Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Original poster

To think that Waverley Council ^shouldn't^ be charging

205 replies

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 07:57

Blue Badge holders to use a disabled parking space??!! Apparently they will get a concession of getting one hour extra for their money. Are Waverley council Tory by any chance??!! AIBU to think that this is well out of order?

OP posts:

borderslass · 30/09/2011 09:59

Hunty some people don't have a clue about the difficulties of being disabled brings you'll never change their opinion unfortunately.

Kladdkaka · 30/09/2011 10:00

Oh yeah, regarding the 'get on the bus' thing. There is a bus I could catch, up the end of my road, through the carpark. 3 minute walk away. Runs every half hour to the station. Station is a 3 minute walk from the shops.

So my husband can pop out for milk in 10 minutes but I'm restricted to taking over an hour. Well that seems equal.

aldiwhore · 30/09/2011 10:01

Not you personally hunty I should have made that clearer! A few comments that got my heckles up is all... kladdkaka for example, that comment in my opinion was below the belt. Its not disabled bashing, and I don't think anyone has overtly been rude, maybe there is some general ignorance, but in a discussion, people learn if you don't tar them as heartless bastards!!

I'm up for a discussion.

If I was a disabled person in Waverley I would be writing to the council with my concerns over moving from one unfair system (free parking for all blue badge holders whether they require the free element or not) to another (charging for all blue badge holders who may now have to face a choice of staying at home as they can't afford to use the spaces anymore).

Hunty Iaccept your point that charging for ALL, with no allowance for actual means testing/opt outs, could be unfair.

Faithless12 · 30/09/2011 10:01

I never said pregnancy equaled disability read it again, I said people who are disabled are stuck here due to this hill in the middle of the town. With parking either at the bottom or middle.

Either way heard of SPD? I'm sure that equals a disability which happens in pregnancy.

Original poster

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 10:02

I KNOW, Borders - BUT I'm not physically disabled in this sense, but I can still see how this will impact on people that ARE physically disabled. Empathy? Seems to be non-existant in some people these days? Very good quality to have, I would have thought?

OP posts:

Original poster

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 10:03

SPD, yes - but you didn't mention SPD - just that it took you 15 mins when you were pg. Can only go by what's typed.

OP posts:

VeryLittleGravitas · 30/09/2011 10:04

Hunty

I'm the one guilty of sarcasm and guilt-tripping, for which I make no apologies.

slavetofilofax · 30/09/2011 10:05

Faithless, pregnancy is a choice, and it doesn't last long. SPD is a consequence of your choice.

Disability is not a choice and it tends to last a lifetime.

You simply cannot compare the two.

Original poster

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 10:05

I think Waverley District Council is lacking in Empathy, for starters...

OP posts:

NorfolkBroad · 30/09/2011 10:07

I think that is very mean. It is very hard being disabled. My MIL is disabled and it is a nightmare getting from place to place. I think we have a duty to help people who already have a very challenging life and letting them park for free is nothing in the great scheme of things.

Original poster

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 10:09

^ What slavetofilofax said. My friend didn't choose to have her legs amputated when she had meningitis as a teenager. I didn't choose^ to get epilepsy. I DID however, make a choice to continue with my pg with DS3 despite knowing I was going to get SPD and hyperemesis.

VeryLittleGravitas - I readily apologise for sarcasm, as it is practically a default setting for me. .

OP posts:

aldiwhore · 30/09/2011 10:09

VeryLittleGravitas yes you are. Non apology accepted. But my defensiveness is not apologised for either. Now we're back on a level playing field eh?

I will concede that Waverley Council has not thought this through, though I do not think that every blue badge holder requires the free element of blue badge parking, if there is no opt out scheme, or means testing, or grade of blue badge, then yes, its unfair.

Original poster

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 10:09

Sorry, Italics FAIL there.

OP posts:

Sevenfold · 30/09/2011 10:11

yanbu
if people think it is only fair that disabled people pay to park.
then I think it is only fair that non BB become disabled

Original poster

CardyMow · 30/09/2011 10:12

At that one, Sevenfold. Even up the playing field!

OP posts:

Hardgoing · 30/09/2011 10:15

I think it's completely ridiculous to charge blue badge holders for parking in town centres. But then, I think it's ridiculous to charge anyone. I almost never go into towns with hardly any parking or charges to do my shopping now, I drive to out of town places with lovely big car parks where I can park for free. There was a programme on last night about why town centres are dying and have no shops in them: I would have thought the reason was staring them in the face.

VeryLittleGravitas · 30/09/2011 10:16

Why should BB/free parking be means tested? DLA isn't, and neither should it be.

These benefits exist to pay for the additional costs incurred through being disabled. they are a way of levelling the playing field, if you will, so that disabled people have the same rights and access as everyone else.

The costs involved with means testing far outweigh any potential savings.

slavetofilofax · 30/09/2011 10:19

The whole point to this arguement is that everyone should have the same opportunities. Other claver posters on here have taught me that equal opportunites has to be based on outcomes, because it is pointless giving two very differently abled people the same opportunity if there is no possible way that their outcomes will be the same. So sometimes, positive discrimination is neccesary.

BUT, true inclusion has to be based on need. If someone has a need to free parking because of the limitations of their disability, there is no question that they should be given it. If they don't need free parking to achieve the same outcomes because of their disability, then they should not be given it.

It is possible for non BB holders to have more need for free parking than BB holders.

slavetofilofax · 30/09/2011 10:20

at me mistyping clever!

Kladdkaka · 30/09/2011 10:22

kladdkaka for example, that comment in my opinion was below the belt.

No it wasn't. It's how I feel as a disabled person reading this thread. Every single week on this forum there is another thread attacking the perceived 'benefits' of being disabled. We are constantly having to justify ourselves. This is just another example of the same.

aldiwhore · 30/09/2011 10:23

Agree Slavetofilofax you said it better than I could.

My Granny didn't need the free element. My mate doesn't either. I accept there are others who absolutely require that.

NinkyNonker · 30/09/2011 10:24

Isn't it already differentiated? I may be wrong, but I've seen signs in car parks saying that the 'DISABLED MUST PAY' which I always thought was an unfortunate turn of phrase, unless they are road tax exempt?

Kladdkaka · 30/09/2011 10:25

Means testing for disabled parking. Publicly displaying your poor financial circumstances for all and sundry to see. I'm rather at some people's ideas of social inclusion. Perhaps we should all wear sackcloth and ashes, to avoid confusion. And a bell.

VeryLittleGravitas · 30/09/2011 10:26

Slave and Aldi

These benefits are not compulsary. If your granny/friend/the bloke next door feels they don't need them then they are under no obligation to claim.

Faithless12 · 30/09/2011 10:28

I really think you should read the re the hill in my town. I used the time it took for me to walk up it to show it is not an insignificant hill. This is hill cuts the town in half so most disabled people can't visit the nice local shops on the hill or at the top of it due to no disabled parking at the top of the hill.

Goodness knows what disabled people do for the hospital at one end which has about two parking spaces and there are a few spaces outside on the main road (which are always full unless you get there at 8am) and once again to get to this hospital there is a hill not so big this time but quite an incline...

Paying isn't the only issue and that was the point I was trying to make (possibly badly)

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9