Disabled commuter calls for bus pass rule change
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
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
The Government has defended the Online Safety Act after Elon Musk's X said the legislation was threatening free speech. In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
The Government has defended the Online Safety Act after Elon Musk's X said the legislation was threatening free speech. In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Voices: Could this be the way Starmer placates his revolting MPs?
Keir cannot afford another fiasco like welfare,' one Starmer loyalist told me, recalling the government's humiliating climbdown on proposed cuts to disability benefits after a revolt by Labour MPs. The prime minister knows the episode showed that his way of governing is unsustainable. He is consulting people widely this summer about how to turn things round. There's a fierce internal debate taking place. In Keir Starmer's right ear, Morgan McSweeney, his influential chief of staff, tells him to focus on wooing back voters in the red wall from Nigel Farage. In his left ear, soft-left cabinet ministers urge a more progressive approach to woo centre-left voters who have deserted Labour for the Liberal Democrats and the Greens. They argue that these lost voters outnumber defectors to Reform by a margin of three to one. The soft left's allies in Downing Street want Starmer to emulate Bill Clinton, who fought back against a right-wing populist – Newt Gingrich, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives – after a rocky start to his first term in 1993. One minister admitted: 'There is a battle over the direction of the government. There is only one person who can resolve it. Keir has got to decide for himself – based on his values, who he is, who he wants to be.' The left-ear whisperers want the PM to trust the instincts that are serving him well on foreign affairs and apply them to the domestic agenda, too. Starmer appeared to be tacking leftwards when he told Tom Baldwin for the paperback version of his biography, published on Thursday: 'We have to be the progressives fighting against the populists of Reform – yes, Labour has to be a progressive party.' He has hinted that he wants to tackle child poverty by scrapping the two-child benefit limit. The PM has nodded to Labour critics who argue – persuasively – that his government has sometimes acted left but talked right, and that it's no wonder, therefore, that it gets little credit from progressive voters. He said that issues such as clean energy, nationalising the railways and increasing the national minimum wage should be shouted louder from the rooftops. 'We should show we're proud of all that,' he told Baldwin. Starmer views this as part of 'telling a better story'. But you can only tell one if you know the direction in which you are heading. The battle isn't over yet; I'm told McSweeney is not convinced about a shift to the left. His critics say the shortcomings of attacking Reform head-on were illustrated when the science secretary Peter Kyle claimed Farage was on the paedophile Jimmy Savile's side in the heated debate over internet regulation. The attack line was reportedly approved by No 10, but it backfired. It was the sort of smear we might expect from Reform. The lesson for Starmer: Labour can't 'out-Farage Farage', and the public will vote for the real thing if Labour tries to look like Reform-lite. Allies of McSweeney believe the red wall will decide the next general election, so Labour's primary pitch must be to the white working class. His internal opponents insist that trying to re-run the 2024 election triumph, McSweeney's greatest hit, will not work next time. They dispute the idea that Labour 'won' the north and the Midlands last year, saying that it reaped the benefit of a split on the right between the Conservatives and Reform, and that Labour regained seats seized by the Tories in 2019 mainly because Tory voters switched to Reform. At the next election, Farage will likely hoover up the right-wing vote. Crucially, the left vote will be split this time – inflicting deep damage to Labour unless Starmer can appeal to left-of-centre voters. He won't do that by tacking right, cutting benefits for the disabled and pensioners or aping Farage. For Starmer to win a presidential contest against the Reform leader, being the anti-Farage candidate will not be enough: he will have to offer progressive voters more than he has offered them so far. Another reason why Starmer should listen to the buzz in his left ear is that the new socialist party launched by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana will present another alternative to disenchanted Labour voters. It already has 600,000 registered supporters. Starmer won't lurch to the Corbyn hard left – and rightly so. But the sensible decision he should make this summer is that it's time for Labour to live up to its name and its values, and stop pretending to be something it is not.
