It seems that the Disability rights commission is still not happy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6173193.stm


For gods sake they are running in addition to the normal buses so if these
were withdrawn then more people would be crowding onto the other buses
making it more difficult for disabled people to get on.




--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDem

On Mar 20, 10:05 am, "News_Demon"
wrote:
It seems that the Disability rights commission is still not happy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6173193.stm

For gods sake they are running in addition to the normal buses so if these
were withdrawn then more people would be crowding onto the other buses
making it more difficult for disabled people to get on.

You're making the mistake of expecting a rational argument from a self
important pressure group who like nothing more than having a drum to
bang.

B2003

News_Demon wrote:
It seems that the Disability rights commission is still not happy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6173193.stm

For gods sake they are running in addition to the normal buses so if these
were withdrawn then more people would be crowding onto the other buses
making it more difficult for disabled people to get on.

I'm not the biggest fan of the RM, I found them rather uncomfortable to
travel on, and cold in winter, but these are a few buses operating on a
route where frequent Low-floor buses duplicate the service.

How about this lot get on to non-London bus operators to replace their
step-Entry buses for which there is no other choice.
--
The presence of this signature shows that this message has been scanned
for misplaced apostrophes by the common sense scanner. However, some
apostrophes may not be included where required due to boredom, gross
negligence, budget cuts, incompetence, stupidity or just plain laziness.
http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk

On Mar 20, 4:55?pm, Joe Patrick
wrote:
News_Demon wrote:
It seems that the Disability rights commission is still not happy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6173193.stm

For gods sake they are running in addition to the normal buses so if these
were withdrawn then more people would be crowding onto the other buses
making it more difficult for disabled people to get on.

I'm not the biggest fan of the RM, I found them rather uncomfortable to
travel on, and cold in winter, but these are a few buses operating on a
route where frequent Low-floor buses duplicate the service.

How about this lot get on to non-London bus operators to replace their
step-Entry buses for which there is no other choice.
--
The presence of this signature shows that this message has been scanned
for misplaced apostrophes by the common sense scanner. However, some
apostrophes may not be included where required due to boredom, gross
negligence, budget cuts, incompetence, stupidity or just plain laziness.http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk

Here is the detail of the formal complaint I have lodged at the
Disability Rights Commission about Mr. Edwards: may I suggest others
who see the idiocy of his comments do likewise?

"I understand that Mr. Edwards has been complaining about the
existence of 12 Routemaster buses on 2 heritage routes. He is
misleading his audience when he makes his complaint: these buses are
EXTRAS, and compliment the full number of accessible buses on these 2
routes. These EXTRA buses can no more be said to be discriminatory
than if I drive my car on the road, providing 5 EXTRA seats to be
occupied. He is also making an idiotic argument worse by claiming
that ALL public transport will have to be disabled-access by 2017: is
he suggesting that TFL and the vast majority of National Rail trains
and stations will be decommissioned as being illegal in 2017?

"Mr. Edwards is clearly a moron and does your organisation a great
disservice.

Marc.

The same lobby are now complaining about the withdrawal of one of the
infrequent 9XX disability buses in Newham. When reminded that all
'normal' routes in the area are fully accessible, the response was
that wheelchair users are no longer able to use bendy-buses
(presumably the 25) since these are always full up and have no room
for a chair! Well with unrestricted free boarding they would be,
wouldn't they? And couldn't this have been foreseen?

" wrote:

Here is the detail of the formal complaint I have lodged at the
Disability Rights Commission about Mr. Edwards: may I suggest others
who see the idiocy of his comments do likewise?

Seeing as the DRC is a government quango, not a charity or pressure
group, I was wondering whether his comments were legally appropriate
for such a body to make. If TfL are compliant with the law by
providing a fully accessible service, surely calling for the extra
heritage buses to be withdrawn simply because the DRC or perhaps this
one individual doesn't like them is making a political point and ought
not to be paid for by the taxpayer.

Marc, you're one of our learned friends aren't you? What do you
think? Perhaps a complaint to the DC's sponsoring department or to
the National Audit Office might be in order.

Roy

On Mar 21, 6:28�am, Roy Stilling wrote:
" wrote:
Here is the detail of the formal complaint I have lodged at the
Disability Rights Commission about Mr. Edwards: may I suggest others
who see the idiocy of his comments do likewise?

Seeing as the DRC is a government quango, not a charity or pressure
group, I was wondering whether his comments were legally appropriate
for such a body to make. *If TfL are compliant with the law by
providing a fully accessible service, surely calling for the extra
heritage buses to be withdrawn simply because the DRC or perhaps this
one individual doesn't like them is making a political point and ought
not to be paid for by the taxpayer.

Marc, you're one of our learned friends aren't you? *What do you
think? *Perhaps a complaint to the DC's sponsoring department or to
the National Audit Office might be in order.

Roy

Roy,

You make a very interesting an valid point, about the
inappropriateness of someone speaking on behalf of an organisation and
thereby representing that organisation's view, as opposed to his own
personal views.

I shall enquire of the D.R.C. whether they have a policy on
Routemaster buses on heritage routes and, if so, what it is. If the
policy is either neutral or non-existent, then clearly Mr. Edwards has
gone beyond his remit, ought to be censured and/or disciplined by his
employers - even if only for omitting the words "speaking
personally....", and thus misrepresenting his employers in a public
forum.

I will keep this forum advised of any developments.

Marc.

On Mar 21, 11:05 am, " wrote:
On Mar 21, 6:28?am, Roy Stilling wrote:





" wrote:
Here is the detail of the formal complaint I have lodged at the
Disability Rights Commission about Mr. Edwards: may I suggest others
who see the idiocy of his comments do likewise?

Seeing as the DRC is a government quango, not a charity or pressure
group, I was wondering whether his comments were legally appropriate
for such a body to make. ?If TfL are compliant with the law by
providing a fully accessible service, surely calling for the extra
heritage buses to be withdrawn simply because the DRC or perhaps this
one individual doesn't like them is making a political point and ought
not to be paid for by the taxpayer.

Marc, you're one of our learned friends aren't you? ?What do you
think? ?Perhaps a complaint to the DC's sponsoring department or to
the National Audit Office might be in order.

Roy

Roy,

You make a very interesting an valid point, about the
inappropriateness of someone speaking on behalf of an organisation and
thereby representing that organisation's view, as opposed to his own
personal views.

I shall enquire of the D.R.C. whether they have a policy on
Routemaster buses on heritage routes and, if so, what it is. If the
policy is either neutral or non-existent, then clearly Mr. Edwards has
gone beyond his remit, ought to be censured and/or disciplined by his
employers - even if only for omitting the words "speaking
personally....", and thus misrepresenting his employers in a public
forum.

I will keep this forum advised of any developments.

Marc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here is the reply received from the D.R.C. today, and my reply to it:-

"Dear Mr Maitland,



"Thank you for your email. The remarks attributed to Mr Edwards have
been taken out of context. The DRC is not calling for the removal of
all existing Routemasters. We are not killjoys or destroyers of
London's heritage.



"His main point, which has gone unreported, is that if we are serious
about promoting the inclusion of disabled people into all areas of
life (employment, social activities etc), then a prerequisite for that
is an accessible public transport system.



"Many disabled people have reported to us that the new fleet of London
buses has had a transforming effect on their lives, enabling them to
get out and about in a way that was impossible on the Routemaster
fleet. That is the kind of progress we want to see.



"Yours sincerely,





"Lisa Patel

"Secretariat Support Officer

"Disability Rights Commission

Tel: 020 7543 7053"



My reply:-

"Dear Miss Patel,

"Thank you for your reply.

"If what you state is correct, i.e. that your Commission is not
calling for the removal of all existing Routemasters and that you are
not "killjoys or destroyers of London's heritage", could you kindly
advise me what is meant by the following quote from Mr. Edwards:-

""We've stated to Transport for London that we're not happy about the
heritage routes".

"Moreover, the clear implication of his comment, "TfL are opening
themselves to legal action" because by 2017 all forms of
"inaccessible" public transport will be illegal, is that Routemasters
will have to be removed by that date and ought to be removed now. Why
else refer to something that may or may not be the case in ten years'
time?

"I should be grateful for a copy of your Commission's formal policy on
Routemaster buses on heritage routes in London.

"Looking forward to your reply,

"I remain,

"Yours sincerely,

"Marc Maitland.

"21st March 2007."

wrote:

Here is the detail of the formal complaint I have lodged at the
Disability Rights Commission about Mr. Edwards: may I suggest others
who see the idiocy of his comments do likewise?

Don't bother. I contacted the DRC about a policy change which was not widely
known but would have a negative impact on the mobility of wheelchair
users... I was told that since I was not disabled myself, they had no
interest in anything I had to say!

On Mar 21, 12:35 pm, "John Rowland"
wrote:
wrote:

Here is the detail of the formal complaint I have lodged at the
Disability Rights Commission about Mr. Edwards: may I suggest others
who see the idiocy of his comments do likewise?

Don't bother. I contacted the DRC about a policy change which was not widely
known but would have a negative impact on the mobility of wheelchair
users... I was told that since I was not disabled myself, they had no
interest in anything I had to say!

John,

Clearly, they are having their feathers ruffled, because within
minutes of my reply above, I have just received the following:-

"Dear Mr Maitland



"The Commission's policy in relation to Routemaster buses on Heritage
routes derives from recent changes made to disability discrimination
law. These changes require TfL to ensure that all its buses are fully
accessible by 2017. During the interview Mr Edwards did no more than
express disappointment that the very significant progress which TfL
had already made in replacing inaccessible buses (well ahead of the
statutory timetable) had not gone a bit further. Furthermore, he
correctly stated the legal position: if TfL continue to run
Routemasters beyond 2017 then any disabled person who is not able to
access a bus of that sort will have a cause of action in the county
court. I cannot see how Mr Edwards can be criticized for stating in
plain terms what the law is and what the consequences might be if TfL
ignore it. But I reiterate: the Commission is emphatically not saying
that all Routemasters must be withdrawn immediately. There is no legal
basis for such a policy position. The really serious point in all
this is that TfL have invested a very substantial amount of capital
expenditure to make travelling for disabled people so much easier. We
applaud that because of the transforming effect it has had and will
continue to have on disabled people's lives. We may have a slight
quibble with TfL about the remaining Routemasters but this does not
disguise the fact that we are delighted with the huge progress already
made which surpasses anything being done in the transport field in any
other part of the country.



"Yours sincerely



"R ROBB
"Head of the Secretariat"




I will formulate a reply and post a copy of it here, and it will be
along the lines of "Miss Patel states that you are not killjoys and do
not require the removal of Routemasters - which is clearly
contradictory to what you are now saying"! Three people all employed
by the D.R.C. saying different things!

Perhaps they employ people with mental disabilities too?

Marc.