Osborne uses a disabled parking space

Original post by Architecture-er

If you're crapping yourself and the men's loos are out of order you'd use the disabled toilet as well.

There's a difference between using the disabled toilets, when you're generally in there for a couple of minutes at most, and taking up a disabled parking space, when you're there for a couple of hours. I use disabled toilets if the ladies are full, because I have IBS so quite often, waiting just isn't an option for me. However, if we don't have my Dad in the car, we don't park in disabled spaces (unless we've dropped him off somewhere closer so he needs to be able to get back to the car afterwards).

My Dad rarely leaves the house, and on the rare occasions that he does, it's sometimes to come shopping with us. If there are no disabled spaces available, we can't go out as a family - and quite often, the disabled spaces are taken up by people without blue badges. I don't mind when I see someone walking perfectly fine from the space to the shop, because not every disability can be seen, as long as they have a blue badge. People without blue badges parking in disabled spaces are selfish and don't realise the impact of their actions.

Reply 24

Original post by Aj12

That or the car drove off and picked him up again. It's a stupid headline and a non story

It definitely isn't a complete non story, which is why the main press agencies immediately picked it up and circulated it. The Tory press aren't running it (surprise!) but it is a story, even if it only shows that government security staff regard disabled facilities with disdain. Not very good behaviour really. It's also of a piece with Osborne's previous conduct, for example, his insultingly superior behaviour towards train staff when he moved to First Class without the relevant ticket. It tends to indicate a pattern of conduct - one of arrogant, superior disdain for the rules that govern ordinary people.

This in turn is politically interesting because this is the "we're all in it together" Chancellor, who has made a great play of doing it all for the common man. His latest speech was a carefully coordinated piece of political theatre, using a group of slightly better paid working class people in a warehouse to run a speech attacking alleged "scroungers" and those on benefits. During that speech, he used words clearly designed to make him sound 'ordinary' and a 'regular guy'.

Incidents like this one and the one on the train demonstrate that this is a sham and he and his colleagues regard those who are struggling, like the disabled, who are currently at the receiving end of a massive attack on their incomes, with superior indifference.

Reply 25

Original post by Fullofsurprises

It definitely isn't a complete non story, which is why the main press agencies immediately picked it up and circulated it. The Tory press aren't running it (surprise!) but it is a story, even if it only shows that government security staff regard disabled facilities with disdain. Not very good behaviour really. It's also of a piece with Osborne's previous conduct, for example, his insultingly superior behaviour towards train staff when he moved to First Class without the relevant ticket. It tends to indicate a pattern of conduct - one of arrogant, superior disdain for the rules that govern ordinary people.

This in turn is politically interesting because this is the "we're all in it together" Chancellor, who has made a great play of doing it all for the common man. His latest speech was a carefully coordinated piece of political theatre, using a group of slightly better paid working class people in a warehouse to run a speech attacking alleged "scroungers" and those on benefits. During that speech, he used words clearly designed to make him sound 'ordinary' and a 'regular guy'.

Incidents like this one and the one on the train demonstrate that this is a sham and he and his colleagues regard those who are struggling, like the disabled, who are currently at the receiving end of a massive attack on their incomes, with superior indifference.

Ah another beautiful non story:

""As he had no seat reservation on the new train which was crowded, he decided to upgrade - and obviously intended and was happy to pay.

"An aide sought out the train manager and paid the ticket upgrade," the spokesman added.

The initial reports suggested the upgrade fee was £160, but Virgin Trains have since confirmed the actual figure was £189.50 and covered the cost of an upgrade for the chancellor and an assistant.

'Dealt with amicably'
A Virgin Trains spokesman said that the Chancellor's aide found the train manager as soon as the train left Wilmslow station near Manchester "to explain the situation and arrange to pay for an upgrade".

They added: "It was agreed that the Chancellor would remain in first class and an amount of £189.50 was paid by the aide to cover the upgrade for Mr Osborne and his PA."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20008342

I really think you are inferring far too much from what could have simply been a simple mistake. His security staff dropped him off and he went to buy something before they parked. We don't know how he acted when he found out where they had parked nor if Osborne had anything to do with the choice of parking space. I get you hate the guy, but honestly I doubt he was sat in the car laughing away telling his driver to park in a disabled space because he likes to **** over anyone he can anyway he can.

If you want to attack the government I'm sure you can come up with much better ways than pathetic attacks like this one.

Reply 26

Original post by Aj12

Ah another beautiful non story:

""As he had no seat reservation on the new train which was crowded, he decided to upgrade - and obviously intended and was happy to pay.

"An aide sought out the train manager and paid the ticket upgrade," the spokesman added.

The initial reports suggested the upgrade fee was £160, but Virgin Trains have since confirmed the actual figure was £189.50 and covered the cost of an upgrade for the chancellor and an assistant.

'Dealt with amicably'
A Virgin Trains spokesman said that the Chancellor's aide found the train manager as soon as the train left Wilmslow station near Manchester "to explain the situation and arrange to pay for an upgrade".

They added: "It was agreed that the Chancellor would remain in first class and an amount of £189.50 was paid by the aide to cover the upgrade for Mr Osborne and his PA."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20008342

I really think you are inferring far too much from what could have simply been a simple mistake. His security staff dropped him off and he went to buy something before they parked. We don't know how he acted when he found out where they had parked nor if Osborne had anything to do with the choice of parking space. I get you hate the guy, but honestly I doubt he was sat in the car laughing away telling his driver to park in a disabled space because he likes to **** over anyone he can anyway he can.

If you want to attack the government I'm sure you can come up with much better ways than pathetic attacks like this one.

You're giving a highly selective version of events. A journalist who was present gave a very different one, of arrogant Osborne staffers, a loud row on the train, superior behaviour, etc. That's why a large posse of journalists rushed to the station to meet the train and quiz the Chancellor on it. Oh, and of course, we are supposed to just take at face value what Virgin had to say about it, when they are totally dependent on the government for renewal of their franchise?

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 27

Original post by Fullofsurprises

You're giving a highly selective version of events. A journalist who was present gave a very different one, of arrogant Osborne staffers, a loud row on the train, superior behaviour, etc. That's why a large posse of journalists rushed to the station to meet the train and quiz the Chancellor on it.

Even if the Journalist gave a completely accurate version of events which is a fairly questionable assumption, the event still has nothing to do with Osborne, he has a **** for an aide. It's hardly breaking news nor any sort of revelation that those in power tend to have stuck up fools surrounding them. Would't be surprised if the guy had been fired by now

Look let's just cut the crap here. You hate Osborne, you want any excuse to attack him and them make wild assumptions about what went on and how it somehow represents the government. I'm sure your smart enough to be able to come up with ways to attack the government without using non stories about idiot mistakes of Osborne's staff.

Reply 28

Original post by Aj12

Even if the Journalist gave a completely accurate version of events which is a fairly questionable assumption, the event still has nothing to do with Osborne, he has a **** for an aide. It's hardly breaking news nor any sort of revelation that those in power tend to have stuck up fools surrounding them. Would't be surprised if the guy had been fired by now

Look let's just cut the crap here. You hate Osborne, you want any excuse to attack him and them make wild assumptions about what went on and how it somehow represents the government. I'm sure your smart enough to be able to come up with ways to attack the government without using non stories about idiot mistakes of Osborne's staff.

I've attacked government policy in detail in loads of other threads. This thread is about the disabled bay parking incident.

The point is (that you deny, against the facts in evidence) that there is a clear pattern of conduct of the staff that surround Osborne (and other government ministers presumably) - one of arrogance, superiority and dismissal of ordinary rules. This latest incident IS news and it IS interesting, precisely because it is part of that pattern.

If this was a court, it would definitely form part of the case against the accused.

Reply 29

Original post by Fullofsurprises

I've attacked government policy in detail in loads of other threads. This thread is about the disabled bay parking incident.

The point is (that you deny, against the facts in evidence) that there is a clear pattern of conduct of the staff that surround Osborne (and other government ministers presumably) - one of arrogance, superiority and dismissal of ordinary rules. This latest incident IS news and it IS interesting, precisely because it is part of that pattern.

If this was a court, it would definitely form part of the case against the accused.

I'd hardly call an ITV Journalist's tweets very strong evidence, especially when Virgin came out and completely contradicted his version of events....

Two events involving two staff members is not clear evidence especially when we do not know how Osborne reacted in either case. It's clutching at straws at best for you to make the assumptions your making and just comes across as a pathetic attack against a man and government you don't like

Reply 30

Angry Spartan

3

Original post by Fullofsurprises

You're giving a highly selective version of events. A journalist who was present gave a very different one, of arrogant Osborne staffers, a loud row on the train, superior behaviour, etc. That's why a large posse of journalists rushed to the station to meet the train and quiz the Chancellor on it. Oh, and of course, we are supposed to just take at face value what Virgin had to say about it, when they are totally dependent on the government for renewal of their franchise?

That's rather funny. So Virgin's account must lack accuaracy because of government dependence on their franchise renewal, but the journalists view of the events is perfectly accurate and that is what must be believed? Give us a break. You can't dismiss one version of events simply because you disagree with what they've said.

Reply 31

rmhumphries

17

Read about this on bbc news - in my opinion seems like a honest mistake.

However, on the flip side, people using disabled places without a blue badge annoys me, and I would be perfectly happy for a law to be passed so that private parking tickets for disabled bays (only) are as enforceable as council parking tickets.

Reply 32

Original post by Aj12

I'd hardly call an ITV Journalist's tweets very strong evidence, especially when Virgin came out and completely contradicted his version of events....

Two events involving two staff members is not clear evidence especially when we do not know how Osborne reacted in either case. It's clutching at straws at best for you to make the assumptions your making and just comes across as a pathetic attack against a man and government you don't like

It's completely reasonable to think that Virgin would obfuscate, apart from anything else, they would be concerned not to get caught up taking sides and as I say, their franchise was up at the time. They had every motive to distort the facts. Not to mention they have a long history as a company of playing fast and loose with the actualité when it suits them.

It isn't 'pathetic' to highlight this type of behaviour! Talk about shoot the messenger. Your ire would be better directed towards the Chancellor's staff, who plainly think they are above normal people.

Reply 33

Original post by Aj12

I'd hardly call an ITV Journalist's tweets very strong evidence, especially when Virgin came out and completely contradicted his version of events....

Two events involving two staff members is not clear evidence especially when we do not know how Osborne reacted in either case. It's clutching at straws at best for you to make the assumptions your making and just comes across as a pathetic attack against a man and government you don't like

But we do know something about how Osborne reacted. Rachel Townsend is a highly respected journalist, it wasn't just some random tweet. Here is what she said shortly after the incident:

Townsend told ITV: "Then his aide approached the ticket collector right next to me. He said he is travelling with George and he has a standard ticket but can he remain in first class? The guard said no. The aide said Osborne couldn't possibly sit in standard class. The guard replied saying if he wants to stay it's £160. The aide said he couldn't pay and he couldn't really sit in standard. The guard refused to budge. The guard went on gathering tickets and later told me Osborne had agreed to cough up the £160."

Reply 34

Original post by Fullofsurprises

It's completely reasonable to think that Virgin would obfuscate, apart from anything else, they would be concerned not to get caught up taking sides and as I say, their franchise was up at the time. They had every motive to distort the facts. Not to mention they have a long history as a company of playing fast and loose with the actualité when it suits them.

It isn't 'pathetic' to highlight this type of behaviour! Talk about shoot the messenger. Your ire would be better directed towards the Chancellor's staff, who plainly think they are above normal people.

Then why aren't you railing about his staff? Sure he has some degree of responsibility for his staff's actions however in both cases he was not aware of what was going on and seems to have only found out about these events afterwards. His aide bought him a ticket and made a scene about it, his driver parked somewhere whilst Osborne was not in the car. Seems extreme to be holding him personally responsible as you and the Mirror were for events he had no control over

Reply 35

username1135580

10

I'm more interested in the "Korea Can now nuke UK"

Reply 36

Original post by Aj12

Then why aren't you railing about his staff? Sure he has some degree of responsibility for his staff's actions however in both cases he was not aware of what was going on and seems to have only found out about these events afterwards. His aide bought him a ticket and made a scene about it, his driver parked somewhere whilst Osborne was not in the car. Seems extreme to be holding him personally responsible as you and the Mirror were for events he had no control over

I have repeatedly used the phrase "his staff", etc.

The point is that these stories show a pattern of conduct by Osborne's staff that must point a finger at his attitudes and totally contradict the PR that he is trying to put across.

The principle reason why the story is interesting though is none of the above - it is that he is now routinely attacking 'scroungers' and 'cheats' who abuse the benefits system - yet here he is, cheating himself, about something that matters to disabled people - who are in turn also being victimised by this filthy government to help foot the bill generated by the City!

Today we also have news that 643 bankers earning more than £1m are to receive a tax cut of £34m. I think it's clear who's side Osborne is on - this story just helps to demonstrate it in a very visible way.

Reply 37

coconut2456

1

Original post by Fullofsurprises

I have repeatedly used the phrase "his staff", etc.

The point is that these stories show a pattern of conduct by Osborne's staff that must point a finger at his attitudes and totally contradict the PR that he is trying to put across.

The principle reason why the story is interesting though is none of the above - it is that he is now routinely attacking 'scroungers' and 'cheats' who abuse the benefits system - yet here he is, cheating himself, about something that matters to disabled people - who are in turn also being victimised by this filthy government to help foot the bill generated by the City!

Today we also have news that 643 bankers earning more than £1m are to receive a tax cut of £34m. I think it's clear who's side Osborne is on - this story just helps to demonstrate it in a very visible way.

You say you repeatedly used the phrase "his staff", but you really should have put that in the bolded bit. If he was dropped off earlier and was just getting in the car then he had no control over where his driver was going to park. He didn't cheat anyone in this incident, his driver did. This is honestly a non-story.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 38

Original post by Fullofsurprises

I have repeatedly used the phrase "his staff", etc.

The point is that these stories show a pattern of conduct by Osborne's staff that must point a finger at his attitudes and totally contradict the PR that he is trying to put across.

The principle reason why the story is interesting though is none of the above - it is that he is now routinely attacking 'scroungers' and 'cheats' who abuse the benefits system - yet here he is, cheating himself, about something that matters to disabled people - who are in turn also being victimised by this filthy government to help foot the bill generated by the City!

Today we also have news that 643 bankers earning more than £1m are to receive a tax cut of £34m. I think it's clear who's side Osborne is on - this story just helps to demonstrate it in a very visible way.

But you have not been using his staff at all have you? In fact you made a thread saying Osborne likes to park in disabled bays....

I think we can just stop this, next time you want to pursue a vendetta against Osborne please try to do it with a proper story. Thanks :smile:

Reply 39