David Gillon

About three months ago, there was a story in the Guardian about a bunch of climate activists letting the air out of the tires of every SUV parked in a posh area of London, with an interview with them where they claimed that no one needed something the size of a SUV.

Now I thought that it was a particularly stupid idea in the first place, being more likely to irritate people than attract them to pro-climate policies, but it also seemed to have the potential to cause issues for disabled people. So I tweeted about it, noting that if you're mobility impaired then the height of a SUV can make getting in and out more practical, and if you're a wheelchair user then the extra space of the SUV bodyform is really useful, so there's a pretty good chance you're hitting disabled people, not the wealthy. (I actually was thinking more of the mid-range SUVs than your typical Range Rover, there, but the point applies from mini-SUVs on up).

And got a response from a cycling activist saying "How can we tell the difference?"

*Headdesk*

So I answered you can't, which is only the truth (but I would probably have said that even if it wasn't, like I said, it's a stupid idea we don't want to encourage).

Then nothing for two or three months, only for a new message today from (looking at his Twitter profile) another cycling evangelist.

"With respect David, no one needs a supersize SUV. We have a VW Touran which we choose, having kids, due to its very large boot capacity. It’s a 2 litre, 7 seater. So please explain why anyone needs a 5l ranger rover?"

(I was particularly amused at the cycling activist claiming he's a better person because he only drives a 2l seven seater VW Touran. I'm sorry, you're preaching everyone should do everything by bike while riding around in a 2L Touran? Can we have some consistency please?)

Hmm, not a mention of my points about access and mobility needs, and the reductio ad absurdum strawman of the 5L Range Rover. Somehow I don't think you really meant any respect whatsoever, and I'm really not sure you actually read my points, or gave them  any value if you did. Well, if you're going to be like that I'll tailor my response to fit:

I can only get into it comfortably because I can just squeeze falling straight back into the driver's seat (and tall I'm not) which doesn't work in, say, my sister's Fiesta. Getting out is awkward. 3/4

But your typical compact SUV with its larger bodywork might well solve all my issues - larger bootspace, no need to drop seats, higher mounted body makes it easier to get into and out of. 4/5"

(Actually, looking again the Yaris Cross might well be no better than my Yaris wrt space, though the extra height would help, probably need to go up to the mid-size SUVs to fit the chair)

Anyone monitoring my webfeed over the past few days is potentially going to be concerned.

I'm back to working on my WIP post US-election, I've finally got a model for the political landscape that should work with however things finally turn out. Well, at least as long as it's short of absolute coup. And a major plus point is that it's one that works simply by changing the President's pronoun to 'she' (though it's only the Veep who makes it on stage). I'm at the point in the plot, neatly dropping exactly on midway, where terrorist attacks are escalating. Which means I've spent hours over the weekend looking at major US airports in Google Earth and Google Street View, and particularly at where their fuel-storage tank farms are. What's scary is how many are set right up against the perimeter fences, often right on the roads past the airport. Is there such a thing as your scenario being too believable?

In other news, I've started discussing the potential I won't make it home for Christmas with my family. My sister raised it first, and then it just came up by accident when chatting with my mother. If I don't make it it'll be the first time ever. As things stand, we won't know if I'll even be able to travel until the end of lockdown, and any change in Tier-based restrictions that replace that. Particularly as Durham is a hot spot - currently infections are 518/100k where they are, vs 234 where I am (though this is only 37 cases/week in their MSOA* vs 23/week in mine). And then for the six days after the end of lockdown (Dec 3rd to 9th), the students are supposed to head home, and there is absolutely no way I'm travelling until that's over. So if I do get home it's likely to be done in a rush. Must start doing some more practise in the chair, not going anywhere for 10 months means my pushing muscles are totally shot given I don't use it in the house. I'll definitely be travelling by train, the advantage of needing the wheelchair space is social-distancing is pretty much built in.

And in other Covid-related news, my sister is currently self-isolating. They had a teaching assistant test positive on Saturday, and while she hasn't spent any time around her, Andrea has had a chest-infection, so she got herself a test at a local site yesterday, and got the result at lunchtime today. Which was negative, but in the meantime she'd started running a temperature, so she rang 119** for advice and they've told her to continue isolating until it drops to normal. I'm not sure if I'm amused or exasperated that they told her they don't define what 'normal' is. So her school has now got an entire class out again, and I think it's four teaching staff on top of that currently self-isolating, plus a dinner lady who tested positive in the middle of last week. I'm not surprised the normally so mild-mannered she's ineffective head has started snapping at people.

* Census version of a postcode, about 2500 households.

** The Covid specific version of 111, our NHS helpline/triage service.

Picked up my tickets for my trip North on Tuesday and realised that the Passenger Assistance booking I'd gotten by email was wrong when I compared the two.

I have a 1st Class Ticket (wouldn't normally buy one, but this time the difference was only £13 and I'll save most of that from the food and drink you get in 1st), but now I'd noticed it, the Passenger Assistance wheelchair space booking was for Standard - ticket and assistance were both booked on the same web form, but I'm pretty much convinced they then read the PA stuff off it and do it manually.

So I phone PA, convinced that by this close to Christmas the 1st Class wheelchair space will already be booked by someone else. Get through to someone and explain what's happened.

He is confused by the existing booking: "So, there's three of you travelling?"

Me: "No, just me."

Him: "But they've reserved three seats"

Me: {Sigh} "That's because you have to fold up the other two to use the wheelchair space." (Seats F99, F003, F004. Seriously, how can he not know that!)

Him: "Okay, give me a minute and I'll reserve the 1st Class Wheelchair Space"

Me, to myself : "You'll be lucky."

Amazingly enough he was: "All sorted. I'll send you through the email confirmation"

20 minutes later, confirmation arrives. It still lists the Standard class reservation.

I ring back, amazingly I get the same guy (not sure how many Passenger Assistance operators they have, but I could hear at least two more in the background).

Me: "It still says Standard Class"

Him: "I definitely changed it and reserved seat L99 for you." [and I know that's the 1st Class wheelchair space] "The system probably hasn't updated itself. I wrote it into the text. Here, I'll send it again."

New email arrives almost instantly. It won't let me in initially, but eventually does, I scroll down to the relevant section:

"

(My highlights)

So it's entirely possible I have both the 1st and Standard Class wheelchair spaces booked, plus my original non-wheelchair 1st Class seat (it's a great system, it allocates you a normal seat and prints it on the ticket before it allocates you the wheelchair space). I'm definitely going to be interested to see where I end up on Tuesday, and I'll definitely need a drink, whichever it is.

Why is everything so complicated when you're a wheelchair user?

I still haven't had the "So, can you have sex?" question, but yesterday's train journey was an experience.

The local line from my hometown to the mainline station at Darlington is having its trains upgraded as the Pacers (1980s Leyland bus body on a goods wagon chassis) that are currently used are illegal after the end of the year on the grounds they have no wheelchair accessible toilets (this illegality didn't stop the senior civil servant at the Department for Transport suggesting that replacing them was "a waste" and they should be kept on). When the train pulled up yesterday morning it turned out to (presumably) be the first of the replacements - equally old hand-me-downs that happen to have an accessible toilet (in theory, getting a manual chair in there would be terribly tight, powerchair - forget it).  There's a standard marking scheme in use across the British train system, the carriages with wheelchair spaces have the wheelchair symbol by the door on the outside. This one didn't have a symbol on either carriage.

Having gone first to one end looking for the wheelchair symbol, and then to the other, I grabbed the first crewmember I saw, the driver, in the process of changing cabs from one end of the train to the other as we're at the end of the line, and asked him which carriage the wheelchair space was in.

"Er, I dunno."

At this point the guard pops her head out of the door next to us.

"Hey, Carrie, which carriage is the wheelchair space in?"

"Er, I'm not certain, that one, I think."

So she follows me to the front of the train, explaining that the hand-me-downs have just arrived from Scotrail and they've never used them before. And yes, the wheelchair space is there.

"Right, now I have to go and find the ramp," she says.

In the Pacers the ramp was hung on the interior wall of the driver's cab, just in front of the wheelchair space, but that was clearly far too sensible an answer and in these the ramp is hung at the back of the carriage. Wheelchair space at front, ramp at back, that makes sense (particularly when I could see at least four places it could go).

Given the ramp is presumably part of the essential safety equipment if they need to evacuate passengers in a station, the crew not knowing where it is doesn't really give me the warm fuzzies. And if you're replacing trains to improve wheelchair access, then doesn't it make sense to make certain the train crews know the basics of their accessibility features, like which carriage they're in? And having the "improved" wheelchair space feature a broken table really doesn't impress.

So I get to Darlington and the first thing I have to do is grab Passenger Assistance and tell them: "There might be a problem, I was checking my ticket just before I set off, and the seat reservation is for the 12:02 to Kings Cross, but the Passenger Assistance booking is for the 12:29. They were both booked online at the same time, so I genuinely don't know which train I'm supposed to be getting." They were their usual efficient selves and sorted it out - the wheelchair space on the 12:02 was empty, so that was the one they'd put me aboard.

So I get aboard and as I'm getting myself settled the guard makes an announcement. "I'd like to apologise to everyone just getting on board, due to disruption I'm the only crew aboard*, where normally there should be me and 5 or 6 others, so there's no catering facilities in Standard Class and a very limited service in First Class". 

* Presumably there was also a driver.

It turned out he actually did have someone helping in First, but he got off at the next station, so I'll imagine the First Class passengers, who are supposed to get a meal and drinks as part of their ticket, were probably revolting.

I did wonder if it was technically safe to run the train in that condition, given the catering crew probably have emergency roles in addition to their normal tasks, but everything went fine until Peterborough, an hour outside London, when Miss I Talk to Everyone Whether they Want Me to or Not got aboard and decided to sit next to me.

It was a production from the moment she appeared and announced "I've got six bags. Do you mind if I put this one against your chair." ('This one' being a black binliner stuffed with god knows what.

So I explained that if she put it there I couldn't get to the toilet when I wanted to.

"Well I'll move it if you ask me to."

So I'll need to stick my hand up like I'm a 5yo asking teacher if I can go to the toilet? No thanks. "No, I'd really prefer you to put it somewhere else."

So she puts it in the luggage rack on the opposite side of the cabin. At which point she announces "This is really heavy. I'm pregnant, I really shouldn't be lifting heavy things."

Hey, great timing, now I feel like the bad guy.

Finally she gets everything arranged, having dragooned the guy sitting opposite into doing it for her. And then proceeds to talk to me constantly for the next hour**, even though I was clearly reading my book. And practically the first thing out of her mouth, presumably prompted by me being insistent on being able to get to the toilet was "So, how do wheelchair users manage to get from their wheelchair to the toilet?"

I decided to avoid the technicalities of side transfers and simply pointed out the five wheelchair users out of six have some ability to stand and/or walk.

Thankfully the third leg of the journey was perfectly normal.

** She talked so much I had the HHGTTG line about "If they don't keep talking their brains start working" running through my head.

Post Voting Complaint:

Dear X,

I understand that in addition to your position as Chief Executive of Medway Council you hold the position of Returning Officer for Medway. At the European Elections on 23-5-19 the polling station for Chatham Central Ward was the Scout Hut on Boundary Road. I am writing to draw your attention to the access to the hut for wheelchair users being so bad as to constitute a danger. And an obvious one at that.

Yes, the hut does have a wheelchair ramp, but the wheelchair ramp is actually the shallowest part of the approach from the road. While Polling Stations, as existing buildings, are not in general subject to the updated Building Regulations, Approved Document M: access to and use of buildings, Volume 2: Buildings other than Dwelling provides some useful guidance on minimal standards for access to public buildings. In particular, paragraph 1.7 notes that there should be ramped access for any gradient over 1 in 20 on the approach to the building. Paragraph 1.13 suggests an overall gradient for the approach of no more than 1 in 60, or of 1 in 20 with level landings for every 500mm rise.

I would estimate the gradient between the road and the Scout Hut at 1 in 5 or greater, and the unramped rise at somewhere between 1200 and 1500mm. Beyond failing to come even close to the recommendations of the Building Regulations, this gradient is clearly well in excess of any appropriate slope for wheelchair users as wheelchairs are in general unstable and at immediate risk of tipping backwards at any gradient over 1 in 10.

Additionally paragraph 1.14 of Part M specifies the need for on-site parking for wheelchair users to allow them to drive to the location and then have space to access their wheelchair. The Scout Hut on Boundary Road offers no off-road parking and ‘limited on-road parking’ was notified on my polling card. When I went to vote there were no parking spaces visible in either direction for a considerable distance, all parking spots being taken by residents. As I was the only person attempting to vote during the whole of my visit, there was no possibility that I had simply arrived at a busy time. As a wheelchair user who needs to be able to park in close proximity to my polling station, I was left with no legal option for parking if I wished to vote. I consider this a completely unacceptable imposition and further evidence that the site is unsuitable.

Having parked, I wheeled to the entrance of the site. Someone standing there, probably a party teller, immediately offered to push me up the slope, demonstrating that the inappropriate nature of the entrance was readily visible even to non-wheelchair users. I told them that I preferred to attempt the slope myself. However, it was immediately apparent that not only was the slope so steep that my being able to push myself up it was questionable, but that, even lying with torso across thighs to lower my centre of gravity, the slope was such that I was in immediate danger of falling backwards in my wheelchair either onto the concrete slope, or out into the road (I would additionally note here that my chair is set up to be more stable than most active user wheelchairs). At this point the Presiding Officer came running out and pushed me into the building, while I expressed my opinion of the suitability of the venue in a forceful manner. I believe the term I used was ‘utterly ridiculous’. She noted that she would report the issue.

I then voted and was offered assistance to leave. I told the staff that I would probably be all right going downslope. This was overoptimistic. When I attempted to brake the slope was so steep that my wheels started to slip on the concrete. I was forced to release braking pressure (manual wheelchair users brake using their palms) in order to regain control of the chair and barely avoided an uncontrolled emergence onto the road. This was on a completely dry slope, and with good tyres on my chair. The risk of a wheelchair user being unable to control their chair on the slope in wet weather and potentially being forced onto the road in front of traffic is clear.

Incomprehensibly, my polling card displays the Wheelchair Symbol next to the map, implying the Polling Station location is accessible. This is clearly not the case.

I recognise that there may be difficulty in finding appropriate Polling Stations, particularly when elections occur at short notice. However Polling Stations must be accessible to all voters and no voter should be denied their vote for reason of disability. Nor should they be exposed to danger while casting their vote. Access to the Scout Hut at Boundary Road for wheelchair users is so clearly dangerous that I feel fully justified in saying it must never be used as a Polling Station again.

Yours,

David Gillon
 

"Very successful Artisan/Collectables MARKET on Saturday" says the Rochester City Centre Forum (apparently a joint effort of the council and the High Street traders) on their FB page.

To which I replied: "Very successful, except for those of us who are wheelchair users and find ourselves barred from the footpaths. What you can't see in that top picture is that it is the exit from the disabled car park and the pavement is blocked in both directions, as is the kerb-cut directly in front of that stall - to use the kerb cut safely a wheelchair user needs to start/finish at least as far back as the orange box visible in the picture. In fact it was significantly worse than that when I was in Rochester about 4PM on Saturday as the stall had boxes down the side that meant there wasn't even space to squeeze a narrow wheelchair like mine between the lamppost and stall, taking the unsafe approach down the side of the kerb-cut. For anyone in a wider chair or a powerchair, forget it. Remember, the space in front of the stalls is going to be occupied by customers, so there is even less space available. I ended up having to hop off the kerb, which nearly threw me out of my chair and didn't even try to use the entrance on my return, despite that being my normal route back to the car.

The steep camber of Rochester High Street makes it difficult to wheelie from road to pavement without risking tipping - I can't do it at all if I have the anti-tip protection deployed on my chair - and many people have chairs, powerchairs or scooters which are completely incapable of kerb-climbing. The reality of the choice of stalls which block the full width of the pavement is that they completely block wheelchair users from accessing the shops between them, or even safely exiting the disabled car park.

Rochester High Street is an obstacle course to wheelchair users at the best of times due to paving, camber, and cobbles, but these stalls leave it completely inaccessible. I raised the issue with the Council after their previous appearance, and was assured my concerns, particularly with respect to the kerb cut would be passed on, but this time things were even worse. To use the space in front of the disabled car park, blocking wheelchair users from exiting, really shows a careless contempt for the needs and rights of disabled people."

I had a reply within about an hour from the chair of the Forum. He did promise to do something about the kerb-cuts, but did not impress by first launching into a rant about cyclists on the pedestrianised High Street (why yes, I did know it's pedestrianised on Saturday, that's beside the point, the road doesn't help if I can't get from road to footpath) and then protesting "It's only 12 times a year," and "it's for the community". Do I not count as a member of the community?

Grrrrrrr!!!!