DDB 12 Disabled Persons Transport Advisory
Committee
DPTAC response to the Joint Committee in respect
of the Department of Work and Pensions' Draft Disability Discrimination
Bill
Summary of comments and recommendations
The consultation process
DPTAC seeks assurances from the Government that
it will ensure that all documentation that its departments, agencies
and regulators produce for consultation will be available in accessible
formats on the day of publication. (paragraph 6)
Clause 3 - Application of Sections 19 to 21
of the Act to transport vehicles
DPTAC recommends that the Government sets out
its intended timetable for regulations to lift the Part 3 exemption
from transport operators before the Bill is introduced into Parliament.
(paragraph 10)
Clause 3 - Power to make regulations for aviation
and shipping
DPTAC recommends the early announcement of dates
by which the Government expects to be ready to take a view as
to how effective the voluntary approach has proved. DPTAC recommends
a date of the end of 2005 for this purpose. (paragraph 13)
Clause 3 - Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations
DPTAC recommends that Ministers give the drafting
of these powers the priority and resources needed to ensure that
the powers could be included in the Bill by the time that it is
introduced into Parliament. (paragraph 14)
DPTAC's recommendation is for an end date of 2017
[for all rail vehicles to comply with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility
Regulations 1998], which would bring rail in line with the bus
industry, We also recommend the implementation of a 'Menu Plus'
approach to refurbishment regulations which will improve access
(if not achieve full compliance) in the interim. (paragraph 16)
DPTAC is aware that for any agreed end date and refurbishment
regulations to be effective in ensuring compliance and accessibility,
that they need to be backed up by robust and proactive monitoring
and enforcement regimes. DPTAC urges the Government to ensure
that these schemes are adequately resourced and implemented by
appropriately trained and resourced staff. (paragraph 17)
Clause 3 - Exclusion of the Blue Badge Scheme
DPTAC believes that there is a real danger of
the Government missing the opportunity to legislate in respect
of the Blue Badge Scheme in its draft Disability Discrimination
Bill. (paragraph 18)
Clause 4 - Discrimination by Public Authorities
DPTAC recommends that the Government amends the
Bill to make clear that public authorities have an anticipatory
duty to make reasonable adjustments and not to discriminate.
DPTAC further recommends a more appropriate trigger for reasonable
adjustments. (as in Clause 5) of the Bill. (paragraph 27)
DPTAC finds the subjective 'reasonable opinion
standard' objectionable in all cases, and particularly inappropriate
to the carrying out of public functions. (paragraph 28)
DPTAC recommends that the Disability Rights Commission's
arbitration service is extended to cover public functions…
or an equivalent service provided by its successor, the Commission
for Equality and Human Rights. (paragraph 29)
Clause 6 - Discrimination in relation to the
letting of premises
DPTAC believes that Clause 6 provides an opportunity
to implement the Disability Rights Task Force's recommendation
that provision should be made in civil rights legislation so that
landlords cannot unreasonably refuse consent for disabled people
to change physical features to improve accessibility. (paragraph
30)
-
Clause 8 - Duties of Public Authorities
DPTAC supports the proposal to create a duty for
public authorities to promote disability equality in the exercise
of their functions…. Where bodies are excluded, DPTAC believes
that this needs to be justified on a case-by-case basis. (paragraph
31)
Clause 9 - Codes of Practice
DPTAC seeks assurances from the Government that
it will provide DPTAC, the Disability Rights Commission, and other
bodies involved, with the resources and support they need to allow
them to complete this process [developing and issuing Codes] in
good time. (paragraph 33)
Clause 12 - Meaning of 'disability'
DPTAC recommends that an appropriate and flexible
way of including specific conditions would be to include a regulation
making power in the Bill. (paragraph 37)
Introduction
1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory
Committee (DPTAC) is pleased to have the chance to comment on
the draft Disability Discrimination Bill at the stage of pre-legislative
scrutiny. DPTAC welcomes the publication of this draft Bill, which
would extend the duties on service providers to meet the needs
of disabled people. DPTAC particularly welcomes the Government's
intention to secure Royal Assent for this Bill before the end
of the current Parliament.
2. This is a long awaited measure, which
goes much of the way towards enacting the unanimous recommendations
of the Disability Rights Task Force in 1999. DPTAC also welcomes
this route of pre-legislative scrutiny that the Government has
chosen to adopt, while acknowledging that this could delay Royal
Assent. Pre-legislative scrutiny suggests Government recognition
that the Bill will benefit from taking on board the comments of
disabled people. We look forward to a positive response to our
recommendations.
3. DPTAC was established under the Transport
Act 1985 to advise the Government on the transport needs of disabled
people. In 2000 our role was extended, on a non-statutory basis,
to advising the Government on the built environment needs of disabled
people, and we will be commenting on this consultation in both
these capacities.
4. DPTAC's four overarching principles
form the basis of responses to consultations. Annex 1 sets these
out, along with the demographic trends that underpin DPTAC's strategic
approach to disability, transport and the built environment, and
outlines that approach.
The consultation process
5. The draft Bill was published on 3 December
2003. DPTAC is very concerned by the length of time it has taken
to produce the draft Bill in alternative formats. It has taken
a month to provide the Bill papers in Braille, and audio-tape
versions and on-line text in a format which can be read by the
screen readers used by many visually-impaired people. British
Sign Language and 'Easy Read' versions for people with learning
disabilities were still in preparation after six weeks of the
consultation period had elapsed. DPTAC seeks assurances from the
Government that it will ensure that all documentation that its
departments, agencies and regulators produce for consultation
will be available in accessible formats on the day of publication.
Comments on specific clauses
Clause 3 - Application of Sections 19 to 21 of
the Act to transport vehicles
6. Clause 3 of the draft Bill allows the
Disability Discrimination Act to be extended to cover discrimination
in relation to the use of a means of transport. At present section
19(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 excludes the use
of a means of transport from Part III of the Act. As a result
disabled people are denied a 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. Therefore DPTAC welcomes the proposal to replace
the current exemption of transport services from sections 19 to
21 with the more precise exclusion of the provision and use of
a vehicle, which is set out in the new section 21ZA(1) and (2).
7. DPTAC also commends the proposal in new
section 21ZA(3) to disapply this exclusion by regulation. This
has the potential to bring within the scope of the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995 services such as tourism, leisure transport,
private rental, car hire and vehicle breakdown operations, as
well as taxis, private hire vehicles, trams, buses and trains.
DPTAC sees no justification for the continued exclusion of these
services from the scope of the Act.
8. DPTAC believes that regulations need
to set out in detail what is needed to address the needs of the
widest range of disabled people, including wheelchair users, ambulant
disabled people, and those with sensory or learning impairments
or mental health problems. There is a risk that these last two
categories can be excluded from consideration. Ministers, officials
and commentators have been known to use expressions such as 'accessible
buses' and 'accessible taxis', when what is meant is vehicles
that are accessible to people in wheelchairs. This can promote
an inaccurate and incomplete view of what the term 'disability'
means.
9. DPTAC appreciates the value of the flexibility
that is proposed in allowing the exclusion to be lifted for different
types of vehicles, or types of service, at different times. However,
DPTAC is concerned at the absence of any commitment to a timescale
by which the new exclusion will be lifted for any service or type
of vehicle whatsoever. DPTAC recommends that the Government sets
out its intended timetable for regulations to lift the Part 3
exemption from transport operators before the Bill is introduced
into Parliament.
Clause 3 - Power to make regulations for aviation
and shipping
10. The Government has stated that it plans
to introduce regulations covering public transport services -
buses and coaches, trains (including trams and light rail), taxis
and private hire vehicles. It maintains that this would have the
biggest impact on the mobility of disabled people in their day-to-day
activities.
11. In addition, 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
with the principle that the voluntary approach needs to be given
time to work. The Government has worked in partnership with DPTAC
to develop Codes of Practice, and the setting of benchmarks is
well in hand.
12. DPTAC therefore recommends the early announcement
of dates by which the Government expects to be ready to take a
view as to how effective the voluntary approach has proved. DPTAC
recommends a date of the end of 2005 for this purpose as providing
sufficient time for the aviation and shipping sectors to have
shown evidence of significant progress. If progress has not been
achieved by then, the Government should be prepared to introduce
regulations for aviation and shipping.
Clause 3 - Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations
13. The Government has stated that the Bill
it will bring to Parliament will include powers to set a final
date for all rail vehicles to comply with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility
Regulations 1998 (RVAR). The Government also plans to take a
power to make accessibility regulations, which will apply to the
refurbishment of rail stock before existing trains have to be
replaced. DPTAC appreciates that the inclusion of these powers
in the Bill will depend on the outcome of a consultation exercise
that the Department for Transport has recently concluded.
14. DPTAC has responded fully to this consultation,
and a copy of the response is attached at Annex 2 to this memorandum.
In its response, DPTAC welcomed assurances from the Department
for Transport that draft regulations would be ready for inclusion
and that rail provisions would be fully covered when the Disability
Bill was presented to Parliament. DPTAC now recommends that Ministers
give the drafting of these powers the priority and resources needed
to ensure that the powers could be included in the Bill by the
time that it is introduced into Parliament.
15. It is DPTAC's view that the most practical
and pragmatic way forward is to achieve a balance between end
dates and refurbishment regulations to achieve optimum accessibility
within the shortest timescale.
16. DPTAC's recommendation is for an end date
of 2017, which would bring rail in line with the bus industry,
We also recommend the implementation of a 'Menu Plus' approach
to refurbishment regulations which will improve access (if not
achieve full compliance) in the interim. This would be a major
step towards the 'seamless' journey that is required to give
disabled people the confidence and ability to travel independently
with ease, safety and in comfort. We commend it to the Committee.
17. DPTAC is aware that for any agreed end date
and refurbishment regulations to be effective in ensuring compliance
and accessibility, that they need to be backed up by robust and
proactive monitoring and enforcement regimes. DPTAC urges the
Government to ensure that these schemes are adequately resourced
and implemented by appropriately trained and resourced staff.
Clause 3 - Exclusion of the Blue Badge Scheme
18. DPTAC believes that there is a real danger
of the Government missing the opportunity to legislate in respect
of the Blue Badge Scheme in its draft Disability Discrimination
Bill. The Blue Badge Scheme is the popular name for the Disabled
Persons' Parking Badge Scheme, introduced in 1971.
19. The 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.
20. In November 2001 Ministers invited DPTAC
to co-ordinate the collation and assessment of responses to the
Department for Transport's consultation on the review of the Blue
Badge Scheme. DPTAC made recommendations to Ministers (including
Scottish Ministers). These included three changes that required
primary legislation: creating powers of inspection by the Police
and parking attendants to assist with enforcement; adopting an
alternative form of wording to "institutional" to better
reflect eligible organisations; and the creation of a national
database.
21. The then Parliamentary Under Secretary of
State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson) said to the House of
Commons on 18 December 2002: 'There are a number of areas
in which we have undertaken to look at amending primary legislation…
We will be seeking opportunities to introduce those changes as
soon as possible.'
22. Almost exactly a year later, the Government
appears to DPTAC to have missed a clear chance to legislate in
the original Traffic Management Bill that Ministers introduced
into Parliament on 11 December 2003. An amendment was recently
tabled in Committee, which would have brought into the Traffic
Management Bill a provision giving Blue Badge enforcement powers
to constables, traffic wardens and parking attendants. The Parliamentary
Under Secretary of State' clearly stated his intent, on the withdrawal
of this amendment on 10 February, to "come back to the issue
at a later stage in the Bill's progress with something that reflects
the sentiment of the new clause".
23. DPTAC warmly welcomes this statement, but
is aware that Traffic Management Bill, at the end of the day,
may not contain this provision. DPTAC also remains concerned that
two of its other recommendations which require primary legislation
- adopting an alternative form of wording to "institutional"
and the creation of a national database - have not been included
in the Traffic Management Bill statement. DPTAC notes that the
draft Disability Discrimination Bill could be another missed opportunity,
particularly as the equivalent powers on enforcement in Scotland
were included in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 and introduced
in January 2004.
24. Pre-legislative scrutiny offers the ideal
opportunity for the Government to make the changes to the draft
Disability Discrimination Bill that are necessary for it to include
these changes to the Blue Badge Scheme. DPTAC recommends that
this be done by amending the long title of the Bill to read 'To
implement the recommendations of the Disability Rights Task Force
by amending the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and other legislation'.
Clause 4 - Discrimination by Public Authorities
25. DPTAC welcomes the proposal to extend the
Disability Discrimination Act, making it unlawful for public authorities,
without justification, to discriminate against a disabled person
when exercising its functions. This will be in addition to the
provision of services, which is already covered by the Disability
Discrimination Act. DPTAC's interest in this is in respect of
transport and built environment functions, including those relating
to access to pavements and highways and to planning and housing.
The proposal should also clarify the status of the pedestrian
environment, which is one of DPTAC's key concerns.
26. However DPTAC is concerned at the very high
threshold that has been set for making reasonable adjustments.
These are required where an authority carries out a function and
where, for a reason related to the disabled person's disability,
the outcome is very much less favourable for her or him than it
would be for others to whom that reason would not apply. This
creates the very high threshold that there must be a "very
much less favourable" outcome. In addition this duty does
not appear to be anticipatory, unlike the equivalent and current
duty that local authorities have in relation to delivery of services.
27. DPTAC therefore recommends that the Government
amends the Bill to make clear that public authorities have an
anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments and not to discriminate.
DPTAC further recommends a more appropriate trigger for reasonable
adjustments. This could be 'adversely affect' (as in Clause 5)
of the Bill.
28. Additionally, DPTAC is concerned that the
'reasonable opinion standard' in discrimination cases could be
applied to the carrying out of public sector functions. This
allows for a defence of discrimination where it is based on wrongly
held prejudices and stereotypes about disabled people, provided
that such beliefs are viewed by the judge as "reasonably"
held. DPTAC finds the subjective 'reasonable opinion standard'
objectionable in all cases, and particularly inappropriate to
the carrying out of public functions.
29. DPTAC also recommends that arbitration should
be encouraged as a method of resolving disputes in cases of discrimination.
DPTAC therefore recommends that the Disability Rights Commission's
arbitration service be extended to cover public functions, in
addition to the provision of services, or an equivalent service
provided by its successor, the Commission for Equality and Human
Rights.
Clause 6 - Discrimination in relation to the letting
of premises
30. DPTAC believes that Clause 6 provides an
opportunity to implement the Disability Rights Task Force's recommendation
that provision should be made in civil rights legislation so that
landlords cannot unreasonably refuse consent for disabled people
to change physical features to improve accessibility. The Government
has taken the position (in the footnote to page 12 of the Explanatory
Notes to the draft Bill) that this is covered by existing legislation,
including the 1927 Landlord and Tenant Act. The Disability Rights
Commission has expressed a contrary view, that existing law is
inadequate and has never been used for this purpose. DPTAC supports
the Disability Rights Commission's recommendation that provision
should be made in the new Bill so that proper guidance can be
given and disabled people's rights can be properly enforced.
Clause 8 - Duties of Public Authorities
31. DPTAC also supports the proposal to create
a duty for public authorities to promote disability equality in
the exercise of their functions. DPTAC wishes to see early clarification
of what other bodies, in addition to Government Departments, local
authorities, the police and other governmental organisations,
would be regarded as 'public authorities' for this purpose. Where
bodies are excluded, DPTAC believes that this needs to be justified
on a case-by-case basis.
Clause 9 - Codes of Practice
32. DPTAC welcomes the proposal to change section
53A of the Disability Discrimination Act to enable the Disability
Rights Commission to issue Codes of Practice in relation to the
new public authority duties. Codes will be particularly useful
in helping local authorities, the courts and those who advise
disabled people to employ correct and consistent definitions of
what adjustments and opinions are 'reasonable'.
33. DPTAC notes that the Government aims to make
regulations with respect to the transport provisions, along with
issuing these Codes, as soon as practicable after the Bill in
its final form receives Royal Assent. DPTAC seeks assurances
from the Government that it will provide DPTAC, the Disability
Rights Commission, and other bodies involved, with the resources
and support they need to allow them to complete this process in
good time.
Clause 12 - Meaning of 'disability'
34. DPTAC acknowledges that it is difficult to
legislate around a purely social model of disability . DPTAC
does remain concerned that naming specific conditions in legislation
can have the effect of placing excessive emphasis on medical aspects
of the definition of disability. This should be kept to a minimum.
35. DPTAC does welcome the Government's acceptance
of the Disability Rights Task Force's recommendation that the
definition of disability be extended to clearly include more people
with HIV and cancer from the point of diagnosis. At present,
coverage of these conditions is not guaranteed. This action acknowledges
the disabling effect of stigma associated with these conditions.
36. The Government also plans to extend the definition
of disability to cover multiple sclerosis. This was not a Disability
Rights Task Force recommendation. DPTAC believes that multiple
sclerosis does not differ in kind from similar progressively disabling
conditions, such as motor neurone disease and rheumatoid arthritis,
and that these should also be included in the scope of the Bill.
DPTAC sees merit in simply extending the definition to cover all
progressive conditions from the point of diagnosis.
37. DPTAC recommends that another appropriate
and flexible way of including specific conditions would be to
include a regulation making power in the Bill. This would permit
Ministers, with the agreement of Parliament, to establish and
modify a list of eligible conditions. This would also allow for
the inclusion of mental health problems and learning impairments.
Additionally, the list could be updated to reflect changes in
treatment that could in future render certain disorders less disabling
than they are at present. It would complement the Government's
proposal for a power to enable the Secretary of State to issue
guidance on the definition of disability.
| Name and Address |
| Neil Betteridge
Chair, Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee
1/14 Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4 DR
|
| Telephone Number 020 7944 8012 |
| Email address Dptac@dft.gov.uk |
Annex 1 DPTAC's approach and its basis in population
trends
1. DPTAC uses four overarching principles on which to
base its advice to Government, other organisations and disabled
people on. 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.
Trends in population
2. 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.
3. Disabled people account for a significant
proportion of the population. People with physical and sensory
impairments make up one in five of the UK population, or 8.5 million
adults in Great Britain. One in five of these are of working age.
In addition, one in six adults will experience some form of mental
ill health at some point in their life. It has also been estimated
that up to 1,750,000 people may have mild, and up to 350,000 people
may have severe learning disabilities.
4. Levels of disability increase with age:
8% of those aged 16-17 years have a current long-term disability,
compared with 33% of those aged 50 to 65. Disabled people
have a spending power of around £40 billion each year.
5. Disabled people are not an homogenous
group with identical needs. The needs of people with mental health
problems or learning disabilities are distinct from those of wheelchair
users for example. Even within disabilities needs vary; for example
a profoundly deaf person will not benefit from an induction loop.
6. Of disabled people overall, in broad
terms:
- 70% have difficulty walking and/or climbing steps;
- 41% have a hearing loss;
- 24% have a vision loss.
7. The recent 2001 census has confirmed that
the population in England has aged and will continue to do so.
There is a strong positive correlation between ageing and disability,
particularly as ever more people will live into their late 70s
and 80s when the incidence of disability rises sharply. In broad
terms, over the next 30 years:
- The proportion of the population over 65 will
increase by 40%;
- The number of people aged over 65 will double;
- The proportion over 80 will increase by 100%
and the number will treble.
8. Over the period that will bring about these
changes in the population profile, the overall population will
increase by less than 7%.
9. The nation risks adverse economic as well
as social impacts from this growth in numbers of disabled and
older people, if we fail to recognise and address the need for
more inclusive environments. Mobility and transport are vital
to achieving and sustaining self-sufficiency and independence
into old age.
10. Disabled people live throughout the community.
One in four households has a disabled resident. The need for access
for disabled people is not limited to specific areas or buildings
but present throughout the wider transport and the built environment
systems.
A strategic approach
11. There is enormous scope and opportunity to
improve accessibility for disabled people but it will require
a strong commitment at all levels.
12. Accessibility for disabled people is often
only considered in terms in terms of detailed design. DPTAC believes
this is no longer sufficient and that strategic decisions, investment
and policies must be underpinned by consideration of accessibility
for disabled people, with evidence of how diversity has been considered
in decision making.
13. DPTAC welcomes the Government's commitment
to accessibility being a condition of public money being spent
in Transport 2010.
14. Private and public investors of any transport
or built environment project need to know whether investment plans
meet the need of disabled people. They will also need evidence
that people at all levels of responsibility understand how to
provide accessibility for disabled people effectively to prevent
a waste of resources.
Annex 2: Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee
response to
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
Rail Vehicles
Consultation on the Government's proposals
to amend the Rail provisions in Part V of the Disability Discrimination
Act
Introduction
1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee
(DPTAC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Department
for Transport's, 'Consultation on the Government's proposals to
amend the Rail provisions in Part V of the Disability Discrimination
Act'.
2. DPTAC was established under the Transport
Act 1985 to advise the Government on the transport needs of disabled
people. Our role was extended in 2000, on a non-statutory basis,
to advise the Government on the built environment needs of disabled
people.
3. We based our advice on four underlying principles,
which 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.
4. These principles are the basis of our response.
Some general comments on accessibility for disabled people are
also set out in Annex A.
General
5. DPTAC welcomes the opportunity to comment
on this consultation and is pleased that the Department for Transport
is taking this opportunity to clarify requirements and rectify
omissions, which have become apparent since the drafting of the
original Disability Discrimination Act and Rail Vehicle Accessibility
Regulations. However we are disappointed by the length of time
that it has taken to reach this stage, as the recommendations
upon which it is based were first made by the Disability Rights
Task Force in 1999 and accepted by the Government in 2001.
6. In line with the rest of the population, disabled
people's expectations are higher than ever before, in terms of
being able to travel when, where and how they chose. It is DPTAC's
stated aim 'to ensure that disabled people can go where everyone
else goes and that they can do so easily and without extra cost'.
To this end, DPTAC would wish to see full compliance across the
rail network as soon as possible.
7. However we are aware that there are considerable
cost and engineering implications to the industry, and accept
that it is not reasonable or practical to expect TOCs to replace
their whole fleet instantly. Accessibility must be achieved through
a structured, mutually agreeable programme, which is transparent
to both the industry and users.
8. It is DPTAC's view that the most practical
and pragmatic way forward is to achieve a balance between end
dates and refurbishment regulations to achieve optimum accessibility
within the shortest timescale.
9. We do feel, however, that during any consideration
of timescales and end dates, it should be remembered that we are
not starting from a blank sheet, the DDA has been in place since
1995, the RVAR since 1998 and in July 2000, the Government clearly
set out its stance in its ten-year plan for transport, Transport
2010[42].
10. The Rail Industry, in common with other service
providers, has been aware of the Government's and intention to
legislate for a long time and should already be well advanced
in planning and implementing access for disabled people.
11. DPTAC recognise that some operators have
taken this proactive approach and have used the time to develop
and implement good practice in providing access for disabled people,
thereby spreading costs. DPTAC commend these operators and welcome
the social and financial benefits they have achieved.
12. However some operators
have chosen to adopt a 'wait and see' stance. This 'minimum standard'
approach to accessibility, which demonstrates a lack of commitment
to meet the needs of disabled passengers, is not acceptable and
should not be seen as valid grounds to delay the implementation
of an end date.
Proposed changes
End Date
13. The Government is committed to integrated
public transport and to enforceable civil rights for disabled
people. These commitments must be translated into quantifiable
legislation.
14. DPTAC understands that this is only the first
stage of the consultation and that a definitive end date will
be established following the more focussed subsequent consultation.
We would take this opportunity to urge the Government to set the
end dates as early as is practicable, to allow disabled people
the ability to use the rail network or at least to consider rail
as a viable transport alternative.
15. It is unlikely that any rail journey would
be made in isolation, most potential rail passengers would have
to use some other form of transport to get to the station, and/or
to continue their journey. It is therefore vital that every step
of the journey is accessible.
16. We believe that an end date of 2017 should
be introduced, to bring rail in line with the bus industry. Continuity
between RVAR and The Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations
(PSVAR) 2000 would be a major step towards the 'seamless' journey
that is required to give disabled people the confidence and ability
to travel independently with ease, safety and in comfort.
17. However, DPTAC concede that some operators
may have legitimate reasons to consider this date unfeasible.
To address these cases, a robust exemption process should be put
in place. This exemption process should place the duty firmly
on the owner/operator to demonstrate that they are taking accessibility
seriously and would consider owner/operators and vehicles on a
case by case basis.
18. DPTAC recommend that an end date of 2025
should be set for all exemptions granted under this process.
19. DPTAC is sensitive to the need to strike
a balance between end dates and refurbishment to achieve optimum
accessibility within the shortest time scale. Any agreed end date
must be backed up by a strong and proactive refurbishment programme
which will improve access (if not achieve full compliance) in
the interim.
20. DPTAC have no wish to delay or impede this
process, we would rather see an active, ongoing programme of refurbishment
than wait for the industry to comply with a distant end date.
21. If companies can
demonstrate that an end date of 2017 would cause them to delay
or even cancel refurbishment programmes which would impede accessibility
then they should apply to be considered under the above exemption
process.
22. DPTAC believe that any agreed end date should
override any prior lifetime exemptions, except those granted on
grounds of innovation and heritage (see paras 60-64). DPTAC also
agree that the of the scope of RVAR should be extended to include
mass transit systems, as we see no reason for their current exemption
from RVAR.
23. DPTAC supports the amendment of RVAR to include
all new vehicles rather than just new classes of vehicles.
24. In the 6 years since RVAR came into effect,
the problems and areas of non-compliance with classes of trains
already in service or in development, have been identified and
in many cases solutions have been developed and implemented.
It is up to the industry to find appropriate solutions and share
good practice.
25. DPTAC firmly believe that there is no justification
or reason for any non-compliant trains to still be in production.
Refurbishment
26. As stated earlier, DPTAC believe that any
agreed end date must be backed up by a strong and proactive refurbishment
programme.
27. DPTAC realise that through interim improvements,
a large proportion of vehicles will become accessible, if not
fully compliant, long before the end date.
28. However any such programme must be transparent,
structured and enforceable. In terms of the options identified
in the consultation, DPTAC agree that the most efficient and
effective method of implementing a refurbishment programme would
be by means of the 'Menu' option.
29. We appreciate the practical issues involved
in undertaking refurbishment work whilst still providing a full,
uninterrupted service for all passengers, and believe this approach
would be the most cost effective and cause minimum disruption
by giving greater control to the vehicle owners and operators,
enabling them to factor access improvements into routine maintenance/refurbishment
schedules, thereby reducing costs and downtime.
30. However we do not feel that this approach
goes far enough since it only takes into account 'like for like'
improvements and does not apply to facilities where they do not
already exist. We recommend that this option should be extended
to become a 'Menu Plus' approach which would then cover the installation
of items as such as passenger information systems and wheelchair
accessible toilets where they do not currently exist.
31. DPTAC feel that this is especially important
as the provision or absence of Passenger Information Systems and
wheelchair accessible toilets are two of the major barriers or
deterrents preventing many disabled people from using the rail
network.
32. Good, clear, reliable, up-to-date information
is essential not only to people with visual and hearing impairments,
but also to ambulant disabled people, who may need advance warning
and preparation time to act e.g. prior to arriving at their destination
station or when a change of platform is announced. It should also
be noted that this applies to many other groups of rail passengers
such as older people, parents with small children and/or buggies
and people with heavy bags or luggage.
33. Accurate and reliable information is also
key to relieving stress for people with mental health problems,
learning disabilities as well as tourists and other passengers
travelling on an unfamiliar route.
34. DPTAC does not consider it unreasonable to
expect a wheelchair accessible toilet on all trains making journeys
of more than one hour's duration.
35. DPTAC strongly feel that these are not items
which can reasonably be allowed to remain unaltered or absent
until the agreed end date and need to be addressed during refurbishment.
36. We are aware of the need for very thorough
consideration on how to take this 'Menu Plus' option forward and
would expect the next phase of the consultation to explore more
closely the drafting and implementation.
37. Again, DPTAC would expect any refurbishment
regime to be backed up by a robust enforcement procedure implemented
by appropriately trained and resourced staff.
38. It is vital that this is not seen as a disincentive
to refurbish existing rolling stock, or used as a loophole by
owners/operators in order to avoid making what are perceived to
be expensive accessibility improvements.
39. We would seek the inclusion of a process
by which operators must demonstrate that they have ensured that
improvements to access have been considered (even if they have
not been implemented), every time money is spent on vehicles prior
to the end date. We also would seek a system which encourages
owners/operator of even vehicles with limited franchise or vehicle
life to do as much as possible towards access if not full compliance.
Compliance Certification
40. DPTAC supports the introduction of Compliance
Certificates such as those issued under Schedule 4 of the PSVAR.
41. This formal compliance process will clarify
requirements and eliminate areas of ambiguity, which currently
exist. It would send a clear message to train designers, manufactures,
owners and operators that access for disabled passengers should
not be treated as an 'optional extra'.
42. However we are concerned that a Compliance
Certificate should not be seen merely as a 'tick box' for accessibility.
It is often the everyday operational policies and practices of
operators and staff that make vehicles inaccessible. A commonly
cited example of this operational non-compliance is a wheelchair
space which users are unable to access if the table is left locked
in place, as is often the case.
43. To ensure that compliance with RVAR is seen
as essential at both the design, manufacture and operational stages
of a vehicle's life, we would seek assurances that an ongoing
regime to monitor operational compliance and maintenance will
be included under this certification process. This regime should
be proactive and carried out by fully trained and resourced inspectors.
44. DPTAC feel that this monitoring and enforcement
of compliance is vital if disabled people are to have the confidence
to travel and to ensure that money spent on implementing and improving
accessible facilities is not wasted by misuse or bad practice.
45. DPTAC is aware that in future the RVAR will
be superseded by European Interoperability Directives, such as
those already in effect for Heavy Rail systems.
46. DPTAC welcome this opportunity to standardise
requirements and provisions across Europe. However, we share the
concerns of many disabled people that in order to do so across
a number of regulatory regimes with varying or no accessibility
standards, that these industry lead directives may take a more
conservative approach that we would wish.
47. We understand that the UK Government is committed
to not lowering the current standards of RVAR and we urge them
to ensure that the RVAR is used as a base standard for any European
Interoperability Directive including accessibility requirements.
48. We would also request assurances that the
Government would seek an exemption from any such Directive if
its requirements were less than those currently laid out in RVAR.
Decriminalisation
49. DPTAC support the decriminalisation of
the offences in Section 46 and the implementation of civil sanctions.
50. Regulations are only as strong as the
relevant monitoring and enforcement regime, and DPTAC is well
aware that the current system is ineffective and does not command
respect.
51. We would therefore welcome the establishment
of a strong and proactive enforcement regime.
52. DPTAC would also seek assurances that
any enforcement scheme would be adequately resourced to ensure
that it is proactive rather just rely on customer complaints.
53. However we are concerned that the term
'light touch' enforcement regime, as used in the consultation
document, does not sit well with many disabled people.
54. DPTAC would urge the Department to reconsider
this terminology so as to reassure disabled people that the proposed
changes are for the benefit of passengers rather than the industry.
Exemptions
55. DPTAC welcomes the simplification of the
RVAR exemption procedures under section 47 of the DDA 1995.
56. As a statutory consultee and active participant
in the RVAR exemption process, we are well aware of the shortcomings
of current exemption process.
57. We agree that the current requirement for
all exemptions orders to be made by Statutory Instrument following
Parliamentary approval is unnecessary and time consuming.
58. During this consultation process we have
sought and received reassurance from the Department for Transport
that DPTAC will still be included in the exemption process and
are content with these assurances. We are also content with assurances
that the simplification of the process will not mean a relaxation
of the current strict criteria. Following these assurances, DPTAC
sees no problem with the concept of Administration Orders which
would be drafted and authorised by the Department for Transport.
59. DPTAC is pleased by the decreasing number
of applications for exemption from RVAR over the last few years.
We see this as a positive indication that the Rail Industry is
'designing in' accessibility and finding solutions to existing
problems. We would encourage TOC's to innovate and share existing
good practice.
60. In 2003 the majority of applications considered
were from heritage organisations who, in most cases, are providing
an experience rather than a transport service.
61. Although we agree that, given the nature
of the vehicles and service, it seems inappropriate that small,
voluntary organisations should have to go through the same process
as TOC's, we are concerned that they should not be completely
exempt from the process. We feel that it is important that such
organisations should still be encouraged to comply with the spirit
if not the letter of the regulations.
62. DPTAC have been encouraged that it is
often these smaller organisations who try the hardest and devise
the most innovative solutions to give access to disabled people.
We would encourage the introduction of a simplified process by
which heritage organisations could seek advice and guidance on
accessibility and staff training issues.
63. We have also been pleased to recommend
the granting of exemptions on the grounds of innovation. Several
operators have developed facilities which, whilst not complying
with the exact technical specification of RVAR, are well within
the spirit and attempt to improve the quality of the travelling
experience for disabled passengers. DPTAC welcome these applications
and strongly believe that there will always be a place for innovation
within the framework of the RVAR
64. We believe that only current exemptions granted
on the basis of innovation or heritage should be exempt from the
agreed end date.
Implementation
65. Whilst we share the concern of many disabled
people that rail provisions are not included in the current draft
Disability Bill, it is our understanding that the conclusions
of this and the subsequent consultation will feed into the final
Disability Bill.
66. DPTAC welcome assurances from the Department
for Transport that draft regulations will be ready for inclusion
and rail provisions fully covered when the Disability Bill is
presented to Parliament.
Conclusion
67. DPTAC welcome the proposals to amend the
rail provisions in Part V of the DDA1995. We believe that a review
of the current provisions is necessary and long overdue.
68. We believe that the rail industry need clear,
unequivocal direction that access for disabled passengers is not
a luxury or an optional extra. DPTAC believe it is unacceptable
that in 2004 many disabled rail passengers travelling on routes
served by Mark I 'slam door' stock are still forced to travel
in guards vans without heat, light or any proper security measures.
69. In the process of creating a fully compliant
rail network, the introduction of an agreed end date and refurbishment
regulations will give guidance and clarity to both the industry
and disabled people in terms of what needs to be done, how it
will be done and when it will be done.
70. To ensure ongoing compliance and accessibility,
it is vital that these regulations are backed up by robust, proactive
and fully resourced monitoring and enforcement regimes.
71. Whilst we understand that the rail industry,
- in common with all other industries - does not enjoy unlimited
funding, we do not accept that cost should be the deciding factor
in providing access for disabled passengers, limited budgets should
not be used as an excuse to avoid responsibility.
72. We firmly believe that the operators and
regulators should ensure that all available money is used wisely
to ensure maximum benefit to all passengers.
73. We feel that the rail industry should realise
that access is not just about expenditure, but also about creating
revenue by carrying more fare paying passengers.
Annex A
General comments on accessibility for disabled
people
The population
1. Disabled people account for a significant
proportion of the population. The number of disabled people varies
according to the definition used. There are an estimated 8.6 million
adult disabled people in Great Britain and 11.7 million people
are covered by the provisions of the Disability Discrimination
Act 1995.
2. Disabled people are not a homogenous group
with identical needs. The needs of people with mental health problems
or learning disabilities are distinct from those of wheelchair
users for example. Even within disabilities needs vary, for example
a profoundly deaf person will not benefit from a hearing aid.
3. Of disabled people overall, in broad terms:
- 70% have difficulty walking and/or climbing steps;
- 41% have a hearing loss;
- 24% have a vision loss.
4. Disabled people live throughout the whole
community. One in four households are reported to have a disabled
resident. The need for access for disabled people is not limited
to specific areas or buildings but present throughout transport
and the built environment.
5. In broad terms, over the next 30 years:
- The proportion of the population over 65 will
increase by 40%;
- The number of people aged over 65 will double;
- The proportion over 80 will increase by 100%
and the number will treble.
6. Over the same period that will bring about
these changes in the population profile, the overall population
will increase by less than 7%.
7. There is a correlation between the age and
disability. Over half the population aged over 75 has some kind
of disability and two thirds of disabled people are over pension
age. Many have more than one disability that affects their mobility.
8. The growing disabled and older populations
will have social as well as economic implications if those responsible
for transport systems and built environments do not recognise
and address the need for more inclusive environments. Mobility
and transport are vital to achieving and sustaining self-sufficiency
and independence into old age.
Accessibility for disabled people
9. 'Accessibility' is a term that is interpreted
differently by different audiences. By accessibility for disabled
people we are seeking inclusive transport systems and built
environments which are easy to reach, use and understand in safety
and comfort.
10. DPTAC's believe disabled people should have
access to the transport choices and opportunities available to
non-disabled people. By doing so everyone would have the opportunity
for independent mobility.
11. To maximise the full potential market, people
need to be able to use a service. Otherwise many people will be
excluded - and along with them their friends and families. Those
people will be forced to look at alternatives. It is estimated
that accessibility issues are relevant for 30-40% of the travelling
population at any one time. Disabled people alone spend £40bn
annually in the UK.
12. Accessibility for disabled people benefits
everyone, including older people, those with temporary disabilities
or those temporarily encumbered with heavy luggage or pushing
a pram. It also helps people for whom English is not their first
language or people in an unfamiliar place by making it easier
to use and understand.
A strategic approach
13. There is enormous scope and opportunity to
improve accessibility for disabled people but it will require
a strong commitment at all levels.
14. DPTAC believes that the need for - and benefit
from - an inclusive transport system and built environment should
be given a high profile.
15. The Government's ten-year plan for transport,
Transport 2010, stated;
"6.5 The Government is committed to public transport
that is accessible to disabled people. The rate and level of new
investment in this Plan will ensure that improvements in the accessibility
of public transport are brought forward more quickly. Building
in accessibility for all disabled people in all new investment
is a condition of public money being spent. Local authorities
and transport operators should ensure that the transport needs
of disabled people are factored into their plans and that the
full benefits of improved public transport are accessible to all."
16. Providing access for disabled people is often
only considered in terms in terms of detailed design. DPTAC believes
this is no longer sufficient and that strategic decisions, investment
and policies must address access for disabled people.
17. We welcome the Government's commitment to
accessibility being a condition of public money being spent. However,
it is the experience of disabled people which will measure whether
it is having an impact.
18. To be effective all investors in the transport
and built environment, public and private, at all levels, need
to understand how to provide access effectively and require evidence
access is improving as a result of their investment.
19. The Disability Rights Taskforce (DRTF) report
'From Exclusion to Inclusion' contains a summary of the
problems faced by disabled people with access to travel and the
built environment. The Government's response, 'Towards Inclusion',
published in April 2000, provides details of action that is being
taken to address these issues. Further references are given on
DPTAC's web site at www.dptac.gov.uk
Skills and competencies in accessibility for disabled
people
20. Investment in people is also necessary. All
staff, including those who plan, provide, manage and operate services
or deliver policies will benefit from disability equality training
to a high standard.
21. Training is relevant to everyone involved
from the boardroom to the front line of service provision and
policy implementation. There is a need for all staff, not just
those dealing with the public, to understand the relevance of
their work to access for disabled people.
22. To be effective, training itself must be
relevant to the job, of high quality and on-going. Education and
on-going training for staff should be a key element in delivering
access.
23. It will be essential to incorporate accessibility
for disabled people in training and retraining of those responsible
for planning, designing, operating, maintaining and management
transport services, infrastructure and built environments, including
the public realm.
24. There is support, guidance and advice available
to help deliver inclusive environments. Those responsible need
to understand and apply this to their work and not see access
as a separate burden.
25. There are also specific regulations and requirements
that set out the minimum standards for accessibility for disabled
people, for example on bus and rolling stock design. These minimum
requirements must be met in full. As the understanding
of peoples access needs evolves improvements can be made.
Early consideration and involvement of disabled people
is advised to ensure accessibility considerations and local problems
are taken into account.
42
'Transport 2010'
6.5 The Government is committed to public
transport that is accessible to disabled people... Building in
accessibility for all disabled people in all new investment is
a condition of public money being spent. Local authorities and
transport operators should ensure that the transport needs of
disabled people are factored into their plans and that the full
benefits of improved public transport are accessible to all."
| 
