COUNCILLORS fear a £30,000 study on car parking in Kirklees will be pointless.
They believe their efforts to examine parking problems throughout the area will be thwarted - because the council's ruling Cabinet has already vetoed some proposals.
A council scrutiny panel recommended last year that officials should study whether introducing parking charges in new areas of Kirklees would be feasible.
The idea was to see if parking problems could be controlled through charging.
They will look at parking problems - including traffic problems, safety issues and enforcement by traffic wardens - in 26 areas of Kirklees.
To find out what improvements could be made, they will send questionnaires to all 72 Kirklees councillors.
It will ask how people think improvements could be paid for - which could include introducing parking charges in town and village centres.
However, members of the council's Overview and Scrutiny Panel for Transport, who met yesterday, said the study seemed pointless.
The panel - Holme Valley South Clr Donald Firth, Heckmondwike Clr Peter Sykes and Newsome Clr Julie Stewart-Turner - said spending £30,000 on the study was a waste, because the council's Cabinet member for the environment and transport, Clr David Payne, had already said new car parking charges would not go ahead.
Clr Payne wrote in the Examiner last Monday, stating: "The idea of extending parking charges to new areas came from a scrutiny investigation led by a Labour councillor in Dewsbury, who resents the fact that parking in Batley is free.
"The Liberal Democrats lead the council in partnership with the Green Party, and for such a plan to be implemented we would have to introduce it.
"We shall not do so."
Clr Firth, Clr Sykes and Clr Stewart- Turner had their reservations about the study recorded. However, they had no power to scrap the plans.
Clr Sykes said: "Clr Payne said the plans weren't going to happen, so what's the point in officers getting public feedback? The decision has been made. I can't support this process. It would seem to be a waste of £30,000."
He added: "Parking charges are clouding the issue. If the panel had said to look at car parking across the district to see where they can be improved, who would argue with that?"
Clr Stewart-Turner also thought parking charges should not be the focus of the study.