Memorandum from Leonard Cheshire (DDB
11)
SUMMARY OF
RECOMMENDATIONS:
— The exclusion for transport services
should be immediately removed as recommended by the Disability
Rights Task Force. This removal should cover the transport sector
as a whole and should not be subject to individual transport sector
regulations.
— Leonard Cheshire would like to see
the Committee seek clarification that IF regulations are used
to remove the transport operators' exemption, that these regulations
will be introduced quickly and will include the obligations of
the October 1999 duties. Further consultation is unnecessary,
as this issue has now been consulted on three times over a period
of five years.
— The DRTF specifically named aviation
as an area where statutory intervention was needed and Leonard
Cheshire would like to see the Committee propose amendments that
would bring both of these sectors immediately within the remit
of legislation.
— To regulate for 2017 as an end date
by which all rail vehicles should be made accessible.
— All trains should be required to
adopt half-life refurbishment programs with clear outlines of
what accessibility changes are legally required during these refurbishments.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Leonard Cheshire is the UK's largest
voluntary sector provider of support to disabled people. It supports
over 21,000 disabled people in the UK, offering a range of flexible
social care services to meet a wide range of needs. Leonard Cheshire
also campaigns for the rights of disabled people in the UK and
raises awareness of the discrimination still affecting them.
1.2 Leonard Cheshire has recently researched
and published a report on the impact an inaccessible transport
system has on the type and degree of social exclusion experienced
by disabled people. This provides a strong evidence base from
which to comment on the issues raised by the transport provisions
within the draft bill (see annex A for a full copy of "Mind
the Gap")[1],[2].
Although Leonard Cheshire holds opinions on the many other aspects
of the draft bill, due to space restrictions and the importance
of the transport issue, we have focused only on this issue in
this response. Other issues are covered in detail in the joint
submission from the Disabilities Charities Consortium (DCC), of
which Leonard Cheshire is an active member.
2. TRANSPORT
PROVISIONS WITHIN
THE DRAFT
BILL
2.1 Leonard Cheshire welcomes the provision
within the draft Bill that allows for the extension of the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) to transport services. This was
a major recommendation of the Disability Rights Task Force.
2.2 Inaccessible transport has a major impact
on disabled people's independence, social participation and employability.
Sixty per cent of households with a disabled member do not have
access to a car (compared to 27% of the general population) so
access to the public transport system is a crucial part of many
disabled peoples' lives. Findings from Leonard Cheshire's research
show that 23% of disabled people actively seeking employment have
had to turn down a job offer because of inaccessible transport.
Sixty-two per cent of wheelchair users and 86% of people with
a visual impairment said inaccessible transport had restricted
their choice of jobs. Our research shows that disabled people's
access to employment and access to healthcare are limited because
of a continuing inaccessible transport system. As a result, disabled
people are denied access to key civic services and their opportunities
to socially participate are severely limited.
2.3 The specific details of the transport
provisions within the draft bill are difficult to comment on because
of their reliance on regulation-making powers. Until we are able
to see the content of these regulations, we must reserve judgement
on the overall effectiveness of this part of the legislation.
We would urge the Committee to call for the urgent publication
of these regulations along with a firm timetable for their implementation.
Exemption of all modes of transport
2.4 We are extremely disappointed with the
decision not to remove fully the blanket exclusion but to introduce
regulation-making powers that allow it to be done on a sector-by-sector
basis. Ambiguities surrounding the areas of responsibility within
the transport infrastructure remain, and it is unfortunate that
the opportunity to remove them has not been taken. Removing the
exemption from all modes of transport in a blanket coverage way
would bring greater clarity to this extremely confusing area of
law, and Leonard Cheshire would like to see this more positive
approach taken.
2.5 As the Regulatory Impact Assessment
(RIA) with the draft bill suggests, removing the exemption for
transport vehicles is likely to mean transport operators will
have to implement disability equality training for their staff.
Leonard Cheshire feels that as many operators are already doing
this, the cost incurred by transport operators would not be prohibitive
and therefore cannot be seen as a significant factor in not removing
the exemption immediately. The benefits to disabled people however,
would be considerable, as they would receive protection from discrimination,
which they currently do not have.
2.6 To demonstrate the need for the immediate
removal of this exemption instead of the suggested staggered regulations,
Leonard Cheshire has listed below a number of examples of discrimination.
Without the immediate removal of this exemption, disabled people
have no legal recourse when such discrimination occurs:
— Bus drivers refusing to stop for
wheelchair users, refusing to operate functioning ramps or assisting
passengers.
— The recent case of a group of deaf
people being removed from an EasyJet flight because they were
not travelling with a carer.
— Drivers/staff refusing to alert people
with learning disabilities or visual impairments to get off at
the correct stop.
Recommendation
The exclusion for transport services should
be immediately removed as recommended by the Disability Rights
Task Force. This removal should cover the transport sector as
a whole and should not be subject to individual transport sector
regulations.
Regulations
2.7 In last year's consultation on the removal
of the exemption of transport services from Part III, the proposals
did not require a transport provider to consider providing a reasonable
alternative means of accessing the service (October 1999 duties
of Part III). We hope that by allowing for this in the draft bill,
this indicates the Government's intention to use these regulations.
However, the RIA explores the consequences of the 1996 obligations
of Part III and not the October 1999 duties.
2.8 The "Enforcement and Sanctions"
section of the RIA suggests that regulations will not be introduced
immediately after Royal Assent and further consultation will be
required. This is an unnecessary further delay.
Recommendation
Leonard Cheshire would like to see the committee
seek clarification that IF regulations are used to remove the
transport operators' exemption, that these regulations will be
introduced quickly and will include the obligations of the October
1999 duties. Further consultation is unnecessary, as this issue
has now been consulted on three times over a period of five years.
Aviation and Shipping
2.12 It is suggested in the RIA that aviation
and shipping will only be brought under the legislation if they
are failing to comply with existing voluntary Codes of Practice.
Recent high profile cases with both EasyJet and RyanAir prove
that the aviation industry is already failing to comply with the
voluntary code and Leonard Cheshire does not think this failure
requires further examination and consultation. The RIA also states
on page 29 that relying on voluntary compliance from the transport
sector "would not provide disabled people with confidence
in the transport network as a whole. And it would not deliver
against the Government's manifesto and policy commitments".
Leonard Cheshire agrees with this.
Recommendation
The DRTF specifically named aviation as an area
where statutory intervention was needed and Leonard Cheshire would
like to see the Committee propose amendments that would bring
both aviation and shipping immediately within the remit of legislation.
3. TRANSPORT
PROVISIONS TO
BE PUT
INTO THE
BILL AT
A LATER
STAGE
3.1 Leonard Cheshire welcomes the Government's
intention to include in the final bill measures on setting an
end date for rail vehicle accessibility and regulations to cover
refurbishment of vehicles, subject to the outcome of the ongoing
Department for Transport consultation. However, we are very concerned
about the length of time this important DRTF recommendation is
taking to be acted upon and we hope the committee will take this
opportunity to investigate both the content and timing of this
consultation.
End dates
3.2 Leonard Cheshire is extremely concerned
that 2025 is the Government's preferred date by which all rail
vehicles must be accessible. Such a date will mean that trains
remain inaccessible to disabled people long after other forms
of transport have become accessible. Consequently, a crucial link
in the transport chain will be absent, ruling out whole journeys
for many disabled people.
3.3 Leonard Cheshire urges the Government
to regulate for 2017 as an end date for all rail vehicles and
has started the All Aboard! campaign to encourage members of the
public to support this. 2017 would be in line with the PSVAR for
buses and would provide disabled people with freedom to move across
the country, having the full choice of transport modes. The widespread
support that our campaign is receiving demonstrates that, regardless
of age, social class or impairment, inaccessible transport is
still the single most important issue facing disabled people today.
Whilst recognising the additional costs that will be incurred
by the rail operators as a consequence of earlier compliance,
the additional revenue generated as a result of the increased
volume in passengers using the service will to some degree, offset
such costs. Although this was cited as a benefit that has been
experienced by bus companies complying with similar legislation,
it was not costed in the RIA. It is essential that RIAs give full
weight to both the costs and the benefits of the proposals for
ALL stakeholders.
Recommendation
To regulate for 2017 as an end date by which
all rail vehicles should be made accessible.
Interim improvements (refurbishment regulations)
3.4 The Government has indicated a preference
for option 8, the "menu approach". Leonard Cheshire
is opposed to option 8 as a refurbishment proposal for rail vehicles.
The menu option lacks clarity and would be very difficult to enforce.
Whilst the refurbishment proposals give a small number of examples
of proposed changes, they do not provide clear indications of
all the changes that would be required by a refurbishment program.
For example, there is no mention of the need to install accessible
toilets or visual signage when making refurbishments.
3.5 Leonard Cheshire would like to see option
7 adopted. This option proposes half-life refurbishments. The
advantages are that they will bring much needed clarity and will
be easy to enforce. It is vital however, that the term "half
life refurbishment" is clearly defined and that all trains
are subject to a "half-life" refurbishment. Whilst there
is an argument put forward in the consultation that more recent
vehicles have a design life of 30 years and should last for 30
years without any major work being needed, the need for all trains
to be made accessible should overrule that.
Recommendation
All trains should be required to adopt half-life
refurbishment programs with clear outlines of what accessibility
changes are legally required during these refurbishments.
Enforcement system
3.6 Leonard Cheshire welcomes the proposal
to provide an effective enforcement system, but would urge the
Government to ensure that sanctions are tough and effective. If
done alongside recommendation 5, enforcement should be straightforward
as there will be an agreed program of works to be carried out
by an agreed date.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Our report "Mind the Gap" illustrates
the consequences of inaccessible transport for disabled people.
Despite recent government initiatives, social exclusion continues
to be acutely felt by many disabled people. The reality of this
exclusion is recognised by the majority of non-disabled people
but this recognition does not appear to extend to either the transport
planners or operators. This is a serious gap in joined up government,
as disabled people are unable to access many services and leisure
facilities that are themselves accessible, simply because public
transport fails them. It is now time to introduce comprehensive
legislation to make transport fully accessible to disabled people.
In view of the importance of transport for disabled people and
Leonard Cheshire's research in this area, Leonard Cheshire would
be happy to give oral evidence to the Committee should they choose
to explore this area in more detail.
February 2004
1 Not printed. Back
2
Campion et al, Mind the Gap, London, 2003. Back
| 
