Not so much wrong as misinformed. I was told/lead to believe the Double Time parking permits were new – or newish. Nothing I read or looked at in my researching of the issue told me otherwise. I am not a professional in this area, just a person with a chronic illness trying to navigate my way through the system. I took the word of the people I communicated with. One conversation in particular I look at now and can see there must have been miscommunication on both sides, but at the time I understood it as confirmation of my understanding. Such is life, we move on. New permit or not, my view as to the suitability HAS NOT CHANGED.
How did I find out I was wrong?
As readers know, I lodged a Freedom of Information request. I have received a response advising my FOI request is not valid.
You are making a request under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic) (FOI Act), however at this time your request is not valid under section 17 of the FOI Act because it is not clear and specific enough for us to identify the documents you have requested.
The letter I have received goes on to say:
At this time, your request is not sufficiently clear because your correspondence refers to introduction of a new accessible parking permit, the Double Time DT permit in Victoria.
Preliminary advice from the program area indicates that the Double Time Parking Permit is not new and was part of the original Disability Parking Permit Scheme in Victoria.
While I have no reason to doubt the above advice, that does not change ANY of my arguments for change and/or innovation. The Double Time permit is not suitable for many people with chronic illnesses, as outlined in my previous articles on the topic:
I am not at all sure what my next steps will be. I will lodge a new FOI request, however based on the content of the letter I have received, I may not be able to provide sufficient detail to meet the requirements of the FOI Act.
The battle continues.