To think this is a fair change to the Motability scheme...

[BusyBumbling]

BBC News - 'Premium' cars like BMW and Mercedes cut from Motability scheme
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9znkxq47xo

It's still supporting disabled people with the cost of owning a car whilst also supporting the British car industry. I think public opinion has been listened to on both sides and this seems very sensible.
It may also reduce some of the costs of the grants paid from the scheme which were helping fund the upfront cost for premium cars for poorer claimants.

@MarbleHunt
I spend much of my time reading economic reports so can’t remember where every statistic has come from but your claims here have been manifestly false as any glance at the data will show you.

What you say you want is good quality debate informed by facts, and how you behave is general character abuse (not specifically to me, but your posts here are littered with complaints about the stupidity and jealousy and economic illiteracy of others), spurious tangents (the first few of your numbered points rebut claims I haven't made), appeal to authority/knowledge (I spend lots of time reading stuff but can't remember where) and partial presentation of the data you do provide.

Let's step back and do this carefully:

The claim you made that I questioned: "disability benefits are broadly in line with the levels they have been at since the 1970s as a proportion of GDP".

I provided an OBR source, with link, for data that shows disability benefits rising from 0.2% to 1.6% of GDP. The precise thing you are making a claim about (though it only goes back to 1986). If you think something happened between the 1970s and 1986 then let's look at that. That's not what you did though.

In return you paste screenshots that you think contradict this. The mature way to proceed is: this other data says something different, let's work out why. Is it measuring the same thing? Is it a difference in sources, etc. Instead you went straight for the line that my stats are obviously false as anyone would know at a glance. I think this is bad faith from you, or bad reading.

From the parliamentary report you yourself screenshotted: "There have been significant rises in both disability and incapacity benefits". Again, disability benefits. The thing you make the claim about.

From your own chart: working age disability benefits up from about 0.2% to 1% of GDP since 2000. All work-related health-related benefits up from 1.3% to 2%.

The data you yourself chose don't support the point you made. You've added in various other claims that rebut points I wasn't making. OBR says seven-fold increase since 1986, Parliamentary report says four-fold increase since 2000. Neither supports your claim.

I think you need to get off your high horse about other people's ignorance and numerical illiteracy, and practice what you preach a bit more.

The taxes we pay services government debt. That's before you get to the massive and still growing welfare spending. Taxes have risen and have hit SMEs all over the place, minimum wage workers are being let go, but they don't matter to you as long as the rich are taxed to the point of leaving the country, thus taking all the jobs away with them, henceforth more jobs lost.

Who needs economic prosperity when the triers and the doers are totally put off from ever investing again?

Completely unreasonable. A premium car costs the disabled person more, no one else. What you’re saying is Disabled people must live limited lives. They shouldn’t be allowed to pay a little more up front for a better car. You want to penalise people for being disabled.

You need to understand the costs of being disabled. If you need both a wheelchair and a car you only get one of these on Motability - not both. The NHS doesn’t cover much at all for some common conditions. There is no NHS care pathway for Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos (it almost always affects women). I have had to pay for Physio and Chiro all my adult life, even on minimum wage. I had to pay for brain and spine surgery - most people have to go abroad for this. It has taken me 6 years post spine fusion to get an NHS wheelchair and 8 years since I couldn’t walk. I have had to buy so many Orthotics for my spine, hips, shoulders, knees, ribs, elbows, ankles, feet… because they can all dislocate easily.

Grants aren’t awarded for high end specs or premium brands unless it’s the only thing available to meet the needs of the disabled person whether that’s headroom in a van for a permanent wheelchair user or space to add in all the driving controls they need. It is incredibly rare for grants to be awarded for anything but cheap brands and basic specs.

But why should she qualify if she doesn't need anything specifically for the car and she's unable to drive it? How is it different for her to be a passenger in the car with you and a passenger in a bus or taxi with you?

They can use the money to finance a car. Maybe slightly subsidised but it shouldn't be in the same categeory as ones with adaptations and a true need besides 'privacy'.

Motability car owners get free MOT, road tax, etc.

As a mind reader, you are not much good!

No, tax evasion bothers me far more, than PIP on Motability cars, which I see as immaterial in the context of government spending!

France have a scheme whereby disabled people don’t get cars, but they’re entitled to free taxis, which the government pays for. It costs an absolute fortune and there have been massive taxi strikes this year because the government are threatening to cut the money they pay to taxi drivers. It is far cheaper to lease a car for £77 a week than allow unlimited taxis.

And surely you can understand why parents of disabled children would find it challenging to use public transport? Can you understand that a child having a seizure on a bus would be far more difficult to deal with than in a car?

If leasing a car and letting the parent act as an unpaid chauffeur is the cheapest, most practical solution then that is what we should do. It would be spiteful to do anything else, as well as far more expensive.

A passenger in whose car? You seem to have missed the point. The mobility part of PIP is designed to alleviate some (not all) of the staggering costs of transport for disabled over 16s in the UK. Do you expect your own parents to provide a vehicle and drive you to work or college? Disabled people are not some sort of sub humans forever to be cared for by their parents.

I see tax evasion as a moral imperative, to be perfectly honest. Because tax is theft, regardless of the form it comes in. With higher taxation comes struggle, with struggles comes anger, anger will compel anyone to hide money away.

I have a DD with epilepsy. She’s under the top specialist centres - which used to mean travelling into London to go to Great Ormond Street, or now as an adult, the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery next door.

We’d have to get a taxi to the station, a train into London and then another taxi to the hospital for three of us. At any point, on that journey, she could have a seizure, wet herself (because there is a limit to what any incontinence pants can hold) and be unconscious for several hours. How do you get an unconscious adult off a train, down the platform, queue for a taxi and then get into the taxi? How do you change the wet clothes of an unconscious adult on a train? You’d also have to leave the train seat covered in urine. Train platforms are a hazard in themselves - she could run off (because she doesn’t see why she should do anything anyone says), have a seizure and fall onto the tracks!

Once, she fell down unconscious in a seizure, outside the mainline terminus and refused to get off the ground. Luckily, a passing ambulance picked her up and gave her a lift to the hospital. Another time, she fell down unconscious in the hospital and was screaming her head off with pain - we had to take her to A & E at UCLH instead.

It is much less stressful to drive into London in her Motability car, even though parking in Central London is no picnic.

Social Services and the ICB both accept, it is too stressful for one adult to take her out on their own.

@IDidntSayThatSorry if you don’t know why travelling with people with uncontrollable epilepsy is so difficult, why make comments on it?

The poster said she drives her daughter in her daughter's car. So it means she is always with her because her daughter doesn't drive. So what's the difference between being always with her in the car and being always with her in a taxi or bus? Same thing except for privacy.

Why not go and live in a developing country then where you’ll pay little/no tax. Surely you don’t want to enjoy the spoils of a developed nation without expecting to pay for it?

Can you understand that a child having a seizure on a bus would be far more difficult to deal with than in a car?

I disagree. It would be easier and safer to have an episode in a bus or taxi than if it was just her and her mum was driving.

Having an episode would mean her mum needs to quickly find a parking spot to attend to her and/or call 999. Before then, she'd be distracted causing her to not be safe on the road with ither drivers.

On the other hand, if she were to have an episode on the bus, this wouldn't be the case as her mum would be able to tend to her immediately and she or others would call 999 immediately while the bus/taxi drivers are still paying attention on the road.

So what you've said isn't correct.

Because my roots are here. My family is here. My ancestors built and cultivated where I was born. I'm not giving all that up because some morons decided to replace one incompetent party with an even more incompetent party in haste.

I have no issue paying for things I and my family benefit from. If we are to have a ruling class of coke-addled elite scum, all they need to do is empty the bins. That's it. Empty the bins and piss off.

Edit, quoted wrong post.

"I disagree. It would be easier and safer to have an episode in a bus or taxi than if it was just her and her mum was driving."

Do you know her daughter and have personal experience supporting her when she has an episode?

if you don’t know why travelling with people with uncontrollable epilepsy is so difficult, why make comments on it?

Who says that I don't know? I know that it's difficult. I just don't agree that it's more difficult than with public transport except for privacy reasons. I'm not exactly against people with disabilities having privacy in vehicles but I don't believe it should be a given or criteria to qualify for motability.

Just privacy?

• The leased car will be much cheaper than taxis. I have a relative with stage 4 cancer who has to travel to his nearest cancer centre twice a week. £77 wouldn’t cover one round trip. People on PIP pay for their own fuel too.
• What if PP’s daughter had a seizure on the bus or in the taxi? That could impact all the passengers if medical assistance were needed. Imagine if she emptied her bladder in a taxi. It would result in a hefty cleaning charge and the taxi driver may lose the rest of his day’s pay.
• Many disabled people wouldn’t be able to use a bus.
• What about all the other trips aside from hospital appointments? Getting to and from work, shopping, visiting family and friends. How far do you think £77 a week will stretch on taxis?
• Look at the money that local councils spend on transporting children with disabilities and learning difficulties to and from school (on average £9,000 per year per child) If possible, it’s far preferable to pay £4,000 a year and give the parent access to a vehicle in which they can do the school run.

I reckon the taxpayer is getting a good deal on their £77 a week when you consider the cost of the alternatives. Obviously it would be far cheaper to just let disabled people remain incarcerated in their homes with no access to medical care, but surely you wouldn’t advocate for that scenario?

Having an episode would mean her mum needs to quickly find a parking spot to attend to her and/or call 999. Before then, she'd be distracted causing her to not be safe on the road with other drivers.

Do you disagree with this? If so, why?

Ahh so your question is really “why does a disabled epileptic need to use a car at all?” You feel it might be perfectly possible for her to always use public transport?
I don’t know the posters with the epileptic daughter but have some understanding of the challenges that individual might face as my own adult son is epileptic. Here (rural town in uk) we don’t have buses that run door to door. It’s a mile walk along a road without pavement to the bus stop and two buses to get ds from home to college. He can’t go independently and would need me (mum) or a support worker (£20ph and VERY hard to find) to go with him. It might take 45 mins. So £40 a day. If he had a seizure on route (more likely when cold or hot and exerting yourself for mine) he would need a taxi home at the bare minimum but more likely an ambulance to hospital and then I would have to miss a days work and obviously drive to get him plus he would likely not be able to attend college for the next day (given the journey has triggered a seizure).

Trust me, me rearranging my work schedule to allow me to drive him to school is NOT a luxury experience.

There's no need for insults. It's nasty and a personal attack. You don't know anything about me. If you think I sound clever but you disagree with me still, that's fine. I never said that - you did. I'm simply posting on a chat forum.

I didn't attack you, I didn't call you anything. I just stated that your posts are ignorant as you clearly don't understand the subject matter at all. I am just stating the obvious. 🤷

You did and you still are. Passive aggressive insults are still insults - perhaps you think you're clever enough to make snide rude remarks. But if that makes you feel better. Perhaps you have nothing else to say about the issue than resort to making adhominem attacks. Carry on. You're doing great.