George Osborne Caught Parking In Disabled Bay

Portly_Pig

It's a moral thing and it looks like Osbournes have already been decided. Even though it's nothing to do with him.

1886

When I go shopping etc. I usually have a look to see how many of the cars in disabled bays actually have disabled badges, usually about 70%. People are lazy, people don't care, people in the public eye are no different

Joe_Horner

Avoriaz wrote: »

Spot the irony.

Osborne wasn't driving and wasn't even in or near the car when it was parked in a disabled space yet you are happy to pass inaccurate judgement on him. :rotfl:

His driver, his responsibility.

The suggestions about security are absurd - if that was the issue they wouldn't have been dropping him at the door then going off to park anywhere.

Beyond that, the distance Osbourne might have to walk wasn't a concern of the driver (because he wasn't walking it) unless it was "expected" not to make the boss walk too far. Such expectations are set by the attitudes of - you guessed it - the boss!

What judgement do you pass on Ed Balls, the Shadow Chancellor, for speeding, a far more dangerous thing to do?

Believe it or not, exactly the same. He f***** up (in a way many people do) so he should take the consequences, which should be greater because of his (chosen) role as an MP. Although at least he appears to have had the moral fibre to 'fess up.

It's not about party, it's about standards in public life. When a Government (or Opposition) chooses to pass judgement on the life situation (often imposed rather than chosen) of others they need to be whiter than white themselves in their chosen lifestyle.

I try to exhibit morals in my personal and business affairs, the least I can expect from the people I'm paying £60k + per year to is that they do the same.

Portly_Pig

Joe_Horner wrote: »

His driver, his responsibility.

The suggestions about security are absurd - if that was the issue they wouldn't have been dropping him at the door then going off to park anywhere.

Beyond that, the distance Osbourne might have to walk wasn't a concern of the driver (because he wasn't walking it) unless it was "expected" not to make the boss walk too far. Such expectations are set by the attitudes of - you guessed it - the boss!

Believe it or not, exactly the same. He f***** up (in a way many people do) so he should take the consequences, which should be greater because of his (chosen) role as an MP. Although at least he appears to have had the moral fibre to 'fess up.
e
It's not about party, it's about standards in public life. When a Government (or Opposition) chooses to pass judgement on the life situation (often imposed rather than chosen) of others they need to be whiter than white themselves in their chosen lifestyle.

I try to exhibit morals in my personal and business affairs, the least I can expect from the people I'm paying £60k + per year to is that they do
the same.

It's the driver who is responsible for parking not Osbourne.

Lum

Personally I couldn't care less about someone doing 56 in those road works (and don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly a fan of Ed Balls either), unless it was actually at a time when people are on the road (which is to say almost never, at least at the times I drive through the area)

That one harms nobody, unlike taking up one of the very small number of disabled bays which could well mean that somebody isn't getting to the toilet before it's too late.

Quiet_Spark

I think George Osborne had every right to be parked there, since when has being a useless c**t not been a disability?

Lum

Quiet_Spark wrote: »

I think George had every right to be parked there, since when has being a useless c**t not been a disability?

Although it's a valid disability, I don't think you can get a blue badge simply because you can't tell the difference between the phrases "second class" and "first class".

Portly_Pig

Lum wrote: »

Personally I couldn't care less about someone doing 56 in those road works (and don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly a fan of Ed Balls either), unless it was actually at a time when people are on the road (which is to say almost never, at least at the times I drive through the area)

That one harms nobody, unlike taking up one of the very small number of disabled bays which could well mean that somebody isn't getting to the toilet before it's too late.

The same could be said about occupying any parking space.

Lum

Portly_Pig wrote: »

The same could be said about occupying any parking space.

Well yes, there is an element of first come first served for parking, but at that services there are loads of standard spaces and only a handful of disabled ones.

I'm thinking specifically of someone I know who has a bunch of autoimmune conditions that leave them both unable to work and also with IBS, such that when their digestive system decides it wants to empty itself they really don't have long.

They have in the past shat themselves while waiting for someone to finish having sex in the only wheelchair-accessible toilet in the building, and a similar issue could occur if the last accessible parking pay is occupied by a selfish able bodied git in a Range Rover.

Joe_Horner

Portly_Pig wrote: »

The same could be said about occupying any parking space.

Being especially nice here to give new posters a chance, but I'm guessing you don't have many acquaintances with real mobility problems, do you?