By Marjory Inglis, health reporter

HEFTY PARKING charges of up to £15 a visit are planned for Ninewells Hospital, Dundee.

If approved, that charge will represent one of the highest hospital parking charges in Scotland.

Health bosses are also planning to introduce parking charges for the disabled, something that has never happened before at the hospital.

However, the majority of car parks on the site will continue to attract the standard charge of £1.50 per visit.

The £15 charge would apply only to those parking over seven hours in car parks five and six, close to the hospital. A four-hour maximum wait is proposed in these car parks and the disabled car park number seven, closest to the hospital for £1.50.

The plan is to deter long stay parkers from taking up these spaces, freeing them up for patients attending appointments and encouraging more turnover in these spaces.

It is proposed that for motorists who stay beyond four hours in car parks five and six the charges will rise in two stages to £15 for over seven hours.

There will be an end to free parking for patients visiting the accident and emergency department but six emergency “set down” spaces will be introduced at A&E and spaces in the car park there will have a four-hour maximum wait for £1.50.

The proposal pegs parking for patients to a maximum of £1.50, even in the four-hour maximum car parks. The belief is that four hours is time enough for a clinical appointment but the proposal allows a waiver on any penalty notice for over-staying the time limit if the recipient can prove a longer appointment. The variable charges are aimed at encouraging a higher turnover of cars occupying the 2400 parking spaces and treating patients more fairly.

There has long been concern that some patients have been treated as exceptions, while others, including those making regular return visits for life-saving treatment, such as cancer sufferers, do pay.

Last year NHS Tayside chairman Peter Bates called in Bill Spence, the former chief constable of Tayside, to conduct a review of car parking at Ninewells.

Mr Spence brought together a group including representatives of the hospital, Dundee City Council who have been instrumental in improving the bus stance area at the site, and representatives of the private contractor Vinci Park, who operate parking on site.

It is their report that will go to today’s meeting of the board of NHS Tayside. Members will be asked to approve the recommendations which include continuing the existing “compassionate permit arrangements” but extending that to make available additional free permits for patients who are required to attend “on a regular, frequent basis.”

The Spence review focused on providing solutions to increasing complaints from patients and visitors who were finding it increasingly difficult to find parking spaces close to the main entrance of the hospital.

In addition, the review considered the case of those attending for regular treatment and tackled abuse of disabled spaces by non-disabled drivers.

The group believes their recommendations will improve access for disabled drivers attending the hospital and that disabled drivers will be prepared to pay for that improved access. The plan is to phase in the proposals over six months, starting next month.

In his foreword to the report, Mr Spence makes clear the proposals will not be a long-term solution to the parking crisis.

“This (report proposals) has the potential to relieve some of the pressure but it is clear that the attendance levels within the site are such that management measures will be overtaken in early course by the continued demand for access from the public alone.

“To meet these pressures, and to allow those attending for treatment reasonably adequate access, additional parking adjacent and close to the hospital is strategically necessary.”

Last night SNP MSP and shadow health spokeswoman Shona Robison welcomed the proposed extension of the compassionate parking permit scheme but was concerned about charging disabled people. She said, “I am concerned about the potential impact of proposals to charge disabled drivers for parking at the hospital. While I accept that there may have been abuse of the disabled parking scheme at Ninewells, I remain to be convinced that charging all disabled drivers for parking is the best way to address this problem.”

“It should be possible to enforce reasonable time limits on disabled parking without resorting to the introduction of charges. Many disabled people are on fixed incomes and this proposal will penalise those who play fairly under the current rules.”

Council planning and transportation convener Councillor Fiona Grant said, “Dundee City Council made no direct contribution to the parking charging policy of NHS Tayside. Dundee City Council was asked to join the Ninewells group to give advice about the improvements to the public transport infrastructure to encourage more people to use buses and also other schemes like car sharing and cycle routes.”

Councillor Nigel Don, councillor for the Ninewells ward and SNP group transportation spokesman, welcomed the move to shake up parking arrangements—but warned there could be “worrying” implications for the effect the proposals may have on parking in surrounding residential areas, writes Graeme Cleland.

“If it is true that those using the car parks at Ninewells are treating them as a kind of ‘park and ride’ then these proposals make sense and should act as a deterrent,” he said. “If they are wrong then I question the overall logic of these plans because there are not going to be any more spaces or less cars wishing to use them. They will simply be moving them around.”

* A Dundee councillor last night said the Ninewells Hospital car parking charges proposals were tantamount to a charge for a service that is supposed to be free at the point of delivery, write Bryan Kay and Brian Allison.

Neil Powrie said he was of the view that charging patients and visitors for parking should be made illegal.

“I am vehemently opposed to any car parking charges for any hospital in Scotland for patients and visitors,” he said.

“It is immoral and thoroughly sickening. It is nothing more than a tax on being ill. The National Health Service is free at the point of delivery but we are now having to pay through the nose to get to the point of delivery.”

Mr Powrie said he had undergone cancer treatment at Ninewells a few years ago and had to make regular visits to the complex over a protracted period of time.

Had he not been provided with a disabled parking pass because of the arduous nature of the treatment, it would have cost him several hundred pounds in parking charges.

“There are people who are having to pay hundreds of pounds in parking charges over the course of their treatment and that is morally indefensible,” he said.

“The same applies to people who are visiting relatives in hospital for long periods of time and are facing a substantial outlay in parking charges.”

A number of staff members reacted angrily to the charges.

A university employee based at Ninewells said, “It will affect me when I have to take the car to work. Normally I get dropped off. I don’t have a fob (staff pass) so have to park in the non-staff designated areas.

“We have to park where we can get spaces—you can’t always get one faraway. So I think £15 is a bit extortionate.

“Even visitors from out-of-town, or quite a distance away, may be coming to park up for the day to be with someone for most of the day. It’s not fair on them either. What I would say is that we need more spaces.”

A student nurse said she thought staff were being unfairly punished for a lack of spaces.

Another student nurse added, “Why do they have a former chief constable at the head of the panel proposing this. Would it not be better if patients, nurses, staff and doctors who know and use the system were the people to decide?

“These proposals are outlandish, far too expensive.”

Janet Williams, from Cupar, said, “I think it’s a disgrace that there should be any charges for parking at all.”

Anne Adams, from Stonehaven, said, “I think for regular users of the car park, such as people receiving chemotherapy, radiotherapy etc, there should be a reduced price ticket.”

Greg MacPhail, from Dundee, said, “I think it’s ridiculous. I wouldn’t have thought people using the car park to park then go into town is a huge problem. They should provide proper parking for their staff, then there wouldn’t be a problem with them using visitor and patient car parks.

“Disabled people shouldn’t have to pay anything for parking, it’s a disgrace.”

Gordon Robertson, from Dundee, agreed with the four-hour limit.

He said, “I think it’s a good idea to put a limit on the time they can park for. They should stand at the bus stops in the morning and catch the people abusing it.”

Margaret Robertson, from Dundee, added, “I don’t think disabled people should pay at all.”

William MacAndrew, from Perth, said, “I don’t think disabled people should have to pay anything. They pay for their blue badges so why should they have to pay for anything else?”

Meanwhile, city council finance convener Fraser Macpherson said he was concerned by what were sharp increases.

“It is essentially a tax on needing to attend hospital or visit a loved one who is ill—and the outline detail being proposed for Ninewells is deeply concerning.”

Dundee West MSP Kate Maclean added, “One obvious worry is that patients who have to stay for over four hours due to delayed appointments will then have to go through a bureaucratic process to avoid paying a huge sum for parking…

“I will also be seeking assurances from NHS Tayside that staff will not have to pay more for parking.”