A PROTEST petition calling for Waverley to reverse “highly discriminatory” proposals to charge disabled blue badge holders, has been signed by more than 680 objectors.

There was an outcry when Waverley implemented new charges in the borough’s car parks that removed the three-hours free parking provision previously enjoyed by disabled drivers, unless they were on income-related benefits, from April 3.

After receiving a 390-strong protest petition claiming Waverley had not made its ticket machines safely accessible to wheelchair users – or those with walking frames – the borough council agreed a few weeks later, to suspend enforcement action “temporarily” and undertake a review.

Surrey Disabled Alliance Network (SDAN) claimed only two of 13 councils in Surrey and neighbouring Hampshire charged blue badge holders and even they offered some concessions.

An SDAN spokesman said: “The comparative analysis reveals none of Waverley’s neighbouring authorities differentiate between those holders of blue badges, who receive certain benefits, and those who do not receive certain benefits in determining who should receive free parking.

“Such means testing is demeaning, divisive, discriminatory and unfair since many who do not receive these certain benefits mainly due to age are more disabled than those who do receive these certain benefits.”

Announcing Waverley was suspending enforcement and would conduct a review, director of finance Graeme Clark said: “We have listened to feedback from residents and community groups on the council’s decision to charge for disabled parking.

“We understand there have been concerns about the accessibility of the payment machines. We stand by our decision to charge for disabled parking however, in light of residents’ concerns, we will now revisit our equality impact assessment in relation to accessibility aspects, and work with members of the disabled community, to identify any further measures we can take.”

Waverley is due to report the results of the review at its executive committee scheduled for September 5.

Keen to keep the pressure up, Godalming objector Amanda Clegg has just launched a further petition.

It objects the proposals: “Discriminate unfairly against our most vulnerable citizens most of whom have limited incomes due to their disabilities. Those living outside the borough cannot apply for a Waverley permit.

“This not only discriminates against visitors, but also non-Waverley residents, who, due to the borough boundaries, find their nearest shopping/commercial centre is in Waverley.

“There has been no move as yet to make ticket machines safely accessible to wheelchair users or those with walking frames: machines in Crown Court Godalming are all up a kerb, bar one at the furthest point.

“Haslemere has all the machines on a steep slope above the disabled parking area, difficult and very unsafe for a disabled person to negotiate.

“The suggestion wheelchair users can purchase tickets using Ringo is unfair – Ringo costs extra on top of the parking charge.

“The monetary gain for the council is relatively low.

“Why is this money being sought from the pockets of our most vulnerable and disadvantaged citizens?”

Using the public slot at July’s executive meeting, SDAN chairman David Beaman asked how any additional revenue raised through parking charges from blue badge holders would be spent.

Mr Beaman noted the latest figures showed Waverley was already in “significant surplus” to the tune of £2.7million, from its offstreet parking revenue.

The executive claimed Waverley was under “unprecedented financial pressure” and it was one of the difficult decisions it had taken to protect vital services.

The committee respon ded “It means those blue badge holders who can afford to, will now need to pay to park. This generates additional income for the council which, along with other car park income, helps pay for important environmental services in the borough, such as street cleaning, community transport, open spaces and management of the countryside and woodlands. This is a perfectly legitimate use of car park revenues.”

Speaking after the meeting, Mr Beaman said Waverley intended to use the extra parking income from disabled motorists to effectively cross-subsidise public services provided to able-bodied people on top of the practical difficulties certain disabled people would have in using existing car park payment machines – even if accessibility for wheelchairs was improved.

He said: “No final decision has yet been and we shall continue to campaign for the proposed charges to be completely abandoned.”

Witley-based campaigner for the disabled Carolyn Eley, condemned WBC’s “double whammy” in charging for disabled parking at the same time as shutting public toilets.

Waverley closed toilets in Godalming and Farncombe in June and Haslemere Town Council is currently battling plans to shut ones in the High Street car park.

Writing to Richard Homewood, head of environmental services, Mrs Eley said: “I wish to protest most strongly not only about Waverley’s plans to change the arrangements for disabled parking, but also its plans to close the public toilets.

“Disabled bays are placed next to public toilets in town centres for a reason. It is commonly recognised most disabled people have bladder/bowel urgency problems and need to access toilets very quickly. Disabled people are, by default, often impoverished. They have few choices of transport and have to use cars/vans.”