Memorandum by the Disabled Persons Transport
Advisory Committee (DAF 16)
DISABLED PEOPLE'S ACCESS TO TRANSPORT
INTRODUCTION
1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory
Committee (DPTAC) is pleased to submit a memorandum and give oral
evidence to the House of Commons Select Committee on Transport's
second investigation of "Disabled People's Access to Transport".
2. Established under the Transport Act 1985
to advise the Government on the transport needs of disabled people,
DPTAC has identified four overarching principles on which to base
its advice. These are that:
— Accessibility for disabled people
is a condition of any investment.
— Accessibility for disabled people
must be a mainstream activity.
— Users should be involved in determining
accessibility.
— Achieving accessibility for disabled
people is the responsibility of the provider.
3. The absence of accessible transport means
that disabled people are less able to secure and retain employment,
obtain medical treatment, enjoy a full social life, or travel
with whom they want, where they want and when they want. Compared
to others, disabled travellers may plan further ahead, use more
effort, find themselves more tired at the end of a journey, pay
more to travel, and experience embarrassment and stigmatisation.
This will have a crucial effect on their confidence and preparedness
to travel in future.
4. We believe that the Committee decided
to carry out this investigation because: the Disability Discrimination
Bill is still awaited; the access provisions of the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) came fully into force on 1 October
2004; and there have been reports that the need to make services
accessible has led to unexpected consequences.
5. We address these issues below, and also
consider progress nationally towards giving disabled people proper
access to public transport.
WHAT PROGRESS
IS BEING
MADE IN
ENSURING THAT
DISABLED PEOPLE
HAVE PROPER
ACCESS TO
TRANSPORT?
6. While there has been welcome progress
in some aspects, DPTAC believes that there is a need for a more
comprehensive and joined up approach to this issue.
Buses and coaches
7. Part V of the DDA sets a framework for
accessibility only for some land-based public transport modes.
It gives the government powers to make technical regulations setting
access requirements for buses, coaches, trains and taxis. Regulations
for all but taxis are in place. The Public Service Vehicle Accessibility
Regulations 2000 set out the standards that new buses and scheduled
coaches must meet, together with end dates by which existing vehicles
must meet regulations. In addition conduct regulations set out
duties for operators on for example, the treatment of assistance
dogs and passengers using wheelchairs.
8. Only 30% of the national bus fleet is
currently accessible to people in wheelchairs. Progress has been
fastest in cities, where there is a quicker turnover of vehicles,
and a large proportion of such vehicles are in London. Rural areas
seem to be less well served.
9. However, just as important as the accessibility
of the vehicles is the accessibility of the supporting infrastructure,
such as bus stops and pavements. This now appears to be lagging
behind the accessibility of vehicles in both urban and rural areas.
Greater encouragement needs to be given to local planning and
highways authorities in this respect.
10. The regulations do not cover important
features, such as the provision of audible and visual information
systems on vehicles and at bus stops. DPTAC believes regulations
requiring such systems to be installed for all bus and coach routes
are long overdue. These would greatly increase the accessibility
of buses and coaches for people with visual, hearing and learning
disabilities. They would also benefit people whose first language
is not English, tourists and older travellers.
Trains and light rail
11. It is important that an end date is
set by which all vehicles must comply with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility
Regulations 1998 (RVAR), which set standards for new vehicles.
DPTAC expects the Government to bring forward a transparent and
effective enforcement regime for these provisions.
12. DPTAC stands by its recommendation to
the Scrutiny Committee on the Draft Disability Discrimination
Bill of an end date of 2017, which would bring rail in line with
the bus industry, along with the implementation of a "Menu
Plus" approach to refurbishment regulations. This would involve
the replacement of facilities with compliant equivalents to include
items such as passenger information systems and wheelchair accessible
toilets where they do not currently exist.
13. Where deadlines have been set for Mark
1 rolling stock (commonly known as "slam door trains"),
which have very limited accessibility, to be taken out of service,
there must be no further slippage.
14. The condition of our stations must not
undermine the increasing accessibility of rail vehicles. DPTAC
welcomes the clarification of roles and responsibilities arising
from the Rail Review, We consider it important that the accessibility
of stations remains a high priority during and after the transition
to the new arrangements. Robust data from access audits must for
the basis for the design and prioritisation of work on stations,
including that supported by the Access for All Fund.
15. DPTAC also considers the booking requirement
for disabled people to use the railways to be unfair, and welcomes
the fact that some train operating companies have changed to an
0800 number for this service as a first step towards a more equitable
system.
The transport exemption
16. At present section 19(5) of the DDA
excludes the use of a means of transport from Part III of the
Act. As a result disabled people have no right of access to transport.
For example, a transport official could refuse them access on
the grounds of their disability, even to a service that is otherwise
accessible to them. DPTAC would like to see this exemption lifted
at the earliest opportunity. Now that pre-legislative scrutiny
is complete, we are very disappointed at how long it is taking
the government to introduce the Disability Discrimination Bill.
Transport infrastructure and information
17. This exemption does not extent to transport
infrastructure, such as bus and coach stations, airports and ferry
terminals, or to transport information. However, DPTAC is aware
that many disabled people encounter difficulties in accessing
such buildings and information. Even such straightforward facilities
as the provision of wheelchairs for disabled people at airports
without charge, or copies of timetables in large print, have proved
problematical. The needs of people with learning difficulties
are particularly poorly recognised. Some of these failures come
from design of buildings and facilities that ignore the DPTAC
principles set out at paragraph 2 above. Many of these failures
could be alleviated through effective training and management.
Taxis
18. The design of taxis is not at present
covered by regulations. There are regulations on such matters
as the carriage of assistance dogs in taxis and private hire vehicles,
which need to be effectively monitored. However, the government
has carried out research to establish the ergonomic requirements
of an accessible taxi. DPTAC is working with the government towards
regulations and believes that regulations should now be developed
and implemented.
Aviation and shipping
19. Voluntary codes and advice currently
cover aviation and shipping. We are working with the government
now to evaluate their effectiveness. We would not wish to anticipate
the results of this research. There is also an international dimension,
with current and planned European Union Directives providing advice
and guidance on accessibility in various transport modes. The
government has stated that it plans to make regulations to cover
aviation or shipping only if the voluntary approach fails to produce
results. DPTAC agrees that the voluntary approach needs to be
given time to work. However, we will seek the prompt introduction
of regulations as soon as it becomes clear that the voluntary
approach has not worked.
Transitional periods
20. DPTAC recognises the logic of having
start dates by which new vehicles in a particular transport mode
should be accessible, followed by an end date by which all existing
vehicles must comply or be taken out of service. This allows operators
to obtain maximum use of their existing investment, and to schedule
increasing accessibility of vehicles across a reasonable time
period. However, one consequence can be that, through this period,
disabled people cannot guarantee that they will be able to secure
an accessible vehicle for all stages of their outward and return
journey. The provision of complete and up to date travel information
in a range of accessible formats, and the appropriate training
for staff, are crucial to ensuring that disabled people can plan
their journeys during these transitional periods.
Blue Badge Scheme
21. The Blue Badge Scheme provides an on-street
parking concession enabling people such as those with severe walking
difficulties, who travel either as drivers or passengers, to park
close to their destinations. The scheme also applies to registered
blind people and people with severe upper limb disabilities who
cannot turn a steering wheel by hand.
22. In November 2001, at the invitation
of Ministers (including Scottish Ministers), DPTAC co-ordinated
the collation and assessment of responses to a Department for
Transport consultation on the review of the Blue Badge Scheme.
DPTAC remains concerned at the length of time that it is taking
to implement its recommendations. Some require primary and others
secondary legislation, while a number need research. DPTAC seeks
a commitment that the government provides the priority for the
legislation and the resources for the research.
Concessionary fares
23. Another area where DPTAC feels that
more progress can be made is concessionary fares and other schemes
that are designed to improve disabled people's access to mainstream
travel. We are reviewing the eligibility for and availability
of concessions, how schemes are administered, the need for an
appeals system and the way in which local authorities advertise
their schemes. We would be likely to see greater consistency in
the way that schemes operate across the country and across local
authority boundaries. We also note that there are major variations
in the level of provision for disabled people in different parts
of the UK with people in Wales and Scotland being generally better
provided for than those in England. We also consider these schemes
do not take full account of the range of barriers that disabled
people, such as those with mental health problems, may experience
with transport systems.
Road pricing
24. However, accessible public transport
becomes, private cars will remain vital for some disabled people
to travel. As far as congestion charges are concerned, we believe
that the concession for disabled people in the London charge is
working fairly effectively, and Transport for London is taking
steps to improve it. However, customers with hearing disabilities
can experience difficulty making payments. However, we are concerned
that the government, in its Feasibility Study of Road Pricing
in the UK, has reserved its position on the exemption of disabled
people from future road charging. Part of its case is that "by
2017 all buses must be accessible to disabled people, including
wheelchair users, therefore the basis of an exemption would need
to be reviewed." However, we have shown in paragraph 7 above
that the absence of audio-visual information systems makes buses
inaccessible to many people with visual and hearing disabilities.
Training
25. We have referred to the role of effective
training at several points. Related to this is the need for more
effective initial and continuing training for transport engineers,
architects, designers and associated professions. A strong government
lead is needed to monitor the current and future activity of professional
accreditation bodies to ensure inclusive design principles are
integrated in education and professional qualification requirements.
ARE THE
PROVISIONS OF
THE DISABILITY
DISCRIMINATION ACT
BEING INTERPRETED
IN UNEXPECTED
WAYS?
26. The Disability Rights Commission has
been assisting a number of individuals to take cases through the
courts to establish case law and interpretation in respect of
a number of transport issues. We would therefore look to them
to lead in commenting in their evidence on unexpected interpretations
of the DDA.
27. DPTAC's concern centres on the speed
and thoroughness of implementation, rather than any unexpected
interpretations. It is not uncommon, at the same time that senior
staff in transport organisations express their commitment to accessibility,
for disabled travellers to find their needs are not being met.
28. Accessibility often fails to be fully
achieved because service providers do not provide commitment or
resources, understand or find out what is necessary, consult with
disabled people or involve them in the design and development
process.
29. Simple ways of changing this would be
to set up effective systems to evaluate compliance with the law
and with voluntary codes, and to directly involve disabled people
in these. For example "mystery shoppers" and user panels
could be quickly and effectively established.
IS ACCESSIBILITY
COMING SECOND
BEST TO
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS,
SUCH AS
HEALTH AND
SAFETY? WHERE
SHOULD THE
BALANCE LIE?
30. DPTAC is aware that health and safety
issues have been raised, for example in respect of the carriage
of groups of deaf people on international flights. We feel that
these fears have been overstated. In that case we feel that the
risk of carrying groups of deaf passengers is no greater than
of carrying a group of people who do not speak English or other
languages spoken by cabin staff. Yet airlines do not voice the
same reluctance to carry the latter.
31. Health and safety issues do need to
be taken into account in deciding what facilities to offer passengers,
including disabled passengers. For example, barrow crossings,
with suitable enhancements, can be safe on some low speed rail
lines, but unsafe on high speed ones. Grab handles outside trains
can help many ambulant disabled passengers enter and leave vehicles,
but can also facilitate train-surfing. The carriage of some electric
scooters on public transport could be unsafe because of their
size, stability and manoeuvrability. That is why we wish to see
further guidance for scooter users, including kite marking at
the point of sale.
32. Decisions on health and safety will
always be made on the basis of what is a reasonable provision,
given the risk. For example seat belts for train passengers could
well save lives, but the government has not yet decided that this
would be a reasonable step to take. Decisions on accessibility
will also be made on the basis of what is reasonable to provide,
particularly when the Part III exemption is lifted. Health and
safety and accessibility do not need to be set against each other,
and they should certainly not be presented as if only one can
be affordable.
IS THERE
ANY TRUTH
IN THE
SUGGESTIONS THAT
SERVICES ARE
BEING "LEVELLED
DOWN" RATHER
THAN "LEVELLED
UP "?
33. There is little data on the extent to
which this is true. However, it has been studied in the area of
concessionary fares, where the change is not a specific consequence
of the DDA. In England relevant authorities must provide a minimum
50% concessionary fare to disabled bus passengers.
34. Fewer authorities now offer free travel
or flat fares, and this is rare outside London and the Metropolitan
areas. With regard to time restrictions, the story is mixed. Some
authorities now impose time restrictions in the morning peak,
while other authorities have removed their restrictions, particularly
on afternoon peak travel. Overall there is a slight upward trend
in restrictions, in 1998 39% of authorities imposed time restrictions
but this has increased to 42%. Overall in England there are 43
areas where the validity of concessionary fares is greater in
2003 than in 1998, though 18 areas have a reduced area of validity.
35. London Buses has been reported as consulting
on plans to phase out "hail and ride" bus routes, on
the grounds that low floored buses would not able to pull in close
enough and parallel to the kerb for passengers to alight safety,
and would therefore not comply with the Disability Discrimination
Act when the Part III exemption from the DDA is lifted for buses.
Our view is that hail and ride services are appropriate in areas
where it is not practicable for a permanent stop to be positioned.
This may be because a narrow pavement cannot accommodate a bus
pole without restricting access unduly. However, the use of fixed
bus stops must be incorporated such routes, for the benefit of
people with sight disabilities.
CONCLUSION
36. DPTAC's principal concern is to ensure
accessibility for disabled people. By this we mean inclusive transport
systems and built environments that are easy to reach, use and
understand by all; in safety and comfort.
37. Despite considerable progress by government,
local authorities and the transport industry, much remains to
be done. The long awaited Disability Discrimination Bill will
help to develop the momentum for change. However it will need
to be buttressed by vision, resources, and creativity.
Neil Betteridge
Chair
November 2004
| 
