Sir.-Cllr Stuart Parker believes that because there were only 128 responses to the consultation paper on parking policy, they should have little weight given to them when considering the matter because that number compares unfavourably against the 25,80 tickets issued every week (Gazette, January 7).

Following that thought process to its logical conclusion, because Cllr Parker and his Cabinet colleagues number eight out of a population of more than 150,000 we should clearly have no regard for them whatsoever.

Central government is strongly encouraging consultation at local level, which means that Cllr Parker and his colleagues should recognise the need to move away from the simplistic insistence on relating everything to figures and learn to take a broader view.

I believe the parking policy is a poor reflection on our council. It does not stand any form of intellectual analysis and gives the overall impression of a grasping administration intent on short-term and very limited revenue-raising at the expense of all else.

It raises a number of important and major issues, such as the New Road car park and the need to reduce reliance on the private car, but makes no effort to deal with them in depth and hides them behind a debate on the introduction of disabled parking charges.

The Cabinet system and the present balance of the council places a great personal responsibility on Cabinet members to fully reflect the needs of a balanced community.

The parking policy and the Cabinet response to it do not come anywhere near that standard.

The scrutiny committee response clearly reflects the view of the electorate, which should be recognised at full council and the lesson learned by Cabinet in future policy decisions.

-Paul Bailey, Basingstoke Road, Ramsdell.