Vote “yes” in the transit referendum to defend the right to mobility
Returning to isolation of past not an ethical option, HandyDART riders argue
By Beth McKellar and Bet Tuason
Not very long ago, people with disabilities and older seniors were routinely isolated in their homes or in institutions. Even sidewalks designs excluded people using wheelchairs. We have come a long way, with the right to move and participate in society now being widely recognized. But there is a danger that we will slip backwards towards that dark past, just as the first baby boomers enter their 70s and the population of people over 80 soars.
Denying mobility and access based on ability can be compared to sentencing someone who has committed no crime to permanent house arrest. And the person whose rights are denied may be you or someone in your immediate family.
Creating age-friendly communities is now a stated goal for every level of government, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms supposedly guarantees people with disabilities equal benefit and protection. But the fact that the provincial government has forced a transit referendum on us shows that these words on paper are not enough. Words don’t fund services, numbers in government budgets do.
While there are people with disabilities in every age group including young children, the probability of living with a disability increases with age. Only about eight percent of Canadians 25 to 44 years old live with disabilities while about a third of people between 65 and 74 do, and this increases to more than half for those over 75. Not everyone living with a disability needs services such as HandyDART, but the probability of needing specialized services to live independently with a high quality of life increases greatly for those over 70 years old.
The Metro Vancouver transit referendum is sometimes framed as being just about a few major rapid transit projects. But the Mayors’ Council included a 30 percent increase in HandyDART service in the plan—adding 100 HandyDART vans to the present fleet of about 300, along with major bus service improvements for the whole region. HandyDART is a door-to-door transit service for people with disabilities and older seniors who cannot use the regular transit system for at least some trips.
HandyDART service hours have been frozen in Metro Vancouver since 2009, and as a result trip denials went up over 600 percent before the contractor changed procedures to disguise the crisis. A similar freeze on bus service has led to overcrowding, and made riding conventional transit less convenient and safe for seniors and people with disabilities. You may be able to jam on a crowded bus or SkyTrain car, but many people with even fairly mild “invisible” disabilities can’t do so safely. People using wheelchairs and walkers just get left behind at the curb.
If the No side wins it will be a tough fight to get any increase in HandyDART service, and cutbacks are a real possibility. Over the past few months the B.C. government has announced cancellations of planned bus and HandyDART service improvements in communities across the province. Despite Premier Christy Clark’s new-found interest in reducing climate pollution, things are not looking good for public transit in B.C. outside of Metro Vancouver. With a No vote we will likely have lots of company in cutting planned bus and HandyDART service improvements.
The HandyDART Riders’ Alliance is going to keep on campaigning for more and better HandyDART service no matter what way the vote goes. But we can’t do it all; we need people and organizations to step up and make better transit their priority. And we need your vote today.
Comments
10 Comments
Jim Howden
May 21, 2015 at 2:33pm
Another red herring to aid with the smoke and mirrors being employed.
We're hell bent on the end game, densification of not only the grater Vancouver area, but the Fraser Valley. Building more and more expensive tiny apartments unsuitable for most let alone young families in Vancouver, which require large debt accumulation by locals to acquire. Liveability has gone out the window, to accommodate the elite and the developers abetted by their political handmaidens.
We're told a yes vote will reduce congestion by 20%. However, Gregor Robertson's council shut down one of the limited city conduits, Point Grey Road, which had been used as a major route to UBC for the 50 years I've lived in the area. Was that a ploy to add to congestion thereby justifying even more taxes and levies for a dysfunctional transit authority?
If that closure was really about a bike lane, the city could have reclaimed the city land appropriated by said homeowners. It was in fact an action that further added to vehicular congestion on all other corridors to UBC.
Vision and Green councillors lost not only my vote with that charade but any trust in what they say or advise. Densification is the end game and the Point Grey closure shows that congestion is not the real issue, but a ploy to extract even more cash from us.
Vancouverite's quality of life and affordability is first, but the whole of the Fraser Valley is next.
We've voted, No!
F.U.D Fear uncertainty and Doubt
May 21, 2015 at 2:34pm
I support Transit but not at any cost and not on a non binding 'Promise' 10 years from now.
The reason are as follow's
1. The Mayor's 'Plan' is Unfunded! It depends on both Federal & Provincial Funding to about $8 billion+,
2. Neither the Federal Cons nor the Provincial Crusty Neo Cons have shown any interest and in fact have been campaigning against this 'Plan' / Funding,
3. Most of the Politicians selling this pipe dream with no funding won't be in office in a few years let alone 10 years from now,
4. A Yes vote does NOT increase capacity is simply authorizes a .5% PST Tax to be put aside up to ten years if there is no Funding by than it will be turned over to Translink, NO added capacity!
5. That's right a Yes vote means NO added capacity unless both the Federal and Provincial Governments magically give the Mayors $8 Billion + in ten years, good luck!
A 'No' Vote does NOT change the status quo in fact it forces the Politicians and Translink to come up with;
(A) a better plan,
(B) A Plan to Fund and deliver actual not 'promised' in ten years capacity in the near future!
The Provincial Government has already allocated Funds to 50 Year Toll Bridges, PPP (Private, Public, Partnerships) aka Corporate Welfare for the Construction and other Corporations.
Therefore there is zero allocation and no future allocation from this Provincial Government nor the Federal Governments for any 'Yes' Vote.
And you realize this is a simple Non Binding Plebiscite that is not even Funded!!!
Transit has been cutting back on Handy Dart service over the last decade despite public outcry and support, that won't change much,
No.
May 21, 2015 at 3:21pm
No.
Richard Campbell
May 21, 2015 at 3:22pm
@F.U.D.
Please stop spreading misinformation. It adds nothing to the discussion.
The Provincial Government has committed to funding their portion and the current Federal Government has likely committed enough funding over the next 10 years as well. And the other Federal Parties are likely to be even more supportive of transit.
People voting Yes to a sales tax increase will send a strong message to the Federal and Provincial governments that people want better transit. This will help ensure enough funding.
I see more spin
May 21, 2015 at 4:20pm
Ramping up the emotional appeal here at the Straight once again I see. How about a piece on how a "no" vote is misogynist? Or how about threatening to kill a puppy unless there is a win by the "yes" side? I do not believe any promises made by Translink or the mayor's aside from the fact we will be out of pocket a little more than we are already. Voted "no" and would do so again if the chance came up. I have already converted some friends to "no" and also managed to get some folks who usually can't be bothered to vote to support taxpayers for the first time in decades. We have a duty to say "no" to ever increasing costs of "public services" and demand accountability from the useless bureaucracy.
... and a NO vote sends a message too
May 21, 2015 at 4:48pm
@Richard Campbell
NO sends a message too.
It says NO we don't want your Mayors' plan, we dont want to passively accept the government's hands ever deeper in our pockets, we dont want to fund your ecotopian dreamscape while developers of high rise, high density box 'transit villages' reap obscene profit building them and while the green and pleasant town we've called home is run roughshod over and rent ascunder.
We say NO to Orwellian 'mobility pricing' where using a road, ANY road, is electronically charged to your account.
We say NO to tearing down the main arteries into downtown ( the VIADUCTS) to build more of these glass and concrete monstrosities in our town and purposely INCREASING not decreasing congestion.
We say NO=NSENSE to the idea that running more buses will materially affect any future climate for any future grandchildren.
And if in the process of saying NO to all these things that threaten the freedom and wellbeing of our populace, we accidentally say no to payng for the present level of HandiDart, well I'm sure we can fix that with a fraction of the money we'll save over encouraging this insanity with a free pass to our wallets.
Remember, bus rides are not the only thing we'll be asked to pay for to absorb this next million. Hospitals, doctors, nurses, technichians, diagnostic equipment, etc will all have to be expanded to maintain todays levels of service, as compromised as they are.
Nope. BUSES are way down the list of a MILLION people's needs.
We so NO to the practice of taxing car drivers wallets to pay for transit they dont use or want. NO MORE to higher property taxes to fund Translink, more fuel tax to fund translink, more levies like on your HYDRO bill to fund translink. NO to them all.
We say NO to bulding new infrastructure to accommodate a MILLION more people who havent yet arrived. We say NO to spending money on bike lanes, traffic 'caliming' and other congestion inducing practices being foisted upon us.
And we MEAN it.
Be sure. This referendum is NOT just about NO to Translink or about a few more HandiDart pickups. It is about voting NO to a whole.. lot... more. This time the message WILL be delivered.
grant
May 21, 2015 at 5:29pm
I don't live in vancouver,but i would vote no because the idea of raising funds by pushing up the sales tax to 7.5 scares me.If the vote is yes i can see other local governments looking into the same idea to pay for whatever is their grand plans.Maybe planting more flowers in the middle of the road or something?
edoherty
May 21, 2015 at 9:38pm
"We say NO=NSENSE to the idea that running more buses will materially affect any future climate for any future grandchildren."
I really hope most people, including most people who voted no, find this kind of amoral climate shrug highly offensive. Climate is the defining ethical issue of our time, and pretending to sit on the fence tells everyone what side you are really on.
These kinds of comments are usually anonymous for a reason.
Devil's Avocado
May 21, 2015 at 10:20pm
Should've been a *targeted* sales tax, a luxury sales tax, applying to things such as BMW's, iPhones, Prada purses, Rolex watches, etc. You know, junk no one needs that only people with way too much money buy.
But no, for some reason they just had to aim it directly at poor peoples food, clothing and other necessities. Broad sales taxes hurt low income residents more than anyone else. That's not debatable, it's simply a fact.
To all the allegedly progressive pro-tax folk: Please stop spinning for a moment and *learn* something from this miserable failure of a proposal. The way it sank had nothing to do with Bateman's measly ineffective $40k No campaign.
ursa minor
May 25, 2015 at 12:01pm
Devil's Avocado - The PST does not apply to unprocessed food or restaurant food.