"James" wrote in message
om...
"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3595351.stm

London Underground (LU) has been warned that it could be sued by
disabled
people if it does not improve access for them by October.
By then the part of the Disability Discrimination Act which governs
access
to transport will come into force.

Currently only one in seven stations are step-free, which allows entry
for
wheelchair users.

[snip]

And at quite what height should the platforms be at Ealing Common and
Rayner's Lane to Uxbridge to be step free?

Maybe they should make the platform a slope so it is stepfree to
Districts/Mets at one end and Piccadillys at the other!

Peter Smyth

James wrote:

"John Rowland" wrote in message ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3595351.stm

London Underground (LU) has been warned that it could be sued by disabled
people if it does not improve access for them by October.
By then the part of the Disability Discrimination Act which governs access
to transport will come into force.

Currently only one in seven stations are step-free, which allows entry for
wheelchair users.

[snip]


And at quite what height should the platforms be at Ealing Common and
Rayner's Lane to Uxbridge to be step free?

Hasn't there been some consideration to hiving off the Rayner's Lane
Piccadilly branch to the District line - or running it as a Acton Town -
Rayner's Lane / Uxbridge shuttle?

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"John Rowland" wrote in message ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3595351.stm

London Underground (LU) has been warned that it could be sued by disabled
people if it does not improve access for them by October.
By then the part of the Disability Discrimination Act which governs access
to transport will come into force.

Currently only one in seven stations are step-free, which allows entry for
wheelchair users.

[snip]


And at quite what height should the platforms be at Ealing Common and
Rayner's Lane to Uxbridge to be step free?

Hasn't there been some consideration to hiving off the Rayner's Lane
Piccadilly branch to the District line - or running it as a Acton Town -
Rayner's Lane / Uxbridge shuttle?

That would REALLY be popular. If it could even reach Hi Ken, there may
be more chance of that idea flying.

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
news

The other day I boarded a bus and the leaflet rack
behind the driver held booklets entitled "A staff
guide to ticketing on London's buses"

to quote page 20:

Any female passenger wearing a Burqa or Yashmak
can hold a valid Photocard, that shows the face
similarly covered, to support a valid Bus
Pass, Travelcard or LT Card.

Under *no* circumstances should a female passenger
be asked to uncover her face or be refused travel
when holding a valid ticket supported by such a Photocard.

However, she may be asked to uncover her vagina to prove she is female... I
don't think they've thought that one out.

Does it say anything about certain Amerindian tribes, who refuse to be
photographed because they believe that a camera takes away part of their
soul?

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"Peter Smyth" wrote in message ...
"James" wrote in message
om...
"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3595351.stm

London Underground (LU) has been warned that it could be sued by
disabled
people if it does not improve access for them by October.
By then the part of the Disability Discrimination Act which governs
access
to transport will come into force.

Currently only one in seven stations are step-free, which allows entry
for
wheelchair users.

[snip]

And at quite what height should the platforms be at Ealing Common and
Rayner's Lane to Uxbridge to be step free?

Maybe they should make the platform a slope so it is stepfree to
Districts/Mets at one end and Piccadillys at the other!

Peter Smyth

I can hear the exploding arteries from the HSE's direction...

Brad

(Fat Richard) wrote in message . com...
(Nick Cooper) wrote in message ...

By October? Unrealistic expectations?!
--
Nick Cooper

They may be unrealistic but the act has been known about for years. I
have no doubt that TFL / LUL have staff dedicated to this sole subject
so if things have not been prepared then . . .

Well exactly. Of course it's unrealistic *now*, but in the USA
disabled people have been able to sue over access since the mid-1970s,
and as a result there is far more awareness and accessibility over
there. LU must have known that things were going the same way here;
they've just chosen to prioritise other things. Doubtless this was
the correct course of action; no one, not even a wheelchair user, can
use the tube if the signals are screwed up, but to say that this issue
has crept up on LU unawares is simply untrue.

Does anyone know if work has / is / will be done ? I know the politics
of this subject are far greater than the trivial way I reply and is an
emotive subject for both sides, I show an "interest" as my partner
works in this field and have many long and intersting "discussions"
with her.

I would suggest that the huge steps being taken towards making all
buses fully accessible to wheelchair users are London Transport's
response to the Disability Discrimination Act; ok, wheelchair users
can't take the tube, but accessible transport is provided, will be the
defence in court.

What I find more annoying is the fact that the lifts on the JLE, which
was specifically designed with accessibility in mind, are constantly
out of order...

Patrick

In article ,
The Only Living Boy in New Cross wrote:
Well exactly. Of course it's unrealistic *now*, but in the USA
disabled people have been able to sue over access since the mid-1970s,
and as a result there is far more awareness and accessibility over
there. LU must have known that things were going the same way here;

Indeed, a friend of my parents who is in a chair had a Churchill
Fellowship to the US in the seventies to look at this issue. Of course,
it's a social shift that has a lot of relationship to guilt over Vietnam
and improvements in battlefield medicine: there was a sudden rise in the
number of wheelchair using young men who were otherwise fit, politicised
and politically significant. How much of the wheelchair access to, say,
BART is practical if you don't have the upper body strength of a fit
young man who is the victim of an injury (as oppposed, say, to
progressive wasting from MS) is an interesting issue. Wheelchair users
are not, by and large, the wheelchair users one sees doing the London
Marathon, but have multiple other issues.

ian

Ian G Batten wrote:

In article , The Only
Living Boy in New Cross wrote:
Well exactly. Of course it's unrealistic *now*, but in the USA disabled
people have been able to sue over access since the mid-1970s, and as a
result there is far more awareness and accessibility over there. LU
must have known that things were going the same way here;

Indeed, a friend of my parents who is in a chair had a Churchill
Fellowship to the US in the seventies to look at this issue. Of course,
it's a social shift that has a lot of relationship to guilt over Vietnam
and improvements in battlefield medicine: there was a sudden rise in the
number of wheelchair using young men who were otherwise fit, politicised
and politically significant. How much of the wheelchair access to, say,
BART is practical if you don't have the upper body strength of a fit young
man who is the victim of an injury (as oppposed, say, to progressive
wasting from MS) is an interesting issue. Wheelchair users are not, by
and large, the wheelchair users one sees doing the London Marathon, but
have multiple other issues.

To be honest it raises the whole issue of whether such people should be
using the tube at all. Let's face it, even with lifts and ramps a wheelchair
is the last thing needed on a busy tube platform or train even outside of
rush hour.
Given that there is plenty of access to other transport options, I think
some sense of balance is needed. For example, would subsidising taxis for
these people be more cost effective than digging lift shafts and altering
the layout in Victorian underground structures? Almost certainly.
What will suing the tube actually achieve? Some cash for the folks in
wheelchairs but less money available to actually do the work they are
demanding. Crazy.
It has to be accepted that the Tube was never designed for disabled people
and that altering it would be prohibitively expensive for little real gain.
I know that's a very harsh view, but that's life. If you end up in a
wheelchair, yes it's very tragic but you can't go around expecting the rest
of the world to change so that you can live exactly the same life you did
before.

IMHO

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 13:42:12 GMT, Steve wrote:


Does anybody why wheelchair users are allowed to travel for free?

Actually, before you do, let me make one thing clear - I am all for making
travel in London more accessible for wheelchair-bound and disabled people. I
think we all agree on this point - why should they be discriminated against?

But I have a problem with the fact that they are allowed to travel free? Is
this not rather discriminatory in itself?


I suspect that *most* wheelchair passengers would be entitled to a
normal TfL disabled pass.

--
Thomas Covenant
Please observe reply to Address.
Unsolicited mail to "From" address
deleted unread.

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 10:34:03 +0100, Robert R News wrote:

Ian G Batten wrote:

To be honest it raises the whole issue of whether such people should be
using the tube at all. Let's face it, even with lifts and ramps a wheelchair
is the last thing needed on a busy tube platform or train even outside of
rush hour.
Have a trip on the Jubilee Line Extension sometime.

Or better still, choose any Tube line and have a rant at young mothers and
fathers with baby buggies.