3 million a year is spent on staffing costs, including attendants, estates personnel and admin staff. A further £3 million is incurred in maintenance costs, such as lighting, gritting, cleaning and repairs. Finally, the ANPR contract costs approximately half a million pounds a year. Those costs will remain broadly constant whether the Act commences now or later. I acknowledge that Members may wish to see the costs associated with the abolition of charges and its delay clearly set out and formally reported. I also acknowledge that the additional transparency may assist the Assembly in tracking expenditure and ensuring that the Department continues to make decisions that are based on the best available evidence. For those reasons, I am content to accept the amendment, although I highlight the fact that the costs to be reported are not expected to be significant. When it comes to setting up the system, approximately £4·9 million has been spent to date to enable preparatory work for upgrading existing car park barriers and to support the procurement of the automatic number plate recognition equipment. There will also be ongoing running costs of up to half a million pounds a year, which will be offset by income from parking notices. That investment will not be wasted, because the infrastructure that has been installed is required for the long-term operation of hospital car parks and will directly support the implementation of free parking, once financial circumstances allow. In summary, although, given the financial pressures, the deferral remains both necessary and justified, I support Members in their desire for any associated costs to be visible.

Just in time.

I do believe that the leader of the Opposition has asked me to disclose confidential information. I suggest that he puts in an FOI request for the minutes of the meeting in question. In conclusion, I am content to accept the amendment.

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

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:16 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

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