Coastal Fairness at Stake: Councillor Warns of "Two-Tier System" Over Public Toilet Charges

The ongoing debate surrounding the future of public conveniences on the Yorkshire Coast continues with local representatives warning that delays in standardising fees are creating a "two-tier system" that unfairly penalises coastal residents.

While North Yorkshire Council recently postponed a decision on introducing a county-wide fee for the use of public toilets, Hunmanby Councillor Michelle Donohue-Moncrieff has voiced strong concerns that the current lack of a unified policy is leaving communities in Scarborough and Filey at a disadvantage.

The controversy follows a North Yorkshire Council review of its network of 93 public toilets—the largest of its kind in the UK—which currently costs the authority an estimated £230,000 annually. Under proposed plans, a consistent entry fee of either 40p or 50p would be introduced at all sites to fund essential maintenance and a capital improvement programme aimed at bringing all facilities up to a "good" or "excellent" standard by 2030. However, the proposal was deferred from a recent executive meeting to allow for further scrutiny and consideration of amendments. Some councillors had also expressed a view that the toilets should be made free to use across the county

Councillor Donohue-Moncrieff argues that this delay in making a decision ignores the reality already facing residents on the coast where toilet fees are already in place. Expressing her frustration with the current state of affairs, she stated:

"If the status quo remains, we will have a two-tier system where people that use a to public toilet in Scarborough and Filey pay and in other parts of the county they don't pay. That is not fair.

It is easy saying make everything free, but at the moment, every time that decision is delayed, it is unfair on those people in those communities as well who have to pay to use these services."

The proposed standardisation has met stiff resistance from other quarters, notably the "free to pee" campaign spearheaded by Councillor Keane Duncan, who describes the potential charges as an "unjust" tax on a basic public service. Cllr Duncan and other members of the ruling Conservative and Independents group successfully lobbied for the postponement, arguing that the full impact on local communities and the potential increase in car parking charges to subsidise the toilets must be carefully weighed.

Yet, for those managing facilities on the ground, the financial uncertainty is a growing burden. Councillor Donohue-Moncrieff highlighted that some parish councils took over the running of toilets with the specific understanding that they could use fees to offset maintenance costs. She criticised the political pushback as being out of touch with the practical needs of the coastal region:

"Every time that decision is delayed, it is unfair on those people in those communities who have to pay to use these services. Also unfair on the parishes who took over toilets on the understanding that they could charge in order to offset the cost.

So fairness is an interesting concept depending on where you live.

So it's easy to go on Facebook and say I've stopped this. You haven't. You've made it more unfair for people on the coast and that's not acceptable."

The urgency of the situation is underscored by the physical condition of many facilities. In Filey, the public toilets and an adjacent café on Royal Parade were recently forced to close due to "serious structural issues" exacerbated by age and heavy rainfall. Gary Fielding, the council's corporate director of resources, noted that the site had suffered from "years of underinvestment" prior to being inherited by the new unitary authority.

Similarly, in Scarborough, a resident poll conducted by the Scarborough United group found that "new loos" were the joint top priority for local people, alongside the revitalisation of empty shops. Residents expressed concern that a lack of public facilities forced a reliance on local businesses, such as Marks and Spencer or the library, which Michelle Richardson of the residents' group noted should not be the case for those wishing to "spend a penny" in the town.

While Executive Member for Managing our Environment, Councillor Richard Foster, maintains that the proposed fees will lead to "major improvements" and help the council achieve its goal of a net-zero carbon neutral service, the political divide remains.