APPENDIX 7
Memorandum submitted by Mr Mark Blathwayt
1. INTRODUCTION: SOME
WHEELCHAIR USERS'
POINTS OF
VIEW
1.1 What transport benefits will accrue to people
of All Different Abilities as a result of the Olympic Games opening
on 27 July 2012 in London?
1.2 Will these benefits begin to accrue
well before the Games or will they last only for the duration
of the Olympics and Paralympics. Will there be a "living
legacy" of ever wide-spreading improvement for people who
take their electric scooters and wheelchairs on trains, buses,
river buses and trams? Will real integrated transport result?
1.3 Will there be lasting benefit that will
spread throughout the United Kingdom as a result of the example
set of what is possible when there is a need and a will? Is it
possible that the benefits are found not to extend much beyond
London? What about Weymouth the setting and venue for sailing
events? Will capacity for more wheelchair spaces result?
1.4 Is it realistic to hope that transport
opportunities will improve from Europe too, for people with different
abilities, including those who use electric scooters as well as
wheelchairs? Will Eurostar welcome wheelchair and scooter users
in numbers or will demand continue to be suppressed or worse,
as a result be un-expressed?
1.5 What surveys have been carried out to
assess demand and to assess levels of suppressed demand and un-expressed
demand from people who wish to use electric scooters or wheelchairs
on public transport as they can already in taxis ? Is this information
in the public domain and is it accessible to all?
1.6 "Consultation is not however a
substitute for technical advice" (RICS Building Surveying
Journal Issue 16 September/October 2005 page 13 : Access Statements
in a nutshell).There are many people outside Government in the
rail industry who need to be more involved not merely consulted.
The Department for Transport is full of people with the same expertise
and rigour who recognise these truths. Are they really allowed
publicly to bear witness to the real facts? Are there constraints
that disable Civil Servants, stifle debate and deny delivery of
accessible transport to people who use wheelchairs and electric
scooter wheelchairs? Disabled Peoples' Protection Policies drawn
up by train operators seem, to some, to be drawn up on a very
different more restrictive basis. Why?
2. THE PRINCIPAL
OF INTEGRATION
2.1 Will the spin off benefits extend only
to competitors and spectators in London and nearby sporting venues
or to Society as a whole? Will it include all sorts of wheelchair
user or will there be subtle discrimination against people who
use electric scooter wheelchairs or powered chairs in order to
suppress demand for proper train travel accommodation?
2.2 Is there a strong case for saying that
if an electric scooter can be accommodated safely in a Black London
Taxi it should be allowed on a train?
2.03 If scooter wheelchairs less than 1,200mm
long and not more than 700mm wide fit within the size criteria
of a "Reference Wheelchair" described by the Rail Vehicle
Accessibility Regulations made under part V of the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995, should not all such scooters, in logic
and in truth, be permitted in wheelchair spaces on trains by law?
3. CAPACITY
3.1 The Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations
fall significantly short of meeting demand.
3.2 There has been resolute refusal by The
Department for Transport, even the Mobility and Inclusion Unit
itself to grasp true reality. It may be difficult and expensive
to convert some old carriages to welcome wheelchair and scooter
users. However, I am led to understand it may be more difficult
still, if not impossible, to convert present day new designs in
the future because they may incorporate elements of stressed skin
construction or similar techniques. If this is true does it call
into question why only 25% of new railway carriages have to be
able to accommodate wheelchair or electric scooter users?
3.3 Until every new railway carriage designed
or constructed from now on has space for a reference wheelchair
700mm x 1200mm how guilty of culpable discrimination are British
Governments?
3.4 As noted previously to the Transport
Committee there may be a "European" angle. Is it any
valid business of the European Union to threaten the United Kingdom
with prosecution in the European Courts if the UK requires access,
for people who use wheelchairs and electric scooters, which is
superior to what may be imminently being proposed is acceptable
for Europe-wide regulation? This is what I have been given to
understand by The Department for Transport. Is it true?
3.5 The United Kingdom did not wait for
the rest of the world to wake up to discrimination before it abolished
slavery. Neither should it now be using as an excuse, the fear
that it is now being cowed by a multi-national EU some of whose
members base instinct is the closing of ranks against valid requests
from those with different abilities. Whether people are described
as "disabled" instead of "Handicapped" or
"Sick" makes precious little difference if the change
in attitude is only as deep as the paper the word itself is printed
on. The truth is we ALL have different abilities and we ALL have
the right to travel on public transport. Put simply Public Transport
is not "public" if some of the public are excluded by
short-sighted government, administration and design that is blind
to short-comings and deaf to protest of injustice from those with
all sorts of different abilities.
3.6 Does such discrimination originate from
the industry, from regulators or crucially from Government Departments
and the Treasury? Ann Frye, the leading Civil Servant who set
up the fore-runner of the Mobility and Inclusion Unit in 1987
has said to me more than once: "nothing will change unless
you make things political" Who among present politicians
is brave enough to do so? Who is today's Wilberforce? Is Suffragette-like
assertion of rights the only way in the end? Will it be tolerated
or perhaps listened to? Will action follow words?
4. THE OLYMPIC
TRANSPORT PLAN
4.1 Will the Olympic Transport Plan also
be the Paralympic Transport Plan in actual deed as well as name?
4.2 How will the message of "Accessibility
for All", in the numbers and means All will require, be underscored,
under-pinned and built into the structure of every decision?
4.3 How will paraplegic spectators from
Scotland, Wales or the West of England be able to get to see their
countrymen and women compete in specific events relevant to them?
Will the limited scope of the present Rail Vehicle
Accessibility Regulations be recognised and changed in time?
4.4 Good design doesn't cost extra.
Bad government decisions that exclude and discriminate
are very costly to correct. Sadly suppressing demand and misrepresenting
facts is sometimes too attractive a temptation for comfort. Good
government rejects such options and faces up to changing the realities
of a world that excludes.
4.5 Are the very concepts of Glasnost and
Peristroika, openness and clarity as in short supply in HM Treasury
as it would, to some working in the worlds of transport, sometimes
seem to appear? How can funds required for accessible transport
be ring-fenced? The portents so far have not been good. How can
the requirements for an Olympic Transport Plan to be fully inclusive
not be watered down?
4.6 How can the benefits endure, this promised
"Legacy" that Lord Coe and his team were so successful
in emphasising? How can improvements benefit all in the UK of
all ages and every sort of ability?
4.7 (i) Integrated Transport surely
means London Olympic Transport Plans cannot exist in a vacuum.
There must not be gaps in its own provision. There are just seven
years to ensure that there is no hiatus in journeys for people
who use electric scooters and power wheelchairs and wheelchairs
whether they come from Scotland Wales or the West of England by
domestic rail or from the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Germany,
Switzerland and Italy by Eurostar.
4.7 (ii) Will there be extra Eurostars
in service to ensure demand is not stifled or suppressed? Is there
a resurgent need for extra Channel Tunnel Trains such as The Grampian-Pennines-Pyrenees
Expresses running overnight that were investigated by the Committee
earlier but which have now been sold to Canada?
4.8 At the Commonwealth Games in Manchester
unprecedented strides were made to accommodate the paraplegic
athletes and spectators. Manchester cares. In the past civic building
by-laws governing mobility in Manchester have been adopted as
the basis for Statutory Building Regulations governing access
(Part M for Mobility) across the nation. No surprise then that
every carriage in Manchester's Metrolink tram system is universally
accessible. How long will it take for the penny to drop in those
who rule the Department for Transport? Will it take the Olympics
to give the nudge needed?
4.9 The Department for Transport's current
stance seems to many to be set against the idea of each and every
new railway carriage being accessible to electric scooter wheelchairs
and wheelchairs. Discrimination against such users cannot be justified.
The policy has never been logical fair or coherent.
4.10 Stadia for all events will have significant
numbers of places for scooter wheelchair and wheelchair users.
4.11 The transport links that enable spectators
to take their seats in time for events and to get home without
delay afterwards must not leave wheelchair and scooter wheelchair
users delayed and frustrated because transport capacity for them
has been wilfully emasculated. When capacity was restricted in
the past was this because of HM Treasury strictures? These may
seem to have been imposed without thought to the consequences
on the Mobility and Inclusion Unit at the Department for Transport.
Has this been disadvantaging the work of Radar ( Royal Association
for Disability and Rehabilitation) and the sadly short-lived Disability
Rights Commission?
"Make things political!" the oft repeated
phrase. Will Parliament ever be free to do so with effect? Will
Parliament win round HM Treasury into recognising its objections
run counter to Human Rights Law?
4.12 Is there a political case for insisting
on one of the most easily deliverable and long lasting benefits
of the Paralympic and Olympic Games being held in London in 2012?
This is that the Olympic Delivery Authority will secure, once
for all, the acceptance, on its merits, immediately, of the long
needed and well argued case for all new railway carriages to be
electric scooter and wheelchair accessible?
4.13 If a wheelchair or scooter wheelchair
with leak-proof gel-acid batteries can be safely manoeuvred into
a small London Black Cab for a short journey, they must be able
to find safe accommodation in spacious railway carriages for long
journeys from Scotland, Wales or the West of England to the Olympics
and Paralympics.
4.14 The preparation of an Olympic Transport
Plan will recognise the need for integrated transport systems
that allow the spectator or participant who uses an electric scooter
wheelchair or wheelchair to get from their home or accommodation
independently, un-fussed, un-tired, ready for what the day brings.
What "did in the past" isn't good enough.
The Olympics take place in seven years time,
not 1948, over half a century ago. Will progress be measured by
such historic landmarks?
4.15 London's Olympic Transport Plan matters
to the whole country. Difficult journeys to London for people
who use electric scooter wheelchairs and wheelchairs un-necessarily
hobble the country's cultural, political and commercial life as
well as London's. Not only the Olympics are adversely affected.
The show-piece event can make or mar perceptions of our country
for a generation. Britain's economy as a whole will suffer if
access for the disabled is revealed as "token". Discrimination
is avoidable. Make its eradication a political cultural commercial
and national imperative. "Give us the tools and we will finish
the job" should be one of the phrases the Olympic Delivery
Authority borrows from Sir Winston Churchill.
5. THE OLYMPICS
DELIVERY AUTHORITY
5.1 Making sure that the London Olympics
Bill shall contain powers that lead directly to changing the Rail
Vehicle Accessibility Regulations made under Part V of the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995 needs to be one of the first administrative
and political actions by Parliament when it re-assembles to consider
the Bill after the summer recess.
5.2 Determined actions would give real notice
that the Paralympics and Olympic Games are going to bring changes
for good for the whole of the United Kingdom. London will need
the support of the whole of the country and is getting it already.
The rest of the country especially those who use electric scooter
wheelchairs and wheelchairs need the help of London now as Olympic
city to secure integrated transport that includes them.
5.3 The Olympics held in Barcelona may have
improved matters in that city, but it did not extend far across
Spain. One Spanish student at Bristol University works as a volunteer
at HOP SKIP AND JUMP a support centre for children with special
needs and their families, on the edge of Bristol. In her opinion
even Bristol and Bath are much better for people needing joined
up transport integration than Madrid. This shows that it takes
more than token Government support to make sure that the gains
won in London are shared and benefit the whole country, especially
those who would otherwise be frustrated or delayed by non inclusive
transport or excluded altogether.
5.4 The costs of good design, good access
and good allocation of space are no greater than for bad design,
poor access and inadequate capacity. It is when priorities become
lost, when pet projects take precedence over universal common
sense that problems arise.
5.5 The basic improvements, the fine tuning
of Transport Accessibility Legislation, both on Eurostar and domestically
are almost precisely the same requests made in the past on behalf
of Bath, Bristol and Gloucester Rugby Clubs on behalf of their
wheelchair using spectators. Requests from clubs whose players
and staff helped win the Rugby World Cup were ignored.
The changes and the foresight that illuminates
them will also benefit cyclists whose own organisations will be
trying to make many of the same points. Integrating cycling, public
transport and the health of future generations helps sustainable
eco-friendly transport policies.
5.6 In the years and months in the run up
to the Olympics, sports teams for the Paralympics and Olympic
Games will be staying in the United Kingdom to become acclimatised
to local conditions and to be attuned to our time zone. They will
stay at Universities and other institutions that are centres of
excellence or can provide many kinds of facility. Among many places
Bath University, Loughborough, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Cambridge,
Swansea and Oxford, Leeds and Newcastle, Manchester and Liverpool
will all expect to host national teams of both Paralympic and
Olympic Teams. They will wish to train. They will wish to travel
and experience Britain as well as London. What will they find?
Will they be able to travel by train when and as they wish or
will there be no alternative to the team coach which can not always
cater as well for wheelchair users as a well designed train?
5.7 Building alterations such as those proposed
for Bath Spa Railway Station make a mockery of the gospel of universal
access. Where once taxis could deliver wheelchair using Athletes
direct to platform level, or electric scooter wheelchair users
could drive themselves to the boarding point for the train, there
will in future be a single tiny congested lift on the London Olympic
bound platform. Is this good enough?. Is this the way sister cities,
with a share in London's Olympic endeavour ought to behave? Bathonians
don't think so.
6. A CHARTERED
SURVEYOR'S
VIEW
6.1 Chartered Surveyors working in the environment
have some practice in ways of doing the possible and practical,
often with resources that are finite and sometimes limited. Complications
and problems found when working with Listed historic buildings,
making them as accessible as possible, are not an excuse for doing
nothing. The same is true with the engineering of accessibility
on transport.
6.2 For many who have never done so, the
London Olympics will be an opportunity to roll up sleeves and
get involved in the voluntary sector perhaps for the first time.
They will be welcoming Athletes, Teams and spectators
to London and also to training villages for pre- Olympic preparation
in Universities Colleges and Sports Clubs throughout the United
Kingdom.
6.3 If this gift of welcoming is true of
the Olympics it is more emphatically important for the Paralympics.
If, under Part V of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, the
Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations are changed as a fundamental
part of the Olympics Bill, statesmen and politicians in Parliament
will have made up ground in a way that significantly introduces
greater equality of opportunity for those who use scooter wheelchairs
and wheelchairs. As the demography of the nation changes and the
balance tips between the very young in push chairs and the older
or the frail perhaps in electric scooters, these alterations will
benefit us all.
7. A SPORTSMANS
STORY
7.1 Alastair Hignell, the Double Blue who
won 14 England Rugby Caps, played with distinction for the Barbarians
XV, and represented Gloucestershire in First Class Cricket for
many seasons as well as teaching History, works for the BBC as
a Radio 5 sports commentator. Living with multiple sclerosis means
needing to use an electric scooter wheelchair. Whereas a wheelchair
means dependence an electric scooter brings the euphoria of everyday
inclusion once more and good feelings about yourself.
7.2. For three years until October 2004
he travelled to Bristol Temple Meads using his electric scooter
wheelchair. He drove his scooter up the little portable ramp onto
the Paddington train. From there he went in his scooter by Black
London cab to the BBC, or to Heathrow or to Eurostar. Seamless
integrated journeys.
7.3 Then scooters were banned. First Great
Western, confident that it would have no effect on renewing their
franchise, unilaterally banned all types of electric scooter wheelchairs
from all their trains.
7.4 In depth lengthy negotiations led, after
months to a concession that he could take his scooter on a train
again provided he dismantled it first. Tiredness and compromised
mobility were the reasons he started to take his scooter on the
train in the first place. Was going to London now going to be
more like a Royal Tournament Assault Course?
This is not good enough for National Integrated
Transport. Can Parliament give us confidence to expect much better
from multi-national companies involved in our transport industry?
7.5 Compare this with the experience of
Tanni Grey-Thompson, one of our greatest athletes at the BBC Sports
Personality of the Year ceremony. The first year no-one had realised
that she'd be unable to get up onto the Dais. By the next time,
the BBC had learnt from its mistakes and got it right. The new
Dais was accessible.
8. CONCLUSION
8.01 Like the BBC's old discarded Dais that
embarrassed the BBC and excluded Tanni, the current Rail Vehicle
Accessibility Regulations are defective. They need to be changed.
The London Olympics Bill is the place to start. Every new carriage
built from now on must be accessible to and offer welcome to those
who use electric scooter wheelchairs and wheelchairs. Good luck,
courage and imagination are needed by those entrusted with delivering
the Paralympics and Olympics in London and across the United Kingdom.
8.02 Thanks are due to Lord Coe and the
team that secured the Olympic Games for London in 2012, thereby
giving those who use electric scooters and wheelchairs hope. Hope
that, to quote another English writer, "All will be well,
and all will be well and you shall see yourself that all manner
of things shall be well".
8 September 2005
| 
