Disabled motorists told they must pay for parking

The Northern Echo: Disabled motorists facing car park charges across Stockton borough Disabled motorists facing car park charges across Stockton borough

DISABLED people have been told "you must pay to park" by council bosses.

Previously. parking was free for Stockton’s blue badge holders. But thousands of disabled motorists across the borough have now discovered that they have to pay in car parks - although charges do not apply to street parking.

Disabled motorists can still park for free in Yarm High Street, where campaigners won concessions over the general pay and display scheme. However, they still apply in other car parks in Yarm.

It’s not known how much money Stockton council will raise from the new charges. When a similar plan was considered in Redcar it was anticipated £60,000 a year would be raised, although Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council eventually decided against the scheme.

Stockton Council’s cabinet agreed the charges in principle in December, 2011 but has held off introducing them. The fees apply to both general parking bays and those dedicated for disabled people.

A concession has been made to allow the time on blue badge holders’ tickets to over-run by one hour, as long as the blue badge is displayed properly.

Charges in short stay car parks in Stockton town centre are currently applied Monday to Saturday, between 8am and 6pm, and are £1 for two hours and £1 for each hour thereafter.

Councillor Mike Smith, Stockton Council’s cabinet member for regeneration and transport, said: “Charges for blue badge holders are part of the borough-wide car parking strategy that outlined how flexible parking tariffs, car parking promotions and parking management can support the economic development and regeneration aspirations for the borough.

“The blue badge scheme is related to disability rather than financial circumstances and consultation with the disability advisory group has been undertaken.

"Though current tariffs in Stockton town centre are £1 for two hours, tariffs for blue badge holders will be £1 for three hours thereby allowing a longer parking period to assist those with severe mobility problems.”

Kerry Morrison, chairwoman of the Parents for Change group, which helps families dealing with disability in neighbouring Middlesbrough, said the charges were a bad idea.

She said: “Everything is twice as expensive for parents with a disabled child anyway and anything which limits the mobility of that family is a bad thing.

"I appreciate they’re not charging for on-street parking, but you’ve got to think about access to health centres and doctors. It’s not just about shopping.

“Even getting a blue badge can be difficult for families dealing with disability. For a start we have children with severe difficulties who still haven’t been given an official diagnosis and can’t even get a blue badge.”

A spokeswoman for disability charity Scope said the organisation had recently published a report which found that disabled people pay a financial penalty on everyday living costs which amounted to £550 a month more. One in ten disabled people pay more than £1,000 extra per month on everyday living costs.

A blue badge is still listed as costing £10 on Stockton council’s website.

A similar policy was scheduled for the Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council area in 2012, however in the even the authority decided only to charge blue badge holders for parking in non-disabled bays after three hours.

Comments (39)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:43am Sun 4 May 14

Darkroom Devil says...

Maybe we need different coloured clocks which could be given to those holders who genuinely deserve free parking. You can be a millionaire and get free parking under the current system.
Maybe we need different coloured clocks which could be given to those holders who genuinely deserve free parking. You can be a millionaire and get free parking under the current system. Darkroom Devil
  • Score: 12

11:47am Sun 4 May 14

Darkroom Devil says...

Maybe we need different coloured clocks which could be given to those holders who genuinely deserve free parking. You can be a millionaire and get free parking under the current system.

Or how about shops doing the subsidised parking thing but for everyone, a bit like Morrisons in bishop but with say a maximum of 20p per shop per purchase so if you shop local you can get parking fees back ie butcher, baker, green grocer, pub lunch etc

Just a thought
Maybe we need different coloured clocks which could be given to those holders who genuinely deserve free parking. You can be a millionaire and get free parking under the current system. Or how about shops doing the subsidised parking thing but for everyone, a bit like Morrisons in bishop but with say a maximum of 20p per shop per purchase so if you shop local you can get parking fees back ie butcher, baker, green grocer, pub lunch etc Just a thought Darkroom Devil
  • Score: 0

11:50am Sun 4 May 14

Darkroom Devil says...

No idea where that first post came from.......
No idea where that first post came from....... Darkroom Devil
  • Score: -4

12:29pm Sun 4 May 14

Dragonqween says...

I am disabled and use the Blue badge scheme. I also get a paltry pension - £76 a week - so I rely on being able to park for free. Goodbye Stockton; I wont be coming again to you and it's pointless saying parking on the streets hasn't changed as all the parking spaces will have been taken up by those who would normally park in the carparks. :(
I am disabled and use the Blue badge scheme. I also get a paltry pension - £76 a week - so I rely on being able to park for free. Goodbye Stockton; I wont be coming again to you and it's pointless saying parking on the streets hasn't changed as all the parking spaces will have been taken up by those who would normally park in the carparks. :( Dragonqween
  • Score: -15

4:50pm Sun 4 May 14

oliviaden6 says...

Thin end of the wedge, hit the people who can least afford it and the people who need it the most, I will agree the system needs overhauling as there are people using badges who are not entitled to them and quiet frankly take the urine.
Thin end of the wedge, hit the people who can least afford it and the people who need it the most, I will agree the system needs overhauling as there are people using badges who are not entitled to them and quiet frankly take the urine. oliviaden6
  • Score: 5

6:33pm Sun 4 May 14

Libertarian Party (North) says...

Well I guess Bob Cook has to find the £26,000 for paying vice-chairmen their "special responsibility allowances" somehow, so it looks like he's chosen to rob the disabled.

See "Councillors accused of 'lining their own pockets' after voting to keep special allowances" - Gazette 2nd May 2014.

Time to get the Statist cabal out of Stockton, and replaced with real, ordinary people who do not need to be paid extra to take responsibility. Nobody should be paying to park in Stockton. If we want our shops and businesses to thrive, we should not be allowing the cost of peoples' business there to be increased by a Council-run, State sanctioned protection racket.
Well I guess Bob Cook has to find the £26,000 for paying vice-chairmen their "special responsibility allowances" somehow, so it looks like he's chosen to rob the disabled. See "Councillors accused of 'lining their own pockets' after voting to keep special allowances" - Gazette 2nd May 2014. Time to get the Statist cabal out of Stockton, and replaced with real, ordinary people who do not need to be paid extra to take responsibility. Nobody should be paying to park in Stockton. If we want our shops and businesses to thrive, we should not be allowing the cost of peoples' business there to be increased by a Council-run, State sanctioned protection racket. Libertarian Party (North)
  • Score: 13

9:18pm Sun 4 May 14

Mr bright side says...

Bloody disabled people, always winging about something, does your head in, frig the rest of us, us normal people who have to pay for things. I say give them back free parking, that way the big fat DLA check they get every month can be used on other things!
Bloody disabled people, always winging about something, does your head in, frig the rest of us, us normal people who have to pay for things. I say give them back free parking, that way the big fat DLA check they get every month can be used on other things! Mr bright side
  • Score: 5

8:06am Mon 5 May 14

darloboss says...

Mr bright side change your name to mr dim
what makes you normal ?
Mr bright side change your name to mr dim what makes you normal ? darloboss
  • Score: -4

11:55am Mon 5 May 14

Blankface says...

It's only bloody right that they should pay. If you don't want to pay use the bus that you get for free and stop whining about it.
It's only bloody right that they should pay. If you don't want to pay use the bus that you get for free and stop whining about it. Blankface
  • Score: 21

1:09pm Mon 5 May 14

Voice-of-reality says...

Society must protect those who truly deserve assistance. Clearly, therefore, blue badge holders should not have to pay for parking. In contrast councillors attending meetings at the town hall should have to pay. That Stockton is proposing this does not surprise me - the Labour Party always ultimately punishes the weakest - and does so 'safe in the knowledge' that those it claims to represent (but ultimately screws over) will continue to vote them in.
Society must protect those who truly deserve assistance. Clearly, therefore, blue badge holders should not have to pay for parking. In contrast councillors attending meetings at the town hall should have to pay. That Stockton is proposing this does not surprise me - the Labour Party always ultimately punishes the weakest - and does so 'safe in the knowledge' that those it claims to represent (but ultimately screws over) will continue to vote them in. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: -6

1:23pm Mon 5 May 14

Dragonqween says...

My so-called 'big fat DLA cheque' goes directly to Motability so I am able to get about and take my wheelchair with me. Without my DLA I would be stuck as I can't afford a car otherwise. Getting on and off a bus is extremely difficult - that is when one comes along AND has space for me!
My so-called 'big fat DLA cheque' goes directly to Motability so I am able to get about and take my wheelchair with me. Without my DLA I would be stuck as I can't afford a car otherwise. Getting on and off a bus is extremely difficult - that is when one comes along AND has space for me! Dragonqween
  • Score: 0

1:57pm Mon 5 May 14

Darlo Mother says...

Blue Badges give holders access to accessible bays and on street parking, never understood why it should be free to them.
Blue Badges give holders access to accessible bays and on street parking, never understood why it should be free to them. Darlo Mother
  • Score: 21

2:02pm Mon 5 May 14

stephen40 says...

I'm a disabled driver i think it's a DISGRACE AN OUTRAGE especially since we have to pay to get the blue badge in the first place. What's the point of having a blue badge any more.
I'm a disabled driver i think it's a DISGRACE AN OUTRAGE especially since we have to pay to get the blue badge in the first place. What's the point of having a blue badge any more. stephen40
  • Score: -24

2:07pm Mon 5 May 14

stephen40 says...

Mr bright side wrote:
Bloody disabled people, always winging about something, does your head in, frig the rest of us, us normal people who have to pay for things. I say give them back free parking, that way the big fat DLA check they get every month can be used on other things!
ARSEHOLE
[quote][p][bold]Mr bright side[/bold] wrote: Bloody disabled people, always winging about something, does your head in, frig the rest of us, us normal people who have to pay for things. I say give them back free parking, that way the big fat DLA check they get every month can be used on other things![/p][/quote]ARSEHOLE stephen40
  • Score: -11

2:15pm Mon 5 May 14

stephen40 says...

stephen40 wrote:
Mr bright side wrote:
Bloody disabled people, always winging about something, does your head in, frig the rest of us, us normal people who have to pay for things. I say give them back free parking, that way the big fat DLA check they get every month can be used on other things!
ARSEHOLE
Mr bright side if u think our DLA check is that big u want to try living off of it IDIOT.
[quote][p][bold]stephen40[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr bright side[/bold] wrote: Bloody disabled people, always winging about something, does your head in, frig the rest of us, us normal people who have to pay for things. I say give them back free parking, that way the big fat DLA check they get every month can be used on other things![/p][/quote]ARSEHOLE[/p][/quote]Mr bright side if u think our DLA check is that big u want to try living off of it IDIOT. stephen40
  • Score: -12

3:09pm Mon 5 May 14

rtjsnj2013 says...

I agree I think they should have to pay, everybody else has to.
I agree I think they should have to pay, everybody else has to. rtjsnj2013
  • Score: 21

4:24pm Mon 5 May 14

Libertarian Party (North) says...

rtjsnj2013 wrote:
I agree I think they should have to pay, everybody else has to.
Why should anybody have to pay to park in town? We all pay our Council Tax. If that is not enough for Town Hall, let them economise on yellow road paint and town hall Hitlers in the Parking Fine department. Our town needs prosperity, and forcing people to pay Parking Tax on top of their other costs of doing business in Stockton has a depressive effect on business success.

Enforcing a no-parking policy is also fraudulent. It is called Corporatism. Council uses Council Tax to prevent taxpayers from parking in places where there is no practical reason for them not to do so, at the same time forcing them to pay for parking in carparks run by large private corporations. This relationship between Council and Corporations is unhealthy to say the least, and should have an end put to it.
[quote][p][bold]rtjsnj2013[/bold] wrote: I agree I think they should have to pay, everybody else has to.[/p][/quote]Why should anybody have to pay to park in town? We all pay our Council Tax. If that is not enough for Town Hall, let them economise on yellow road paint and town hall Hitlers in the Parking Fine department. Our town needs prosperity, and forcing people to pay Parking Tax on top of their other costs of doing business in Stockton has a depressive effect on business success. Enforcing a no-parking policy is also fraudulent. It is called Corporatism. Council uses Council Tax to prevent taxpayers from parking in places where there is no practical reason for them not to do so, at the same time forcing them to pay for parking in carparks run by large private corporations. This relationship between Council and Corporations is unhealthy to say the least, and should have an end put to it. Libertarian Party (North)
  • Score: 8

4:34pm Mon 5 May 14

bambara says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
Society must protect those who truly deserve assistance. Clearly, therefore, blue badge holders should not have to pay for parking. In contrast councillors attending meetings at the town hall should have to pay. That Stockton is proposing this does not surprise me - the Labour Party always ultimately punishes the weakest - and does so 'safe in the knowledge' that those it claims to represent (but ultimately screws over) will continue to vote them in.
Oh and it started so well VOR, then you went off on a party political rant.

Indeed society should protect those who truly deserve assistance, which is what makes the cuts to benefits and the unequal cuts to council funding (which hit those councils with a greater number of those in need far harder than the wealthy councils with relatively few who need assistance) such an anti-social (sociopathic) act.
Remember the 10 most deprived areas of the country saw their funding cut by an average of 25% by this Tory government, while the cuts to the 10 wealthiest areas was 2.5%.
Cuts and Cuts and more cuts imposed from the Tory central government:
Cuts to funding (unequally applied to hit Labour councils harder than Tory councils)
Cuts to benefits, to hit the weak and defenceless.
Cuts to higher rate tax levels to make sure the rich do not have to cut back on the skiing holidays, bollinger and cocaine that they so desperately need to numb them from the harshness of their grim existance...
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Society must protect those who truly deserve assistance. Clearly, therefore, blue badge holders should not have to pay for parking. In contrast councillors attending meetings at the town hall should have to pay. That Stockton is proposing this does not surprise me - the Labour Party always ultimately punishes the weakest - and does so 'safe in the knowledge' that those it claims to represent (but ultimately screws over) will continue to vote them in.[/p][/quote]Oh and it started so well VOR, then you went off on a party political rant. Indeed society should protect those who truly deserve assistance, which is what makes the cuts to benefits and the unequal cuts to council funding (which hit those councils with a greater number of those in need far harder than the wealthy councils with relatively few who need assistance) such an anti-social (sociopathic) act. Remember the 10 most deprived areas of the country saw their funding cut by an average of 25% by this Tory government, while the cuts to the 10 wealthiest areas was 2.5%. Cuts and Cuts and more cuts imposed from the Tory central government: Cuts to funding (unequally applied to hit Labour councils harder than Tory councils) Cuts to benefits, to hit the weak and defenceless. Cuts to higher rate tax levels to make sure the rich do not have to cut back on the skiing holidays, bollinger and cocaine that they so desperately need to numb them from the harshness of their grim existance... bambara
  • Score: -1

5:59pm Mon 5 May 14

Voice-of-reality says...

Ah Bambara,
Once you more fail to see the larger picture - much of the reallocation of grants between councils was to offset the imbalance imposed under the last Labour adminsitration. There is also a sizeable difference from being born with a disability or befalling to one during life (and therefore needing life-time assistance) and deciding not to work or apply yourself.
All benefit claimants are supposed to inform the state when their circumstances change and the so called 'bedroom tax' merely brings the issue of housing into line with this.
Those who are truly sick deserve benefits - and if those who erroneously claim them are removed - there will be more money for the state to support those most in need.
Further, your comments on higher rate tax levels do not fully apply. You must remember that a majority of higher rate tax payers are merely hardworking professionals not the super-rich of whom you speak. The teacher who has worked for 12 years is now a higher rate tax payer - doesn't quite fit with your 'bollinger and cocaine' comment (though you may do a different type of teacher I suppose).
It is just as wrong for the very rich to avoid paying tax as it is for others to avoid by not declaring income, or claiming benefits they are not entitled to. Of course, we could always adopt the french model and just tax those who crteate emplyment opportunities more and more and more and more, until they leave, take the job creation opportunities with them, and deprive the exchequer of their own tax contribution and those that they formally employed. Persoanlly, I would rather celebrate wealth creation and its trickle down effect.
Ah Bambara, Once you more fail to see the larger picture - much of the reallocation of grants between councils was to offset the imbalance imposed under the last Labour adminsitration. There is also a sizeable difference from being born with a disability or befalling to one during life (and therefore needing life-time assistance) and deciding not to work or apply yourself. All benefit claimants are supposed to inform the state when their circumstances change and the so called 'bedroom tax' merely brings the issue of housing into line with this. Those who are truly sick deserve benefits - and if those who erroneously claim them are removed - there will be more money for the state to support those most in need. Further, your comments on higher rate tax levels do not fully apply. You must remember that a majority of higher rate tax payers are merely hardworking professionals not the super-rich of whom you speak. The teacher who has worked for 12 years is now a higher rate tax payer - doesn't quite fit with your 'bollinger and cocaine' comment (though you may do a different type of teacher I suppose). It is just as wrong for the very rich to avoid paying tax as it is for others to avoid by not declaring income, or claiming benefits they are not entitled to. Of course, we could always adopt the french model and just tax those who crteate emplyment opportunities more and more and more and more, until they leave, take the job creation opportunities with them, and deprive the exchequer of their own tax contribution and those that they formally employed. Persoanlly, I would rather celebrate wealth creation and its trickle down effect. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Mon 5 May 14

spragger says...

People holding a blue badge appear to have magical powers
I am told it is unsafe to park on double yellow lines but they park with impunity & stay safe

Now they do not have to pay for parking
What happened to equality?
Whats that?
Its only one way?
People holding a blue badge appear to have magical powers I am told it is unsafe to park on double yellow lines but they park with impunity & stay safe Now they do not have to pay for parking What happened to equality? Whats that? Its only one way? spragger
  • Score: 20

11:51pm Mon 5 May 14

bambara says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
Ah Bambara,
Once you more fail to see the larger picture - much of the reallocation of grants between councils was to offset the imbalance imposed under the last Labour adminsitration. There is also a sizeable difference from being born with a disability or befalling to one during life (and therefore needing life-time assistance) and deciding not to work or apply yourself.
All benefit claimants are supposed to inform the state when their circumstances change and the so called 'bedroom tax' merely brings the issue of housing into line with this.
Those who are truly sick deserve benefits - and if those who erroneously claim them are removed - there will be more money for the state to support those most in need.
Further, your comments on higher rate tax levels do not fully apply. You must remember that a majority of higher rate tax payers are merely hardworking professionals not the super-rich of whom you speak. The teacher who has worked for 12 years is now a higher rate tax payer - doesn't quite fit with your 'bollinger and cocaine' comment (though you may do a different type of teacher I suppose).
It is just as wrong for the very rich to avoid paying tax as it is for others to avoid by not declaring income, or claiming benefits they are not entitled to. Of course, we could always adopt the french model and just tax those who crteate emplyment opportunities more and more and more and more, until they leave, take the job creation opportunities with them, and deprive the exchequer of their own tax contribution and those that they formally employed. Persoanlly, I would rather celebrate wealth creation and its trickle down effect.
Oh I see the larger picture very well VOR, I see that the last Labour administration acted to provide a level playing field. they provided additional money to those councils which were most in need due to the levels of deprivation. They acted to even out the imbalance resulting from the inequality of the distribution of those in need.
"Deciding not to work or apply yourself" - Again demonising the poor VOR. Those who choose not to work, are a small minority, I grew up on a council estate, I go back to visit family and friends, I know the demographics by experience.
The bedroom tax merely brings housing into line with what precisely? It merely brings it into line with Tory sociopathic ideology, that is definately correct, it penalises those who are unable to move, that is correct. The cost of an average move is as has been highlighted previously £6000, where do you expect the victim of this vindictive little tory policy to find £6000? Now given that a lot of those who are the subject of the bedroom tax are old, or disabled and all of them are by definition poor, how do you expect them to find that money? But then given that it is equally likely that there is no available accomodation for them to move to that would not be subject to the tax it is doubly vindictive isn't it.
" Those who are truly sick deserve benefits" - Indeed they do, unfortunately they are subject to the same cuts that those who are working the system are experiencing.
And I am fully aware that the comments about the higher rate tax do not fully apply, those comments are made to highlight the equally incorrect comments regarding those on benefits, they are the mirror view of the demonising of the poor. The majority of benefits claiments are just ordinary people. People who would like not to be in the situation they find themselves in, the full time carers for elderly or disabled relatives, the single woman on her own looking after 2-3 kids, the young person with few qualifications who can't get a job because there are none to be had, the people with mental health issues, or learning difficulties, the guy in his late 50's who worked in a factory until it closed and isn't qualified for anything else, who is too old to retrain and too old for employers to be bothered with.
The working poor on 0 hours, part time, and short term contracts who are not paid a living wage by exploitative employers.
These people are all hit by the cuts.

Oh and please if teachers were on the 50% (now 45%) tax band after 12 years or even 40 years I would be looking to transfer into teaching. After 12 years they may have reached the 40% rate, but they certainly are not earning over £150,000 a year.

Finally "trickle down" has been shown to be a falicy, the rich don't create wealth they hoard it, that is why we have an increasingly unequal society, the rich keep sucking the money out and the poor get poorer.
The best way to create wealth is to create a more even society by implementing tax based on wealth not income. That creates a situation where the number of people who can be economically active and can create wealth increases, it does not limit that activity to a privilidged few.

As it is the Average salary in this country is £29,000 (approx) but the median salary, the salary that someone who earns more than 50% of the people and less than the remaining 50% earns is close to £20,000 (again approx) So the average man actually only earns around 2/3rds the average wage (I did check this out on the ONS a while ago, but don't have the exact figures to hand so it's only approx.)
That tells us that the figures are massively skewed by those earning at the higher end, it shows us that the rich are the ones who are really playing the system.

Now that is the big picture VOR
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Ah Bambara, Once you more fail to see the larger picture - much of the reallocation of grants between councils was to offset the imbalance imposed under the last Labour adminsitration. There is also a sizeable difference from being born with a disability or befalling to one during life (and therefore needing life-time assistance) and deciding not to work or apply yourself. All benefit claimants are supposed to inform the state when their circumstances change and the so called 'bedroom tax' merely brings the issue of housing into line with this. Those who are truly sick deserve benefits - and if those who erroneously claim them are removed - there will be more money for the state to support those most in need. Further, your comments on higher rate tax levels do not fully apply. You must remember that a majority of higher rate tax payers are merely hardworking professionals not the super-rich of whom you speak. The teacher who has worked for 12 years is now a higher rate tax payer - doesn't quite fit with your 'bollinger and cocaine' comment (though you may do a different type of teacher I suppose). It is just as wrong for the very rich to avoid paying tax as it is for others to avoid by not declaring income, or claiming benefits they are not entitled to. Of course, we could always adopt the french model and just tax those who crteate emplyment opportunities more and more and more and more, until they leave, take the job creation opportunities with them, and deprive the exchequer of their own tax contribution and those that they formally employed. Persoanlly, I would rather celebrate wealth creation and its trickle down effect.[/p][/quote]Oh I see the larger picture very well VOR, I see that the last Labour administration acted to provide a level playing field. they provided additional money to those councils which were most in need due to the levels of deprivation. They acted to even out the imbalance resulting from the inequality of the distribution of those in need. "Deciding not to work or apply yourself" - Again demonising the poor VOR. Those who choose not to work, are a small minority, I grew up on a council estate, I go back to visit family and friends, I know the demographics by experience. The bedroom tax merely brings housing into line with what precisely? It merely brings it into line with Tory sociopathic ideology, that is definately correct, it penalises those who are unable to move, that is correct. The cost of an average move is as has been highlighted previously £6000, where do you expect the victim of this vindictive little tory policy to find £6000? Now given that a lot of those who are the subject of the bedroom tax are old, or disabled and all of them are by definition poor, how do you expect them to find that money? But then given that it is equally likely that there is no available accomodation for them to move to that would not be subject to the tax it is doubly vindictive isn't it. " Those who are truly sick deserve benefits" - Indeed they do, unfortunately they are subject to the same cuts that those who are working the system are experiencing. And I am fully aware that the comments about the higher rate tax do not fully apply, those comments are made to highlight the equally incorrect comments regarding those on benefits, they are the mirror view of the demonising of the poor. The majority of benefits claiments are just ordinary people. People who would like not to be in the situation they find themselves in, the full time carers for elderly or disabled relatives, the single woman on her own looking after 2-3 kids, the young person with few qualifications who can't get a job because there are none to be had, the people with mental health issues, or learning difficulties, the guy in his late 50's who worked in a factory until it closed and isn't qualified for anything else, who is too old to retrain and too old for employers to be bothered with. The working poor on 0 hours, part time, and short term contracts who are not paid a living wage by exploitative employers. These people are all hit by the cuts. Oh and please if teachers were on the 50% (now 45%) tax band after 12 years or even 40 years I would be looking to transfer into teaching. After 12 years they may have reached the 40% rate, but they certainly are not earning over £150,000 a year. Finally "trickle down" has been shown to be a falicy, the rich don't create wealth they hoard it, that is why we have an increasingly unequal society, the rich keep sucking the money out and the poor get poorer. The best way to create wealth is to create a more even society by implementing tax based on wealth not income. That creates a situation where the number of people who can be economically active and can create wealth increases, it does not limit that activity to a privilidged few. As it is the Average salary in this country is £29,000 (approx) but the median salary, the salary that someone who earns more than 50% of the people and less than the remaining 50% earns is close to £20,000 (again approx) So the average man actually only earns around 2/3rds the average wage (I did check this out on the ONS a while ago, but don't have the exact figures to hand so it's only approx.) That tells us that the figures are massively skewed by those earning at the higher end, it shows us that the rich are the ones who are really playing the system. Now that is the big picture VOR bambara
  • Score: 2

8:13am Tue 6 May 14

thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth says...

Not before time. There is no reason at all why disabled people, who can pretty much park where they like in their free cars, shouldn't have to pay parking fees.
Not before time. There is no reason at all why disabled people, who can pretty much park where they like in their free cars, shouldn't have to pay parking fees. thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth
  • Score: 17

1:39pm Tue 6 May 14

Jackaranda says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
Not before time. There is no reason at all why disabled people, who can pretty much park where they like in their free cars, shouldn't have to pay parking fees.
I agree Sir, are their wallets/purses disabled?
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: Not before time. There is no reason at all why disabled people, who can pretty much park where they like in their free cars, shouldn't have to pay parking fees.[/p][/quote]I agree Sir, are their wallets/purses disabled? Jackaranda
  • Score: 10

6:37pm Tue 6 May 14

meggie13 says...

And why shouldn't they pay? People with disabilities fight and demonstrate for equality and to be treated without discrimination, so when it's an equality issue they disagree with it, it's ok for them to be treated differently? There are thousands of people in this country on low wages and benefits who find parking fees an unnecessary expense, why should you be exempt just because you're living with a disability? Stop complaining and embrace your equality, of which you fight so hard to get!
And why shouldn't they pay? People with disabilities fight and demonstrate for equality and to be treated without discrimination, so when it's an equality issue they disagree with it, it's ok for them to be treated differently? There are thousands of people in this country on low wages and benefits who find parking fees an unnecessary expense, why should you be exempt just because you're living with a disability? Stop complaining and embrace your equality, of which you fight so hard to get! meggie13
  • Score: 14

8:32am Wed 7 May 14

MartinMo says...

Peolpe only fight for equallity when it acts in their favour.

Many car parks have designated bays for disabled parking, usually larger in width and closer the the car park exit and therefore closer to the shops, why should you be able to park in them freely. Another thing that needs stamped on is blue badge holders parking on double yellow lines, especially when not even 10 meters away their is a car park with available disabled parking bays.

The moment you are treated differently is the moment equallity has no meaning.
Peolpe only fight for equallity when it acts in their favour. Many car parks have designated bays for disabled parking, usually larger in width and closer the the car park exit and therefore closer to the shops, why should you be able to park in them freely. Another thing that needs stamped on is blue badge holders parking on double yellow lines, especially when not even 10 meters away their is a car park with available disabled parking bays. The moment you are treated differently is the moment equallity has no meaning. MartinMo
  • Score: 12

8:47am Wed 7 May 14

MartinMo says...

Dragonqween wrote:
My so-called 'big fat DLA cheque' goes directly to Motability so I am able to get about and take my wheelchair with me. Without my DLA I would be stuck as I can't afford a car otherwise. Getting on and off a bus is extremely difficult - that is when one comes along AND has space for me!
This is not really an arguement that works in your favour, their are many people whom need cars in order to carry out specific tasks from travelling to work or just getting about. If my car broke down I could not afford to replace it and buses do not pass my place of work without catching several different connections (rather costly). Is there a benefit I don't know about by the name of working living allowance (WLA) which would recognise the need for motability and fund the purchase of a cars for the working class at the expense of someone else..............th
ought not as that would mean treating the working class with a level of equallity and that would not be very british.
[quote][p][bold]Dragonqween[/bold] wrote: My so-called 'big fat DLA cheque' goes directly to Motability so I am able to get about and take my wheelchair with me. Without my DLA I would be stuck as I can't afford a car otherwise. Getting on and off a bus is extremely difficult - that is when one comes along AND has space for me![/p][/quote]This is not really an arguement that works in your favour, their are many people whom need cars in order to carry out specific tasks from travelling to work or just getting about. If my car broke down I could not afford to replace it and buses do not pass my place of work without catching several different connections (rather costly). Is there a benefit I don't know about by the name of working living allowance (WLA) which would recognise the need for motability and fund the purchase of a cars for the working class at the expense of someone else..............th ought not as that would mean treating the working class with a level of equallity and that would not be very british. MartinMo
  • Score: 12

3:53pm Wed 7 May 14

pixie4612 says...

I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free.
I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.
I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch. pixie4612
  • Score: -1

6:29pm Wed 7 May 14

thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth says...

pixie4612 wrote:
I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free.
I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.
Nobody's disputing the fact that spaces for disabled people are near to where they need to be. The point is they park for free - which is unfair on the rest of us who have to pay. I begrudge it! Being disabled shouldn't mean free parking.
[quote][p][bold]pixie4612[/bold] wrote: I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.[/p][/quote]Nobody's disputing the fact that spaces for disabled people are near to where they need to be. The point is they park for free - which is unfair on the rest of us who have to pay. I begrudge it! Being disabled shouldn't mean free parking. thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth
  • Score: 7

7:37pm Wed 7 May 14

Libertarian Party (North) says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
pixie4612 wrote: I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.
Nobody's disputing the fact that spaces for disabled people are near to where they need to be. The point is they park for free - which is unfair on the rest of us who have to pay. I begrudge it! Being disabled shouldn't mean free parking.
There is no reason why ANYBODY should have to pay for parking. The Council should economise and stop wasting taxpayers' money like a drunken sailor. £38,000,000 they are spending on the High Street. If, instead of making pavements wider than most roads, they had included parking bays for cars on both sides, and up the middle, it might encourage people to support the little shops and businesses there instead of shopping out of town and giving all their business to the Supermarkets.
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pixie4612[/bold] wrote: I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.[/p][/quote]Nobody's disputing the fact that spaces for disabled people are near to where they need to be. The point is they park for free - which is unfair on the rest of us who have to pay. I begrudge it! Being disabled shouldn't mean free parking.[/p][/quote]There is no reason why ANYBODY should have to pay for parking. The Council should economise and stop wasting taxpayers' money like a drunken sailor. £38,000,000 they are spending on the High Street. If, instead of making pavements wider than most roads, they had included parking bays for cars on both sides, and up the middle, it might encourage people to support the little shops and businesses there instead of shopping out of town and giving all their business to the Supermarkets. Libertarian Party (North)
  • Score: 4

7:58pm Wed 7 May 14

meggie13 says...

pixie4612 wrote:
I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free.
I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.
We're not missing the point, the article was about parking fees not the size or location of disabled parking bays, I have no issue with either. My issue is the fact that people living with a disability campaign for equal rights and ask not to be singled out or given special treatment just because of their disability, yet it would appear, that when it doesn't suit, their disability is suddenly brought to the forefront.
On a different note, not all disabilities are physical, some are mental health issues, these people can walk, so are you going to charge them but not someone who can't walk? Where do you draw the line?
[quote][p][bold]pixie4612[/bold] wrote: I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.[/p][/quote]We're not missing the point, the article was about parking fees not the size or location of disabled parking bays, I have no issue with either. My issue is the fact that people living with a disability campaign for equal rights and ask not to be singled out or given special treatment just because of their disability, yet it would appear, that when it doesn't suit, their disability is suddenly brought to the forefront. On a different note, not all disabilities are physical, some are mental health issues, these people can walk, so are you going to charge them but not someone who can't walk? Where do you draw the line? meggie13
  • Score: 6

9:21pm Wed 7 May 14

tomtopper says...

They should go back to the little blue 3 wheeled invacars they used to give to disabled folk.. Whilst the rest of us able bodied workers can only afford cheap bangers the 'disabled' run about in brand new top of the range motors, just add fuel.. And very rarely do you see a wheelchair..

The amount of disabled spaces outside of places such as hypermarkets has increased tenfold too, the premise being that they don't have to walk far because they're close to the entrance, yet they still manage to cover the massive floorspace inside well enough..

Best of all is the fact that, for example, if one bloke breaks their back aged 64 yrs old he can get motability, car etc for the rest of his life, but if another bloke breaks his back aged 65 yrs, he can't.. very fair that is..

People with bad health are usually encouraged to mildly exercise.. Can't think of a better way than parking your car a little further away, or maybe that would be too much for their ADHD child, or make them more depressed or obese..???

About 15-20% badge holders really deserve them, I reckon..The rest are just players (usually those who deride said point vociferously)

They'll be rolling out a similar system for the long term unemployed next...Poor souls
They should go back to the little blue 3 wheeled invacars they used to give to disabled folk.. Whilst the rest of us able bodied workers can only afford cheap bangers the 'disabled' run about in brand new top of the range motors, just add fuel.. And very rarely do you see a wheelchair.. The amount of disabled spaces outside of places such as hypermarkets has increased tenfold too, the premise being that they don't have to walk far because they're close to the entrance, yet they still manage to cover the massive floorspace inside well enough.. Best of all is the fact that, for example, if one bloke breaks their back aged 64 yrs old he can get motability, car etc for the rest of his life, but if another bloke breaks his back aged 65 yrs, he can't.. very fair that is.. People with bad health are usually encouraged to mildly exercise.. Can't think of a better way than parking your car a little further away, or maybe that would be too much for their ADHD child, or make them more depressed or obese..??? About 15-20% badge holders really deserve them, I reckon..The rest are just players (usually those who deride said point vociferously) They'll be rolling out a similar system for the long term unemployed next...Poor souls tomtopper
  • Score: 6

3:20pm Thu 8 May 14

punkrocker says...

just claim your a gypsy leader then any fine will be squashed as you cannot read. penalty points are for the majority only folks in pc Britain. why wont the n. echo let anyone comment on the letting off for our regions gypsy leader. cowardly paper.
just claim your a gypsy leader then any fine will be squashed as you cannot read. penalty points are for the majority only folks in pc Britain. why wont the n. echo let anyone comment on the letting off for our regions gypsy leader. cowardly paper. punkrocker
  • Score: 3

6:30pm Thu 8 May 14

The Sleeper says...

I have no problem with the Blue badge scheme. But like everything in life there are people out there who abuse the system.
Yes they should pay for parking. There are still many people out there on low incomes' who have to pay for there parking.

I also see the above comment from Punk Rocker re the gypsy leader. Come on Northern Echo, open this up for comments...
I have no problem with the Blue badge scheme. But like everything in life there are people out there who abuse the system. Yes they should pay for parking. There are still many people out there on low incomes' who have to pay for there parking. I also see the above comment from Punk Rocker re the gypsy leader. Come on Northern Echo, open this up for comments... The Sleeper
  • Score: 9

7:21am Fri 9 May 14

somethinginsidesostrong says...

Redcar charging the Disabled was its death knell, I will not go to Redcar now. Stockton charging disabled drivers will be its own death knell. A people who do not care for or protect the vulnerable/dying is beggared. Disabled people do not live in isolation or a bubble they have family who feel indignant at injustice. This is bully boy tactics - targeting victims of perceived least resistance. Stocktonians this is just the thin end of the wedge, do you want to be governed by application of Orwellian/Kafkesque bureaucracy? Time to use Civil Resitance - do not just accept it.
Redcar charging the Disabled was its death knell, I will not go to Redcar now. Stockton charging disabled drivers will be its own death knell. A people who do not care for or protect the vulnerable/dying is beggared. Disabled people do not live in isolation or a bubble they have family who feel indignant at injustice. This is bully boy tactics - targeting victims of perceived least resistance. Stocktonians this is just the thin end of the wedge, do you want to be governed by application of Orwellian/Kafkesque bureaucracy? Time to use Civil Resitance - do not just accept it. somethinginsidesostrong
  • Score: -2

9:20am Fri 9 May 14

MartinMo says...

somethinginsidesostr
ong
wrote:
Redcar charging the Disabled was its death knell, I will not go to Redcar now. Stockton charging disabled drivers will be its own death knell. A people who do not care for or protect the vulnerable/dying is beggared. Disabled people do not live in isolation or a bubble they have family who feel indignant at injustice. This is bully boy tactics - targeting victims of perceived least resistance. Stocktonians this is just the thin end of the wedge, do you want to be governed by application of Orwellian/Kafkesque bureaucracy? Time to use Civil Resitance - do not just accept it.
So only disabled people went to Redcar as only disabled people currently visit Stockton.....I think not. By your reckoning, any one who hates paying for parking (that's everyone) should stop going to places that inforce these charges.

If it's bully boy tactics then the able bodied have been bullied for a long time now. I think it's more along the lines of, in respect to parking fees, treating the able bodied and disabled evenly and equally. Your post shows you not to like this so please decide now, do you think disabled folk should be treated as equals to the able bodied or not.
[quote][p][bold]somethinginsidesostr ong[/bold] wrote: Redcar charging the Disabled was its death knell, I will not go to Redcar now. Stockton charging disabled drivers will be its own death knell. A people who do not care for or protect the vulnerable/dying is beggared. Disabled people do not live in isolation or a bubble they have family who feel indignant at injustice. This is bully boy tactics - targeting victims of perceived least resistance. Stocktonians this is just the thin end of the wedge, do you want to be governed by application of Orwellian/Kafkesque bureaucracy? Time to use Civil Resitance - do not just accept it.[/p][/quote]So only disabled people went to Redcar as only disabled people currently visit Stockton.....I think not. By your reckoning, any one who hates paying for parking (that's everyone) should stop going to places that inforce these charges. If it's bully boy tactics then the able bodied have been bullied for a long time now. I think it's more along the lines of, in respect to parking fees, treating the able bodied and disabled evenly and equally. Your post shows you not to like this so please decide now, do you think disabled folk should be treated as equals to the able bodied or not. MartinMo
  • Score: 6

9:58am Fri 9 May 14

pixie4612 says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
pixie4612 wrote: I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.
Nobody's disputing the fact that spaces for disabled people are near to where they need to be. The point is they park for free - which is unfair on the rest of us who have to pay. I begrudge it! Being disabled shouldn't mean free parking.
All I am saying is that if I (as a person who has no mobility problems) doesn't want to or can't afford to pay for parking, I don't have to. I can park further away and walk in. Those who do have mobility problems cannot. So if they couldn't afford to pay they couldn't go out to where they need to. So I for one don’t begrudge a free space. (Although as stated I would prefer we all parked for free in our own town!)
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pixie4612[/bold] wrote: I think some people are missing the point. Disability parking spaces are provided so that they can park near to where they need to be. I don't begrudge this being free. I don't/won't pay for parking as I disagree with being charged for it in my own town but luckily I have the ability to walk, those that sadly don't can park for free on my watch.[/p][/quote]Nobody's disputing the fact that spaces for disabled people are near to where they need to be. The point is they park for free - which is unfair on the rest of us who have to pay. I begrudge it! Being disabled shouldn't mean free parking.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that if I (as a person who has no mobility problems) doesn't want to or can't afford to pay for parking, I don't have to. I can park further away and walk in. Those who do have mobility problems cannot. So if they couldn't afford to pay they couldn't go out to where they need to. So I for one don’t begrudge a free space. (Although as stated I would prefer we all parked for free in our own town!) pixie4612
  • Score: -3

5:55pm Fri 9 May 14

st-george1 says...

Just like the COOP, whose days were also numbered for misuse of public money and now at last, justice is being seen to be done for most of these people driving their cars of distinction and taking the high moral ground, greedy folk with long arms in my opinion, who for years have been happily abusing the free parking system 24/7 while ALL others had to pay to finance their discriminatory and politically-motivate
d benefit.
All good things must come to an end I‘m afraid … so lets remain optimistic
Just like the COOP, whose days were also numbered for misuse of public money and now at last, justice is being seen to be done for most of these people driving their cars of distinction and taking the high moral ground, greedy folk with long arms in my opinion, who for years have been happily abusing the free parking system 24/7 while ALL others had to pay to finance their discriminatory and politically-motivate d benefit. All good things must come to an end I‘m afraid … so lets remain optimistic st-george1
  • Score: 5

6:17pm Fri 9 May 14

greenfinger says...

Equal opportunities for all i say, let them have the equal right to pay. Then we are all treat the same. If you cannot afford to pay for your parking how are you going to pay for the petrol/diesel? It doesn't stand up to argument imo.
Equal opportunities for all i say, let them have the equal right to pay. Then we are all treat the same. If you cannot afford to pay for your parking how are you going to pay for the petrol/diesel? It doesn't stand up to argument imo. greenfinger
  • Score: 5

1:00pm Sat 10 May 14

hippyjohn says...

tell them you can hardly read. echo is still barring comments on billy welch
tell them you can hardly read. echo is still barring comments on billy welch hippyjohn
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree