VOTE FOR ME, VOTE FOR ME, VOTE FOR ME FOR THE PRESIDENCY!

Prior our last national elections a disabled friend of mine discovered that her local polling station was inaccessible. She took the matter up with the authorities and received a rather neutral "ho-hum" response, the "Why are you making a fuss?" response which we so often encounter. The matter was escalated, all the way up to parliamentary level, but in all honesty the responses still remained disinterested.

It is important that elected officials at all levels realise that while freedom came to South Africa’s able-bodied citizens back in 1994 the struggle for freedom in the disabled community continues to this day. To prove my point one only need ask how many minutes it would have taken for the entire media industry to descend on a polling station if a woman had been denied entry based on her sex, or a black person had been denied entry based on their colour. Yet for a disabled person it was shrugged off.

This scenario occurs daily, in office blocks, schools, restaurants, public buildings, train stations, and bus terminals. Every flight of stairs, every non-accessible toilet, is a glaring “No Disabled People” sign. We are expected to endure this, to wait, to be patient. Things will improve we are told, yet after 1994 there was no phased approach to the lifting of discriminatory laws. Black people did not need to wait, women did not need to wait, so why must the disabled community wait?

What really galls many of us is that city councils have office bearers supposedly dedicated to promoting the needs of the disabled community. How then is it possible that public buildings are being built at Canal Walk, Parklands, and Steenberg in Cape Town as of this time of writing which are not accessible? How can a council, which supposedly is considering the needs of the disabled community, approve those plans?

Why is it possible for the council to inspect the water, electricity, sewage and road connection details of every single house, mall, shop, office and factory, but they cannot check the access levels? Why is it possible for major hotel chains to hold licenses to do business when they do not provide wheelchair access? How can a hotel be voted best in SA for three consecutive years running yet be completely inaccessible? Why can one open a new restaurant tomorrow without providing access? Why can major corporations open offices today without providing access beyond their foyers? Why are schools free to turn their backs on disabled learners by providing no access? Why can a disabled person not catch a bus in Cape Town? Why are all the train stations not accessible?

The first Year Of The Disabled was held in 1981. We are now 30 years down that road. Thus far the disabled community has relied on the “carrot and stick” approach to encouraging greater inclusion. Everyone want to tread lightly, no-one wants to upset anyone. We should not be having to deal with any of the issues mentioned above. None of it is rocket science. Costs are not a factor if access is provided at the planning stage. It can all be taken care of with the signing of a single document.

The bottom line is that while racial discrimination and gender discrimination are taboo, discrimination against the disabled is not considered to be an important issue. There are no negative consequences to not providing access. Perhaps that needs to change.

Disabled citizens are voters, and ratepayers, and taxpayers, and employers . . . factors which people of influence often forget.

So here is a challenge for our elected officials, from someone who has been disabled for 49 years, permanently wheelchair based for 37 of those, been a taxpayer for 32 years, been a ratepayer for 22 years, and a voter for 32 years.

Until recently I have questioned whether my vote counted for much, but now there is a glimmer of light. As local political parties fracture so our votes hold more power, particularly in the metropolitan areas. Disabled people constitute more than 8% of the population, that is nearly 4-million people, arguably more in the cities. Our freedoms, or lack of, are shared by family and friends. We represent more than just ourselves. Those parties which have our best interests at heart might be viewed more favourably. Those local councils and municipalities which better represent our needs might be recognised as such. To paraphrase a popular line, "Are you with us, or against us?".

In the years which lie ahead the vote of a disgruntled disabled community might just swing an election, either locally, or nationally. Can you afford to see us marginalised much longer?