Disabled commuter calls for bus pass rule change
A campaigner has called for time restrictions on disability bus passes to be scrapped.Hans Gording said current rules which allow those eligible to travel for free between 09:30 and 23:00 on weekdays needed changing. "We get the carrot of the free bus pass but then we get beaten up by the stick because we are not allowed to travel when normal commuters travel," he said.A spokesperson for the Department for Transport said local authorities had the power to extend the passes, with 77% of councils offering free travel before 09:30.
Mr Gording, who works for Harrogate-based charity Disability Action Yorkshire, has Stiff Person Syndrome (SPS) and can no longer drive from his home in Knaresborough to his workplace in Harrogate so uses public transport to get to work."It's almost the assumption that disabled people don't work, as most businesses start work from 9am but you can't travel before 9am," he said.In York and North Yorkshire, disabled passengers can travel for free from 09:00, but in neighbouring West Yorkshire they cannot travel for free until after 09:30.Tom Gordon, Liberal Democrat MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, said he had spoken with the government about the issue."At the moment we have a postcode lottery across England, in different places you have different restrictions on the times that people who have a disabled bus pass can use it."We know many people want to use them to go to hospital appointments, to go to work, to employment, to education and training and, at a time when people are worried about potential cuts to disability benefits, the restrictions on those bus passes just adds to that additional cost."
A DfT spokesperson said: "We fully recognise bus passes are vital to many and provide access to job opportunities, essential services, and keep people connected."Local authorities have the power to extend the times when disabled passholders can use their concessionary bus passes locally, and 77% offer free travel before 9.30am."We're already in the process of making ambitious reforms to improve bus services for passengers, supporting local areas to improve reliability and helping to cap fares."
Listen to highlights from North Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
24 minutes ago
- The Sun
Iconic tourist attraction could vanish forever in huge blow to one of UK's most popular destinations
AN ICONIC tourist attraction in one of the UK's most popular cities could soon be extinct. Punting on the charming River Cam in Cambridge could soon be a thing of the past as the organisation managing the time-honoured tradition warns it could collapse within twelve months. 1 CamCon, who act as the Conservators of the River Cam, says it is "in crisis" and may become "unviable and inoperative" without urgent financial intervention, The Times reports. The crisis centres on two lock islands essential for regulating water levels and which are at urgent risk of collapse. Their potential demise could mean the the famed Backs - which offers punters a scenic view of King's College and other landmarks - could soon be rendered "a measly, muddy trickle" which won't be able to support flat-bottomed boats which accommodate tourists. David Goode, CamCon's chairman, has highlighted that both Jesus Lock island and Baits Bite Lock, situated a few miles up the river, face an "imminent danger of collapse". "If it was imminent a year ago it's not going to get better," he added. "On the river stretch along the Backs between Mill Pond and Jesus Lock the water level is held artificially high by the sluice gates at the lock." The historic city heavily relies on the industry for waving in thousands of domestic and international visitors annually. Beyond the punting industry, university rowing clubs will also be affected as the Cam could soon become overgrown with weeds. David continued: "There would be a lot of consequences: the loss of punting, exposing of the foundation of college walls and the devastating impact to the appeal and economy of Cambridge." Provisional financial support to stabilise the river could cost in excess of £1.5million, while permanent aid would require more than £10million per structure. Oxford and Cambridge's chief coaches share how they're feeling ahead of The Boat Race Anne Miller, co-chair of the Cam Valley Forum which advocates for river conservation, called on the colleges to step up their efforts. 'If the river is fetid sludge the tourists aren't going to want to come; the colleges along the river are going to suffer," she said. 'We are a techy city. We've got loads of billionaires, wealthy colleges, wealthy businesses from Microsoft to AstraZeneca. "If everybody puts a chunk in a kitty we can get this sorted." The Sun Online has reached out to Cambridge County Council for comment. How to enjoy a river punt on the Cam Nothing is as quintessentially 'Cambridge' as floating down the River Cam in a wooden punt. It's the best way to view the city's most famous buildings, as many of these are spread along the banks of the river and cannot be seen from the centre of town. Punting is also the only way to see all the stunning bridges which give the city its name, including the Bridge of Sighs and the Mathematical Bridge (which, according to urban legend, was constructed using no nuts or bolts). You can get a chauffeured tour complete with a guide or simply rent your own, but be warned, first-timers are known to occasionally fall in. Don't worry if you're visiting during the colder months — punting firms will equip you with blankets to stay warm and umbrellas in case of bad luck with the weather. Prices vary by season and by company, but guided tours on a shared boat cost around £15-30 per person for adults and roughly £10 for kids. If you fancy a go at pushing the punt yourself, it will cost between £24-£36 per hour.
Telegraph
41 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Stephen Fry says JK Rowling's been ‘radicalised'. I've got just one question for him
Sir Stephen Fry, the renowned psychoanalyst, says he believes that JK Rowling 'has been radicalised'. I must say that I for one was somewhat taken aback by this diagnosis. Because, if Ms Rowling has indeed been 'radicalised', that means she harbours beliefs that are 'radical'. In which case, would Sir Stephen be so kind as to tell us which of her beliefs he has in mind? Take, for example, Ms Rowling's belief that women don't have testicles. Or her belief that men can't give birth. Is either of those beliefs radical? Extreme? Wildly at variance with established medical science? Perhaps he's thinking of her belief that biological males should not be entitled to enter the female changing room at their local swimming pool and strip naked in front of small girls. Or her belief that confused children should not be pumped with drugs designed to prevent them from going through a normal, healthy puberty. Or her belief that we should not grant a convicted rapist his wish to be placed in a jail full of women merely because he's suddenly taken to sporting a blonde wig and pink leggings. Does Sir Stephen consider those beliefs to be radical? I do hope he'll let us know. It's urgent. Otherwise, there's a serious risk that innocent members of the public will become radicalised, too. In the meantime, I'm anxious to ascertain how exactly Ms Rowling came to fall for the outlandish notion that women are female and men are male. Who radicalised her? Sir Stephen reckons it was 'Terfs' (i.e., trans-exclusionary radical feminists). But I wonder if she was brainwashed at an early age – by, say, an O-level biology teacher. Or perhaps some appallingly irresponsible school librarian gave her access to a dictionary. Whatever the source of her indoctrination, I dread to think what crazed ideological nonsense this dangerous woman will pollute our children's minds with next. The Earth is round? Water is wet? Members of the family Ursidae typically defecate in arboreal environs? Then again, I suppose there is an alternative way to look at this story. Which is that the beliefs Ms Rowling espouses have been completely mainstream since the dawn of humanity – and that it is, in fact, her opponents who have been 'radicalised'. Just a thought. Lost in translation A 29-year-old Afghan asylum seeker, we learnt this week, attempted to defend his rape of a 15-year-old Scottish girl by claiming that he had not been 'educated' about the 'significant cultural differences' between Afghanistan and Britain. As it turned out, the court didn't buy this excuse. Which is a relief. After all, doesn't his argument imply that Britain was somehow at fault, for failing to 'educate' him about these 'differences' when he arrived? God only knows what he thinks the authorities should have said, the day his dinghy washed up here in 2023. 'Good afternoon, sir, and welcome to our country! Please do make yourself at home. But, if you don't mind, we'd just like to help you fit in by giving you a quick introduction to a few traditional British customs. 'Number one: we're completely obsessed with talking about the weather! Number two: we drink endless cups of tea! Number three: we all absolutely love the adorable adventures of Paddington bear! 'Oh, and number four: we generally tend to frown on grown men who rape children in the street. 'We appreciate, sir, that as a newcomer you may find this a touch puzzling. But then, all cultures have their distinctive little quirks and foibles, don't they? And 'not sexually assaulting terrified pubescent girls' just happens to be one of ours. So we thought we'd better give you a little heads-up, to save you from making a rather embarrassing faux pas! 'Of course, there are some people in our country who have been known to disregard the above convention. Late BBC disc jockeys, for example, and Pakistani grooming gangs. The feeling among the wider British public, though, is that it's still something of a no-no, and best avoided. After all, you can't be certain that our police, social workers and politicians will cover it up for you! I mean, they might, but it's not guaranteed. 'Anyway, thanks for listening, sir, and have a lovely new life! The hotel's this way, we'll just come and check you in.' A question of Pride LGBT Pride is about to enter its fourth week. Best wishes to all who are still celebrating. I hope no one will be offended, however, if I respectfully ask why this event now has to last for an entire month. It does feel like quite a long time. Especially when you compare the lengths of certain other annual events. For example, we have Pride month – but Remembrance fortnight. So we now spend twice as long waving rainbow flags as we do honouring those who died defending us. There's nothing hateful about suggesting that Pride has started to drag on a bit. When people complain about shops putting their festive decorations up in September, it doesn't mean they hate Christmas. It just means they think Christmas should last 12 days, not four months. Mind you, there are now so many different groups under the LGBTQIA+ umbrella, I suppose it takes about a month just to list them all.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Ancient trees are shipped to the UK, then burned – using billions in ‘green' subsidies. Stop this madness now
How green is this? We pay billions of pounds to cut down ancient forests in the US and Canada, ship the wood across the Atlantic in diesel tankers, then burn it in a Yorkshire-based power station. Welcome to the scandal of Drax, where Britain's biggest polluter gets to play climate hero. The reality is that billions in public subsidies has enabled Drax to generate electricity by burning 300m trees. Now the government is trying to force through an extension that would grant Drax an estimated £1.8bn in public subsidies on top of the £11bn it has already pocketed, keeping this circus going until at least 2031. This isn't green energy. The mathematics alone should horrify anyone who cares about value for money or the environment. Burning wood creates 18% more CO2 emissions than coal. Even if you replant every tree Drax destroys, it takes up to a century for new growth to reabsorb the carbon released. We're supposed to reach net zero by 2050, not 2125. Yet through circus-trick accounting, all of Drax's massive emissions magically disappear from Britain's climate ledger. They've simply been wished away – counted as 'zero', while the company becomes our largest single contributor to climate breakdown. Extraordinarily, this scandal unites opposition across the political spectrum. From the Greens to Reform, from the Morning Star to the Daily Telegraph, there's rare consensus that Drax represents everything wrong with our approach to climate policy. The Labour-dominated public accounts committee condemned Drax as a 'white elephant' that's been allowed to 'mark its own homework' while claiming 'billions upon billions' in subsidies. A Lords committee agreed, saying parliament needs to see key documents before approving any more funding. I don't agree with Ed Miliband on everything – we clearly have different views on nuclear power. I respect the energy secretary's commitment to tackling climate crisis, and it is worth noting that the further subsidies are half of what was previously on offer for Drax. But that's exactly why continuing to subsidise Drax at all is so disappointing. When Miliband announced his plans to 'ramp up' biomass burning back in 2009, he was genuinely trying to find alternatives to fossil fuels. But 16 years on, this policy has gone badly astray. What was meant to be a bridge to renewable energy is actually making emissions worse. If, on Monday, the House of Lords votes to extend this unabated wood burning for another four years, what is to stop these subsidies being extended again and again? And why should the government deal with a firm as untrustworthy as Drax? Perhaps most damning is what Drax refuses to reveal. After the BBC's devastating Panorama investigation into the company's destruction of Canadian primary forests, Drax asked auditor KPMG to investigate, hoping for a clean bill of health. However, the evidence was so damning that the reports are still being hidden from the public. If Drax has nothing to hide, why not publish these reports? A former top Treasury official turned whistleblower accused it of deliberately concealing unsustainable practices to secure subsidies. The case, now settled, raises questions of dishonesty that should disqualify any company from public funding. The extra billions Drax is seeking could help build enough wind and solar capacity to power millions of homes. It could create permanent jobs in genuine renewable industries, not temporary employment destroying irreplaceable ecosystems. Every pound spent subsidising tree burning is a pound not invested in technologies that could actually deliver net zero. While other countries race ahead with wind, solar and battery storage, we're burning money on the most primitive fuel known to humanity. There's a huge loophole in the government's pledge to stop Drax burning trees from primary forest. Their restrictions on Drax only apply to subsidised electricity supplied to the grid. Drax wants to power private data centres but there is no plan that prevents it from destroying ancient forests to power 21st-century AI searches. That means Drax could be cutting down even more primary forests than it does today. MPs have lost trust in the government's ability to hold Drax to account – the criticism from parliamentary committees has been brutal. The environmental movement didn't fight to establish renewable energy so politicians could facilitate the burning of ancient forests that took millennia to grow. Real climate action means making hard choices, not hiding behind accounting tricks that make our emissions disappear on paper while making them worse in reality. It is time for Labour MPs to speak up; the fight for net zero is hard enough. More subsidies for Drax's wood burning in the name of sustainability is just more fuel on that fire. Dale Vince is a green energy industrialist and campaigner
