http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4725264.stm
Almost half of Britain’s pubs are difficult or impossible to use by disabled people, a new report shows.
Disabled customers were unable to enter almost one in five of the pubs visited by auditors, UK disability charity Leonard Cheshire said.
where’s the outrage? 
I take it there’s no equivalent to the American’s with Disability Act (ADA) in Great Britian?
I’d also take it that many of the bars and pubs in Britain are much much older than those in America and as such are more difficult to put wheelchair ramps into…
Cran - that’s probably true, but if there are ANY improvements done to a building in the US, there’s no “grandfather” clause in place, the ramps, etc. must be put in. And there’s all kinds of regulations on width, grade and all that makes it very difficult, if not impossible to accomplish. We’ve had several restaraunts and bars close in our area that were in older buildings because they couldn’t conform to the ADA rulings without taking up half of their parking lot or such.
There is a disability act in the UK, its pretty new and very little enforcement takes place. The majority of our local buses are unable to take powered wheelchairs. I think it’s going to take a while.
I have difficulty walking and find things hard enough.
D
Where’s the sympathetic understanding?
I hope you’ll never have to find out how hard it is for wheelchair-bound people to do things most of us take completely for granted.
Carol
I honestly don’t have a problem with making things handicap accessable, as long as you don’t have to go to expensive and extensive measures to do so.
But the local law reads that you MUST have a handicap accessable restroom and if you have ANY steps you must have a ramp, etc. Doors also MUST be of a specific width.
That’s fine for new construction - but when you are trying to have a coffeehouse in a 100+ year old building, it can be financially impossible to conform to all of these regulations. It’s not always possible to widen doorways that are in structure bearing walls, or to have a large space restroom in a building that was probably built with NO indoor plumbing originally.
I’m entirely sympathetic…the disabled deserve a stout pint same as anyone. The fact is, though, in Britain, they cannot get one, it seems. Again, I ask, where’s the outrage?
Ah. I guess I misunderstood the tone of the thread title and the smiley in the original post.
Carol
I think the major problem here is that politicians and managers treat disabled access as though it were scarcely different from gender equality in the workplace. I think they view it as though it were 70% attitude adjustment and 30% resource reallocation. In reality, it’s about 70/30 the other way. I don’t think this is a conscious thing, I just think they see compliance as just details for middle management to sort out.
Actually, achieving compliance is often a major resource allocation problem for those charged with ensuring compliance. Our university has always taken students with minor disabilities but, some years back, decided to promote itself as capable of handling people with major disabilities. The disabilities centre was not given the appropriate resources nor were teaching staff trained in the often highly specialised skills required. Our first fully blind student turned up in one of my classes. Fortunately, I had teaching materials in a shape that gave her full access to lectures and the text, and, since my mother was legally blind towards the end of her life, I was able to discuss her special needs with her and do my best to help with her other classes. For a whole semester, she had to access certain materials on weekends at home because the University failed to deliver or install on her college computer the software required to convert text only files to audio files. It was very frustrating for her and for me trying to help her and very pleasing for all of us that she ended up with a high distinction in my subject, the highest possible grade. It was just a complete accident that one of her lecturers knew about her needs and cared. A decade or two back, a friend of mine at another university actually learnt how to read and write Braille just to provide materials for one of his blind students. No university budgets seriously for this kind of thing and none of the people who give of their own time get the credit, management does. Not that we care about credit, but for every feelgood story of academics going out of their way to help, there would surely be one or two of academics adopting a sink-or-swim attitude towards disabled students.
Part of the problem in getting management to adopt a realistic attitude to this kind of thing is that you actually have to decide just how much to put into providing special services, thus making something warm and fuzzy appear to turn into a bean counting exercise. But it is the only way to do this efficiently, and it is deeply dishonset to pretend otherwise. A few years back, a group of Americans were surveyed on health care. It turned out that about 90% thought everyone had a right to a decent minimum standard of health care, regardless of market forces, but only about 10% were prepared to pay the higher taxes needed to provide this level of care. You could put all your resources into health care .. but what then of roads, defense, crime prevention, sporting facilities, education … ? This same problem stands in the way of providing as many disabled people as possible with the means to live a fulfilled life. At some point, something else that you value just as much will be competing for the same dollar and energy.
Every few years they do a program on TV where a “celebrity” or two pretend to be disabled, and try to get around London using the Tube, Buses and Taxis.
Of course they have a total 'mare, and it makes great TV, and at the end of the day they are glad to discard their wheelchairs and white sticks.
Now if they fixed all the access problems, what would the program makers do?
As for where’s the outrage, of course only a tiny percentage of the public are actually disabled, so they do not have a very loud voice.
They could do a programme where the celebrity tries to get around London without being mobbed by fans. They could have the guest host be an emotional counselor, on hand for when the celeb realises (s)he’s not all that important after all.
Probably resort to programs like Candid Camera, Jackass and Punk’d. 
I feel that the dissabled access issue is at the top of the community responsibility list. As such the community should provide the resources - not the poor struggling service provider.
Consider:
A very large percentage of those confined to wheelchairs are there as a result of car accidents. The privelige of having personal motor transport also carries the responsibility of managing the results of a crash. Since the community and the laws tollerate the ubiquitous presence of these killing and maiming machines, does the commumity provide adequatelty for the result? I can’t see any evidence of that around here.
If the only doctor in town (or any other service provider) would be put out-of-business by the cost of upgrading access to his premeses - is it fair that he should just revert to becoming a factory laborer to feed his family? Would it not make sense for the town to weigh-in and help to ensure the service remains in town?
I think there’s a temptation to mistake services for rights - this leads to folks regarding the community as their own private grab-bag.
Q. Do you live IN, or ON, your community?
I feel that these initial laws dealing with access for the dissabled are a great first step - but there is quite a bit of maturing to be done yet before they can garner true respect