Here are Neil Dent's comments on this issue:

'I am one of those uneducated, or so implied the educated Aldo Portelli (The Sunday Times, May 18). I refer to his comments on the subject of Residents Only parking schemes that are springing up in so many localities.

'Mr Portelli distinctly and clearly disapproves of (sic) The Sunday Times' campaign against this illegal practice. Good for him and his distinct and clear disapproval. It is undoubtedly his absolute right to comment, as it is mine.

'Mr Portelli says I contradicted myself in my initial contribution to this campaign. Perhaps he misinterpreted my mild, uneducated sarcasm regarding my own parking dilemma, as a wish to gain the same status as the more privileged road taxpayers in Ta' Xbiex, and not to offend so many other localities.

'Had I wished to contradict myself, I would have taken the precise course he suggested and harangued Msida council, taking along my neighbours for good measure to also adopt such an illegal scheme, in spite of having already expressed my feelings against it. Now that would surely be a selfish contradiction, would it not?

'What does Malta joining the EU have to do with this? Major cities and town centres? Is he referring to Ta' Xbiex or some other Maltese metropolis? I'm sure Ta' Xbiex, like other localities, enjoys an abundance of empty parking spaces during daytime - precisely the time when this illegal restriction is in effect. Why?

'It's a residential area, that's why. People leave to go to work in the morning (and park, hopefully legally, in another locality), to return in the late afternoon or evening, by which time the illegal restriction is no longer in force. However that is simply not the point. The point is that public roads, precisely as the term suggests, belong to the taxpaying public, without exception and regardless of where they reside.

'And what of the dismal and inhumane picture Mr Portelli portrays of Malta, where without any illegal parking schemes, "the elderly are trapped within their home" for fear of losing "their parking space". Is it their parking space? What legal right do other taxpaying individuals who callously invade that particular locality with the flimsy excuse of making an honest living have?

'If one has the financial means, one can buy a garage, or a private parking space. Many cannot afford it, so they have to park in the street, as is their legal right. What one definitely cannot do is claim, partially or wholly, an area of public land, such as a parking space on a public thoroughfare, just because it happens to be in the vicinity of one's home. Not even local council officials, whose sole responsibility is to serve their constituents without exception, have the legal right to break the law.

'The choice to use the words 'illegal' and 'break the law' is purely my own, but I would refer readers to a legal precedent in this matter, as highlighted in a letter by Anthony Mizzi (The Times, May 19), referring to Case No. 949/2004 in which Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco found "a particular local council" had acted ultra vires by imposing a residential parking scheme, deeming it as "effectively discriminating between Maltese citizens who live in different parts of the island", and finding that "fines imposed for such interventions should be waived".

'Where does the government stand on this, I must ask?'

Since this issue is becoming rather heated, I must add Edwin Zaffarese's thoughts on the matter:

'Having read the articles published over the past two weeks, may I point out that this parking practice is illegal. In fact, there were instances when I was fined when parked in these 60 minutes/resident parking spaces, and upon presenting my petition to the Petitions Board, these contraventions were waived.

'In support of our request, we cited a court sentence delivered by Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco on January 31 (Case No. 949/2004, in the names of Maria Victoria and Joseph Borg vs the mayor and executive secretary on behalf of Pietà council.

'The sentence declares that the imposition of the reserved zone for residents is ultra vires and of preferential measure, and accepted the request to have the contravention declared null and without effect.

'A copy of this sentence can be obtained from the court's website or from the customer care section of the local council department.

'However, what amazes me most is the fact that this sentence was delivered over a year ago and still we have local councils breaking the law. I would presume that both the government and local councils are aware of the sentence.' (Edwin Zaffarese)