Motability cars - should they be UK made?

[Pandersmum]

Motability cars are currently in the news with suggestions VAT will be added. I realise they are a lifetime to some and a perk to others. They are a huge annual cost to the tax payer.

AIBU to think that all motability car choice should be limited to those manufactured in the UK? This would support British manufacturing worker jobs and increase UK business tax revenue whilst still providing cars for those who need them?

I am a few years off but I feel your fear. I hope it goes ok for you

Dear OP and the 40% agreeing with her/him/whatever.

Generally 20% of people don't understand the question.

And more generally 5% just don't understand.

I work for a converter of cars to wheelchair accessible Motability cars. There are specific structural needs for some people, so limiting the cars to UK made only would cause problems.

Our most popular conversion at the moment is French, for engineering reasons.

That is simply not true.

I do believe there should be a reform of the current benefit system, but I also believe that there are some people who should be given more support - both financial and public services support. It is not all about taking things away.

But the harsh reality is that the government does not have the finances via current taxation system to fund everyone’s current level of need. A ‘need’ which is expected to grow exponentially over the next few years.

This therefore requires all of us to think a little differently about the future funding of the country.

Its not expected to grow exponentially.

Concorde 😀

Depends what people mean by exponential, really. And I will suggest that more people mean something by saying it than they know by saying it.

Remember the basic level of maths in the UK.

I recon you have no 'need'? You realise that you and your family are just one accident away of being in 'need'. It's all well lecturing people that they get too much when it's not your life and when you have no lived experience of not being able to work/work full time because of illness/disability and caring responsibilities. You realise that carers who are often forced to give up work are e.g. just paid £83 in exchange for full time caring?

How would the government thinking differently and reducing disability benefits affect you personally?

Err, no.

Motability cars help provide jobs whatever country they come from.

I work at a citroen dealership and a hell of a lot of our business comes from the sale and servicing of motability cars. Couldn't even see us surviving if they took away motability from us. So that would be me and all my colleagues out of a job.

And FYI, I speak and deal with motability customers on a daily basis. For most, their cars are a lifeline. Cars that can be adapted, have wheelchair provision, etc.

So I'm massively pro motability.

It's always the same undercurrent on these threads. It's ok to be disabled, and to have a little help, but not to the degree it makes others feel you're getting something they'd really like. So if there is a car, it should be a Robin Reliant. Or at least have a visual acknowledgement the car has not been earned by "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps" and "making sacrifices down to the bones of our arses".

Anyway, I'm off to take my Nanna for a drive down Southend Seafront to show off her new wheels. I'll be towing her wheelchair in the sports car, as it doesn't fit in the boot.

other posters…. If search the OP’s posts… you’ll be in no doubt of the OP’s position on benefits and PIP

And this thread is entirely in keeping with posting history

The thing is the vast vast majority of people who are claiming disability benefits would swap their benefits for a disability free life in a heartbeat.

I would love to be excited for what the future holds for DS as he finishes his GCSES but instead I am worried about fighting the LA for suitable provision for post 16 and then worrying what the future will hold beyond that, especially with a not too small minority of the country believing he doesn’t deserve to be supported

It's always the same undercurrent on these threads. It's ok to be disabled, and to have a little help, but not to the degree it makes others feel you're getting something they'd really like.

Added to an ever nagging attitude that the disabled should really be happy with their lot. As someone once said to a friend, "You're disabled so I don't have to be".

Whatever happened to global Britain?

Seriously, restricting to UK made only favours the people who work there (few) to the detriment of everybody else (many).

Trade is good.

Excellent. Another day, another outrageous disabled benefits bashing thread by a poster who has extracted a ludicrous suggestion from their fundamental oriphice without having any relevant knowledge or expertise on the subject and without doing any basic research, or even giving it a few moments consideration. It isn't as unbelievably ableist and hateful as the thread that recommended removing disabled children from their families and forcably detaining them in large state-run institutions, the OP of that one can rest easy in still retaining their title of most horrifying thread of the year!
Other posters have explained eloquently why this is a particularly fatuous plan, the fact that cars made in the UK are usually quite expensive so the OP's avowed aim of saving 'tax-payer's money' is not going to be served by this idea. Also, of course, what will be of less interest to the ableist posters on here who clearly do not care about the welfare of disabled people, it is doubtful that vehicles manufactured in the UK could entirely cater for the complex and diverse needs of people who use the motibility scheme to lease cars.
It has also been argued that it is wrong to deny disabled people as much choice than their non-disabled peers, though I see that this argument is likely not to hold much water with the kind of posters on here who seem to think that disabled people, including children, should only be given the very basics they need to subsist and that any disabled person having any enjoyment at all is a sign that they are getting too much money, regardless of if the poster actually knows where their money comes from.
Also, as has been noted on here countless times, PIP is a non means-tested benefit. This means you can work full time and still receive it, I do. The fact that some of us lazy PIP scroungers are also poor hard-working tax payers must blow the minds of some on here!
Also, as previously mentioned, motibility vehicles are not 'free', the recipient has to give up their mobility component of PIP to receive it and usually have to put down a non-refundable down payment to access the vehicle which meets their needs. These vehicles are also leased, not owned, and have to be given back after three years at which time they are sold.
Not that the ableist bigots on any of these threads are interested in facts, it gets in the way of their demonisation and dehumanisation of the disabled. I feel sorry for these people in a way, perhaps their othering of disabled people is to convince themselves that it could never happen to them, and to help them forget that they and their loved ones are only temporarily non-disabled and that a single accident or illness separates them from the life they are wishing on those of us with disabilities.
I am also sure that the posters on this thread would love disabled people to be forced to drive around in cars with some kind of symbol on the side so that everyone knows they are in receipt of disability benefits and that this car has been generously provided by the Great British tax payer. In fact, I have seen this exact thing being seriously suggested on MN threads many times, so it is not a joke, though I sincerely wish it were! Perhaps these same people would also like those in receipt of disability benefits to wear some kind of badge bearing an easily identifyable symbol so that members of the public will know who they are and can tell them off when they see them frittering away hard-working tax-payers money on things they deem to be frivolous and unnecessary.
I think there was an example in relatively recent history of a regime which denoted certain 'undesirable' groups by forcing them to wear an identifying mark, I can't remember the exact details but am sure it all ended very well.

It's the whole "history going backwards" thing. We've now left the 20th century (via the 1970s) and are now heading to the 1830s and repealing the corn laws. Undoing all the social advancement since.

Just wait until we get past 1215 and the absolute power of the state is restored.

Ooh. Does that mean we can start burning people at the stake again? Iron maiden manufacturers will be pleased too. And rack makers. All good for British industry.

There’s been a big surge in these kinds of posts lately — a real tidal wave of resentment aimed at the poor, the vulnerable and the disabled. Social media algorithms thrive on anger and outrage, and certain groups are only too happy to stoke the fire for political gain. People are being encouraged to punch down instead of questioning those at the top and, as usual, it’s those at the bottom who end up paying the price.

Here is another disabled benefits bashing thread, predictably filling up quickly with dozens of awful posts, using such discriminatory and hateful language about disabled adults and children that it is a deep shame on the MN authorities that these comments have once again been allowed to stand. Were similarly outrageously offensive comments made about any other group on here I am confident they would be swiftly removed. However, apparently, the MN mods are completely cool with even extreme ableism and will not lift a finger to moderate it.
In fact, by allowing countless of these tediously, predictable ableist threads to be posted multiple times a day they are making it clear that MN endorses such views, not just tolerates them.
Their failure to delete the post advocating for the forced segregation and detention of disabled people, including children, to which I alluded in my previous post, a post which was blatant in its contempt for the lives and welfare of disabled people and which carried clear overtones of eugenics, is the clearest sign possible that the MN mod team and therefore, by extension, the powers that be, tacitly subscribe to such extreme views.
I know many posters complained about that post and were all met with a shrug of the shoulders by mods. My reply said that the suggestion of locking up disabled children was an unorthodox one but that it did not breach community standards. If the mods think that advocating depriving disabled people of their liberty is merely a quirky idea and not a horrifyingly disturbing one then that sends a very clear message to disabled posters that we are neither safe nor welcome on this site.
I will not forget the silence of the mods in tackling ableism on here and nor should other disabled posters. It needs to be called out on every revolting thread like this, even though doing so is incredibly frustrating and draining. Bigots must not be allowed to spread their ignorant bile unchallenged.

Does that mean we can start burning people at the stake again?

It won't be too long. Eventually a firebombed hostel will have someone inside it.

Some very personal attacks on here.

I am ND and do not claim PIP as can manage without it (I have also never tried to claim so have not personally been through the process). Yes that makes me fortunate. I am also a problem solver in my professional life.

So what happens when the UK govt cannot borrow any more money to continue servicing the National debt? Does this really not concern anyone? It genuinely concerns me.

Lucky me, getting such a perk. Who knew that having the inability to walk when I would like would result in receiving it. Given the choice I’d rather be able to put one foot in front of the other when I need to thanks.

If it makes you fortunate that you can manage without it, why describe motability cars as a perk?

You're also funding cars that teachers, doctors and university lecturers choose to buy with their tax payer funded salaries. Do you want to decide for them what they can buy? Or is it just disabled people who you get to choose for?
What about child benefit - do you want to decide what school clothes or Christmas presents people who receive child benefit can buy with it? Or again is it just disabled people who aren't allowed to make their own decisions?

They are a huge annual cost to the tax payer.

How?

Are you arguing that limiting the range of cars to choose from will save the taxpayer anything?

Or are you arguing that there should be no mobility element of PIP at all?

PIP costs the tax payer. Yes. All benefits do.

The mobility portion of PIP is the same whether you use it for a Motability vehicle, be that a WAV, a normal non-adapted car, or a wheelchair.

If I hand back my Motability scheme WAV tomorrow, the tax payer will see zero saving, I will still be in receipt of the mobility element of my PIP payment - currently, it all goes to Motability for my car.

How would limiting my choice (keeping in mind that I had the choice of one make/model in the first place, due to the size of my wheelchair) save the taxpayer?

If you're arguing there should be no mobility payment - that those of us who need a car or wheelchair on the motability scheme should get nothing toward that... erm. I don't actually know what to say to you, you want us all to stay inside our homes and never get out, go to work, do things?

Of course some people could use public transport, private hire cabs etc - lots of people can't. There are NO private hire cabs in my local area (small town) that have a wheelchair accessible minibus that will take my chair. None. Not a single one. This is not uncommon either, a friend in much larger city, has failed to find a single taxi firm that can take her in her powerchair too and she spent weeks phoning every single one!