---

Rail Network (Disabled Access)

11. Jon Trickett (Hemsworth) (Lab): If he will make a statement on disabled access for users of electronic mobility scooters to the rail network. [191998]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Charlotte Atkins): Scooters are generally not considered to be suitable for carriage on trains. That is because of concerns over size, weight, manoeuvrability and stability. However, some train operators will carry smaller models. I shall place a copy of my letter of 13 October to my hon. Friend in the Libraries of both Houses.

Jon Trickett: I thank my hon. Friend for her answer. Mr. Gill, my constituent, was recently prevented from making a journey on GNER because his scooter was not considered suitable. He is one of several thousand constituents who are disabled. Will my hon. Friend continue to keep the matter under review as technology changes and develops and scooters become smaller and lighter? Is it possible to convene a meeting with the rail operating companies and others to ascertain whether the issue can be pushed forward at a later stage?

Charlotte Atkins: I certainly will. A recent trial involved South West Trains attempting to board a range of scooter models on different sorts of trains, and it showed the difficulty of a single policy on motorised scooters. In the light of new scooter availability, some train operators are re-examining their current policies to allow smaller scooters on to their trains. We are reviewing the legal position of scooters and gathering views from stakeholders about current laws on their use.
 
19 Oct 2004 : Column 763
 

Mr. Archie Norman (Tunbridge Wells) (Con): Does the Minister recall the Transport Select Committee saying that there was not much point in spending billions of pounds making trains accessible if disabled people could not get on to the platforms in the first place in order to get on to the trains? Is she aware that the then Minister of State, the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Dr. Howells), wrote to me in June to say that there would be a

"nationally prioritised, ring fenced Access for All fund",

which would start to address this problem, on which the Government would consult in the autumn? It is now autumn, so will the Minister give the House an update on how the consultation in going and on how large the fund is going to be? What hope can she offer to my disabled constituents in west Kent, where there is not a single disabled-friendly station?

Charlotte Atkins: I am not aware of the statement that my hon. Friend made in June. However, we are looking at the whole issue of accessibility and we are committed to ensuring that disabled people have access, but there is no law to require train operating companies to carry scooters. As the technology and the models improve, however, I am sure that there will be a way of ensuring that disabled persons can use trains more effectively. This is a priority for the Department for Transport and I shall certainly make it a priority for me.

Miss Anne Begg (Aberdeen, South) (Lab): If the Minister looks at early-day motion 1740, she will find that in it I condemn Southern for still operating slam-door trains, on which people in wheelchairs have to travel in the guard's van. That happened to me last Tuesday, when I boarded a train at London Bridge and discovered that that was the only way in which I could travel. I was going to Dorking, but I could not get off the train at Dorking because that station is not accessible, so I had to get off at Redhill. These slam-door trains are old rolling stock, and this is a barbaric practice. I was not in a big scooter; I was in a very small, lightweight wheelchair. The guard's van was little better than a cattle truck and, in this day and age, we should be doing something to stop this practice.

Charlotte Atkins: I certainly regret that incident. I have seen my hon. Friend's early-day motion and I sympathise with her. It is ridiculous, in this day and age, that any lady or gentleman should have to travel in a carriage that is almost a cattle truck. That is unacceptable. Obviously, as the new rolling stock comes on stream those arrangements will be ended, but my hon. Friend has made her point very strongly. I am sure that no operating company would want there to be a repeat of that experience, and that they would want to assure her and her colleagues that it will not happen again.

Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con): The Minister said that the train operating companies have no legal responsibility to carry powered scooters. How, then, does she explain the fact that First Great Western
 
19 Oct 2004 : Column 764
 
has told my constituent, Mr. Graham Coe of Downing street, Chippenham—he lives at No. 67, not No. 10—not only that he may not take his scooter on the train, even though he has done so successfully for the past six years, but that he may not take it on to the platform for fear that he might crash into other passengers? First Great Western tells me that this is not its fault and that the Department for Transport was looking into providing kitemarks for scooters, but that it has now stopped doing that. Will the Minister assure First Great Western that it is her intention to allow constituents such as Mr. Coe maximum access to First Great Western trains, and that she will do whatever she can to avoid this perverse consequence of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995?

Charlotte Atkins: We will certainly look at all those issues, but it is clearly a matter for the train operating company whether it allows access. I would be interested to see the hon. Gentleman's correspondence on that matter, and if he shows me a copy of it I will certainly respond to him in detail.

Flight Paths

12. Andrew Selous (South-West Bedfordshire) (Con): If he will make a statement on the criteria for changing airport flight paths. [191999]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Charlotte Atkins): Airport flight paths are changed through the Civil Aviation Authority's airspace change process. The CAA sets out the criteria for assessing airspace change proposals in its civil air publications 724 and 725, which are available on its website.

Andrew Selous: Luton airport's option 3A flight path proposal, if accepted, would leave Leighton Buzzard as the only town on the whole flight path to be directly overflown. If Luton airport is to be allowed to expand from 7 million to 28 million passengers a year, will the Minister ensure that such expansion would be allowed only along flight paths that do not overfly major growing towns such as Leighton Buzzard? If the directorate of airspace policy allows option 3A, will the Minister call in that decision, as it would be wholly unacceptable to the residents of Leighton Buzzard?

Charlotte Atkins: I understand that the hon. Gentleman has recently met the Civil Aviation Authority to discuss the informal consultation on proposed changes around Luton. I understand his concerns about Leighton Buzzard being overflown should the 3A proposal go ahead. At this initial stage, I agree to meet him should he want to push forward those issues. Should the matter come to me later, however, I could not meet him at that stage.
 
19 Oct 2004 : Column 765
 

CABINET OFFICE

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster was asked—

Government Services (E-delivery)

20. Miss Anne Begg (Aberdeen, South) (Lab): What plans he has to develop the electronic delivery of government services to improve access for disadvantaged groups. [192009]

The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Ruth Kelly): The new Directgov site is the main access point for the electronic delivery of government services. It draws together a comprehensive range of information and services from the whole of government, making it easier for all people to access. "Disabled People and Carers", one of the launched sections of Directgov, focuses on the needs and services required by disadvantaged groups.

Miss Begg: I thank the Minister for that reply. The Disability Rights Commission has produced guidelines to ensure that web design in particular is as accessible to disabled people as possible. Those consist of fairly easy-to-follow instructions on how to make web pages clearer and easier to use. Will the Government set a standard ensuring that all Government websites comply with those guidelines, to make sure that everybody in society can access Government services?

Ruth Kelly: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to draw attention to the need to make websites as accessible as possible to disabled users. That is why, in 2001, the Government adopted those guidelines. Clearly, however, there is a long way to go. About half of Government websites are currently compliant with the guidelines, which compares favourably with the private sector, in which about one in five websites are compliant. As of this month, however, the Government have said that all websites with "gov.uk" attached to them must be compliant to be able to use that in their address.

Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam) (LD): I welcome the Minister to her new position. Will she, at an early date, discuss with the new head of the e-government unit the development of standard procedures for the audit of e-government services at both local and central Government level, so that we can understand which social groups are using them and, importantly, which social groups are not using them and what the barriers are to access?

Ruth Kelly: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to draw attention to the fact that there are key barriers to encouraging people to use the internet and digital technology. For example, we already know that income plays a great role, with only 12 per cent. of the lowest income group having home internet access, compared with 86 per cent. of the highest income group. Age also plays a big role, as does motivation. Of course, the head of the e-government unit, Ian Watmore, who has recently taken up his post, has as part of his responsibility the encouragement of the transformation
 
19 Oct 2004 : Column 766
 
of e-government services. As part of that project, we will examine in great detail the barriers that remain to web take-up.

---