Memorandum from the Department for Transport
(DDB 133)
At Wednesday's evidence sessions a number of
points were raised on which the Committee may wish to have further
clarification. For ease of reference I have brigaded them below
by subject.
PART 3
On timing, we are proposing that the exemption
would be lifted at the same time, and as the Minister indicated,
as soon as practicable after Royal Assent for all public transport
services—buses and coaches, trains (including trams and
light rail), taxis and private hire vehicles—along the lines
the Minister explained.
For car hire we envisage that in addition to
the Part 3 sections dealing with gratuitous discrimination and
policies, procedures and practices, we would apply the duty to
take reasonable steps in terms of supplying auxilliary aids and
also the requirement, where reasonable, to make physical alterations
to accommodate disabled people. In terms of the point raised by
Lord Tebbit on wheelchair accessible vehicles for disabled passengers,
or indeed drivers, this would be subject to reasonableness. I
would point out that we have no powers under Part 5 of the Act
to introduce accessibility regulations for hire cars.
RAIL
As the Minister mentioned the consultation which
ended on 26 January marked the first phase in the consultation
on establishing an "end-date" for compliance with RVAR.
It would be our intention, subject to final decisions on the outcome
of that consultation, to have draft regulations on the end date
and refurbishment requirements when the Bill is formally introduced.
There would then be no delay in implementing the requirements
as soon as practicable after Royal Assent.
The Minister was asked for details of projected
replacement patterns for rolling stock over the next 20-30 years.
The attached chart shows the numbers of heavy rail vehicles not
covered by the RVAR from 2013 to 2030. The information is based
on the current "book life" of the vehicles and some
of them could remain in service beyond this date. I should also
add that these are the most recent figures which we have only
received in the last couple of weeks.
AVIATION
The research on compliance with the aviation
code of practice is due to report in the second half of 2005.
On the question of responsibility for boarding
disabled passengers that is currently the responsibility of the
airlines. Some will self-handle, as British Airways, while others
sub-contract those duties to a ground handling company. There
is no suggestion that the draft Bill, were its provisions to be
used in respect of airlines, would impact on that arrangement.
The Committee may be interested to know that
the European Commission are planning to publish a draft proposal
later this year on assistance to disabled people. Their initial
thinking which they have shared with Governments, industry and
disability interests, proposes that the airports should be responsible
for providing assistance, but that the costs of that service should
be recouped from airlines. Until we see their formal draft proposal,
however, we do not know whether that position will be changed.
On restricting numbers of disabled people, there
are already operating standards for the airline industry which
recommend the maximum number of disabled passengers according
to the number of emergency exits. In practice different airlines
interpret those requirements according to their particular policies.
If the legislation were to be applied to airlines then, like other
service providers, they would have to be able to demonstrate that
their policy was reasonable in terms of the DDA and any other
domestic or international safety legislation. This would not be
an issue that would be addressed in our regulations though it
may be something the DRC would want to cover in their code.
I hope this covers the points outstanding from
Wedneday's session
Sue Sharp
Mobility and Inclusion Unit
Non RVAR Heavy Rail Vehicles Life Expiry
| 
