Access to Transport for Disabled People

House of Commons Transport Committee

Access to transport for disabled people

Fifth Report of Session 2013–14

Volume I Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence

Additional written evidence is contained in Volume II, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/transcom

Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 9 September 2013

HC 116 [Incorporating HC 1002, Session 2012-13] Published on 17 September 2013 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £22.00

The Transport Committee

The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Transport and its Associate Public Bodies.

Current membership

Mrs Louise Ellman (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) (Chair) Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham) Jim Dobbin (Labour/Co-operative, Heywood and Middleton) Karen Lumley (Conservative, Redditch) Jason McCartney (Conservative, Colne Valley) Karl McCartney (Conservative, Lincoln) Lucy Powell (Labour/Co-operative, Manchester Central) Mr Adrian Sanders (Liberal Democrat, Torbay) Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South) Graham Stringer (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)

The following were also members of the committee during the Parliament. Steve Baker (Conservative, Wycombe), Angie Bray (Conservative, Ealing Central and Acton), Lilian Greenwood (Labour, Nottingham South), Mr Tom Harris (Labour, Glasgow South), Julie Hilling (Labour, Bolton West), Kelvin Hopkins (Labour, Luton North), Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne), Mr John Leech (Liberal Democrat, Manchester Withington) Paul Maynard, (Conservative, Blackpool North and Cleveleys), Gavin Shuker (Labour/Co-operative, Luton South), Angela Smith (Labour, Penistone and Stocksbridge), Julian Sturdy (Conservative, York Outer)

Powers

The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk.

Publication

The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the internet at http://www.parliament.uk/transcom. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the back of this volume.

The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in a printed volume. Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only.

Committee staff

The current staff of the Committee are Mark Egan (Clerk), Farrah Bhatti (Second Clerk), Richard Jeremy (Committee Specialist), Adrian Hitchins (Senior Committee Assistant), Stewart McIlvenna (Committee Assistant) and Hannah Pearce (Media Officer)

Contacts

All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Transport Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6263; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]

Contents

Report Page

Summary 3

1 Introduction 5

2 Current approach to accessibility 7 Summary of measures to date 7 Buses 7 Railways 7 Taxis and private hire vehicles (PHVs) 8 Aviation 8 Shipping 8 Personal transport 8 Further potential measures 9 Monitoring the Action Plan 9

3 Accessible transport infrastructure 10 Pavements 10 Buses and community transport infrastructure 10 Railways 14 Cross-modal interchange 16 Taxis and private hire vehicles 16

4 Better transport information 17 Transport Direct 17 The requirement for advance booking 18 Travel training 19

5 Staff training and awareness 20 Public transport staff 20 Taxi and private hire vehicle drivers 22 Airports and airlines 22

6 The future of the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee 24

7 Concluding remarks 25

Conclusions and recommendations 26

Formal Minutes 31

Witnesses 32

List of printed written evidence 33

List of additional written evidence 33

List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 36

Summary

Enabling and encouraging access to transport for disabled people delivers widespread benefits across government, through widening employment opportunities; through access to healthcare and education; and by enabling disabled people to participate more in society.

Last year the London Paralympic Games brought a focus on what measures the UK could take to make transport as accessible for disabled people as it is for the rest of the population. These improvements for the Games built a considerable expectation that there would be a significant Paralympic legacy of improved access to transport for disabled people in the UK.

Subsequent to the Games, the Department for Transport published its Accessibility Action Plan. This set out measures to improve the physical accessibility of transport for disabled people; to provide better information for the disabled traveller; and to improve attitudes and behaviour towards disabled passengers. Many of its proposed measures are praiseworthy, but we are worried about how closely the implementation of this Plan is being monitored. The Government should publish annual updates about implementation of the plan, including data on changes in the number and types of journeys made by disabled people.

The full UK bus and coach fleet is not required to be compliant with accessibility regulations until 2020. Many bus routes now advertised as being operated with accessible buses sometimes run step access only buses. This lack of reliability from the network means that many disabled people do not consider making a journey. A lack of on-board audio-visual information on buses also reduces the willingness of the visually impaired as well as the wider public to use buses. We would like to see a system of incentives for operators to bring forward investment in new accessible vehicles, together with a phasing in of audio-visual information as new buses are introduced over the next ten years. We disagree with the DfT’s decision to exercise an exemption to the EU requirement for operators to provide disability awareness training to staff in the bus and coach industry, especially given how readily modern methods such as “e-learning” make it possible for such training can be provided for all staff at minimal cost. We would like to see this exemption ended.

The requirement for rail staff to have disability awareness training stands in strong contrast to the minimal requirements imposed on the bus industry. The rail network is also seeing improvements to station accessibility improvements through the Access for All scheme and we hope to see the DfT involving disability organisations and charities in prioritising stations for improvements. As the requirement for staff training acknowledges, physical improvements to enable greater accessibility improvements do not detract from the importance of staffed stations to ensure a safe and secure journey for disabled people. Any forthcoming changes in ticket offices and technology should not reduce the level of staff on train stations.

Disabled people are required by law to travel with a carer on flights if the airline judges them unable to perform an emergency procedure on the aeroplane by themselves. The DfT

4 Transport Committee

should seek to amend the EU regulations to allow carers to travel free of charge if an airline deems it necessary, as is the case in the USA. The DfT should also press the European Commission to bring forward proposals on adequate compensation by airlines for damaged mobility equipment. Currently, the liability of airlines for damaged baggage is limited to approximately £1,180, which is significantly less than some mobility equipment.

Our evidence indicated that there is very low awareness of Transport Direct, the DfT’s journey planning web portal, that was upgraded substantially following the Paralympic Games and now includes an option to specify journeys that are accessible to disabled people so that such travellers can have greater confidence when deciding how or whether to travel. The DfT should improve its marketing of the portal among disabled people to enable the DfT’s investment in the portal to reap its full benefit. Travel training schemes are also supported in the Accessibility Action Plan, but there is no firm commitment to support the initial capital outlay to set schemes up. The DfT should encourage local authorities to include such schemes in bids for funding in the next round of the Local Sustainable Travel Fund.

The DfT should likewise be working with other departments to improve policy on accessibility for disabled people, and with local government and the new Disability Action Alliance to promote the development of successful local schemes. Local government and the strategic transport authorities have the closest involvement with transport operators and passengers, and it is here that successful transport initiatives and schemes are often devised.

1 Introduction

1. Most people will experience disability at some point in their lifetime, either personally or in caring for disabled family and friends.1 Approximately 11.5 million people (19% of the population) are currently disabled in the UK, as defined by the Equality Act 2010.2 Over one in five of those reporting a disability experience difficulties when using transport.3 This can have a huge impact on the individual, making it difficult or impossible for them to access jobs or voluntary work, go shopping, attend school or college, meet friends and take holidays. The number of disabled people is expected to increase over time, a trend largely driven by an increasing number of people over the State Pension age.4

2. The UK ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2009. It also passed its own Equality Act in 2010 and is in the process of introducing the requisite regulations from the Act. Disability Rights UK described the 2012 Paralympic Games as a time of “real focus” on ways to make certain that disabled people can use transport in the same way as others.5 Subsequent to the Games, the Department for Transport (DfT) published its Accessibility Action Plan, setting out its proposals for improving transport for disabled people in the years ahead.

3. Last year, ahead of the Paralympics, we asked the public for suggestions for future inquiry topics and access to transport for disabled people was one of the subjects proposed. We issued a call for evidence on 16 November 2012. Our terms of reference sought views on the following issues: a) The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufficiently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? b) The accessibility of information, including the provision of information about routes, timetables, connections, delays, service alterations and fares. c) The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different impairments. d) What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its success?

4. We received 107 written submissions and took oral evidence on four occasions between March and June 2013. In the course of this inquiry Committee members undertook journeys with disabled people, to understand the challenges they face when using public transport. We also launched a web forum on 15 May 2013, seeking input from disabled people, from carers and from transport operators about challenges with physical

1 Department for Work and Pensions, Office for Disability Issues:“Fulfilling Potential: Building a deeper understanding of disability in the UK today – Main Report,” 2013 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Q5 [Ms Marije Davidson]

accessibility to transport, travel information and assistance offered by staff. We received over 300 responses and thank all those who contributed. Finally, we are grateful for the assistance we received in our inquiry from our specialist adviser, Carol Thomas, of Access Design Solutions UK Ltd.

5. In this report we review the DfT’s work to date on improving access to transport for disabled people and the new Accessibility Action Plan. We then focus on three key themes identified in the evidence received: accessible transport infrastructure; better transport information; and staff training and awareness. Finally, we consider the future role of the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC). We hope that our conclusions will inform further consideration of this issue in the House of Commons, as well as being relevant to local authorities, transport operators and the DfT.

2 Current approach to accessibility

6. In December 2012, the DfT published “Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all”, its Accessibility Action Plan.

Summary of measures to date

7. The Accessibility Action Plan provides an overview of the improvements in accessibility since the introduction of regulations made under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. These are summarised below.

Buses

8. The Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations (PSVAR) 2000 require new vehicles carrying 22 passengers or more to have facilities such as low-floor boarding devices, space for wheelchair users, highlighting of steps, handrails for visually impaired people and priority seating. All coaches and buses must be compliant by 2020.6

9. The Public Service Vehicles (Conduct of Drivers, Inspectors, Conductors and Passengers) Regulations (Amendment) Regulations 2002 require drivers of buses covered by the PSVAR to help disabled people to board or alight from their vehicle. They also require all buses to allow disabled passengers to board with their assistance dogs.7

10. Since September 2008, all professional bus and coach drivers have been required to hold a Certificate of Professional Competence as a requirement of EU Directive 2003/59. Drivers are required to carry out 35 hours of training every five years. There are no firm requirements on the content or quality of any such training.8

Railways

11. New rail vehicles have been subject to mandatory accessibility standards since the introduction of the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) in 1998. These regulations were superseded by the Railways (Interoperability) Regulations 2006 and the pan-European Rail Vehicle (Non-Interoperable Rail System) Regulations 2010 (both referred to as the PRM-TSI), which brought light rail carriages into line with other rail carriages. All rail vehicles must be compliant with the accessibility standards in these regulations by 1 January 2020.9

12. Railway station accessibility requirements were brought into line with the Equality Act 2010 by the DfT’s “Accessible Train Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice” published in 2010.10 All licensed train or station operators, including London

6 Ev 168 paras 7-9 [Department for Transport] 7 Ev 168 paras 10-12 [Department for Transport] 8 Ev 173 paras 76-77 [Department for Transport] 9 Ev 169 paras 29-30 [Department for Transport] 10 Ev 170 paras 31-33 [Department for Transport]

Underground, must have in place a Disabled People’s Protection Policy (DPPP) which sets out the standards of service and facilities that disabled customers can expect. Enforcement of the Code of Practice is carried out by the Office of Rail Regulation. The DfT launched its Access for All programme of station upgrades in 2005. The programme has recently been allocated new funding for the years 2015-2019.

Taxis and private hire vehicles (PHVs)

13. The Equality Act 2010 includes provisions currently in force to ensure that guide dogs are transported by taxis and PHVs. There are also provisions to ensure that wheelchair users can travel in safety and comfort, which the DfT has not yet enforced. The Law Commission is currently conducting a review into licensing of the taxi and private hire trade. The outcomes of this review are expected to include a recommendation on how to ensure an accessible taxi fleet is available for passengers.

Aviation

14. The Equality Act 2010 applies to air travel in relation to the use of booking services and airport facilities services. The legal right to assistance at an airport and on board planes is outside the scope of national equality legislation, but similar requirements are in force elsewhere in the EU area through the EU regulations on protection for disabled air travellers and persons with reduced mobility (EC 1107/06).11 These regulations require the aviation industry to ensure that all staff providing direct assistance to disabled passengers should have knowledge of how to meet the needs of disabled people.

Shipping

15. The DfT has issued guidance notes on implementing EU Regulation 1177/2010 concerning the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterway, which came into force on 18 December 2010.12 The regulation aims to provide disabled people with the same opportunities to travel by ferry and cruise ship as they have in other transport sectors across the EU. It includes the requirement to have documented procedures for accommodating disabled passengers.

Personal transport

16. The Blue Badge scheme provides a range of on-street parking concessions to those with severe mobility problems. Recipients of the high-level mobility component of the Disability Living Allowance (DLA) have been entitled to apply for a Blue Badge and may exchange their mobility allowance for participation in the Motability scheme. The replacement of the DLA with the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) from 2013 means that eligibility criteria for a Blue Badge may change. Currently, eligibility extends to people unable to walk; those who can only walk with severe discomfort; or those who could become very ill if they try to walk. Others that are eligible include people who are blind, deaf or who need

11 Ev 175 Annex A [Department for Transport] 12 Department for Transport, “Guidance notes relating to EU Regulation 1177/2010 on maritime passenger rights,” 13 May 2013 www.gov.uk

supervision most of the time when walking outdoors, for example people who are severely mentally ill. The new PIP assessment system proposes that the Blue Badge is open simply to those who are unable to walk more than 50 metres. This has caused concern among disability organisations such as Disability Rights UK, which told us that up to 180,000 disabled people could no longer be eligible.13 As well as disabled people themselves, this affects their families who rely on them to provide transport, for example to school for young people.14 The Minister, Norman Baker MP, accepted that “it would have perhaps been more helpful” if there had been more engagement between the DfT and the Department for Work and Pensions (the department responsible for PIP) on the consequences of the changes to Motability.15 In June this year, the DWP agreed to launch a further consultation on the proposed PIP accessibility eligibility criteria.

Further potential measures

17. In addition to the measures described above, the Action Plan sets out other initiatives which are under consideration. These measures are divided into three sections: improving physical accessibility; providing better information for the disabled traveller; and improving attitudes and behaviour towards disabled passengers.16 The following chapters of our report have the same sequence, to enable reference between our recommendations and the relevant initiatives in the action plan.

Monitoring the Action Plan

18. While we welcome the work by DfT on producing the Action Plan, we note concerns in our written evidence about how the Plan’s tasks can be achieved and how their achievement will be measured.17 Regarding this, the Accessibility Action Plan states that “the involvement of transport operators, transport experts, manufacturers, local and central government, as well as users themselves, will be crucial... in holding the Department to account” but does not offer detail on how this will happen.18 The Action Plan also says that the DfT will continue to use existing statistical sources to collect data on the accessibility of buses and trains and the take up of concessionary travel, but does not propose a means of measuring the impact of the Action Plan against existing, background trends in such data.19 The Minister, told us that the DfT is “monitoring” the Action Plan.20 We have concerns about the lack of information available on how the Action Plan will be monitored. We recommend that the Department for Transport publish annual updates on the implementation of the measures in the Action Plan, which should include data on changes in the number and types of journeys made by disabled people.

13 Q21 [Ms Marije Davidson] 14 Q216 (Lord Sterling) 15 Q332 [Mr Norman Baker MP] 16 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, December 2010, p.19-23 17 Ev w38 para 3[Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport]; Ev 98 para 3.1 [Guide Dogs for the Blind] 18 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, December 2010, p.24 19 Ibid. 20 Q325 [Mr Norman Baker MP]

3 Accessible transport infrastructure

19. A journey is only as accessible as its least accessible part. In this chapter we consider the infrastructure on a journey, the potential restrictions to a person with disabilities and make some recommendations for improvements.

Pavements

20. Many disabled people find their journeys interrupted at the very first stage: the pavement. The poor condition and inconsistent design of pavements is a cause of concern because of the trip hazard they present to the partially sighted and those with restricted mobility.21 Steps up a hill may make footways inaccessible, because those in wheelchairs cannot use the route.22 Frequently there are concerns about the accessibility of bus stops, either because buses may not be able to pull up closely to the pavement (for example, due to failure to create or enforce parking restrictions around the stop) or where there may not be any pavement at all.23 This restricts the ability for a wheelchair user to access a bus. “Inclusive Mobility”, the DfT’s guidance to pedestrian infrastructure, has not been updated since 2005, despite new practice in this area (for example, the growth in “shared space” infrastructure and the subsequent concerns of blind and visually impaired people) and the introduction of the Equality Act 2010. Although the Accessibility Action Plan proposes that the guidance be reviewed and updated in 2014, pedestrian infrastructure was not covered in the DfT’s written submissions to our inquiry, which leads us to question the degree of impetus behind this relatively simple measure. We urge the DfT to complete its review of the Inclusive Mobility guidance in the first half of 2014. The review should take account of new practice such as the growth of shared space infrastructure. It should also engage with disability charities and organisations to develop new ideas for providing accessible pedestrian infrastructure in the different physical environments around the UK.

Buses and community transport infrastructure

21. Under the PSVAR 2000, all single-deck bus services must have facilities such as low- floor boarding devices, space for wheelchair users, highlighting of steps, handrails for visually impaired people and priority seating by 2016. The same requirement will apply to all double-deck bus services by 2017; to all small buses or minibus services by 2015; and to all coaches by 2020. All new single and double-deck buses have been required to be PSVAR compliant since 31 December 2000. Outside of London, old buses have not been decommissioned as quickly as expected by those developing the 1995 Disability

21 Ev w41 para 4.2 [Helen Hamlyn Centre for Design at the Royal College of Art]; Ev w47 para 5 [London TravelWatch] 22 Ev w151 [Responses to Committee Web Forum: Vanessa] 23 Ev 109 [Passenger Focus] paras 21-22; Ev w108 [Mr Jonathan L Fisher]; Ev w122 [Northumberland Learning Disability Partnership Board]; Ev w151 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum: Vanessa]

Discrimination Act.24 In 2011/12, 67% of buses in English metropolitan areas and 61% in English non-metropolitan areas were PSVAR compliant.25

22. The confidence that people with impaired mobility have in the consistency of the service can be undermined, because bus routes advertised as step-free are sometimes run with older buses with step access only.26 We also heard that bus operators sometimes operate vehicles without their wheelchair ramps in working order, which can prevent access for a wheelchair user onto a bus route advertised as step-free .27 The DfT does not propose any penalties for operators who do this, even though such practice by bus operators may leave a passenger unable to complete a journey.

23. Wheelchair users can become very frustrated by other passengers occupying wheelchair spaces on buses, with the result that drivers sometimes cannot accommodate wheelchair users on the bus.28 It is the responsibility of bus operators to make passengers aware of the priority of wheelchairs in a space, for example using the “nudge” signage approach of Transport for London.29 Alternatively operators could choose to operate buses with fewer seats (such as the Mercedes Citaro bus) to provide more room for both wheelchairs and pushchairs.30 The Minister told us that there is no place for legislation to evict people from a wheelchair space.31

24. There is an ongoing concern by users of electric wheelchairs or mobility scooters that some bus operators do not allow their devices onto buses.32 We held an inquiry into mobility scooters in 2010 and recommended that the DfT consider further the issue of the carriage of mobility scooters on buses and trains and to seek the views of both operators and users when considering further regulation.33 In March 2012, the DfT published a Written Ministerial Statement which identified the issues to be taken forward following a consultation on policy regarding mobility scooters and powered wheelchairs, including a kite marking system for the carriage of mobility scooters.34 The Accessibility Action Plan incorporates this project and we look forward to the introduction of a kite-mark system for public transport.35 In the interim, we are encouraged that more bus operators are participating in the Confederation of Passenger Transport’s Mobility Scooter Code

24 Q70 [Ms Ann Frye] 25 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.10 26 Ev w6 para 1 27 Ev 164 para 9[Equality and Human Rights Commission] 28 Q69 [Ms Faryal Velmi] 29 Ev 133 para 6.8 [Transport for London] 30 Q54 [Ms Tanvi Vyas] 31 Q352 [Mr Norman Baker MP] 32 Ev 100 [Transport for All]; Ev w89 para 3.1.5 [Mr Richard Fowler] 33 Transport Committee, Ninth Report of Session 2009-10, Mobility Scooters, HC 414, para 11 34 Response to the consultation into possible reforms of the use on the highway of mobility scooters and powered wheelchairs, Department for Transport, March 2012, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/mobility-scooters- and-powered-wheelchairs

35 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.21

scheme, which aims to simplify and standardise procedures for operators and scooter users to ensure they can safely use bus services.36

25. We believe that improvements to the bus network for disabled people are improvements for everyone. As part of the Accessibility Action Plan, the DfT should: a) introduce financial incentives for bus and coach companies to bring forward capital investment in new PSVAR-compliant vehicles ahead of the deadline for compliance; b) introduce a system of penalties for operators who fail to operate low-floor buses on routes advertised as such; c) work with bus operators to implement a nationwide campaign asking people to make space for wheelchairs in wheelchair areas of the buses, similar to that undertaken by Transport for London; and d) introduce the kite-mark system for mobility scooters by the end of 2013.

26. One of the projects listed on the Accessibility Action Plan for 2013 was to develop costings for audio-visual options on buses and decide a way forward.37 Visually impaired bus users, those with learning disabilities and other cognitive impairments, and those with some mental health impairments, suffer when there is a lack of information accessible to them when waiting for or travelling on buses. There is concern about a lack of simple and clear to understand information about the journey at many bus stops,38 but the issue most frequently raised with us was the lack of audio-visual information for users on the bus.

27. Richard Leaman, Chief Executive of Guide Dogs for the Blind, told us that 87% of his service users have been left on a bus because a driver had forgotten to tell them they were at their stop and 27% had had a bus driver refuse to tell them when they were going to get to their destination.39 He considered that audio-visual equipment to provide announcements at bus stops would resolve this and could be fitted at the price of £2,000 for a single-deck bus and £3,000 for a double-deck bus.40 Steven Salmon, Director of Policy Development, Confederation of Passenger Transport, told us that there was potential in using smartphones to provide a personalised audio-visual system and that the bus industry provides the developers of such “apps” the data for “next to nothing”.41 He said that for some operators (particularly smaller ones), investment in audio-visual equipment was not likely in the foreseeable future, because both the investment and running costs of a system would not be affordable.42 Dai Powell, Chair of the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee and Chief Executive of HCT Group, a social-enterprise bus operator, suggested

36 CPT Code: Mobility scooters on low-floor buses, Confederation of Passenger Transport, September 2011, www.cpt.org.uk 37 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.21 38 Ev w65 [British Dyslexia Association]; Ev 79 paras 1.7–1.15 [Brandon Trust] 39 Q49 [Mr Richard Leaman] 40 Q52 [Mr Richard Leaman] 41 Q105 [Mr Steven Salmon] 42 Q104 [Mr Steven Salmon]

that audio-visual equipment could be introduced, but with a lead-in time of several years, as is happening with the existing PSVAR requirements.43

28. The Minister told us that the bus industry had provided him with evidence that there was not a commercial case for audio-visual information systems on buses. He was not inclined to make such systems mandatory because of the cost and possible impact on services.44

29. We accept that retro-fitting and operating audio-visual equipment on an existing bus is expensive and difficult to justify on routes with a more marginal business case. A UK bus fleet fully equipped with audio-visual equipment is therefore unlikely in the short-term. We note various smartphone applications are being developed to assist people with visual or hearing impairments to complete their journey. However, due to the cost of technology and poor 3G mobile phone coverage in rural areas, these are unlikely to replace audio-visual passenger information in the foreseeable future. The DfT and transport authorities should review their position on audio-visual systems on buses. The Accessibility Action Plan should require a phased introduction of buses with audio-visual information systems over the next ten years. The DfT should therefore require new buses to have audio-visual systems in place.

30. New buses carrying fewer than 22 people have been exempt from the requirement for new buses to be step-free. This has meant an especially slow take-up of buses with step-free access on rural routes, which often run less than once daily. Infrequent services impose limitations on access to work and shops for all transport users. For those with physical, mental, learning disabilities and other cognitive impairments, being able to access such routes or to understand the timetables is particularly challenging.45

31. We note that some rural councils, such as Devon County Council, run shared public transport services operated by private hire vehicles, which passengers may pre-book for a scheduled journey departing from the vicinity of their home to and from a local town.46 A report produced for the Commission for Integrated Transport in 2008 suggested that scheduled, shared taxis and other demand-responsive services could be a more cost- effective alternative to buses in remote rural areas.47 Establishing and operating such services may require funding from Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG), but in many cases these services may replace a BSOG-funded bus route.48 We believe that such shared taxis and other demand-responsive services could provide a wider-ranging, more accessible form of public transport than infrequent buses on fixed routes through inaccessible areas and so deserve further investigation.

32. “Community transport” is a service for those in the UK who are not able to travel by mainstream public transport. It exists in a variety of forms, often operated by trained

43 Q304 [Mr Dai Powell] 44 Q348 [Mr Norman Baker MP] 45 Q25 [Ms Srabani Sen] 46 Fare Car, Devon County Council, 2013, www.devon.gov.uk 47 Commission for Integrated Transport, “A new approach to rural public transport,” 2008 48 Ibid.

volunteers on a pre-booked basis. Ewan Jones, Director of the Community Transport Association, told us that he believes that all the services that are developed should be as accessible and inclusive as possible.49 He gave the example of a route in Cheltenham (the “V bus”) as a growing service operated by a community transport provider, which is open to all users.50 He considered that there was scope for third-party sponsors to help fund community transport in the context of government funding constraints.51 This could help make such services more viable.

33. We assessed the likelihood of community transport providing a major role in replacing tendered bus services in our review of bus services after the spending review in 2011 and concluded that the evidence suggests that they are unlikely to replace more than a small number of local authority-subsidised bus services.52 We note that the Accessibility Action Plan proposes to “examine the scope for more flexible services (particularly in rural areas)”, although the DfT did not draw attention to this in its evidence to us.53 We recommend that the DfT enable local authorities to pilot a scheme whereby accessible private hire vehicle consortia or community transport organisations can tender for local bus services which are eligible for Bus Service Operator’s Grant. We shall be looking in greater detail at this in our forthcoming inquiry into passenger transport in isolated communities.

Railways

34. The DfT launched its Access for All programme of railway station upgrades in 2005. This aims for 75% of rail journeys to start or end at a fully accessible station by 2015.54 The programme has recently been allocated £100 million of funding for the years 2015-2019.55

35. All licensed train or station operators must set out the service a disabled passenger can expect in a Disabled People’s Protection Policy (DPPP). This explains how operators will make “reasonable adjustments” to allow disabled people to access their services.56 These “reasonable adjustments” include a requirement for the train operator responsible for an inaccessible station at the start or end of the journey to provide a free accessible taxi for a traveller to or from the nearest accessible station.57 The level of concern expressed to us about the inaccessibility of the rail network to disabled people, and in particular the inaccessibility of unstaffed stations suggests that there is a lack of awareness of the requirement of operators to make reasonable adjustments.58 If a greater number of disabled people made use of their right to request accessible taxis to the nearest accessible station,

49 Q219 [Mr Ewan Jones] 50 Ibid. 51 Q220 [Mr Ewan Jones] 52 Transport Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2010-12, Bus Services after the Spending Review, HC 750, para 39 53 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.20 54 A fully accessible station has facilities to assist disabled people from the station entrance to the platform. It does not necessarily have the facility to allow step-free access from a platform onto trains. 55 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.11 56 Ev 170 [Department for Transport] para 32 57 Ev 170 [Department for Transport] para 35 58 Q62 [Ms Faryal Velmi]; Ev 93 para 3.1 [National Pensioners Convention]; Ev w36 para 3.1.14 [Selby District Disability Forum]; Ev 159 para 2.9 [Unite]; Ev 101 [Transport for All]

we suggest that train operators might invest more to increase the number of accessible stations and thereby avoid expenditure on taxis. The Office of Rail Regulation should work with the train operating companies and launch a widespread campaign to ensure that disabled people are aware of their rights regarding accessibility to the rail network, including receiving a taxi to the nearest available accessible station if necessary.

36. Some disabled passengers encounter problems when attempting to use ticket machines at stations. Touch-screen activated devices without tactile or audio feedback cause problems for blind or partially-sighted people.59 A learning difficulties charity reported that its members find the volume of information on many ticket machine screens confusing and the writing on the display too small.60 People with dyslexia may also find such ticket machines hard to understand, particularly if there is no speech-to-text option.61 Difficulties may also be caused for those with visual impairments by small digital displays on carriage doors.62

37. There is concern by users as well as employees that potential reductions in front-line staff at stations may result in machines being the only way to purchase tickets on the day of travel and that in some stations there may no longer be staff available to give help with the machine if needed.63 We raised this issue in our Rail 2020 report.64 The DfT’s response stated:

...the rail industry will need to look at how staff working practices can keep pace with technological change and mirror best practice in other industries to become more efficient.65

38. We reiterate our view that having staffed stations is crucial to enable disabled travellers have and perceive to have a safe journey. There are also ways to improve the infrastructure itself. For example, we were impressed to hear of the success of ticket machines on the Barcelona metro system; designed for the transport authority by blind people, they are “intuitive for everybody”.66 The Minister, Norman Baker MP, discussed with us the DfT’s funding of £100 million to expand the Access for All programme during Control Period 5 and the ongoing Minor Works Fund, which provides £500,000 per annum to enable rail franchises to match-fund station improvements sought by local authorities.67 We welcome the DfT’s funding for accessibility improvements to stations. The DfT should involve disability organisations and charities in prioritising stations for improvements in the future Access for All programme and in identifying effective improvements at each station. Station upgrades do not detract from the importance of staffed stations to ensure

59 Ev 99 para 6.5 [Guide Dogs for the Blind] 60 Ev w178 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum: Wokingham Caring, Learning and Listening Partnership] 61 Ev w66 [British Dyslexia Association]; Ev w92 [The Adult Dyslexia Association] 62 Ev w1 [Mrs Ann Pedley] 63 Ev w44 para 11 [Campaign for Rail]; Ev 159 para 2.8 [Unite]; Ev 99 para 6.5 [Guide Dogs for the Blind] 64 Transport Committee, Seventh Report of Session 2012-13, Rail 2020, HC 329-1, para 41 65 Transport Committee, Ninth Special Report of Session 2012-13, Rail 2020: Government and Office of Rail Regulation Responses to the Committee’s Seventh Report of 2012-13, HC 1059, p. 6 66 Q79 [Ms Ann Frye] 67 Q336 & Q339 [Mr Norman Baker MP]

a safe and secure journey for disabled people and any changes in ticket offices should not reduce the level of staff on stations.

Cross-modal interchange

39. Many journeys by public transport involve interchanging between modes of transport. For disabled passengers, an absence of integrated and accessible information on the wider interchange can present yet another obstacle in completing their journey.68 There is little point in having accessible trains if the interchanges are inaccessible. The DfT must include a requirement in future rail franchise agreements for train operators to brief their station staff on the interchange beyond the station forecourt.

Taxis and private hire vehicles

40. We heard during our oral evidence that there are a limited number of accessible taxis and private hire vehicles in many parts of the UK.69 Where there are such vehicles, they are a limited part of a fleet and often used for trips to airports because of their convenience for accommodating luggage. The DfT should introduce financial incentives for taxi and private hire operators to choose fully accessible vehicles when they invest in new fleets, with a target of a fully accessible taxi and private hire fleet within ten years.

68 Ev 111 para 31 [Passenger Focus] 69 Q67 [Ms Ann Frye]

4 Better transport information

41. We received evidence that many disabled people find it difficult to plan their journey and to find out about tickets and fares.70 Many disabled people are often also unaware of how to arrange the provision of assistance for rail journeys.71 There are also particular issues with specific impairments: information on websites may not be accessible to the visually impaired;72 a person with learning difficulties may have compromised literacy and numeracy skills and so find it difficult to understand route maps, fares, charging arrangements and signage.73 People with mental health conditions may be affected by a lack of straightforward, easily accessible information on journeys which transcend local authority boundaries and different transport operators. The Mental Health Action Group quoted one of its members in written evidence:

Having a mental health issue can be like an army moving base. They would plan every part of that trip making sure that there was support from land, sea and air to make it to their destination. This is the same for us.74

Repeated experiences with inadequate information may make discounting travelling by public transport habitual, with adverse consequences for a disabled person’s social life and wellbeing.

Transport Direct

42. The DfT launched its “Transport Direct” web portal on 31 December 2004. This provided Internet-based multi-modal journey planning for England, Wales and Scotland. This can plan journeys by car, cycle or public transport; calculate the carbon dioxide emissions for a journey; and provide live travel news. A spectator journey planner was subsequently developed for the London Olympics and Paralympics. This had an additional capability, which allowed users to plan journeys that were accessible to people with mobility impairments. The spectator journey planner was well-publicised by the Games organisers, for example with information sent out along with tickets and with material distributed by “Games-maker” volunteers on the streets. As part of the Accessibility Action Plan, the DfT subsequently adapted the Transport Direct website to include an option to specify journey plans that are accessible to disabled travellers.75

43. Tanvi Vyas, Campaigns Officer of Trailblazers (a national network of over 400 muscular dystrophy campaigners), told us that nobody in the organisation’s network was aware of the website. 76 She said that “promotion of it in the first place would be extremely helpful”. The site was mentioned by as few as eight of the 107 individuals or organisations

70 Ev 100 [Transport for All]; Ev 114 para 1.1 [Leonard Cheshire Disability]; Ev w26 para 9 [Capability Scotland] 71 Ev 114 para 1.3 [Leonard Cheshire Disability] 72 Ev 99 para 6.2 [Guide Dogs for the Blind] 73 Q24 [Ms Lucy Hurst-Brown] 74 Ev 76 para 24 [Mental Health Action Group] 75 Ev 172 paras 62-68 [Department for Transport] 76 Q56 [Ms Tanvi Vyas]

that submitted written evidence. None of the evidence we received from the DfT pertaining to Transport Direct mentioned a strategy for publicising the site to people with disabilities. There is a risk that the investment to enable the planning of an accessible journey via Transport Direct will not reap its full benefit due to a lack of awareness of the site. As part of the Accessibility Action Plan, the DfT should develop and implement a targeted marketing strategy to raise awareness of the new features of Transport Direct among disabled people.

44. We published a link to Transport Direct on our web forum and asked for views on it. There was mixed feedback. A mobility-impaired respondent living in a rural village who discovered the site via our link was pleasantly surprised with the help it offered.77 There was less satisfaction from other respondents, and especially visually impaired people. They felt that the design of the site was cluttered and too busy and were disappointed at the lack of an in-built facility to enlarge the text and change the colour contrast.78

45. Richard Leaman, Chief Executive of Guide Dogs for the Blind, said that Transport Direct was “inaccessible” to blind people.79 Paul Breckell, Chief Executive of Action on Hearing Loss, was concerned that there is no British Sign Language content on the site, which he said made it inaccessible for the profoundly deaf.80 In response to this criticism, we received supplementary written evidence from the DfT explaining that the site conforms to AA standard under the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines produced by the W3C global web community (the highest standard is AAA).81 Given the views expressed on our web forum by contributors with visual impairments, we believe that the standard of accessibility is not adequate. The Government also needs to ensure that people without access to the Internet or who are not confident using it are able to obtain sufficient information to make a journey. We recommend that the DfT reviews the Transport Direct website to increase its Web Content Accessibility Guidelines standard to AAA. The DfT should ensure those who are unable or unwilling to use the Internet have an alternative means of planning an accessible journey.

The requirement for advance booking

46. People with a disability who require assistance with a rail journey should book 24 hours in advance using the Passenger Assist system operated by the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC). Sophie Christiansen OBE, a Paralympian, said that this requirement to book in advance takes away the “spontaneity and flexibility” of those who might want to make a journey.82 She added that the Passenger Assist system was unreliable.83 These concerns were reflected in a number of the submissions we received.84

77 Ev w184 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum: Rebecca Thomas] 78 Ev w173 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum: Ellen Gospel]; Ev w174 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum: Cynthia Easeman]; Ev w180 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum: Michelle Challens]; Ev w182 [Responses to the Committee Web Forum:Jamie Dowling] 79 Q55 [Mr Richard Leaman] 80 Q56 [Mr Paul Breckell] 81 Ev 178 [Department for Transport] 82 Q3 [Ms Sophie Christiansen] 83 Ibid.

47. David Mapp, Commercial Director of ATOC, noted that one per cent of disabled users of the rail network use Passenger Assist.85 He explained that a 24-hour booking period is necessary for organised assistance at stations to enable measures such as the booking of taxis and rostering of staff at stations on the journey to be put in place.86 He was confident that Passenger Assist provides assistance of a good and consistent quality, but regarded the service as one to which ATOC needs to employ a process of “continuous improvement”.87 The DfT has supported the development of this service, which falls within the rail industry’s wider “Stations Made Easy” project.88 We see a monitoring programme for the service as very important in ensuring value for money from the Government’s contribution. The DfT should commission Passenger Focus to undertake a “mystery shopper” survey of users of Passenger Assist, to monitor the quality of the service. This should be repeated regularly. Train operators must work to reduce the booking time required for organised assistance on a journey, so that advance booking for assistance is phased out.

Travel training

48. Travel training (also known as travel mentoring or travel buddying) is a scheme run by some local councils, transport authorities or charities aimed at disabled people who would normally rely on “door to door” or community transport. The details vary by operator, but usually participants are allocated a travel trainer (often someone with a similar impairment to themselves), who shows them how to plan their journey using all the information available. The mentor then accompanies the participant to a bus stop or rail station, using the information there to find the correct route, shows the participant how to board, how to stay safe while travelling and offers some coping strategies for when things go wrong. This can be provided for most types of impairments, whether providing advice on access to a physically-impaired traveller or improving travel confidence and awareness for someone with a mental health condition. A successful scheme can provide a disabled person with more independence, while potentially reducing the cost to the local authority of community transport.89

49. The DfT has shown its support for travel training schemes in its Accessibility Action Plan.90 Nevertheless, there is no firm commitment to supporting the initial capital outlay required for schemes which are often self-financing or even slightly profitable for a council.91 The DfT should encourage local authorities to include travel training schemes in bids for funding in the next round of the Local Sustainable Transport Fund.

84 Ev 107 [Transport for All]; Ev w26 para 11 [Capability Scotland]; Ev w43 para 5 [Campaign for Rail]; Ev w52 para 1.4 [Bradford Mobility Planning Group] 85 Q139 [Mr David Mapp] 86 Q141 [Mr David Mapp] 87 Q140 [Mr David Mapp] 88 Ev 173 para 72 [Department for Transport] 89 Q35 [Ms Lucy Hurst-Brown]; Ev 79 para 1.26 [Brandon Trust]; Ev 129 para 3.4 [Merseytravel]; Ev 136 para 3 [Transport for London]; Ev w94 [City of York Council] 90 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.18 91 Department for Transport, Travel Training: good practice guide, 2011, p.69

5 Staff training and awareness

50. Enabling members of transport staff to give appropriate help is perhaps the most efficient way of improving transport for disabled people. People with impairments are more likely to travel and to travel more often if the bus driver on the first public transport stage of their journey is polite and helpful.92 Well-trained railway staff are essential, whether listening to requirements on the Passenger Assist telephone line, helping someone buy a ticket, assisting someone onto a train or arranging a taxi to the nearest accessible station.93 When disabled passengers interchange, they may also require a well-informed member of staff – or even a helpful fellow traveller – to point them on to the next stage of their journey. Taxis and private hire vehicles are an important transport option for disabled people, especially in rural areas, so drivers must be helpful and considerate. At airports, well-trained staff are needed to ensure that disabled passengers navigate safely to and from the aircraft.

Public transport staff

51. In preparation for the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics, Transport for London (TfL) provided over 3,000 back-office staff to work alongside the volunteers during the Games. It worked with the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG) to train staff in providing information and assistance to members of the public, including disabled people. The content of the training was developed with the input of disabled people with a variety of impairments and several disability organisations.94 Senior managers in TfL also received the training and were deployed on the streets to give assistance to the public, gaining an experience of the needs of disabled people and showing staff in the organisation that they regarded the issue as a priority.

52. We heard that having staff trained and confident in assisting disabled people, supported by senior management, was regarded as a successful legacy from the Games.95 However, this was restricted to parts of the country where events occurred and where the LOCOG training was implemented.96

53. It was suggested that transport providers should provide general disability awareness training and also have members of staff as trained “disability awareness champions” at major stations and transport interchanges. 97 The “champions” would provide guidance to colleagues should they have any queries about dealing with a disabled customer. Margaret Hickish, Access and Inclusion Manager, Network Rail, noted that a risk with the “champion” approach is that he or she becomes the person to whom staff direct all disabled

92 Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee, Disability Equality and Awareness Training Framework for Transport Staff, 2008, pp.44-46 93 Ibid. 94 Q172 [Mr Stephen Golden]; Ev 134 para 7.5 [Transport for London] 95 Q5 [Ms Sophie Christiansen, Ms Marije Davidson]; 96 Q8 [Ms Marije Davidson] 97 Ev 73 para 2.7 [Whizz Kidz Kidz Board]

passengers, rather than all staff feeling equally empowered to offer help. She described the training given to all Network Rail staff, which is delivered by disabled people:

… it is a different type of training, it is much more about reaching people on a more emotional level rather than just telling them about the law and all the rules they must follow. It is much more about allowing people to empathise and understand that disabled travellers want to be impetuous and be able to live life like everybody else, but also that disabled people have some terrific lives and it is not always leisure travel. That is particularly important to get across.98

54. We are encouraged by the success of the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics preparation and by the new approach of Network Rail towards training its staff. However, while rail operators are required as part of a station’s Disabled Person’s Protection Policy to provide all front line station managers and staff with disability awareness training,99 the DfT has exercised various exemptions from the new EU regulations on bus and coach passenger rights (EU 181/2011), with the effect that bus and coach operators are exempt from providing training to their staff for up to five years.

55. Steven Salmon, of the CPT, said that his organisation argued for this because bus operators “did not want to be in a position where you could not use a [driver] if their disability training was not up to date”.100 The Minister, Norman Baker MP, told us that he had been persuaded that making such training compulsory for bus and coach operators is an “imposition” that the industry cannot sustain at the present time.101

56. We are not persuaded that the argument to exempt bus and coach operators from requirements to train staff in disability awareness is so strong that it outweighs the interests of disabled people. Providing drivers with confidence and empathy in assisting disabled people (for example, to tell someone when they have reached their bus stop) and with an awareness of different impairments may also reduce the demand for measures such as the provision of audio-visual equipment. This does not necessarily mean a substantial outlay on training for small operators. For example, the Confederation for Passenger Transport could work with disabled charities and software developers to develop online, interactive disability awareness training (or “e-learning”), which in future should be a compulsory part of the Certificate of Professional Competence. We are disappointed that the DfT exercised its exemption to the requirement to provide disability awareness training to staff in the bus and coach industry. The needs of disabled users with all impairments should be taken into account. The DfT should end the exemption and work with the bus and coach industry and disability charities to develop a basic disability awareness training package for drivers for implementation by 2014, including investigating “e- learning” as a means of providing this training at a minimal cost. This should be included in the Accessibility Action Plan.

98 Q134 [Ms Margaret Hickish] 99 Q144 [Mr David Mapp]; Ev 174 para 85 [Department for Transport] 100 Q92 [Mr Steven Salmon] 101 Q344 [Mr Norman Baker MP]

Taxi and private hire vehicle drivers

57. We heard concerns about the attitude towards disabled people of some drivers of taxis and private hire vehicles. For example, allegations were made that some taxi drivers claim that their wheelchair access ramps are broken, refuse to allow guide dogs into their cars and fail to strap wheelchairs in correctly. We also heard that some private hire firms either refuse to accept passengers with disabilities or charge a substantial supplement for carrying them.102

58. Liz Chandler, Director of Corporate Development for Merseytravel, told us there was an “embarrassment factor” among many taxi drivers; drivers did not know what to do with a disabled passenger, so would simply drive on past the passenger.103 She said that Merseytravel has implemented a two-part awareness training programme for drivers, working with district councils (which license taxis) and trade unions. The feedback received from the councils is that the training has reduced the number of complaints received.104 The DfT is committed via the Accessibility Action Plan to “looking at training for taxi and private hire vehicle drivers on disability equality awareness, e.g. by formal training or voluntary measures such as guidance or video”.105 Building on the success in Merseyside, the DfT should bring forward a programme of disability awareness training for drivers of taxis and private hire vehicles without delay, working with licensing authorities and the taxi trade on implementation.

Airports and airlines

59. George Fielding, Kidz Board Chair, Whizz Kidz (a national charity of young wheelchair users), said that air travel is probably the hardest mode of transport to use.106 He told us of problems during the flight, with wheelchair users having to crawl down the aisle to a toilet if they had not been allocated a seat adjacent to one. A bad experience may also come if poorly-trained staff are unprepared for requests from those with “invisible” disabilities, either at reservations or during the journey.107 We are also aware of recent news reports of airlines requiring a carer to travel with a disabled person whom they judge unable to perform an emergency procedure on the aeroplane by themselves.108 This requirement for a carer conforms to European air travel equality regulations (EC 1107/2006), which require air passengers to be self-reliant on the aircraft.109 We note a similar requirement in air

102 Q67 [Ms Ann Frye]; Ev 72 paras 2.0-2.1 [Whizz Kidz Kidz Board]; Ev 97 [Trailblazers]; Ev w2 [Mr Mike Cain]; Ev w8 para 5.3; Ev w26 para 14 [Capability Scotland]; Ev w49 para 7 [London TravelWatch]; Ev w52 para 1.6 [Bradford Mobility Planning Group]; Ev w75 para 2 [Dr Alice Maynard]; Ev w86 paras 11-12 [Disabled Motoring UK]; Ev w89 para 3.1.7 [Richard Fowler]; Ev w99 [Raya Al-Jadir]; Ev w108 [Jonathan L Fisher]; Ev w109 [Access Committee for Leeds] 103 Q201 [Ms Liz Chandler] 104 Q200 [Ms Liz Chandler] 105 Department for Transport, Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all, 2012, p.23 106 Q16 [Mr George Fielding] 107 Ev w57 para 3.3 [Crohn’s and Colitis UK] 108 “Thomson Holidays refuses blind friends flights”, BBC News Online, 1 May 2013, news.bbc.co.uk; “Blind friends told they can’t fly to Majorca”, Mail Online, 1 May 2013, www.dailymail.co.uk; “Easyjet problem”, BBC Radio 4, You & Yours, 15 August 2013, www.bbc.co.uk 109 Council Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2006

travel equality regulations in the United States, but the US regulations state that the carer should travel free of charge:

If the carrier determines that a person... must travel with an attendant, contrary to the individual’s self-assessment that he or she is capable of traveling independently, the carrier shall not charge for the transportation of the attendant.110

60. The DfT should seek to amend the air travel equality regulations (EC 1107/2006) to require airlines to allow carers to travel free of charge on an aircraft, where an airline judges a disabled person to be incapable of travelling independently contrary to the individual’s self-assessment.

61. A separate concern is the risk of damage to expensive wheelchairs being put into the aircraft hold. The Montreal Convention limits the liability of airlines for damaged baggage to a sum of approximately £1,180, which is significantly less than the value of some pieces of mobility equipment. The USA and Canada have taken action to force airlines to cover the full cost of damaged mobility equipment, but there has been no specific action on this by the EU as yet. Peter Duffy, Marketing Director, EasyJet, told us however “if we have caused damage to a customer’s wheelchair, we are not going to quibble”.111 The DfT should urge the European Commission to bring forward proposals on adequate compensation by airlines for damaged mobility equipment.

110 U.S. Department of Transportation, Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in air travel, 14 CFR part 382.35 111 Q235 [Mr Peter Duffy]

6 The future of the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee

62. The Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) is an independent body established by the Transport Act 1985 to advise Ministers on the transport needs of disabled people. Before a restructure in 2010, it was engaged in commissioning research and providing guidance on accessible transport to the public and private sector. It was then identified as a body for abolition under this Government’s public bodies reforms. This was an issue of concern to many organisations.112 Since we took evidence, the DfT and Cabinet Office have decided not to abolish DPTAC. The Minister has said that it will be reviewed and restructured to ensure that it is a more effective and efficient body.113

63. DPTAC has produced some detailed and high-quality guidance for the transport industry and travel advice for disabled people. However, other disabled people’s organisations and charities also produce such material. For example, DPTAC produced a “Handy travel hints” document for holidaymakers in 2009.114 Radar (now Disability Rights UK) subsequently produced “Doing Transport Differently – how to access public transport”, with sponsorship from FirstGroup, which covers much of the same ground.115 We are pleased at the Government’s decision to retain the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee. Where the DfT requires guidance documents, disabled people’s charities and organisations will be able to commission and produce such documents, possibly with private sector sponsorship. A smaller, more efficient DPTAC should have a role in the quality assurance of such documents, but not in their production. DPTAC’s key role should be to help the DfT develop and monitor the delivery of the Accessibility Action Plan. We recommend that future role of DPTAC be one of providing informal and practical advice to the DfT during policy development, the specification of research, and the analysis of policy impact. We therefore recommend that representatives from mainstream transport operators be included in the reformatted committee, to enable it to better advise the DfT on what is feasible.

112 Ev 74 para 25 [Mental Health Action Group]; Ev 128 para 1.7 [Merseytravel]; Ev w25 para 2 [Capability Scotland] 113 Future of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee, Department for Transport, June 2013, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/future-of-the-disabled-persons-transport-advisory-committee

114 DPTAC, “Handy travel hints,” 2009 115 Doing Transport Differently – how to access public transport, Radar, 2012, www.disabilityrightsuk.org

7 Concluding remarks

64. Enabling and encouraging access to transport for disabled people will have widespread benefits. For example:

i. Disabled people would be able to access more employment opportunities. This would improve the standard of living for disabled people. For government, improving the accessibility of transport might therefore reduce the out of work benefit payments made by the Department for Work and Pensions and increase tax income to the Treasury.

ii. Disabled people would be able to travel to healthcare centres, reducing the requirement for home visits.

iii. Disabled people would have easier access to a wider range of education and training opportunities.

iv. Disabled people would be able to travel to shops and to meet friends in cafes and bars, increasing the spending by consumers.

65. Given the potential benefit across government from promoting transport for disabled people, we are surprised at the lack of such co-ordination and engagement currently between departments, as seen with the lack of co-ordination between the DfT and Department for Work & Pensions over changes to Motability. The Environmental Audit Committee recommended in its recent report “Transport and accessibility to public services” that the Cabinet Office convene a working group of ministers and officials to improve cross-government working on accessibility.116 We agree with this recommendation.

66. In many areas of transport expenditure, the DfT undertakes an economic cost- benefit analysis, which it uses to justify changes in expenditure. A methodology for quantitative assessment of accessible transport is not available and so spending decisions on it are not available for scrutiny. We recommend that the DfT develops and publishes a methodology for quantitative assessment of benefits from improving accessibility to disabled people.

67. Local government and the strategic transport authorities have the closest involvement with transport operators and passengers. It is essential that disabled people can work at a strategic-level with local decision-makers at the planning stage of transport services and infrastructure in a local area. When there is a local scheme that is very successful, there should be a means of promoted nationwide so that its full potential is harnessed. The DfT must work with the Disability Action Alliance to identify successful local authority and/or operator schemes and promote their development at a national level. Details of schemes being progressed should be published on an annual basis alongside the annual update of the implementation of the Accessibility Action Plan.

116 Environmental Audit Committee, Third Report of Session 2013-14, Transport and accessibility to public services, HC 201, para 64

Conclusions and recommendations

Monitoring of the DfT’s Accessibility Action Plan

1. We have concerns about the lack of information available on how the Action Plan will be monitored. We recommend that the Department for Transport publish annual updates on the implementation of the measures in the Action Plan, which should include data on changes in the number and types of journeys made by disabled people. (Paragraph 18)

A review of the Inclusive Mobility guidance

2. We urge the DfT to complete its review of the Inclusive Mobility guidance in the first half of 2014. The review should take account of new practice such as the growth of shared space infrastructure. It should also engage with disability charities and organisations to develop new ideas for providing accessible pedestrian infrastructure in the different physical environments around the UK. (Paragraph 20)

Improvements to the UK bus and coach fleet

3. We believe that improvements to the bus network for disabled people are improvements for everyone. As part of the Accessibility Action Plan, the DfT should:

a) introduce financial incentives for bus and coach companies to bring forward capital investment in new PSVAR-compliant vehicles ahead of the deadline for compliance;

b) introduce a system of penalties for operators who fail to operate low-floor buses on routes advertised as such;

c) work with bus operators to implement a nationwide campaign asking people to make space for wheelchairs in wheelchair areas of the buses, similar to that undertaken by Transport for London; and

d) introduce the kite-mark system for mobility scooters by the end of 2013. (Paragraph 25.d)

4. We accept that retro-fitting and operating audio-visual equipment on an existing bus is expensive and difficult to justify on routes with a more marginal business case. A UK bus fleet fully equipped with audio-visual equipment is therefore unlikely in the short-term. We note various smartphone applications are being developed to assist people with visual or hearing impairments to complete their journey. However, due to the cost of technology and poor 3G mobile phone coverage in rural areas, these are unlikely to replace audio-visual passenger information in the foreseeable future. The DfT and transport authorities should review their position on audio-visual systems on buses. The Accessibility Action Plan should require a phased introduction of buses with audio-visual information systems over the next ten years. The DfT should therefore require new buses to have audio-visual systems in place. (Paragraph 29)

Accessible transport for isolated communities

5. We believe that such shared taxis and other demand-responsive services could provide a wider-ranging, more accessible form of public transport than infrequent buses on fixed routes through inaccessible areas and so deserve further investigation. (Paragraph 31)

6. We recommend that the DfT enable local authorities to pilot a scheme whereby accessible private hire vehicle consortia or community transport organisations can tender for local bus services which are eligible for Bus Service Operator’s Grant. We shall be looking in greater detail at this in our forthcoming inquiry into passenger transport in isolated communities. (Paragraph 33)

Access to the rail network and station staffing

7. The Office of Rail Regulation should work with the train operating companies and launch a widespread campaign to ensure that disabled people are aware of their rights regarding accessibility to the rail network, including receiving a taxi to the nearest available accessible station if necessary. (Paragraph 35)

8. The DfT should commission Passenger Focus to undertake a “mystery shopper” survey of users of Passenger Assist, to monitor the quality of the service. This should be repeated regularly. Train operators must work to reduce the booking time required for organised assistance on a journey, so that advance booking for assistance is phased out. (Paragraph 47)

9. We welcome the DfT’s funding for accessibility improvements to stations. The DfT should involve disability organisations and charities in prioritising stations for improvements in the future Access for All programme and in identifying effective improvements at each station. Station upgrades do not detract from the importance of staffed stations to ensure a safe and secure journey for disabled people and any changes in ticket offices should not reduce the level of staff on stations. (Paragraph 38)

10. The DfT must include a requirement in future rail franchise agreements for train operators to brief their station staff on the interchange beyond the station forecourt. (Paragraph 39)

Taxis and private hire vehicles

11. The DfT should introduce financial incentives for taxi and private hire operators to choose fully accessible vehicles when they invest in new fleets, with a target of a fully accessible taxi and private hire fleet within ten years. (Paragraph 40)

12. Building on the success in Merseyside, the DfT should bring forward a programme of disability awareness training for drivers of taxis and private hire vehicles without delay, working with licensing authorities and the taxi trade on implementation. (Paragraph 58)

Journey planning and Transport Direct

13. There is a risk that the investment to enable the planning of an accessible journey via Transport Direct will not reap its full benefit due to a lack of awareness of the site. As part of the Accessibility Action Plan, the DfT should develop and implement a targeted marketing strategy to raise awareness of the new features of Transport Direct among disabled people. (Paragraph 43)

14. We recommend that the DfT reviews the Transport Direct website to increase its Web Content Accessibility Guidelines standard to AAA. The DfT should ensure those who are unable or unwilling to use the Internet have an alternative means of planning an accessible journey. (Paragraph 45)

Travel training schemes

15. The DfT should encourage local authorities to include travel training schemes in bids for funding in the next round of the Local Sustainable Transport Fund. (Paragraph 49)

Staff training and awareness

16. We are disappointed that the DfT exercised its exemption to the requirement to provide disability awareness training to staff in the bus and coach industry. The needs of disabled users with all impairments should be taken into account. The DfT should end the exemption and work with the bus and coach industry and disability charities to develop a basic disability awareness training package for drivers for implementation by 2014, including investigating “e-learning” as a means of providing this training at a minimal cost. This should be included in the Accessibility Action Plan. (Paragraph 56)

Air travel

17. The DfT should seek to amend the air travel equality regulations (EC 1107/2006) to require airlines to allow carers to travel free of charge on an aircraft, where an airline judges a disabled person to be incapable of travelling independently contrary to the individual’s self-assessment. (Paragraph 60)

18. The DfT should urge the European Commission to bring forward proposals on adequate compensation by airlines for damaged mobility equipment. (Paragraph 61)

The Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee

19. We are pleased at the Government’s decision to retain the Disabled Persons’ Transport Advisory Committee. Where the DfT requires guidance documents, disabled people’s charities and organisations will be able to commission and produce such documents, possibly with private sector sponsorship. A smaller, more efficient DPTAC should have a role in the quality assurance of such documents, but not in their production. DPTAC’s key role should be to help the DfT develop and monitor the delivery of the Accessibility Action Plan. We recommend that future role of

DPTAC be one of providing informal and practical advice to the DfT during policy development, the specification of research, and the analysis of policy impact. We therefore recommend that representatives from mainstream transport operators be included in the reformatted committee, to enable it to better advise the DfT on what is feasible. (Paragraph 63)

Qualitative assessment of accessible transport funding

20. In many areas of transport expenditure, the DfT undertakes an economic cost- benefit analysis, which it uses to justify changes in expenditure. A methodology for quantitative assessment of accessible transport is not available and so spending decisions on it are not available for scrutiny. We recommend that the DfT develops and publishes a methodology for quantitative assessment of benefits from improving accessibility to disabled people. (Paragraph 66)

Concluding remarks

21. Enabling and encouraging access to transport for disabled people will have widespread benefits. For example:

i) Disabled people would be able to access more employment opportunities. This would improve the standard of living for disabled people. For government, improving the accessibility of transport might therefore reduce the out of work benefit payments made by the Department for Work and Pensions and increase tax income to the Treasury.

ii) Disabled people would be able to travel to healthcare centres, reducing the requirement for home visits.

iii) Disabled people would have easier access to a wider range of education and training opportunities.

iv) Disabled people would be able to travel to shops and to meet friends in cafes and bars, increasing the spending by consumers. (Paragraph 64)

22. Given the potential benefit across government from promoting transport for disabled people, we are surprised at the lack of such co-ordination and engagement currently between departments, as seen with the lack of co-ordination between the DfT and Department for Work & Pensions over changes to Motability. The Environmental Audit Committee recommended in its recent report “Transport and accessibility to public services” that the Cabinet Office convene a working group of ministers and officials to improve cross-government working on accessibility. We agree with this recommendation. (Paragraph 65)

23. Local government and the strategic transport authorities have the closest involvement with transport operators and passengers. It is essential that disabled people can work at a strategic-level with local decision-makers at the planning stage of transport services and infrastructure in a local area. When there is a local scheme that is very successful, there should be a means of promoted nationwide so that its full potential is harnessed. The DfT must work with the Disability Action Alliance to

identify successful local authority and/or operator schemes and promote their development at a national level. Details of schemes being progressed should be published on an annual basis alongside the annual update of the implementation of the Accessibility Action Plan. (Paragraph 67)

Formal Minutes

Monday 9 September 2013

Members present:

Mrs Louise Ellman, in the Chair

Sarah Champion Karl McCartney Karen Lumley Martin Vickers Jason McCartney

Draft Report (Access to transport for disabled people), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.

Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraphs 1 to 67 read and agreed to.

Summary agreed to.

Resolved, That the Report be the Fifth Report of the Committee to the House.

Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.

Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.

Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the House for printing with the Report.

[Adjourned till Tuesday 10 September at 9.45 am

Witnesses

Monday 11 March 2013 Page

Sophie Christiansen OBE, Paralympian, British Equestrian Federation, Marije Davidson, Policy and Research Manager, Disability Rights UK, and Ev 1 George Fielding, Kidz Board Chair, Whizz-Kidz Niki Glazier, Co-ordinator, Mental Health Action Group, Lucy Hurst- Brown, Chief Executive, Brandon Trust, George McNamara, Head of Policy and Public Affairs, Alzheimer’s Society, and Srabani Sen, Chief Ev 6 Executive, Contact-a-Family Paul Breckell, Chief Executive, Action on Hearing Loss, Peter Rayner, Vice- President, National Pensioners Convention, Tanvi Vyas, Campaigns Officer, Muscular Dystrophy Campaign Trailblazers, and Richard Leaman, Chief Ev 12 Executive, Guide Dogs Monday 15 April 2013

Ann Frye OBE, Consultant on Disability, Faryal Velmi, Director, Transport for All, Mike Hewitson, Head of Passenger Issues, Passenger Focus, and Ev 17 Guy Parckar, Head of Policy and Campaigns, Leonard Cheshire Disability Steven Salmon, Director of Policy Development, Confederation of Passenger Transport, Giles Fearnley, Managing Director of UK Bus, Ev 23 FirstGroup, and Tom Stables, Managing Director, National Express David Mapp, Commercial Director, Association of Train Operating Companies, Gareth Williams, Director of Regulatory Affairs, Eurostar, and Ev 28 Margaret Hickish, Access and Inclusion Manager, Network Rail

Monday 13 May 2013

Bruce Thompson, Head of Transport Co-ordination Service, Devon County Council, Liz Chandler, Director of Corporate Development, Merseytravel, and Stephen Golden, Head of Equality and Corporate Sustainability, Ev 34 Transport for London Ewan Jones, Director, Community Transport Association, and Lord Ev 43 Sterling of Plaistow, Chairman, Motability Iain Osborne, Group Director of Regulatory Policy Group, Civil Aviation Authority, Peter Duffy, Marketing Director, EasyJet, and Mark Hicks, Ev 47 Head of Passenger Services, Heathrow Airport

Monday 3 June 2013

Bob Crow, General Secretary, RMT Union, Manuel Cortes, General Secretary, TSSA Union, and Siobhan Endean, National Officer for Equalities, Unite the Union Ev 34

Dai Powell OBE, Chair, Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC), and Chris Holmes MBE, Disability Commissioner, Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) Ev 57

Norman Baker MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport Ev 62

List of printed written evidence

1 Disability Rights UK Ev 69 2 Whizz-Kidz Kidz Board Ev 71 3 The Mental Health Action Group Ev 74: Ev 77 4 Brandon Trust Ev 78 5 Contact a Family Ev 91 6 National Pensioners Convention Ev 93 7 Trailblazers Ev 94 8 Guide Dogs Ev 97 9 Transport for All Ev 100 10 Passenger Focus Ev 107 11 Leonard Cheshire Disability Ev 114 12 FirstGroup Ev 117 13 National Express Ltd. Ev 119 14 Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) Ev 121 15 Network Rail Ev 126 16 Merseytravel Ev 127 17 Transport for London (TfL) Ev 130: Ev 139 18 Community Transport Association Ev 139 19 Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Ev 140: Ev 144 20 RMT Ev 144: Ev 147 21 Transport Salaried Staffs' Association (TSSA) Ev 147: Ev 153 22 Unite Ev 158 23 Disabled Person's Transport Advisory Committee Ev 160 24 Equality and Human Rights Commission Ev 163 25 Department for Transport Ev 168: Ev 178: Ev 179

List of additional written evidence

(published in Volume II on the Committee’s website www.parliament.uk/transcom)

1 Paul Chitty Ev w1 2 Mrs Ann Pedley Ev w1 3 Mike Cain Ev w2 4 Alice Reid Ev w3 5 Gillian Hill Ev w3 6 David Pickett Ev w4 7 Teresa Jeffery Ev w4 8 Bridget Campbell Ev w5 9 Jean Roberts Ev w5 10 Philip Barton Ev w6 11 David Seligman Ev w12 12 Kathryn Burnett Ev w12

13 Norfolk County Council Ev w16 14 ITS (UK) Ev w18 15 Capability Scotland Ev w25 16 West Midlands Special Needs Transport (WMSNT) Ev w27 17 TravelWatch NorthWest Ev w27 18 Carole Cooke Ev w29 19 The Mental Health Action Group Ev w29 20 Selby District Disability Forum Ev w33 21 Inclusive Cycling Forum Ev w37 22 Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT) Ev w38 23 Professor Jeremy Myerson and Mr Ross Atkin of the Helen Hamlyn Centre for Design at the Royal College of Art Ev w40 24 Campaign for Rail Ev w43 25 London TravelWatch Ev w46 26 Bradford Mobility Planning Group Ev w51 27 Action Disability Kensington & Chelsea Ev w53 28 Cycling Embassy of Great Britain Ev w55 29 Crohn's and Colitis UK Ev w56 30 Catherine Hunt Ev w58 31 ABTA Ev w59 32 Wheels for Wellbeing Ev w62 33 British Dyslexia Association (BDA) Ev w65 34 Angel Trains Ltd Ev w66 35 Allied Vehicles Ev w67 36 Royal National Institute of Blind People Ev w73 37 Dr Alice Maynard Ev w75 38 Joint Committee on Mobility for Disabled People Ev w77 39 Salford Disability Forum Ev w77 40 Transport for Greater Manchester Ev w82 41 Bus Users UK Ev w83 42 Disabled Motoring UK Ev w85 43 Richard Fowler Ev w88 44 Lesley Gibson Ev w89 45 City of York Council Ev w94 46 Amanda Winterburn Ev w94 47 Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) Ev w97 48 Raya Al-Jadir Ev w99 49 Brian Moore Ev w101 50 Richard G. Dutton Ev w102 51 Paul Pacey Ev w103 52 Leicestershire Centre for Integrated Living Ev w103 53 Ruth and David Myers Ev w104 54 Clive Evans Ev w105 55 Becky Coleman Ev w107 56 Angela Higson Ev w107

57 Jonathan L Fisher Ev w108 58 Jane Sellers Ev w109 59 Access Committee for Leeds (ACL) Ev w109 60 Yellow Submarine Ev w111 61 Norma Huxter Ev w111 62 Adrian Traharne Ev w112 63 Alan Johnson Ev w112 64 Chris Miles Ev w113 65 Gateshead Access Panel Ev w114 66 loella Harris Ev w118 67 Daniel Duckford Ev w118 68 Gordon Forster Ev w119 69 Pat Mathewson Ev w120 70 Your Voice Counts Ev w120 71 Shaun McGarry Ev w121 72 Northumberland Learning Disability Partnership Board Ev w 122 73 Pauline Melham Ev w123 74 Jo Church Ev w124 75 Rani Pert Ev w124 76 Margaret E Cossey Ev w125 77 Bristol Older People's Forum Ev w125 78 Disability and Diversity Access Committee for Leeds (ACL) Ev w124 79 Roger Wilson-Hinds, Director Screenreader.net Ev w127 80 Transport Committee Web Forum Ev w128

List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament

The reference number of the Government’s response to each Report is printed in brackets after the HC printing number.

Session 2013–14 Sixth Report Flight Time Limitation: Follow-up HC 641 Firth Report Access to transport for disabled people HC 116 Fourth Report Cost of motor insurance: whiplash HC 117 Third Report The work of the Vehicle and Operator Services HC 583 Agency (VOSA) Second Report Future programme: 2013-14 HC 438 Fifth Special Report The European Commission’s 4th Railway Package: HC 439 Government Response to the Committee’s Twelfth Report of Session 2012-13 Third Special Report Rail 2020: Rail Delivery Group and Passenger Focus HC 81 responses to the Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2012-13 Fourth Special Report Land transport security – scope for further EU HC 177 involvement?: Government Response to the Committee’s Eleventh Report of Session 2012-13 Second Special Report Marine Pilotage: Government Response to the HC 79 Committee’s Ninth Report of Session 2012–13 First Report Aviation strategy HC 78 (HC 596) First Special Report Cancellation of the InterCity West Coast franchise HC 80 competition: Government Response to the Committee’s Eighth Report of Session 2012–13

Session 2012–13 Twelfth Report The European Commission’s 4th Railway Package HC 1001(HC 439) Eleventh Report Land transport security - scope for further EU HC 875 involvement? Ninth Special Report Rail 2020: Government and Office of Rail Regulation HC 1059 Responses to the Committee’s Seventh Report of 2012–13 Tenth Report The Coastguard, Emergency Towing Vessels and the HC 1018 Maritime Incident Response Group: follow up: Government Response to the Committee’s Sixth Report of 2012–13 Ninth Report Marine Pilotage HC 840 Eighth Report Cancellation of the InterCity West Coast franchise HC 537 competition Eighth Special Report Plug-in vehicles, plugged in policy?: Government HC 884 Response to the Committee's Fourth Report of Session 2012–13 Seventh Report Rail 2020 HC 329 Sixth Report The Coastguard, Emergency Towing Vessels and the HC 647

Maritime Incident Response Group: follow up Fifth Report Future programme: autumn and winter 2012–13 HC 591 Fourth Report Plug-in vehicles, plugged in policy? HC 239 Third Report Competition in the local bus market HC 10 (HC 761) (Incorporating HC 1861–i–iii) Fifth Special Report Flight Time Limitations: Government Response To The HC 558 Committee's First Report Of Session 2012–13 Fourth Special Report Air Travel Organisers' Licensing (Atol) Reform: HC 557 Government Response To The Committee's Seventeenth Report Of Session 2010–12 Second Report Road safety HC 506 (HC 648) Incorporating HC 1738 First Report Flight time limitations HC 164 Incorporating HC 1838 Third Special Report Sulphur emissions by ships: Government Response to HC 87 the Committee’s Sixteenth Report of Session 2010–12 Second Special Report Counting the cost: financial scrutiny of the HC 15 Department for Transport 2011–12: Government Response to the Committee’s Fifteenth Report of Session 2010–12 First Special Report Draft Civil Aviation Bill: Pre-Legislative Scrutiny: HC 11 Government Response to the Committee’s Thirteenth Report of Session 2010–12

Session 2010–12 Seventeenth Report Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing (ATOL) reform HC 1798 Sixteenth Report Sulphur emissions by ships HC 1561 Fifteenth Report Counting the cost: financial scrutiny of the HC 1560 Department for Transport 2011–12 Fourteenth Report Cable theft on the Railway HC 1609 (HC 1933) Thirteenth Report Draft Civil Aviation Bill: Pre-Legislative Scrutiny HC 1694 Twelfth Report Cost of motor insurance: follow up HC 1451 (HC 1934) Eleventh Report Thameslink rolling stock procurement HC 1453 (HC 1935) Tenth Report High Speed Rail HC 1185–I (HC 1754) Ninth Report Out of the jam: reducing congestion on our roads HC 872 (HC 1661) Eighth Report Bus Services after the Spending Review HC 750 (HC 1550) Seventh Report Taxis and private hire vehicles: the road to reform HC 720 (HC 1507) Sixth Report The Coastguard, Emergency Towing Vessels and the HC 948, incorporating Maritime Incident Response Group HC 752–i (HC 1482) Fifth Report Keeping the UK moving: The impact on transport of HC 794 (HC 1467) the winter weather in December 2010 Fourth Report The cost of motor insurance HC 591 (HC 1466) Third Report Transport and the economy HC 473 (HC 962) Second Report Financial Scrutiny of the Department for Transport HC 683

First Report Drink and drug driving law HC 460 (Cm 8050) Tenth Special Report The proposal for a National Policy Statement on HC 1598 Ports: Government Response to the Committee Fifth Report of Session 2009–10 Third Special Report The performance of the Department for Transport: HC 549 Government response to the Committee’s Fourth Report of Session 2009–10 Second Special Report Update on the London Underground and the public- HC 467 private (PPP) partnership agreements: Government response to the Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2009–10 First Special Report The major road network: Government response to HC 421 the Committee’s Eighth Report of Session 2009–10

Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 1

Oral evidence

Taken before the Transport Committee on Monday 11 March 2013

Members present: Mrs Louise Ellman (Chair)

Jim Dobbin Adrian Sanders Karen Lumley Iain Stewart Karl McCartney Graham Stringer Lucy Powell ______

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Sophie Christiansen OBE, Paralympian, British Equestrian Federation, Marije Davidson, Policy and Research Manager, Disability Rights UK, and George Fielding, Kidz Board Chair, Whizz-Kidz, gave evidence.

Q1 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the step-free access. There is also a lack of information Transport Committee. Thank you for coming here this on what is at a station or a bus stop and whether it is afternoon to help us with our inquiry. Could you give accessible. In this day and age, with the use of us your name and, if you are here from an technology, that is wrong. organisation, your organisation? This is to help us Marije Davidson: The main challenge is in terms of with our records. attitude of the Government, transport operators and George Fielding: My name is George Fielding. I am other passengers to disabled people. I would add that the Chair of the Kidz Board at Whizz-Kidz. We are there is a lack of information and communication a board of 12 ambassadors who represent the whole before making the journey and during the journey. ambassador network from around the country. There There is inconsistency across the country in terms of are 1,000 ambassadors in total. the accessibility, availability and reliability of public Sophie Christiansen: I am Sophie Christiansen. I transport. suppose my label would be a Paralympian. Marije Davidson: My name is Marije Davidson. I Q4 Chair: In your experience, have things improved come from Disability Rights UK. It is a pan-disability over recent years? Have things got better or worse or organisation led and controlled by disabled people. I has there just been no change? have brought Susie Lithman-Romeo with me, a George Fielding: The best journey I have ever had speech-to-text reporter. commuting into London was during the Paralympics. I could see that they had prepared for that. The viewing Q2 Chair: Thank you very much. What would you experience and the experience of people commuting say are the biggest challenges faced by transport users to the Games were really seen to be as important. The with disabilities and their carers when making majority of people went above and beyond the call of journeys? duty to support disabled people. George Fielding: It would be foolish to sit here and I would echo everything these guys have said about say that we need a major overhaul of the system. From spontaneity and lack of information. We cannot be my side, all or the majority of the problems that we spontaneous. I never book my journey because, like have are attitudinal. It is a really good time to hold many people, I don’t believe it is consistent or this discussion because it has improved since the reliable. I believe that, once you get to know the Paralympics; it is of paramount importance that we people who work at the stations and bus stops, and get it right and that we see the changes that we have they get to know you on a one-to-one basis, you are begun to see in London throughout the country. A absolutely fine. That is fantastic, as public transport is difficulty that I and my ambassadors have seen is the key to the independence of disabled young people. consistency with which these changes have been put I think it is great that the changes that need to be in place. But, as I say, they are all attitudinal as far as made are minor. I believe problems would be vastly I am concerned. improved, if not eradicated, if disability awareness training was implemented across the board by bus Q3 Chair: Ms Christiansen, could you tell us what drivers, taxi drivers and people who work at stations. you think are the biggest challenges? As soon as they have an awareness of wheelchair Sophie Christiansen: How long do we have? In terms users and people with disabilities, they are all kind of assistance, we can book 24 hours in advance, but individuals and want to help. It is just that there could that takes away spontaneity and flexibility. Also, it can be improvement about awareness of all these be quite unreliable. Many users have to use certain different disabilities. trains, and they have to wait and see whether they get help at their station. It is really unreliable. There is Q5 Chair: Ms Christiansen, what is your experience also the question of access—whether there are lifts or from what you have seen of the Paralympics or of the Ev 2 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Sophie Christiansen OBE, Marije Davidson and George Fielding changes? What has been done that has improved with the Kidz Board, why it is not mandatory that things? organisations like Whizz-Kids and Disability Rights Sophie Christiansen: In terms of improvements, the UK go round Crossrail or the high-speed rail line and Paralympics definitely helped in terms of having audit it beforehand, and maybe audit it more regularly, trained staff there at the start and end of your journey and have a regular input into new upgrades and things. who knew what to do. I think it is the key legacy that That is something that I would put in place. we have from the Games. Also, the manual ramps to I would agree with what my friend from Disability get off and on trains produce step-free access. Rights UK said about the confidence of young In terms of improvements, I have noticed that taxi disabled people. I would say that the parents of drivers are more willing to stop nowadays and get disabled people are the most loving and committed their ramps out for disabled people. For me, physical people, but I don’t think it helps that I, as an 18-year access is still the key. In this day and age, if there is old, only really learned how to get on transport two new planning, it should be completely accessible. I and a half years ago. I think it is a great credit to our am worried that projects like Crossrail might not be transport network that I can feel confident getting up accessible, even though it is 2013 and it is a new to London, and I would feel confident using it. From project. Access should be at the forefront of new a disabled person’s point of view, I don’t think there planning permission. is anything stopping young disabled people from Marije Davidson: I agree. So far we have seen lots experiencing independence earlier. Once you get to of improvements over the last year. Disability Rights secondary school, you can make sure you walk to UK—one of our legacy organisations—published a school with a friend. Just get used to transport; get report showcasing improvements, ‘Doing Transport used to anything. The sooner you get experience, the Differently’. I will hold it up. This is a guide for better. That will help with the rate that young people disabled people. The main purpose is to give disabled are going to university. It would help in general if they people the confidence to travel, because there are just had more experience from an early age. As I said, many improvements, but a lot of disabled people don’t that is a difficulty with parents. It is something we know about them or they don’t know how to use the could all work on across the board. services that are available. There have been a lot of improvements. I agree that Q7 Chair: Ms Christiansen, in relation to the the Olympic and Paralympic Games provided a Paralympics, is there anything about transport there momentum, but at the same time there is still so much that you would have changed? to be done. One lesson that we can learn from the Sophie Christiansen: I was very disappointed in the Olympic and Paralympic Games is that they had a real lack of improvements made to the main stations. I am focus on what we can do to make certain that disabled very aware how expensive putting lifts in is, but other people can use transport in the same way as others. transport networks around the world are amazing and They made access a condition of the master transport light years in front of us. Every station is accessible planning on franchising. They actually included it as and there are lifts at every station. I just wanted to a condition so that people had to think about how to see the Paralympics maybe improve the numbers of make it accessible. Give funding as well for projects. stations that were accessible. In general, what It is really about the priorities of how that funding is happened with the Paralympics was good. used. Is it something that happens afterwards as an afterthought—“Oh, we have a little bit of money left Q8 Chair: Ms Davidson, is there anything you would over, so let’s spend it on access”—or do they build it like to say about the Paralympics themselves and the in from the beginning, like Sophie said, right up front? way transport was organised? There was so much training of different people at the Marije Davidson: I think we have to bear in mind that front but also in the back offices. I am sure that the both the Olympic and Paralympic Games were very big bosses in transport authorities have learned from much about London and a few other places. It is this. It is not that difficult if you think about it. important to mention that very good work is being Working with disabled people and the involvement of done outside London, such as in Merseyside, disabled people has been very important. Blackpool and Sheffield. Sheffield has travel training for young disabled people. It is about encouraging Q6 Chair: In relation to the Paralympics, is there them to use travel. The Paralympic Games has anything that you would have changed in terms of improved transport, but it has mostly been about transport? Did things work well? You are all saying it London. I feel that the legacies are all about London did work well, but is there anything that you think and there is not enough thinking about how we can should have been done differently there? translate that to other parts of the country. George Fielding: I was shocked—not shocked, but I think we could have learned the lessons a lot earlier. Q9 Iain Stewart: Mr Fielding, I was interested in We were so fortunate that we had the Paralympics in your comment about a lot of the problems being ones 2012. If you look at organisations like Whizz-Kidz of attitude rather than regulation. Solving attitude and Disability Rights UK, we have all been saying problems involves proper training of staff who operate that for quite a long time. I don’t want to backtrack, the transport systems. From your experience, is there but obviously I am on this panel with very like- a transport company or organisation that has a minded and very experienced panellists. In relation to particularly good training scheme in place to make what Sophie says about Crossrail and all these big sure that staff are aware of the different issues for infrastructure projects, I don’t see, with my expertise disabled passengers and are sensitive to them? Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 3

11 March 2013 Sophie Christiansen OBE, Marije Davidson and George Fielding

George Fielding: I live in Dorking, and all those in Q10 Iain Stewart: In the way that LOCOG clearly Dorking know me and how to help. I don’t travel consulted with disabled groups in planning the across the country, so I wouldn’t be able or want to Games, do you find that train companies, bus point out particular companies. What we can learn companies and others regularly consult disabled from that is that people are very willing to help and groups to see how their services are doing or when very tolerant on disabilities. They perhaps just need planning new services? Does that happen on a regular more educational training or more assistance from basis or not really? disabled people about how to support them better. I George Fielding: I don’t want to interrupt, but I wish I could answer your question about certain would say that the Paralympics was a great target. companies. I would love to travel the country but I Everybody was united in wanting to make the don’t, so I am not really in a position to comment Paralympics the best they could possibly be. on that. Therefore, every company saw its individual part in Sophie Christiansen: I think as public transport users this bigger picture, and that helped. I wouldn’t even we don’t see the training that people have. A lot could be able to name the operator or the person who be learned from LOCOG and how they hosted the best operates my local buses. I wouldn’t be able to do it, but all the disabled people that I know would be Games. They had disabled people at the forefront of willing and approachable. every decision they made. So the transport and I feel I must say now that I wouldn’t be able to accommodation were all accessible because they had commute into London or be half as independent as I gone to disabled people for advice. I think the training am without the kindness and generosity of the general of staff should involve contact with disabled people public. As people have said before, maybe they need and many disabilities so that they know how to cope extra awareness, but people are so willing to help. If with a variety of disabilities. a company hasn’t brought out the ramp for me, then Marije Davidson: I agree. It is very important that a fellow commuter will go and find a person. I don’t attitude isn’t just about disability training. This is want to be drawn into saying that everything is doom really vital. Personally, after the introduction of the and gloom. To answer your question, because I know Disability Discrimination Act 2005, I have really I went off on a tangent there, it is not nearly enough. noticed an improvement in the attitude of staff on I know that everybody would be willing to help. trains. They talk to me, and that is because of training, Sophie Christiansen: I don’t know whether they ask but it is about much more than that. It is really about disabled people or not, but that is the way forward. It what facilities are available. is hard for people to understand what disabled people For instance, you can have very nice staff, but there go through. I don’t know what it is like to be deaf or is a woman whose story I may be using a couple of blind, so maybe part of the training could be for times today. This woman’s mother is disabled and people to get in a wheelchair and do a journey in a uses a mobility scooter. If her mother wants to go and wheelchair. They can then see what it is like. They visit her friends in another part of the country, her could be blindfolded or whatever, just to see what it daughter rings the train company to say, “My mother is like. wants to travel from A to B on that day.” The people Marije Davidson: There are examples of civic are so nice but they absolutely don’t understand. They authorities or transport providers working with ask many questions, saying, “Oh, you have a mobility disabled people, but it hasn’t happened everywhere. It scooter so you can’t go from here to there, but you is really important to work with disabled people can go from there.” Do you realise how difficult it is across the range of impairment. It is quite often about for us to arrive at unmanned stations? They have to people with physical impairment but not about people send someone. You can have very nice disability with mental health issues, people with dyslexia or policy training, but, if the stations are unmanned, then reading difficulties—a whole range of people. You there is no one to help them and you have to make a only find out what the issues are if you talk to those people. It is really important right from the beginning. special arrangement just for that person. That makes it There is a role for local authorities to do that as well, quite difficult to have a spontaneous journey. Disabled because they franchise or issue the licences for taxis, people feel that it is not proper. They should have the buses and other local transport. They could do far same right as other people to travel. I think that is a more in that area. really important part of it. In terms of attitudes, an important part is the attitudes Q11 Mr Sanders: Thank you, George, for the of fellow passengers. One thing we learned from the brilliant idea of trying to involve people with some Paralympic Games was that part of the training also form of disability at the planning stage of a transport involved assertiveness. If a bus driver saw there was network or system, whether it is the design of a new a wheelchair and buggy problem—when there is a vehicle or whatever. That is going to be, I hope, a buggy on the bus in the wheelchair space—how do recommendation we can make and thank you for it. you get that person to move the buggy so that the The Paralympics were very atypical. They were a very wheelchair can make use of that? The bus drivers special one-off. How much of that success that you actually got training in how to address other have described was down to things like the volunteers passengers to explain why they had to move. That is as well as the training, which is not something you a very important part—to improve the assertiveness are going to find in the rest of the transport system? of bus drivers and to improve the attitudes of fellow Is that what we ought to be aiming for within the passengers. transport system? Should there be volunteers there to Ev 4 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Sophie Christiansen OBE, Marije Davidson and George Fielding keep an eye out or designated staff who have a fantastic taxi drivers, but I would say that taxis are responsibility to look out for passengers who may probably the worst. need support? Sophie Christiansen: I have had good experience George Fielding: I guess we are going to keep this with taxis, but they are expensive and they are not pattern going. The Kidz Board has done auditing of really public transport, are they? Trains are generally both Glasgow and London, for the Commonwealth quite good if there is someone at the other end to meet Games and the Paralympics. You are exactly right. me. Quite often coming back, you can’t find assistance One of our concerns was that we wanted people to and then it is spontaneity again. When I get back to have designated roles. It makes people more my destination, there is no one there to help. accountable. We can put a face to the name and a With tubes, it is all about access. My mainline train name to the face. I think that would help. goes into Paddington, but when I get to Paddington I On a specific day in September we went to Hampden can’t access the tube. Paddington is one of the biggest Park. We hope that they are now going to employ stations in the UK, if not Europe. Why can’t I access somebody for the duration of the Commonwealth the underground at Paddington? I have had good Games so that they can be at Mount Florida and Grand experiences on buses as well, but I know people, Central station just to assist young disabled people. again, who have experienced malfunctions with the In short, I think that would be fantastic. Perhaps if ramps. Regular testing for ramps before buses leave somebody had the role of looking after disabled the depot would be a good idea. commuters at every main station—not every station Marije Davidson: I don’t want to generalise because but the bigger stations—that would be helpful and I think it is unhelpful for people who don’t have the perhaps increase accountability. choice. They may live in an area where there are only buses or where there is not much public transport anyway, and they have to rely on taxis. Where I live, Q12 Chair: Ms Christiansen, do you have any views I have two bus lines from two different bus companies on the issue of whether we should have volunteers as going past my house. I always avoid one because of well as designated staff? their attitude and because they don’t have information Sophie Christiansen: I agree that the Paralympics on their buses. I always use the other, even though were a one-off, but we can learn a lot from them. that does not go as frequently and it stops a little bit There were so many volunteers there to help. They further away from my home. That is okay because I were falling over backwards to help, but you just can’t can walk, but I have a choice of both buses. implement that all the time. I agree that having What is also important to bear in mind is that it may volunteers would be a good idea in addition to staff. be okay for a disabled person to make a journey if it It is good to have more people around to help. The involves just one mode of transport, but, if it is train, main issue is that, when you get somewhere, there bus and the tube or whatever, then it becomes very isn’t someone around to help; so yes, more people. hard and difficult because there is a weak link where it can break down. That is a really important argument. Q13 Chair: Ms Davidson, do you want to comment It is interesting that taxis have been mentioned as one on this? example. I wonder if that is because there are no taxi Marije Davidson: I would agree that we definitely accessibility regulations. There are regulations for need more people and more staff, yes. As I mentioned trains and buses. They are becoming accessible. It is before, there are not enough staff around. I would be not fast enough but they are becoming accessible. fairly concerned if we started to rely on volunteers to Their maintenance is okay. We are asking for give support to disabled people. It is not good for the regulations for taxis, for example to make sure that accountability of an organisation, with all due respect their ramps are maintained, and that may be an issue. to them. Q15 Karen Lumley: You have talked about the Q14 Lucy Powell: I have a relatively quick question. Paralympics in London. Do you think other parts of Obviously we don’t really like generalising in these the country have picked up on best practice in London things, but could I ask you to generalise a little bit and are implementing it themselves? and tell me which modes of transport are better or George Fielding: I don’t— worse in your experience, if there is that Chair: Have you seen any changes picking up from generalisation? Say there isn’t if there isn’t, but I the example that was set in London? You are shaking heard what you were saying earlier, Sophie, about your heads. Has anybody seen any changes on that? I taxis, for example, not stopping for you. I just don’t think so. wondered where things are on the spectrum. Marije Davidson: I think some of the organisations George Fielding: I would say that I now feel have been doing good work, but is that just because confident using all transport. of the Paralympics? I am not sure. Lucy Powell: Great. George Fielding: As I was saying, you just need Q16 Karen Lumley: Referring to other countries, are experience. I don’t want to trivialise this, but when I there any experiences you have had in other was coming here today the taxi ramp had literally countries? Do you get better treatment? rusted. The taxi driver plainly did not want to pick us George Fielding: If you will allow me to talk about up; it had literally rusted in place, so you could see air travel, I hope that connects to what you are saying. that he didn’t pick up disabled people that often. It is That is probably the hardest to use, as a whole. I don’t very inconsistent. Sometimes you can get the most know if you have ever seen a disabled person get on Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 5

11 March 2013 Sophie Christiansen OBE, Marije Davidson and George Fielding an aeroplane, but they have these aisle seats that you written evidence to our inquiry that suggests there can climb into and they push you to your seat. Those are also be a problem of abusive behaviour towards not mandatory. I believe they are mandatory on long disabled people who use public transport, either from haul but I have heard differing experiences. The worst fellow passengers or from staff. I would be interested is that, because they did not have an aisle seat on the in your views as to how widespread a problem that is plane, one of my colleagues at Whizz-Kidz had to and, also, if you feel that, when incidents happen, they crawl to the toilet. It was short haul, but that is what are taken seriously by the operators. he had to do. I am not saying that is commonplace, Chair: Have any of you had any experience of but we at Whizz-Kidz don’t understand why those are abusive behaviour from either passengers or staff? not mandatory. George Fielding: I have never experienced any My wheels have batteries in them. Some employees problem. I have always been tolerated, and people of airlines say, “They can go on the flight, no accept me for who I am. I have never experienced problem,” and then you will get to the cabin and they anything so I wouldn’t overemphasise it. Of course will say, “Actually, no.” What I would say is: make it can happen, and, where it happens, it needs to be these aisle seats mandatory and make the rules clearer eradicated because it is not acceptable. I wouldn’t so that all staff know. I don’t mind taking these stress it too much. I can sit here and say I wouldn’t batteries out, but it changes from day to day. I have change anything about who I am and how I come to talk from experience. across, or how I am accepted in my community. I am These wheelchairs, as we often say, are our shoes. incredibly grateful, but, of course, where stuff like that Therefore, there is the absolute nightmare that occurs does happen it is not acceptable. sometimes—not all the time or the majority of time, but it can occur—that the wheelchair breaks. Then Q18 Chair: Have any of you had any bad you are left without a wheelchair for your holiday or experiences? wherever you are going. It is something we can do Marije Davidson: I have. The Equalities and Human and the Government can do. We need to improve the Rights Commission reported on an inquiry into connection between disabled people and air travel, disability-related harassment. It gives loads of because it is not easy. examples. It flags up transport as a hotspot for Sophie Christiansen: I went to Vienna last year and disability-related abuse. The evidence is out there and their underground system is perfect. I came back it is happening. What I think is a real problem is about absolutely disgusted with London’s underground. In reporting, where disabled people can report if Vienna, every single station is accessible. When the something happens to them and what action is actually trains stop, they have a little ramp that comes out of taken. There should be much more of a zero tolerance the carriage so there is no gap between the carriage campaign about what is unacceptable. Part of that and the platform. It is all automatic, so they don’t need particular behaviour is also because there are not any staff. enough disabled people using public transport. If there When I went to Greece for the Paralympics, their were far more disabled people using transport, then it transport was really good, even though they have an becomes more normal. If there are more disabled old network. Their transport was good. We could be people using transport, then it would give rise to less learning from other countries, quite frankly. abuse. Marije Davidson: I am from Holland I went to see my family last weekend. It is interesting because I Q19 Chair: Ms Christiansen, have you had any bad was on a train and it had audio-visual information experiences in relation to staff or people? about the next stop and the end stop. And apparently Sophie Christiansen: I would follow on from what it is the same for buses, even in the village where I has been said. In order to change attitudes, people am from. As you may know, audio-visual real-time need to come into contact with disabled people more information has been here in London for a few years. regularly. To me, public transport is the key to that. Since then I have been using buses far more than I We need it to get out, get to work and socialise. Once used to before. It is not out there because of the cost, public transport allows disabled people to get out, apparently. I asked, “Why do they have it here in a abusive behaviour will reduce because it is small village? They have buses with real-time commonplace for a disabled person to be in the information.” They said, “Because of the EU. We use environment. real-time because of European Union regulations.” That is why they have that information. They gave Q20 Chair: Finally, before we finish this part of the other examples, and it is because of European Union meeting, I would like to ask you about another issue. regulations that it is happening, not because their There is going to be a change in benefits. Disabled Government is so kind. I just think it is really strange Living Allowance is going to be withdrawn. It will be that the UK Government have decided to lay down replaced by a Personal Independence Payment. That exemption regulations in training and information, means changes in relation to Blue Badge parking and when actually it is a real driver to make things happen to Motability. Is this something any of you are aware and improve the lives of disabled people and their of? Are there any particular concerns you have about families. it? Does anybody want to tell us anything about that? George Fielding: I can’t comment. It is not something Q17 Iain Stewart: We have had a good discussion that Whizz-Kidz has expertise on. about where companies don’t necessarily provide the Sophie Christiansen: With the change in benefits, I access that disabled people need. We have had some think the message that Government are sending is that Ev 6 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Sophie Christiansen OBE, Marije Davidson and George Fielding more disabled people should get into employment and costs when they need to take someone with them on get off benefits. But how can they when they can’t get the buses. There are a lot of extra costs that are not to work in the first place? With Motability, I didn’t covered by other services. Social care does not cover even know the changes that will happen. I rely on my that. They may pay for the person assisting them, but car from Motability for everything and to get out. I they do not cover the cost of taking someone with use my car when I cannot access public transport. I you. also know that parking is a massive problem. There One thing that might happen is that more disabled just aren’t enough disabled parking spaces in relation people will have to rely on public transport because to Blue Badge holders, especially in London. You are they can’t use a private car. For most disabled people, opening up a whole can of worms there by reducing it will become very expensive to use public transport the benefits. because of the extra cost involved. In terms of linking to other passporting such as the Blue Badge, because Q21 Chair: Ms Davidson, do you have any the criteria become more difficult for disabled people comments on these changes? to access Blue Badge, that is another problem. Then Marije Davidson: Yes. We are very concerned it becomes a postcode lottery with local authorities as because there is an estimate that about 180,000 people to who gets a Blue Badge and who doesn’t—or a will lose access to Motability. For many of those White Badge or a Green Badge. I am very worried. people, the car is the only reliable means to get It is not just PIP; it is about funding for education in around, especially if they live in rural areas where England. A lot of people, when they are in education, they don’t have other methods. Also, if you think get funding to help with transport, but they lose that about families where a disabled parent has to go to funding as soon as they go on maybe an work, then go shopping and pick up their child from apprenticeship or they get a job. If they don’t have PIP nursery or school, and then go home, if they did that or other benefits in place of that, then their chances of with public transport, even as a non-disabled person living independently and going to work don’t exist it is already a nightmare, but as a disabled person that any more. can become really impossible. Chair: Thank you very much to all of you for coming, We are also concerned about people losing their PIP for being so helpful and giving us so much when they use it to pay for support costs or the extra information about your own experiences.

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Niki Glazier, Co-ordinator, Mental Health Action Group, Lucy Hurst-Brown, Chief Executive, Brandon Trust, George McNamara, Head of Policy and Public Affairs, Alzheimers Society, and Srabani Sen, Chief Executive, Contact-a-Family, gave evidence.

Q22 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the in the first place. The combination of dealing with Transport Select Committee. Could you give your your own difficulties and your own anxiety, whatever name and the organisation you represent? your problems are, and then dealing with that lack of Niki Glazier: I am Niki Glazier. I represent the Mental awareness and understanding is huge. It can be a lack Health Action Group. of understanding on the part of the transport staff George McNamara: I am George McNamara from themselves and a lack of understanding and tolerance the Alzheimers Society. from the travelling public as well. Lucy Hurst-Brown: I am Lucy Hurst-Brown from the For example, if you need to use disabled seating Brandon Trust. because you need to sit near the front of the bus to Srabani Sen: I am Srabani Sen from Contact-a- feel safe that you can get off as and when you need Family. to, if you have anxiety or you have a panic attack and you need to get off, that may be the only way you can Q23 Chair: Thank you. What would you say are the travel—by sitting at the front. We know that members biggest challenges faced by transport users with have been frequently challenged for sitting in disabled disabilities? How much difference is there when we seating because it is not evident that they have a are talking about people with disabilities that are not disability. seen? Is that a special problem and separate from people with seen disabilities? Q24 Chair: Is that lack of understanding a Niki Glazier: It is an additional problem, certainly. widespread problem for people whose disabilities are Not only are you dealing with your own symptoms not seen? and difficulties in getting yourself out of the house— Niki Glazier: I think it is. We did a national survey certainly, in the case of mental health, the process of about 18 months ago now. We had responses from all getting yourself out of the house to the bus stop can round the country. They all reported these kinds of be a huge challenge—but, if, having plucked up all of problems, so I think it is really quite widespread. your courage and willpower, you then get on the bus George McNamara: People with dementia tell us that and the first thing you get is a bus driver challenging they face a number of challenges when trying to your bus pass because you don’t look disabled, that is access public transport in particular. For example, it absolutely devastating for somebody for whom it has may be a difficulty in paying the fare and counting taken so much to get out of the house and on the bus out the money. It may be the communication with the Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 7

11 March 2013 Niki Glazier, Lucy Hurst-Brown, George McNamara and Srabani Sen driver. Increasingly, what can add to the complications often families of disabled children are poorer anyway, and challenges is when transport routes have been on there are real issues around cost. diversion or there have been changes to the transport There are particular issues that have not come up system. around rural availability of transport. A lot of the Similarly, particularly with hidden disabilities around discussion we have had so far has assumed that we dementia, there are 800,000 people in the UK with are all living in the cities. There are already issues dementia at the moment and it is likely to go up to and challenges around public transport in rural areas. over 1 million by the end of the next Parliament. Those are particularly exacerbated if you have a There is a massive lack of understanding and disability. If you are a young person wanting to get a awareness around dementia. That has an impact on a bus to go into town to go to the cinema and you don’t person’s confidence and anxiety in using the have a disability, you can just walk down the lane to transport system. the next village to get the bus or walk over a hill or Lucy Hurst-Brown: The use of transport for people through a field. You can’t always do that if you have with learning disabilities is really critical because by a disability, whether that is physical, mental or a far the majority are unable to drive and, therefore, for learning disability. them transport is absolutely central to an included life. The other thing that has not come up at all so far, and Many of the people we support have an intellectual which is a real issue for disabled children and their impairment and, therefore, a hidden disability. Some parents, is around school transport services. They can also have physical disabilities and sensory be really problematic. We have had examples of impairments on top, so there is a range of complex children with challenging behaviour being denied issues that challenge their ability to use transport school transport, when the reason they need the school easily. The hidden aspects are some of the most transport is because of their challenging behaviour and challenging. I would say that we have heard a lot therefore they cannot use public transport. There is a about physical access being very difficult for people, whole range of issues around that. but people with intellectual impairments have a lot of difficulties around accessibility in terms of Q26 Chair: What sort of transport is involved there? information. Literacy and numeracy skills can be Are those commissioned school buses or buses used compromised, and people find it very difficult to by everybody and not just for schools? understand route maps, fares and charging Srabani Sen: That is specific transport that a local arrangements and signage. Those sorts of things authority has a duty to provide if there is a difficulty become very challenging and very disorientating for with a child getting to school. There are issues around people. the training of the providers who provide those kinds Over and above that, this whole issue of public of school transport and also the accessibility of those acceptance and awareness of their needs is very tricky forms of transport as well. No; it is specific transport as well. We had a conference this year about transport we are talking about here. and the challenges for the people we support, and the The final issue I would raise, which was touched on a biggest fear that people who talk to us have is of little bit in the previous session, is the inconsistency of bullying, abuse and just having a really negative and your entitlement depending on where you live, which difficult challenging journey. It was right up there and makes it very difficult if you are a family with a probably the highest on our list. disabled child to know what you are entitled to and to know what your rights are. It can often vary from Q25 Chair: Is that a widespread issue for a lot of local authority to local authority whether or not you people? get a Blue Badge, what kind of support you get, or Lucy Hurst-Brown: It is a widespread issue. It is the what kind of concessionary travel you may or may biggest fear of all. not be entitled to. Those inconsistencies are a real Srabani Sen: I agree with everything that this panel problem as well. has said and also what the previous panel said. I would like to draw out some of the issues that perhaps Q27 Chair: Is that shared by others too? Is there a have not had the prominence that we have heard so problem generally with the issue of knowledge about far. entitlements to concessions in different forms? Contact-a-Family supports parents and families with Niki Glazier: It is a very big issue within mental disabled children; that is our focus. One of the biggest health for two different reasons. One is because issues that parents raise with us is cost. Often, if you people who have suffered ongoing, longer-term have a disabled child or a disabled young person in mental health problems tend to lose confidence and your family, that person may well need a travel buddy self-esteem. They don’t tend to ask for what they or a companion; so often you have to pay two sets of sometimes need or feel that it is not going to be fares and not just one. You have to use taxis more available for them. often because public transport is not accessible. That is combined with the fact that, in terms of Families face the issues that we have heard about in publicity around assistance on transport, we have terms of harassment and very poor behaviour from never seen any case studies given about people some staff. There is a massive issue around cost, receiving assistance because they have a mental health which was one of the questions you asked the problem or something like autism. When people look previous panel about Personal Independence at these great brochures talking about assistance and Payments and the welfare reform changes. When you things that are available, there is nothing that says, combine those two things together with the fact that “This is for you. This is available for you too.” They Ev 8 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Niki Glazier, Lucy Hurst-Brown, George McNamara and Srabani Sen look in there and think, “Well, I am not there.” That needs, or indeed to have somebody travel with them sends a very powerful message to them. There are on transport and how many hours of support they are a significant proportion of people with mental health going to get to make that possible. problems who are not accessing the help that they In relation to concessionary passes, there is massive could have. variation across the country as to what that actually When we did our survey, something like 80% of our means. We have people in London whom we support, respondents said that they knew nothing of a disability who have concessionary passes that enable them to railcard. They knew nothing about it and did not travel any time of day or night. We have people in realise they were entitled to it; yet cost is a massive Cornwall where there is a real issue about how problem for them. There were some 40% who did not frequently there is any public transport, but when it know about a bus concession, even though that had goes you can’t take public transport during a peak been introduced fairly recently. They felt that they time. That means it is stopping you using the very were not entitled to it. Again, when you look down thing you need to use in order to get to a job or any the list of the major sectors in the concessionary bus of those sorts of things. legislation, you can see all the major sectors of disability apart from mental illness, which is the Q29 Chair: Are you saying that people do not have largest single sector of disability. the information to know what applies? We are really concerned. People have literally looked Lucy Hurst-Brown: The information itself is very down and said, “I am not there; it is not for me.” You difficult to get hold of. That is partly about have to look down into the catch-all section where, if information coming out from many different providers you don’t get a driving licence, you may be able to across different authorities and trying to make sense get a bus concession. We feel that is very of all of that, as well as it being translated into discriminatory. It is putting people off and it means accessible formats. that they can’t have a bus concession when they so Srabani Sen: I would emphasise that there are two badly need it. They cannot manage the constant separate but related issues. One is getting the business of having to apply for a driving licence, then information you need in order to navigate the system handing it in, reapplying and then handing it in again. locally. Separate but related is the issue of the fact that You need it when you are most ill, when you cannot your entitlements vary depending on where you live manage to do that. Instead of being given it on the in the country. They are two separate but related basis of their diagnosis, as for other disabilities, they issues. That sounds a bit dry and boring, but what I have to jump through another hurdle, which is about really want to highlight is the impact of that. being able to drive. For example, for disabled children, it can mean the That is not the same if you have an adapted car. You difference between going to school and not going to can drive your adapted car; you can also have a bus school. It can be the difference between being able concession at the same time. You can choose from day to get to a GP appointment and not getting to a GP to day or week to week which you want to use. It is appointment. It can be the difference between having not the same if you have a mental health problem. friends and not having friends. If you look at some of You can have either/or but you can’t have both. the issues affecting disabled children and their families, the research we have done shows that two Q28 Chair: What are the experiences of the other thirds of families with disabled children feel really panellists on this issue of people having information isolated because they cannot get out and about. That on their entitlements? Does anybody have anything is one of the main drivers. they would like to add? When you consider that 23%—nearly a quarter—of George McNamara: I would say that for people with families with disabled children do not have a car dementia it is not necessarily about the eligibility but the design and accessibility of that mode of transport, because they are often poorer than families with non- be it, for example, getting the train or the bus. They disabled children, when you add up all those total are the biggest challenges and obstacles that people impacts, put them together and think of them in the with dementia are facing. That has a knock-on effect context of the lives of these families, the impact is in terms of their confidence. It can often lead to social really quite severe. isolation. That is what our recent reports are finding out. In a rural area it may be just because of Q30 Iain Stewart: I would be interested to get your availability, but in inner cities we find that due to the view on the extent to which transport companies and complexity of some transport networks this is also a other organisations like Transport for London or the deterrent in terms of the way in which people with passenger transport executives proactively engage dementia use the transport system there. with groups like yours to take on board your concerns Lucy Hurst-Brown: I would say one of the big and aspirations. Does that happen on a regular basis challenges is that the information itself is not always or do you constantly have to fight to be heard? accessible. Even if the information is there, for Niki Glazier: The latter. I would say that we have someone with a learning disability it can be very spent the last five years knocking on doors for that difficult to understand and make sense of it. In precise reason. Most of those organisations, when we addition to that, I would say that there is a real issue do explain to them what the needs are and what is about eligibility criteria from local authorities working missing, are positive. More respond positively, but, across borders and different people having different yes, that is the hard work at the moment. It is that resources available to support them in their transport learning curve. It is trying to get that message across Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 9

11 March 2013 Niki Glazier, Lucy Hurst-Brown, George McNamara and Srabani Sen and that understanding because it has been lacking for general recognition that these things are important, but so long. there is a long way to go to getting that cultural shift. George McNamara: From our perspective—the Q31 Iain Stewart: Is there a particularly good one Alzheimers Society—the needs of people with that you could hold up as a best practice example? dementia have often been overlooked. In recent times Niki Glazier: We have been working locally in we have experienced a growing interest across Derbyshire with some of our bus providers. They have transport providers, albeit from a very low base. For responded very positively and we have seen example, FirstGroup in terms of their bus drivers have improvements there as a result of doing training with recently committed to have 17,000 bus drivers their bus drivers. I don’t know nationally. I think there dementia-aware and trained. They are also looking at is a long way to go. We are campaigning at the other ways of engaging and changing their processes, moment to get the national bus and train providers to policies and wider training for their bus drivers to listen to our message, to make reasonable adjustments become more dementia- aware. That is a step forward and to get the learning there. We have to go to them that is really good. at the moment. In other areas—for example, in London—Transport for London have their travel support card. That is a Q32 Iain Stewart: Is that a similar view for the rest specific card for people with hidden disabilities. It of you? enables somebody to write down, for example, if they Srabani Sen: We have some fantastic examples. One have dementia. Again, that can help. They can just of the things that we would make a distinction show it to somebody on the underground and so on. between is consultation, which is fine, and what we There are things coming through. Fundamentally, it is would call participation. The Government have about a real sea change in understanding dementia but, invested, through Contact-a-Family, in setting up what importantly, how to respond in a way that is are known as parent-carer forums. Every single area productive as well. in England has a parent-carer forum. These parent- carer forums work at a strategic level—and I Q33 Iain Stewart: I am relieved to hear that there emphasise “strategic level”—with commissioners to are some good examples coming through. Do you jointly plan services in a local area and then jointly have any thoughts about how that could be more work to commission those services based on what the widely shared? Is it through statutory regulation or is needs of that area are and the population of disabled it best left to a voluntary arrangement or ATOC? I am children in that area. not clear what the best way forward is. For example, in Newcastle, they are working Niki Glazier: We have had some positive experience specifically on transport issues as we speak. I believe with the CPT—the Confederation of Passenger there are some examples in Southend of where parent- Transport. We went to them and had the opportunity carer forums have engaged, in that instance, with to talk to the national bus providers. They have been school transport providers in working out how to really supportive. They are now looking to help us to develop the best services. There are some great produce training DVDs and are marketing and examples of when you go beyond consultation and promoting that information out to the transport work jointly to develop services. The services are industry in terms of buses, coaches and trams. We generally much more cost-effective, of a much higher would like to see ATOC responding in the same way. quality and they are meeting the needs of the local Then there are airlines. There are lots of other issues population. We would say that consultation is fine, but to move on to as well. For us, it is very helpful when you can do a heck of a lot better by working jointly. the umbrella organisations pull people together and Our stance is that parents with disabled children and say, “Look, this is good practice and this would be disabled children themselves are the experts in terms good”, and encourage their members to work with it. of what services will work for them. Bringing that That saves us a lot of time and effort. together with the expertise of commissioners makes George McNamara: From our perspective again, we for much better results. We are happy to forward some do not want to jump into any legislative approach. of those examples to the Committee if that would be What we have in England is the Prime Minister’s helpful. challenge on dementia. One key strand of that is Lucy Hurst-Brown: From our perspective, I can’t around the creation of dementia-friendly communities. remember a time when we have been directly That is about people with dementia being able to live consulted by any public transport organisation well in their community, of which transport is a vitally spontaneously. What I will say is that, when we important element and a factor of that. We believe approach transport organisations now with particular there is already a driver in place. We are seeing, for issues or try to get involved, they are much more open example, some areas of the country bringing together and have people whose concern is about making people with dementia; but also key stakeholders, of transport accessible and listening to customers in a which transport is one, are now starting to look at way that I don’t think we experienced at all five years what changes they need to make to make transport ago. There are now some very good examples of good more accessible. practice. A lot of these things are not terribly high For example, in York, Joseph Rowntree has been tech; they are not very complicated. It is massively working with the British Transport Police and also the about awareness and good training—those sorts of train providers. They have produced a partnership things. There seems to be a general interest and a between both of them about how to best support Ev 10 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Niki Glazier, Lucy Hurst-Brown, George McNamara and Srabani Sen people with dementia if they have difficulties in terms children are achieving their educational potential. All of their travel. of those things link to transport. As somebody said before in the earlier session, if you cannot get to your Q34 Chair: Is that operating now or is it something job as a disabled person or as a carer of a disabled in the pipeline? person, then it is very difficult to hold down the job. George McNamara: In York, yes. If you cannot get to school, how are you supposed to achieve your educational potential? Q35 Chair: Is it successful? Is it working? There is something about Government thinking about George McNamara: The initial findings from their range of objectives and how they can support Rowntree are that it is making quite a significant each other, and how we make sure the systems and difference. It is bringing together the duty of care of the infrastructure work together to achieve the overall the train provider alongside the role and responsibility Government objectives. of the British Transport Police. It is not just about addressing it within the transport context. The Q37 Mr Sanders: I have a specific question for Niki. Transport Police can enable the person to get home It was something you said at the beginning about safely as well. somebody who may have some condition that means Lucy Hurst-Brown: There are two initiatives and both they want to sit at the front of a bus. For the life of have very powerful applications across the country. me, I can’t work out what the answer is to that, One is something that is being piloted in the Ex-Avon particularly if somebody does not want to declare area, particularly Bristol, called the Safe Haven publicly, with a badge or some pass, that that is their project, which is about creating places across the local problem. What is the answer? How do you address communities where people who get lost or confused, that? have difficulties or are anxious can stop off at a shop, Niki Glazier: There are various strands. You might be an office or police station and get support, whether it aware of the Government’s Time to Change is using the phone to ring a support worker or programme, which is trying to educate and change notifying somebody and getting steered back on track. reactions to mental health and mental illness so that The second thing is that we have been very involved people feel more comfortable in sharing what their in something called travel buddy, which is employing particular difficulty is. That is the long-term goal. people with learning disabilities who are confident on Obviously, we need to have bus drivers who are better public transport to travel buddy with other people and educated and have a better understanding so that they help them to learn routes. We have been working with will support that person if they are challenged. There FirstGroup, which has funded some of that work for could be cards that someone could show, which say, us. That is proving to be hugely useful and massively “I have a non-visible disability. Please accept that and productive, not only in terms of giving people the allow me to sit here. I am disabled like other people.” skills to learn the routes that they are travelling on but Those sorts of things can come in as well. also giving them the confidence to do that travelling It is a difficult one. Disability labelling and badging and to know what to do if they get into difficulty. has historically been about wheelchairs and physical There are some really interesting and innovative disabilities. That is understandable. There should be models around that could be applied. things that remind people that not all disabilities are visible. There is a strong assumption out there in the Q36 Chair: Ms Sen, do you have any suggestions? public—and I have probably been guilty in the past Srabani Sen: In terms of answering your question, it myself—of thinking, “If you don’t have something is a bit of all of those things. In any system you need obviously about you that looks disabled, then why are a few carrots and a few sticks. It is getting the right you sitting there?” There are a lot of strong messages balance. It is definitely important to share best that can be given out about that. Not all disabilities practice, because there are some really fabulous wins are visible. The public haven’t, on the whole, got that you can get from getting it right, both for service yet, I don’t think. There is a long way to go. planners and providers as well as customers of those services. I think that sometimes legislation can help. For Q38 Mr Sanders: George, are you related to example, in a related sphere at the moment the Norman McNamara? legislation going through in the Children and Families George McNamara: No; I am not, no. Bill has within it a requirement for local service providers of health education and social care to work Q39 Mr Sanders: Have you heard of him? with parents in shaping services and defining needs George McNamara: Norman McNamara in Torbay, locally and how you are going to meet those needs. It yes. seems sensible to me that there is some kind of legislative push to ensure that disabled young people Q40 Mr Sanders: He is an absolute star and I just and their parents and carers are involved in shaping wonder what a great model he is. He suffers from services, because that can only help. dementia and wants to make Torbay the most The other thing that would be an enormous help is dementia-aware community in the country. He is far tying up Government policy. For example, we have on down the track to doing that, with hundreds of Government policy in a range of different areas with businesses signed up, particularly hotels, a range of different goals—for example, wanting to accommodation providers and tourist facilities. get people back in to work and making sure that Anybody with dementia can come to Torbay for a Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 11

11 March 2013 Niki Glazier, Lucy Hurst-Brown, George McNamara and Srabani Sen holiday and realise that it is probably more dementia- chosen to defer the recent European regulation friendly than anywhere else. requirement on disability training. From the Do you not have some sort of a campaign to try and Government’s perspective they could be giving a more replicate that elsewhere, particularly given how powerful message perhaps to the providers. successful it looks like it has been and is gaining recognition nationally now? Q43 Iain Stewart: I have one supplementary George McNamara: Indeed. I think this comes under question on the point the Chair was asking about. I the umbrella of the challenge on dementia and read something at the weekend about a new number dementia-friendly communities. As the Alzheimers or text service being launched so that, if a passenger Society, we have a commitment in terms of making on a train sees yobs misbehaving, being intimidating living well with dementia a priority. The example in or whatever, they can text a number and it will alert Torbay is one we are using. We are working with the Transport Police. Is that something that you were Norman’s example quite extensively but also others aware of or consulted about, or do you see a potential as well. We are seeing that there is a stimulus, not just application for people with unseen disabilities? from people with dementia and their carers, but also Lucy Hurst-Brown: I am aware of it because I read transport providers. Local authorities are also it in the newspaper, not because we were involved in recognising the importance of accessibility to any of that process or talked to them about it. I think transport for people with dementia in order to enable it is a fantastic idea. I would like to see something them to live well and be active within their like an app generated that people could use. Not community. It is something that we have been using everybody who has a learning disability would be able and working with. We will be having a conference in to text the right number, but, if it could be built in to late July looking at dementia-friendly communities. a mobile phone with a coloured button or that sort of Transport will be an area of interest in that. thing, then the idea is brilliant. It needs to be translated further so that it becomes usable for people. Q41 Chair: Ms Hurst-Brown, has your organisation Srabani Sen: The other point I would add is that it is conducted a study looking at the attitude of non- how we make sure that any training that happens is disabled people to people with unseen disabilities? effective. We did a straw poll in January as part of our Can you tell us anything about that? gathering evidence to submit to the Committee. I Lucy Hurst-Brown: We commissioned a small piece know you were talking a lot earlier about the of research looking, yes, at the general public’s Paralympics and the effect that that was having. The awareness of non-visible disabilities and, in particular, sort of feedback we were getting was, “During the learning disabilities. We found that 7.45% of the Paralympics it was fabulous, and then we came down people spoken to had witnessed bullying or very to London at Christmas and it was just as bad as it unpleasant experiences amongst adults on buses. ever was.” There is something about understanding There were also a very high percentage of people who what training is being given and whether or not you either would directly intervene or were frightened to can involve disabled people and their carers in that but wished they could directly intervene in those training, and then monitoring whether or not that is situations. having an impact. As well as being able to report either a staff member behaving inappropriately or a Q42 Chair: Thank you; that is helpful. Is there passenger behaving inappropriately, there has to be anything else anyone would like to add in the area of something about checking whether or not the training the attitude of other people? that we are giving is effective. That is really crucial. Niki Glazier: I am going back slightly. It is important George McNamara: On this issue of technology, to the question asked just prior to that on the issue of brieﬂy, in terms of what you have described more disability awareness training. I want to make the point broadly, we have to be careful here that we do not that, along with us banging on doors talking to people have a digital-by-default policy that excludes people and that sort of consultation engagement exercise, it with dementia. What we have found throughout our is important that from the other angle—the stick work generally, where we have surveys and so on that angle, if you like—the Department for Transport is are available online but also in hard copy, is that giving a very clear and strong message about the probably nine out of 10 of respondents ask for hard expectation and requirement for companies to respond copies. The ONS also found that 70% of over-75s to that and deliver that disability training. At the have never used the internet. We need to have that moment it feels like we are asking a favour. I do not balance. Obviously that will change over time, but at know if that is echoed elsewhere. We are asking, this current juncture it is important not to forget that. “Would you please?”, or “Could you please?” There Chair: Thank you to all of you for coming and could be a stronger message coming out about that. It answering our questions so fully. is quite concerning that the Department has now Ev 12 Transport Committee: Evidence

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Paul Breckell, Chief Executive, Action on Hearing Loss, Peter Rayner, Vice-President, National Pensioners Convention, Tanvi Vyas, Campaigns Ofﬁcer, Muscular Dystrophy Campaign Trailblazers, and Richard Leaman, Chief Executive, Guide Dogs, gave evidence.

Q44 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the are cosseted and feel secure, and you end up Transport Select Committee. Would you give your somewhere where there is not anybody apart from a name and organisation, please? machine on which you press a button and ask it Tanvi Vyas: My name is Tanvi Vyas. I am the questions. I mentioned London, because clearly Muscular Dystrophy Campaign Trailblazers London has had money invested in it for a variety Campaigns Ofﬁcer. of reasons. Paul Breckell: I am Paul Breckell, Chief Executive Paul Breckell: The biggest challenges for deaf people of Action on Hearing Loss. We are the largest UK are around inaccessible forms of communication. membership charity supporting people who are deaf Particularly pertinent is poor access to real-time or have hearing loss. information. It is not so much an issue around journey Peter Rayner: My name is Peter Rayner. I am the planning, but when changes happen mid-journey it is Vice-President of the National Pensioners Convention. essential that visual information is available and that Richard Leaman: My name is Richard Leaman. I am staff are on hand. Some of the key issues for people the Chief Executive of Guide Dogs. Our mission is to with hearing loss are about those unscheduled changes make sure that every blind person in the UK has the and making sure that there is sufﬁcient information. It same freedom of movement as everybody else. We are may be a different set of requirements from just some delighted to be here. of the simple mobility requirements.

Q45 Chair: Thank you very much. Could you tell us Q47 Chair: How do you think that could be what you see as the main challenges faced by disabled achieved? people and their carers when travelling or when Paul Breckell: Some of that is just about enforcing wanting to travel? the legislation and those regulations that are already Peter Rayner: For persons of reduced mobility, into in place to make sure that visual displays are up to which my generation falls rather successfully, the date. There is a requirement that 51% of seats on thing that worries us is consistency. The difficulty is trains have a sight line to a visual display. We have that some stations, to take rail to start with, are staffed had case studies where members of ours say that all but some stations are not staffed. Some trains are the visual displays say is, “Listen for further staffed but some trains are not staffed. In those loudspeaker announcements”, which defeats the stations where there aren’t any staff, boarding aids and object. Making sure the visual displays that are there other things are a problem. We have difficulty with are used well is really important. information, in so far as information technology in I know it has been a common theme throughout the some cases misses some of my generation. Also, we afternoon, but it is about staff awareness, disability don’t make much sense of some of the ticket awareness and in this instance communication machines. Older or vulnerable people will not really awareness, in particular, to make sure that staff travel unless they feel safe. It is not just a question consider the needs of people with hearing loss when that they may well be safe, but they don’t perceive there are changes to transport plans. themselves as being safe. It is to do with staffing and seeing the visible things that reassure them. Close- Q48 Chair: Ms Vyas, what are the main challenges? circuit TV may be one thing; good lighting may be Tanvi Vyas: Trailblazers have found that some of the another. It is these sorts of things. main challenges, as my colleagues have said, include It is the fact that we cannot rely on consistent physical access and the attitudes of both staff and transportation from one place to another. I won’t even other passengers; and also changes in communications go into inter-modal transfers. That is another problem can make a really big difference. Some of the issues between bus to train, train to taxi and taxi to walk. could include the example of making sure that With regard to start and finish, you may start in equipment is well maintained and communications are London where it is a good system for a variety of there if there is an unplanned change in the service. reasons, because money has been put into it, but you One of the other main issues is managing an increase may travel to somewhere where that system is not in demand. As there is an ageing population and as quite as good. Therefore, that is not seamless travel, things get a little bit better in terms of physical so without going on too much, our problem is the access—for example, the prams and the wheelchairs consistency of the product, such as it is. on buses—there need to be designs in place to make sure that everybody can access the transport network. Q46 Chair: You mentioned London and other places. Are there any places that are better than others from Q49 Chair: Mr Leaman, what are the main your information? challenges? Peter Rayner: London, for example, has stations Richard Leaman: For blind and partially sighted manned for the continuation of the service, people we see several challenges. The first is presumably for reasons to do with Transport for consistency. I have to agree that across the country we London, who fund such a situation. In other places find that services, staff training, website information staff aren’t there from, say, midday. You will have a and general support to blind people is incredibly journey where you start from somewhere where you patchy. If you live in London, it is pretty good; if you Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 13

11 March 2013 Paul Breckell, Peter Rayner, Tanvi Vyas and Richard Leaman live in the rest of the country, it is a lottery. As an two or three trips and then they are happier within it. example, 87% of our service users have been left on That sort of thing has to be encouraged, but there are a bus because the bus driver did not tell them when big black holes elsewhere. they were at their stop. In fact, 27% of our service Paul Breckell: We would certainly say the same in users have had a bus driver refuse to tell them when relation to Transport for London. London is a really they are going to get to a bus stop. In the last couple good example of an accessible city, in the main. I of years 91 people have been refused access to a taxi, know you have received evidence already about even though the law is very clear about guide dog physical access, but in relation to things like travel owners getting into taxis. Staff training, information apps, text updates, visual displays and wi- implementation of the law and fitting of audio-visual fi access on the tubes, London made some great equipment is very patchy but very important. strides particularly leading up to the Olympics and Paralympics. Out of London it is extremely patchy. Q50 Chair: Does the Passenger Assist system on Again, there are some good examples, Edinburgh City rail work? Council being one, but it is a real lottery, as the case Tanvi Vyas: In some ways it is improving. However, has already been made this afternoon to a large extent, there are really big challenges in terms of the when you move out of London. fragmented service. I would like to say that, Richard Leaman: We would agree that Transport for depending on where you are in the country, it is not London is in many ways an exemplar. We have also necessarily an issue; it is just the consistency. One day recently worked with FirstBus to open up a you may not be going along to the same station programme of training all their staff in how to support because you might be travelling to work from blind and partially-sighted people. There are good different stations. It is not as though it is always a examples out there and yet, in the absence of any regular person and that you are always going to see significant regulation for audio-visual equipment on the same faces. With the APRS, there are some buses, there are bus companies out there who do not situations where there is a breakdown in wish to have AV installed. It would be about £2,000 communication. You may have booked 24 hours in a shot; it is not a lot of money. The same bus advance; however, the information has not got companies are also not interested in training their staff through. In other situations it is improving. For to support blind people. There are notable pockets of example, with e-mail APRS systems, sometimes they bad behaviour and one or two of good. Our view is are proving to be quite useful. Technology should be that, unless we regulate, unless the PSVAR regulations increased. are adjusted, these companies will continue to avoid their responsibilities to support some of the most Q51 Chair: Are there any other experiences of that? disadvantaged people in our society. Peter Rayner: It will vary from organisation to organisation. A lot of it depends upon the emphasis Q53 Iain Stewart: I want to follow on from those that management chooses to put upon the subject. In points. Technology is developing in quite a rapid way. some places some organisations do respond but some The range of visual and audio aids that trains and organisations don’t. It really comes down to training. buses can have is improving all the time. Do the Indeed, this Act does not protect to that extent. It talks manufacturers consult with groups like yours to see about training in terms of awareness. Even in the TSI how they could improve what is there or what new on instructions and regulations it says that there must innovations are on the horizon? be “awareness of disabilities”. It is not just awareness. Richard Leaman: Guide Dogs is working with one or I am aware of the needs of the two gentlemen either two bus manufacturers. That is why we are sure that side of me, one representing those who are deaf and the cost of implementing audio-visual can be very the other those who cannot see as well. They low. We are not asking for a London iBus scheme, manifestly and obviously have different requirements. which is expensive and involves traffic management The difficulty is that staff training has to be more as well as giving passenger information. There are specific. It is very good in some companies but it is simpler forms of AV equipment in the region of very odd in others. It does not recognise these £2,000 to £3,000 for a single-decker and a double- substantial differences that exist within this user decker bus respectively. group. It is a big problem, but it is not legislated in We also feel—and I will be happy to provide the the same way within each mode of transport. Bus, rail Committee with a recent DVD we have produced on and taxi legislation are not exactly the same. this—that there is a much larger infrastructure question to do with technology. We feel that disabled Q52 Chair: Do you want to identify any of the good people should be able to start a journey and plan it or the bad companies? very simply online, get their tickets online, arrive at Peter Rayner: One can identify with the mentoring the station and be told which platform to go to by and the schemes that exist in London to take people their audio device, their telephone, and then be moved into the system, make people feel happy within the to the right part of the train and be told whether the system and travel with them for a period of time. How toilets are engaged or not. When they get to their much this would go on and how much this costs, I do appropriate destination, the shop should have barcodes not know. I am not too sure how much is window that tell them where their particular piece of shopping dressing. I would like to think it is not. Indeed, most is. The technology is out there to support disabled of the feedback I get from organisations is that it people. We are trying to encourage manufacturers, works. Somebody gets used to the organisation after chain stores and transport providers through this DVD Ev 14 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Paul Breckell, Peter Rayner, Tanvi Vyas and Richard Leaman and with our partners in this work—who, not user would be able to fit in at the same time. With surprisingly, are Microsoft—that we can make the regard to access in terms of the metro systems, they world a better place for blind and partially-sighted are completely level access because they are brand people and disabled people by using technology. But new. We understand that, in London, the underground it is not the only answer. Most blind and partially- is 150 years old, but when Crossrail comes in it will sighted people are not employed. Asking them to buy be brand new stations. The excuse on that issue should a £150 or £300 iPhone is not an option. Sometimes not be in place. It is one of those things that we want there is no signal; sometimes the battery runs out. We to make sure is opened up to the wider market to still need to have an infrastructure that has audio- ensure everyone can use their facilities. visual equipment and people on hand who are trained Paul Breckell: Our experience in relation to and can back up the technology for those who can’t comparisons with the European Union is that the UK afford it or for those whose technology is not working. has been comparatively good, to be fair. A lot of the Paul Breckell: Our experience is similar in terms of legislative changes in the EU have been bringing good engagement with equipment manufacturers. things up to UK standards rather than beyond. We Echoing the point, one of the key issues is following have some really good practice examples from that through with the transport providers themselves. America as well. Yellow New York cabs now have There are some opportunities from procurement, so audio-visual equipment as standard in terms of the right from the point of making sure that accessibility new breed coming on line. Access to private hire is built in when contracts for the provision of rail or vehicles is an issue in the UK. There are some good bus services are let, through disability awareness, examples from the United States, both in terms of through adaptive technology and then on into making private vehicles and public transport. sure that that is delivered in practice. It is about that Tanvi Vyas: On the subject of private hire vehicles, whole pathway in terms of making sure that we find that in rural areas a lot of the Trailblazers and accessibility is considered at each stage. young disabled people are not able to use the transport As has been said, the technology is available. That at all. For example, in Kendal, people are only able to is certainly part of the picture. The human factor is use it between 10.00 and 4.00 when buses are not important too. Staff training and awareness is part of in use for the schools. This seems like an absolutely that. It is bringing it together as a package for disabled alarming situation compared with London. If there is people—and people with sensory loss in this case in one accessible taxi in the area and he has a day off, it particular. can prohibit someone from being able to go out and Peter Rayner: The bus companies and train engage, be able to get to work or go out with friends. companies have to accept that this is a fair chunk of Richard Leaman: I would add to what was said the market. It is 38% of the total market. Once you earlier on in the two previous sessions. The big issue sell it to them that it is good for their business and is perhaps not how we compare with other countries they are designing for everybody, not just those of us but how we work within our own United Kingdom who are old or disabled in some way but that the other and this consistency across the regions. Blind people transport users are benefiting from it, then that is the way to do it. That is the only way you will get people do not see their journey from one local authority to in this money-conscious world to invest their money. another or from one country to another. They see it as Through the AGE Platform in Brussels, I am part of a continuum. One of the significant challenges they the Universal Access and Independent Living Group. are facing, which we need to address, is the fact that, Many large organisations of IT are interested in as they hop from one area to another or from one selling this because, at the end of the day, they will mode of transport to another, it is incredibly difficult sell equipment and the operators will benefit. It has to to make that journey; to book those tickets; to expect be sold as something that is of value to them rather some sort of service whether there is AV or not, than as something we are asking for, for nothing. whether the bus driver will talk to you or not or whether the taxi driver will let you in. It is shambolic, Q54 Iain Stewart: Presumably you speak to your and we have to find a way to get consistency across sister organisations in other countries. Is there a the modes of transport and to get the Department for European country that has a particularly good system Transport within itself to look at disability across the of addressing these issues that we could refer to? piece and not in separate pillars across each of the Peter Rayner: Spain, for example, is very good as far transport modes. Then we need to get the law as sighting and blind organisations are concerned. The enforced more effectively where it exists. Where it lottery in Spain funds that particular thing, so a lot of does not exist—and I am again thinking of audio- money is spent. It varies in different parts. I would visual equipment on buses—we need to regulate for have thought that the Germans and possibly the Dutch this or the bus companies will continue to avoid it. are probably better than anybody else in mainland Europe in terms of movement about the country with Q55 Chair: Is the new Transport Direct journey mechanised ramps and an integrated system. planner website useful? Tanvi Vyas: Even with regard to buses, for example, Richard Leaman: For blind people, no; it is there are some designs of buses that work better. I inaccessible. I have to say that that is not an found that in France, Spain and Germany there are uncommon experience. If you go to some of the buses called the Mercedes Citaro that have more free transport websites that show you the timetables, they spaces. There is more than one accessible space so are in pdf format, which cannot be read by blind that parents with prams and more than one wheelchair people. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 15

11 March 2013 Paul Breckell, Peter Rayner, Tanvi Vyas and Richard Leaman

Q56 Chair: Does anyone think it is useful? another person to assist and so on. We are worried Tanvi Vyas: Unfortunately, when we asked the that there are some issues in terms of mobility that Trailblazers they had not heard about it, so promotion aren’t going to be fully built into PIP. of it in the first place would be extremely helpful. The Peter Rayner: The main concern we have is that we Stations Made Easy website and directions have been cannot convince one Government Department of the found to be very useful because they have lots of value of inclusion to another Government intricate information, but again the promotion of the Department. We believe that concessionary travel, for website itself has not been good. what it is worth, and getting the older and less active Peter Rayner: There is too much reliance upon online into the system benefits not just those people but information as far as older people are concerned. society. They spend their money in the precincts and While many of us are able to understand and work they are healthier as a consequence. They do a lot of within IT, 70% of persons over 70 years of age in voluntary work. One can put a value upon it, but it is Europe are not part of the web. We have to find a way difficult to persuade the Department for Transport on of making them. I am not shutting my mind to it. I the occasions we have talked with them. They always am merely saying that too much information talk about the cost of concessionary travel rather than technology at this stage leaves many old people the value of it. Our objective is to try and make people isolated from the very information that these realise that older people are not tomorrow’s problem; gentlemen or we are all seeking to get. we are tomorrow’s solution if you give us inclusion. Paul Breckell: As I have already stressed, planning is Richard Leaman: At Guide Dogs we were very not as much of an issue as real-time updates. While concerned about the potential changes that the there are some real-time updates in relation to the site, Government had envisaged for guide dog owners in the options there are not as full as some of the other particular. Thankfully, they have reacted to our proprietary sites like National Rail Enquiries and so concerns and that is no longer a problem. For us, there on. In that sense it is not particularly adding anything. are going to be partially-sighted people who will fall Also, there is not any British Sign Language content just below the bar, who up until now were getting an on the site. For a proportion of people who are allowance but who will not get an allowance in the profoundly deaf, which is approximately 10%, it is future. They will then fall into a grey zone where they not accessible from that perspective. are not able to drive but are not entitled to an allowance for their disability. For us, the proof of this Q57 Chair: It does not sound as if the solution has will be in the eating. Let us see what comes out. Let been found there. The Disabled Living Allowance is us see how people are assessed, where that bar is set going to be replaced by Personal Independence and to what extent blind or partially-sighted people Payments. That has implications. Are there any are going to be affected. At this moment we are concerns about that? reserving our judgment on that. Tanvi Vyas: As people are taken off the DLA and will Tanvi Vyas: I want to mention the Motability scheme. not receive any Disability Living Allowance at all, This would also affect many people. If people are not that means a lot more people may be reliant upon able to drive their adapted vehicles or go into the public transport because they do not have as much of a disposable income to use for transport providers. family vehicles because they no longer apply, that That could be a real issue. could lead to many more people relying on public One of the other issues is with regard to the transport. Again, the demand for the transport will concessions. If you are in receipt of Disability Living increase. Allowance, if someone is no longer available to prove that and there is sometimes an issue with a disabled Q59 Mr Sanders: What single thing could person’s railcard, you can get a doctor’s note, but Government do that would improve your lot? Is there again that costs money, which could put people off. one single idea on which this Committee could make a recommendation to Government? Q58 Chair: Are there any other comments on the Chair: Here is your opportunity. change? Tanvi Vyas: We believe that writing something into Paul Breckell: I would just follow on from that really. the franchising agreements could make a big There are about 40,000 with hearing loss who receive difference—so measuring, monitoring and reviewing DLA at the moment, and about 4,000 specifically accessibility. It is not necessarily having the physical because of their hearing loss. One of the key issues access in place, but making sure that you evaluate it, is around the potential loss of concessionary travel see how successful it is and how things can get better. entitlement. If in the move from DLA to PIP those They should speak to disabled customers and see what people lose the living allowance, there is potential to could be done better. Perhaps having a good practice lose the concessionary travel entitlement too. That is guide for stations is positive. It would show what a key issue because the two should not go together. works well and celebrate companies that are doing In terms of the design of PIP, we argued well. That is commendable. However, we believe unsuccessfully that communication should be a there could be something in place that could provide separate strand. It is actually built into daily living for penalties if people fall below a minimum standard. within PIP. We do not think that is sufficient in terms At the moment there aren’t any teeth within of covering all of the various issues there will be Government infrastructures to say, “If this isn’t relating to accessibility around buying tickets, journey happening, then are there going to be any financial planning, asking for directions and the presence of penalties in place?” Ev 16 Transport Committee: Evidence

11 March 2013 Paul Breckell, Peter Rayner, Tanvi Vyas and Richard Leaman

Paul Breckell: I would say making sure that the accessible. I don’t agree with one of my colleagues on regulations really are there to enforce the legislation. this bench that the regulation is there. It is not there The legislative framework is there. That is in relation for audio-visual equipment on buses, and it needs to to audio-visual equipment and displays and staff be. Secondly, we were very disappointed that accessibility training. We must make sure as a whole Ministers saw ﬁt not to enact some of the EU piece that we make transport accessible more broadly regulation with regard to training of bus operators. for people who are deaf and have sensory loss. They have avoided that and taken an opt-out. If the Peter Rayner: One million older people are in receipt Government were to make buses more acceptable by of the bus pass in the UK. If that bus pass were to be regulating for audio-visual equipment and insisting used as the senior railcard, because all it does is prove that bus operators train their people, they could age and who you are, that would give the train transform the transportation of blind people outside companies an 11-million client base to sell their senior London in this country. railcard to. They would make money and we would Chair: Thank you very much for coming and put our money into the economy. Older people as well answering our questions. I am sorry you were kept as the train companies would beneﬁt. waiting because we were quite late when we got to Richard Leaman: The one single thing that we would you. Thank you very much indeed. like to see is the Government making buses more Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 17

Monday 15 April 2013

Members present: Mrs Louise Ellman (Chair)

Sarah Champion Adrian Sanders Karen Lumley Iain Stewart ______

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Ann Frye OBE, Consultant on Disability, Faryal Velmi, Director, Transport for All, Mike Hewitson, Head of Passenger Issues, Passenger Focus, and Guy Parckar, Head of Policy and Campaigns, Leonard Cheshire Disability, gave evidence.

Q60 Chair: Good afternoon, everybody, and Q63 Chair: Is that the main thing you have come welcome to the Transport Select Committee. Would across—trains and stations? you give your name and organisation, please? Faryal Velmi: Not just train stations. I would say tube Ann Frye: I am Ann Frye. I am an independent stations are a big issue in London and access to buses. consultant. While we have low-floor buses in the UK, there is Faryal Velmi: My name is Faryal Velmi. I am from still a big problem about wheelchair and scooter users Transport for All. being able to ride them. There are a variety of Mike Hewitson: I am Mike Hewitson from different issues, such as pushchairs in the wheelchair Passenger Focus. space and bus driver training. We have seen a lot of Guy Parckar: I am Guy Parckar from Leonard advancements since that landmark piece of DDA Cheshire Disability. legislation, but progress seems to be achingly slow towards achieving a Britain where disabled and older Q61 Chair: Thank you very much. What are the people with mobility problems are able to travel with main difficulties encountered by disabled people the same freedom and independence as everybody when travelling? else. Ann Frye: They are the things you have been hearing a lot and seeing in written evidence. From my Q64 Chair: Mr Hewitson, Passenger Focus has done perception and from the disabled person’s point of a lot of work on this. What are the main areas you view, the two things I would highlight most have identified? particularly are lack of information and lack of Mike Hewitson: There are certainly physical access training. Even though the vehicles and the issues still remaining. The actual vehicles infrastructure are now a great deal more accessible themselves—the buses and trains—are better now than they were, many people do not have the than they were. The issue now is getting on to the bus confidence or the knowledge to travel, or they have and the train—particularly the buses. It is all well and had bad experiences travelling. The weakest links are good having a bus fitted with a ramp, but, if the bus information and training. cannot get close to the kerb to lower it, the equipment will take you so far and the process fails you at that Q62 Chair: Is this to do with specific modes of point. I still think there is an element of that to look at. transport or is it a general observation? I would echo some of the barriers to use, such as Ann Frye: I think it cuts across all modes of transport. access to information and particularly the confidence I have seen it in rail, aviation and buses across the to use it. The confidence to use public transport comes piece and across the country. It is not universal. There through quite strongly. One of the areas surrounding are some excellent examples, but, if there is a weak confidence is staff—the training of staff and the link, that is almost always where it is. attitudes and helpfulness of staff. There are some Faryal Velmi: Despite the Paralympics, which was a initiatives. There are the “Help Me” type cards that great spotlight on accessible travel in London and the people can show to bus drivers in particular. They are UK, we are still in a situation in 2013 where many disabled simply feel that they cannot access very useful, but a lot more can and should still be mainstream public transport. Physical access is done in making that business as usual rather than definitely a huge issue. There are obstacles and gaps something special. between trains and platforms. Yes, there is definitely a lack of staff assistance and availability. The cutting Q65 Chair: How helpful are the cards and do they of staff, especially on the railways, has been a big work? issue. Increasingly, people feel that, if they do make Mike Hewitson: I think they are helpful, particularly journeys, then their journeys are often a lot longer when you have a hidden disability and somebody than those of non-disabled people. Increasingly, we asks, “Why are you sat in this seat?” If you have are seeing more and more disabled people take up something that you can use to show people and the their right to ride and assert their rights, which is staff, I just think it makes it a little bit easier than it fantastic, but what we would really like to see is more might otherwise be. I can understand people not political will and funding to make our trains and wanting to be stigmatised in having to carry stations physically accessible. something, but of course it is not compulsory. It is Ev 18 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 Ann Frye OBE, Faryal Velmi, Mike Hewitson and Guy Parckar just sometimes helpful to have something that you can Q68 Sarah Champion: I used to run a children’s show to people. hospice, so, unfortunately, I have hundreds of bad experiences across the board. Could you redress that? Q66 Chair: Mr Parckar, what is your experience Do you have any examples of good practice that we from what you have heard? could learn from? I liked Mr Hewitson’s example of Guy Parckar: I would very much echo some of the a card, but does that happen in reality? Could you all comments that have already been made. In advance of share some good practice with us? providing our evidence, Leonard Cheshire Disability Mike Hewitson: The card is a very good example. surveyed our campaigners quite extensively and You can print it yourself or get some help with it; that conducted a wider survey of over 1,000 disabled has worked. The Paralympics have shown the value people UK-wide. The things that came back from that of people and signage as well, in particular. were very much the things that have been mentioned. When it comes to the wheelchair space on buses—or What was pretty much universal across transport was the mixed-use space, as people would refer to it— staff awareness and understanding. That was the thing there is competition for space. Is it squatters’ rights? that could really make the difference between an What happens if there is a buggy in there when inaccessible journey that is not working for people to someone wants to get a wheelchair on? There are all a fully accessible journey, if that support is there, if those associated issues. Increasingly, can you get your the transport provider knows how to work with mobility scooter into that space as well? We need some best practice surrounding clarity of who this disabled people and just talks to disabled passengers space is for. It is something that Transport for London and has that level of understanding. Clearly, physical is doing. We need an awareness campaign in relation accessibility is still an issue in some areas. Train to “This is a wheelchair space” and “This is what to stations are a particular example—particularly in rural do.” It is part of public awareness. That is a good areas. Big central city stations are more accessible. example of changing attitudes as well as providing Some of the smaller stations are unstaffed and there some clarity. is no one to help. That came through as a particular problem from campaigners. Information is another Q69 Sarah Champion: Ms Velmi, would you be critical area. People were saying that they were told able to speak a little more on that? something was accessible but when they got there it Faryal Velmi: Yes. At Transport for All, we have been wasn’t. Obviously, that can completely destroy campaigning for many years for publicity around the someone’s intention to travel. wheelchair space on buses. It was decades of campaigning from disabled people that got that space Q67 Chair: Are there any specific issues on the two in the first place. Increasingly, on our streets, we see areas of taxis or aviation? They have not been wheelchair users left behind because they are not able mentioned. to be in that space. The recent campaign that Ann Frye: On aviation, there is a huge issue. We have Transport for London ran across all the buses, now had European legislation for a number of years highlighting that that space is for wheelchair users, on passenger rights, but there is still a great lack of was great. We would like that continued and rolled awareness among people with disabilities that they out right across the country. have any rights. People do not know what they are entitled to. Most people book a flight through an Q70 Sarah Champion: Ms Frye, do you think that airline and assume that the airline is responsible for the DDA and Equality Act have made any practical everything that happens. In reality, the assistance that improvement to the transport system? they get is the responsibility of the airport, so there is Ann Frye: Absolutely—a huge improvement. It quite a breakdown in communication. There are still focused the minds of the transport industry, for the a lot of instances where people have asked for most part, for the first time on what needed to be done. assistance and it doesn’t materialise, or, again, there Of course, the legislation required physical access. I is a lack of training among the staff who provide it. was involved in the Department for Transport at the The idea of the European legislation was to get time. We took the decision that the DDA should make harmonised provision at both ends of your journey. technical regulation for vehicles rather than just give There is a huge difference around Europe, and indeed people a right, on the grounds that having a right to in this country, in different airports in the quality of get on a bus is of little use if the doorway is too service that is provided. That remains a major issue. narrow or the step is too high. Setting out those design On taxis, again, the position is very patchy across the parameters meant that, for the first time, we started to country. In some areas there are no wheelchair see vehicles that were designed around people’s accessible taxis. In other areas, there are accessible needs. There has been an enormous advance. taxis that don’t suit people with disabilities who are If you look across the board, the rate of purchase of not wheelchair users. Again, there is a huge issue with rail rolling stock or buses has not been as rapid as had lack of driver training, where drivers look the other been hoped for, but I still think that the end dates that way and don’t see a disabled person because either were set by the DDA have been enormously important they can’t be bothered or they have not been trained in focusing the minds of manufacturers and operators in how to assist properly. On taxis, it is both the on deadlines that have to be met. I would certainly vehicles and the training that are a huge need but also hope that those are stuck to. They were long deadlines to have a vehicle that meets everybody’s needs. and they have given enormous impetus. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 19

15 April 2013 Ann Frye OBE, Faryal Velmi, Mike Hewitson and Guy Parckar

As I say, there has been a huge advance. The never going to make your journey comfortable or weaknesses are in the areas that were outside the pleasant. A lot of the feedback that we see from legislation, in a way. It is the soft areas like disabled people is about abrupt and uncivil behaviour information and training that got left behind and also, from drivers, who perhaps should be doing a different in part, the gap between the vehicle and the job. I would strongly advocate starting with empathy, infrastructure, as others have touched on. If there is a and teaching driving skills later. white van—it is always a white van—parked at the bus stop, you cannot get the bus up to the kerb so you Q73 Iain Stewart: Does anyone else have a good cannot deploy the ramp. A lot of the investment is example they can point to? not fully realised in that sense. People lose confidence Mike Hewitson: That point emphasises that it is not because they will have a bad experience and maybe always the training but the attitude that goes with it. won’t travel again. We are absolutely on the right That is quite hard to get across in a training course. course. If you look around Europe, I would still say From a rail perspective, there have been a lot of staff that the UK is one of the best across the board in what training initiatives. ATOC have published a DVD; I we have done in our legislation. cannot remember what they called it. I think they are coming later, so they will be able to tell you. If Q71 Chair: Does anybody else want to comment or something comes out nationally, it helps to set some add to what has been said on the impact of legislation? sort of national expectations and standards. You Guy Parckar: I would very much echo what Ann has always need to adapt for local types of railways and said about the positive impact of the specific details conditions, but there needs to be good central core in the Disability Discrimination Act. Those soft areas guidance that other people can design courses around. around staff training and awareness are perhaps the I would point to some of the cascade work that the areas where we are now facing more challenges. railways have done, particularly on the new Passenger There is one point that links to the previous question Assist programme. in relation to taxis as well. One of the things that Faryal Velmi: When you come to transport, the cropped up in the surveys that we did was in people bedrock of any type of disability or equality training being charged more for their journey when using should really involve disabled and older transport taxis. That is something that should be prohibited users themselves. Unfortunately, I do not think this is anyway under the Equality Act, but section 165 of the the case across the UK. However, there has been a Equality Act—which is a little section that adds turning tide. I know that, in London, Transport for specific duties around taxi provision—has not been London is making headway trying to do this, which is brought into force yet. That would help to clarify welcome. That needs to be the real guiding focus. We some of those duties. There is still a role for cannot get the confidence to assist the disabled to use legislation, but there is also still an awful lot of work a transport mode if disabled people are not genuinely to do around those softer areas and those areas where involved in being part of that training. That is maybe the DDA or Equality Act interacts with other something that would be pretty radical but would things. change things. We hear from a lot of people, as Ann said, that you Guy Parckar: I would absolutely agree with that. get to the bus stop and there are things blocking the Pointing to a London example, Leonard Cheshire pavements, or the dropped kerbs are not in the right Disability did a piece of work just before the places so you can’t get to the bus stops. Those things Olympics with the Docklands Light Railway and can completely disrupt and ruin a journey that would Serco, who manage that. The focus was very much on otherwise be accessible. getting disabled people and disabled passengers who use those services involved by talking to the provider, Q72 Iain Stewart: I would like to follow up my pointing out what the issues were and what barriers colleague’s initial question about best practice. A they faced. Often, it just flags up things that the number of you have mentioned that the training of provider has not thought about. There are things like staff needs to be sensitive to the needs of disabled evacuation plans, for example, and what happens if passengers and being able to assist them. Can you there are wheelchair users, and particularly more than point to a particular bus or rail company, local one wheelchair user, in a station when there is an authority or whoever that does have a very good evacuation. Has that been planned for? Disabled training package available that perhaps other people with that experience can point out and identify companies could emulate? things. That really does make a difference. Ann Frye: With a bus company, it is an attitude rather than a package. There is a company that says it never Q74 Iain Stewart: By and large, do you find that the recruits people because of their driving qualification; train and bus companies are responsive to you when it recruits people because of their people skills. It says you make suggestions, either in a proactive sense to you can teach anybody to drive but you can’t teach introduce new procedures or equipment, or reactively empathy. If you recruit people who have empathy and if you report complaints about uncaring bus drivers they understand the passenger and the passenger’s or similar things? Do you tend to find that transport needs, teaching them how to drive a bus safely is, in companies are responsive when you try and engage a sense, the easy bit. To me, that is a very sensible with them? policy. There are a lot of people out there working as Guy Parckar: I would say there is a mixed picture. It drivers who really don’t like interaction with would depend very much on the individual you passengers—with or without disabilities. They are happen to get through to. Yes; certainly we have heard Ev 20 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 Ann Frye OBE, Faryal Velmi, Mike Hewitson and Guy Parckar from campaigners who have had huge problems and disgraceful. When people apply for a licence to local experienced a difficulty accessing the service. They authorities, do they have any training in providing say that the ramp was promised, but it wasn’t there services for disabled people, especially if they are and they were stuck on the train. They complained but being licensed for a disabled taxi? were treated aggressively and no one came. We have Ann Frye: It is entirely up to the local authority. had experiences like that, and we have had others Because the Government have not implemented the where, yes, there was a problem and there was a really DDA provisions on taxis, the decision about whether swift response to it. I cannot say that I have found or not to license accessible taxis is a matter for there has been one particular company or one borough councils or district councils, which is odd, particular mode of transport that has responded well. because all the other transport functions are at county It is that sort of personal— level. So there is already a slight disconnect there. The local authority decide whether they will license Q75 Iain Stewart: It is an individual thing. accessible taxis in whole or in part and whether they Guy Parckar: It is. It is who you get through to and will require any kind of training. Some councils how that system works. mandate training as a condition of licence, including Faryal Velmi: Transport for All runs an advice and refresher training, and it is training delivered by advocacy service. We certainly get many callers who people with disabilities; others do nothing of that kind. feel very frustrated that, sometimes, even repeat It is a very varied picture across the country and it is problems don’t get dealt with. It often causes people entirely in their hands. who are frustrated to give up trying to complain. That is a big problem because we are very vociferous about Q78 Karen Lumley: Do some councils innovate by people complaining. If we don’t complain about having cheaper licences for those that have disabled access problems, then transport providers don’t know access vehicles? that there is an issue. It is really important to promote Ann Frye: There are various ways of doing it. Some complaining—to get people to put down what their will only issue new licences to accessible vehicles. If problems are and turn that into a positive so that we you want a licence and you are not already a driver, can see change. then you get an accessible taxi. There are different Faryal Velmi: There is also a role, particularly with ways of distinguishing; it can be on cost or it can be the railways and Passenger Assist when people have on availability. Having given the licence, you then booked assistance, and an ideal opportunity for a need to make sure that that vehicle is available to follow-up. “How did it go?” It does not have to be disabled people and not just absorbed into the fleet. I complaints. It does not always have to be negative. know of the experience they had in Dublin where they You can attract some of the “What went well?” introduced a lot of accessible taxis. Disabled people elements by a follow-up. It does not have to be a said that they were never available. It was because survey either. It can be a phone call or a postcard, or they were all out at the airport as they were very anything to that effect. popular for people with luggage. The policy was there but the reality was not functioning. Q76 Iain Stewart: Passenger Focus do regular Faryal Velmi: We would echo a lot of the things that surveys of what passengers’ experience has been. Do Ann is saying. The lack of wheelchair accessible taxis they do specific research into the disabled? is a big concern, as is training. Even in London, when Mike Hewitson: We have done two particular bits of you speak to the drivers of some large minicab firms, research into what was the Assisted Passenger they have had absolutely no disability, equality or Reservation system—now Passenger Assist. We are awareness training. It is quite shocking. There need to hoping to do another one later this year, a year after be much stricter guidelines and even legislation to the Olympics, rather than in the midst of the afterglow make sure that this happens. of the Paralympics, to see how well it is going and Another big issue, which Ann raised again and we get what it is like on a normal Wednesday as opposed to complaints about on a regular basis, is taxi drivers just an Olympic Wednesday. We are hoping to do that driving past disabled people, particularly wheelchair again. users. People basically cannot be bothered with the Most of our research is themed—on fares, ticketing hassle of having to deal with that. The flipside of that, and disruption. There is a disability element to each though, is that, when a taxi does stop, you have the of those as well, so we can find out if there are any meter ticking as the person is trying to get on, which, specifics. Of course, a lot of the issues are the same again, is not fair. in that people want their train or bus on time. That does not change, so it is broadly relative anyway, with Q79 Mr Sanders: Going back to best practice, can specific dips into it. If we are doing quantitative work, you point to another country that does this better than of course we can cut that by the number of people us? It may be that there is a better country than us on who said that they had a disability and look to isolate trains, another country that is better than us on those figures on their own. coaches, and another that is better on stations. Have you looked at where there is better best practice that Q77 Karen Lumley: I want to go back to the subject could be promoted over here? of taxis. Yesterday I was at a church meeting where Ann Frye: A policy that I find very appealing has they were trying to raise money to provide a disabled been adopted by the Norwegian Government, which vehicle to bring people to church because they could is a policy of universal design. They have said that not rely on the taxis in my town, which is fairly every Department of Government must deliver all its Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 21

15 April 2013 Ann Frye OBE, Faryal Velmi, Mike Hewitson and Guy Parckar policies against the brief of universal design. In other regulations and the laws are out there, but it is about words, everything has to be fully accessible to people getting local authorities to use the weaponry that is with disabilities but also easily usable by everybody. available to them. Is that something that you perhaps As we have said for so many years, if it is better for ought to be campaigning on rather than expecting us disabled people in the transport sense, it is probably to do so? going to be easier for everybody to use. If you look Guy Parckar: Enforcement is a big issue. It is the at low-floor buses just as one example, that policy in same with the Equality Act. One of the challenges Norway is now rolling out as an absolute requirement with the Equality Act is that it is unbelievably difficult on every policy coming out of every Government to enforce anything through it, particularly in terms of Department. They will start to see a more joined-up equal treatment. Essentially, you are required to go to approach to accessibility very rapidly. court with it, and there are very few people who can One other example of a country where some things at afford to or who are willing to go to court to take up least are done very well in this sense is Spain. That is that sort of complaint. We need to look at better ways very largely because they have an enormously of enforcing that. powerful organisation of blind people, who get all the I go back again to the point of trying to build in money from the Spanish lottery, so they have huge accessibility right at the start. Ann’s point about purchasing power. They asked blind people to design universal design involving disabled people right at the the ticket machines in the Barcelona metro. They now outset is very important. If you build accessibility in have ticket machines that are completely intuitive. right at the start, it makes the whole process so much They used to have to employ people to stand by the easier. If you look at the way in which franchising machine telling tourists and everybody else, “You put works for rail companies or licensing works for taxi your money here and your ticket comes there,” and so companies, and make sure that accessibility is one of on. Because they have been designed by blind people, the key things that have to be built into that whole it is intuitive for everybody to get the system working, process, you could go a long way to progressing and they have cut down on the people who have to things. stand and help. That is just one example, but there is a lot in Spain that I would say is particularly good for Q81 Chair: How does the Passenger Assist process people with disabilities. work on the railways? Does it work effectively or not? I do not think anyone is doing better than we are in Mike Hewitson: It is certainly getting better. It seems terms of standards of vehicle design, but they are to have worked well during the Paralympics from the doing better in some of the pedestrian infrastructure discussions we have had. Everyone will have an and things of that kind. example or a time when it did not work. We surveyed Guy Parckar: There can also be variations within it in a very traditional style by getting people with countries. To give one example, we occasionally get disabilities to make journeys and tell us what reports back of someone visiting a particular city and happened. Then we did it again and it got slightly having an overwhelmingly positive experience. That better. The Olympics gave it a certain impetus as well; shows there is a role for local government as well as we have the new Passenger Assist. It seems to have central Government to focus in on city provisions. I coped with that, but the acid test is to go out, have remember someone telling me about buses in Berlin another go and get that first-hand experience. being absolutely fantastic, that they had a wonderful One of the big advantages is that communication is experience and it was better than anything they had quicker. If someone takes a booking and speaks to the seen before. I am sure these things develop over time, other train companies, you have evidence that it has but there is that role for cities and local government been received rather than just a fax being sent and not to really focus in on how they purchase services and knowing whether it was ever received. You now have looking at things like licences for taxis. It could a greater sense of assurance that someone will be become a zone of best practice for accessibility. That there. Until we actually go and check, it is quite can be done alongside the national level provision as difficult. well. Faryal Velmi: I would make the point that, within the Q82 Chair: We have had quite a bit of UK, there are some great pockets of best practice, but, correspondence from people saying that it does not unfortunately, they are not replicated in other parts of work very effectively. They talk about making the country. If you go to some of the cities in England, arrangements and then they are not being carried out, Wales and Scotland, you will see so many different or problems of booking trains and needing to do types of bus design. There is a great need within the something at short notice and not having enough time UK to replicate best practice where it is good. I would to do it in. Is that something that echoes your really urge the Transport Committee to look into this experience, Ms Velmi? because it is a big issue. Faryal Velmi: Absolutely. First, the move over to a computerised system is progress. Any type of Q80 Mr Sanders: Ann mentioned somebody parking innovation is welcome, but there is a big issue about in a bus stop area. It is against the law—but which this. There is the caveat of booking 24 hours in authorities enforce it? There is one London borough advance. The idea of disabled people and older people that does enforce it with video cameras. If you have with mobility problems being able to travel stopped there, a few weeks later you get a penalty spontaneously is something that is really important. notice saying that you stopped there and there is no Yes, we do get calls through of people having arrived excuse for stopping there. It may be that a lot of the and there is no one there to help them. That really Ev 22 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 Ann Frye OBE, Faryal Velmi, Mike Hewitson and Guy Parckar knocks people’s confidence. You often have to ask That is certainly in hand. One of the problems with them to try again, but sometimes that is a big issue. the 24-hour notice is if you need an accessible taxi to I would also say this. We do not yet have in the UK— start the journey, because getting hold of one of those and I do not think it would be very expensive—a map can be quite difficult. that covers the entire rail network, which shows us which stations are accessible and which are not Q85 Chair: Is the Department’s new Transport accessible. This is something that would be really Direct journey planner website helpful? Has it made cheap and would make a big difference in assisting any impact? It does not seem to have done. disabled and older passengers. It is something that I Mike Hewitson: I do use it, actually. I find it useful hope will happen soon. getting from home to the local bus routes or from the end of the rail leg on to the bus to the destination. Q83 Iain Stewart: I have a supplementary question My personal experience is that it isn’t always good at on Passenger Assist, but my question has a wider joining the bits up in the middle. It is getting better, application as well. Are there any discussions being but some of the rail journeys it can send you on can had about using mobile phone technology to improve be a slight zig-zag. It is quite useful for local Passenger Assist so that, if the train arrives and there information if you say, “There’s my door, so how do is no one there to assist with the ramp or whatever, I get to the bus stop to go to somewhere?” That is there is a number you can call or a text you can send particularly true if you are not used to public transport to alert the station that a passenger requires or buses. When we did some research in Milton assistance? Is that in development at all, or should it Keynes on, “Why don’t you take the bus if you be if it is not? could?”, one of the strong answers was, “I just don’t Mike Hewitson: I cannot give you a full answer to know how to. I don’t know how to start the process that one, I am afraid. I can go away and find out for or where to look.” From that perspective, a walking you. Certainly, smartphones offer you a lot more route from your door to the bus stop that takes you to ability to have that instant contact. The problem, of x is a starting point. The through journey is sometimes course, is whether everyone has access to that type of the difficult bit. technology. Should the possession of a £150 or £200 Faryal Velmi: We tried it out a few times as well. phone be your requirement to have that first-line Some of the journeys did seem a bit bizarre. In response, particularly when you are in areas where London, we have the journey planner, which generally you are told not to wave your phone about and, all of seems to be a bit more sophisticated but still has its a sudden, that is precisely what you are doing in order own issues and teething problems. Well, they are not to get assistance? There are some issues to address teething problems. There is going to be investment in there. There is that sense of a back-up if it has gone the journey planner, but, potentially, that could be this wrong—absolutely. If you are on the train and you idea of best practice happening in one part of the have been carried past the station because there is no country and being used to develop the national one to help you off, then it is small consolation. That accessible journey planner. should be taken care of. I would like to say that there is, increasingly, a big push to have a lot of information online. There is still Q84 Iain Stewart: I believe you need to give up to a big community—a big constituency—of people in 24 hours’ notice to use it. You might be able to reduce the UK who don’t have access to the internet. That is that time. a big issue. We still need maps and hard copies of Mike Hewitson: Yes. There are certainly discussions, things. It is very easy for some transport companies even now, about whether it can be reduced and where. to stick all the maps online. We need to make sure If you are going from a fully staffed big station to a that the maps and other resources are still produced fully staffed big station, then there must be some for people. means of bringing that down further. There must be Chair: Thank you very much, all of you, for coming some means of getting you on the train and making and answering our questions. sure assistance is arranged while you are en route. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 23

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Steven Salmon, Director of Policy Development, Confederation of Passenger Transport, Giles Fearnley, Managing Director of UK Bus, FirstGroup, and Tom Stables, Managing Director, National Express, gave evidence.

Q86 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the choice of doing something voluntarily or doing it Transport Select Committee. Would you give your under regulation, will almost always choose to do it name and organisation, please? through natural progress through the market. Steven Salmon: I am Steven Salmon from the I will give you an example. There is a clause in the Confederation of Passenger Transport. Passenger Rights Regulations from which the Giles Fearnley: I am Giles Fearnley, Managing Government has taken an exemption, although not to Director of FirstGroup’s UK bus division. the extent that it could have done, that would require Tom Stables: I am Tom Stables from National operators to give customer-facing staff disability Express Coach. awareness training. Of course, that is very widely done, but we did not want ourselves to be put in a position where you could not use a person if their Q87 Chair: Mr Salmon, the Confederation of disability training was not up to date. It is the Passenger Transport did not initially submit any difference between doing something but actually evidence to the inquiry. Was there any particular being required to do it by law. It was because of the reason for that? prospect of a statutory requirement to do these things Steven Salmon: We felt that, although we had that we asked the Government to take the exemptions opinions on the part of our members, we didn’t that they did. actually have any facts about the balance of judgment between what you provide and the standards that it is Q93 Chair: Mr Fearnley, your company has done a provided to. We really felt that that was not a question lot on driver training. From the evidence we have for us. already heard this afternoon, that is clearly a very major issue. Could you tell us something about what you have done in that area? Q88 Chair: But it is an issue that is of concern to Giles Fearnley: Certainly. We take disability you. awareness among our drivers very seriously indeed. Steven Salmon: We fully understand that it is an issue For some years now we have incorporated modules that is of concern to a lot of people, yes. within our driver CPC training and are increasingly doing so. We started the external face of our disability Q89 Chair: Mr Stables, National Express has said awareness some years ago with a card that could be that it is a retrograde step for the Government to issued to passengers to show to the driver when they exempt the UK from new EU regulations on bus and get in. I know the gentleman from Passenger Focus coach passenger rights. Tell us what your concerns are referred to such things earlier. We found there that a and whether you think other operators share your view number of disabled passengers were really pleased to or support the exemption. have these. They could say, “Please listen carefully; I Tom Stables: We are concerned that we continue to speak quietly,” or, “Please tell me when we get to the move forward in this area. We believe that it is the high street,” or whatever. Drivers also found them right thing to do. We have made great steps ourselves very helpful so that they could respond to their towards accessibility and want to ensure that we passengers’ needs much better. achieve a level playing field across the sector. Moving on and since then, we are now working very closely with a number of disability groups such as Guide Dogs, Alzheimer’s and RNIB, to mention just Q90 Chair: How important do you think this issue three. As we develop driver awareness with the is? Alzheimer’s Society, there is a gentleman there—who Tom Stables: It is something that we would like to is one of our regular customers in fact—called Trevor see progress on. We believe it is fair and the right Jarvis, who is the ambassador for the Prime Minister’s thing to be doing. We don’t believe that having an challenge on dementia, who has produced a DVD. inconsistent delivery is in anybody’s interest. That is now incorporated in all our driver training programmes. It explains the issues around dementia, Q91 Chair: Mr Salmon, did the Confederation increasing our staff’s awareness of it and how they become involved in this issue? Did the Confederation can help those passengers who may be suffering lobby the Government and ask for exemption? during their journey. Steven Salmon: Yes, we did. Just today, we have put out a joint release in Worcester with the Royal National Institute for the Blind. A number of blind and partially sighted people are now Q92 Chair: Could you tell us why and what the visiting our Worcester depot, where we employ about views of your members were who wanted that? 250 drivers, to talk to them about their issues and how Steven Salmon: We found ourselves in a position drivers can help them. We will incorporate the where the legislation was going in a very similar awareness and understanding that comes from that in direction to where the UK industry was going anyway, further modules. I could go on; there is a whole range so it would not have been an enormous cultural of examples right across the disability spectrum. We difficulty to introduce it. Our members, given the are finding it very valuable indeed. We are in the Ev 24 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 Steven Salmon, Giles Fearnley and Tom Stables business of carrying more passengers. We are reference to the sorts of examples you mentioned encouraging and helping disabled people and their there if they involve children. We never hesitate to carers to travel. That is good, but, importantly, it is talk to our drivers, explain the issues and try to helping our drivers relate to them and assist them on encourage and help them the next time. There is, their journey. obviously, the stick of disciplinary procedures, but we would much rather work with people and help them Q94 Chair: Mr Stables, your company has also been to understand the issues they might have caused in a involved in driver awareness training. What kind of situation like you are describing, the circumstances evidence do you have of how much difference it has behind that and the danger they might have left a child made to journeys taken by disabled people? in or something like that. We help them to deal with Tom Stables: We think it is making a great difference. passengers, because, yes, it is human nature that some All our drivers now go through CPC training, which people find it difficult to deal with a disabled person includes disability awareness. We have also recently and possibly would rather not. We really work with produced DVD materials, so it is much more available them. Some of the work, as I have just explained, that to people. We find that engaging through champions we are doing as a business—in particular, in with the front line has really worked. We have Worcester with the RNIB—is very much designed to particularly drawn inspiration from Danielle Brown, bring our drivers and partially sighted or blind people the Paralympian, who has been out on our network together for conversations to help. We are focused on and goes to see drivers at our driver drop-ins to this and would take any issue very seriously indeed. highlight the sorts of issues that she and other people Tom Stables: Likewise in terms of treating the face. It is around engagement and this has helped complaint seriously and investigating with the driver more people to make more journeys. It is something the root cause of the problem. In terms of delivery of that we are very actively hoping to encourage. the service, it is important to us, often, that booked assistance is made. We know that, while all our Q95 Chair: Mr Salmon, is there much variation in vehicles have lifts and are accessible, it is not always the requirements of local authorities and others so with the physical infrastructure that they service. contracting services for driver awareness training? Is We may have different needs as a coach operator from this something that is ever specified? a bus operator. While a stop may be okay for a bus, it Steven Salmon: It is very commonly specified. I would say it is more often specified than not. That is may not be for a coach. We urge people to contact us one of the reasons why it is so widespread. because we know where we can serve robustly. All our drivers are briefed in advance so that they Q96 Chair: Have they done that voluntarily or are know who to expect where, which allows them to they required to do it? prepare the vehicle in advance. A little bit of advance Steven Salmon: It depends how you interpret the notice is very helpful for us. public sector equality duty under the Equality Act. There are a number of things that the authorities do Q98 Sarah Champion: It is unfortunate that it has when they are commissioning bus services, including, to get to a complaint. Ms Velmi from Transport for as we have just said, making it a condition of contract All was saying that people should complain, so clearly that you give your drivers appropriate training. You you are echoing that. could also argue under the same Act that they should Tom Stables: Yes; feedback is vital. be procuring buses that have audible and visible Giles Fearnley: I would echo that. information on, but generally speaking they don’t. Q99 Sarah Champion: They can compliment as Q97 Sarah Champion: Mr Fearnley and Mr Stables, well as complain. it was very good to hear about all the training that you Tom Stables: Yes. have put in place. As I declared earlier, I used to run a children’s hospice. Unfortunately, it was standard Q100 Iain Stewart: I would like to ask about the for me to hear from teenage users and parents that a provision of audio-visual equipment in buses. As part beautifully adapted bus would come to the bus stop, of our research for this inquiry, I took a blindfolded see them in their wheelchair or needing additional assistance and just drive straight on. Once people have bus journey with Guide Dogs for the Blind in my had the training, how do you enforce that their constituency. It was a scary and very disorientating mindset is changed so that when they are on the last experience. The bus did not have any audio run of the day, it is raining, they want to get home announcements of stops and I was completely lost as and they don’t want to get out or they don’t want to to where I was on the journey. lower the bus, they are open and accessible? I am Mr Fearnley and Mr Stables, what percentage of your quite sure that, if you ask them at the end of the companies’ fleets will have audio-visual equipment training, they will tell you that, yes, they understand, installed? and, yes, they will do it. If both of you could answer, Giles Fearnley: For ourselves, in England, by the end that would be great. of 2013, we will have about 10% of our fleet installed. Giles Fearnley: I will go first. We take all complaints Tom Stables: On our coach fleet we don’t routinely fit that we receive from customers, whether they are audio-visual equipment. All our drivers are briefed able-bodied or disabled, very seriously indeed and and expected to give announcements tailored to the investigate thoroughly. Obviously, we give particular circumstances. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 25

15 April 2013 Steven Salmon, Giles Fearnley and Tom Stables

Q101 Iain Stewart: The evidence we had from Steven Salmon: There are some interesting Guide Dogs for the Blind was that it would cost developments there. There are two strands going on. between £2,000 and £3,000 per vehicle to install that There is software that sets out to be assistive equipment. Is that a figure you would recognise? technology for people with partial sight or whatever, Giles Fearnley: Yes. £2,000 would buy a system. It but there are also some generally available apps like won’t be the most sophisticated system, but that is Bus Checker, which is quite inexpensive, which will the capital cost, of course. There is also the ongoing monitor where you are. It will give you an alert when maintenance of that. you are getting near your stop. There is an app under test by RNIB Scotland at the moment, which has been Q102 Iain Stewart: You might not fit one in every developed by Traveline Scotland, which is bus immediately, but over a reasonable time period is deliberately setting out to be assistive technology. It it affordable for companies like yours to install this will talk to you and announce the stops to you as you equipment in at least the majority of your fleet? go along the route. It will also tell you when the next Giles Fearnley: As I said in answer to an earlier bus is coming when you are waiting at the stop. There question, we are very much in the business to grow are these things that are very near to coming out into the passenger base. We want to understand how this the public domain, as well as the assisted things that equipment can support that as a business case, as well are there already, like Georgie, which use our data. as supporting individual people. There will be 400 We give Georgie the data on the next buses for buses or so by the end of this year, as I have said. At nothing. That is our industry contribution on that. the moment, we only have them equipped on four or five routes, with probably 70 or 80 buses. We have a Q106 Mr Sanders: Like Mr Stewart, I spent some programme going through the year. It is too small a time with a constituent with a disability that has not number to get a view as to whether we are seeing been mentioned up to now—which was a learning increased passenger numbers as a result, but we do disability. Audio is just as beneficial to them as it is hear the cries being made for this and we want to to somebody with a visual impairment, particularly understand much more how this can benefit. somebody who cannot interpret a timetable, for example, or be absolutely clear about where they need Q103 Iain Stewart: Do you think the 10% figure is to get off the service that they are travelling on. typical for your fellow operators? I am interested to know whether you monitor the Giles Fearnley: I really do not know. It is not a numbers of people with disabilities who are using statistic that we've really collected. your services, or whether that is not something you Steven Salmon: Of course, London sits in one have ever thought of doing. particular place because of iBus, but there are places Tom Stables: With the statistics that we currently outside London where firms have been specifying it monitor, we know how many people book assisted for a number of years and done a bit of retrofitting. In travel. Currently, that is a reasonably small number. places like Swindon and Reading, which would not Last year, it was 539 people. Currently, it is about necessarily immediately jump to mind, there is a lot 60% up year on year, so we are seeing more people of that equipment about, whereas there are other by promoting it. We have about 13,000 disabled coach operators who have not bought a new bus for 20 years. cards that people use to get a discount. Beyond those They are continually buying quite old buses and two measures, it is not something that we specifically running them until they are very old buses. They do monitor unless somebody tells us in advance. not have that sort of equipment now and probably won’t have in the foreseeable future. Q107 Mr Sanders: How does the percentage growth of people with disabilities compare with the Q104 Iain Stewart: Is it fairly easy to retrofit an percentage growth of other passengers? older vehicle, or does it have to be designed into the Tom Stables: It is a phenomenal growth rate bus? compared with the general base. It is a new service Steven Salmon: It is possible, but I would emphasise and the awareness is being pushed, so it is probably that the £2,000 or whatever is just the beginning. You not that great a comparison towards our overall then have to get appropriate material to put on it and growth rate. keep it working. It will probably cost in the matter of hundreds of pounds per year. It might sound like a Q108 Mr Sanders: What about First? little to an organisation like Giles—sorry, you are not Giles Fearnley: The only statistic that would be close an organisation; an organisation like First—whereas, to that would be the number of wheelchair users and if you run 20 old buses, 20 times £2,000 is probably mobility scooter users. We would have no record of more money than you have in the bank. others with disability.

Q105 Iain Stewart: I have a related question. If there Q109 Mr Sanders: Most areas have monopoly is a prohibitive cost to installing vehicles with this providers, but, given that the infrastructure of bus equipment, is there a technological alternative? If stops can be shared, and not everywhere in the visually disabled people were equipped with a special country has the sort of Transport for London resource phone—I don’t understand technology—or something that there is here in the capital, how can you improve that was personal to them that alerted them to where that infrastructure for people with disabilities, such as they were at any point in the route, is that something waiting at the bus stop and having the information that is being explored or could be explored? available either orally or in signage? That is taken for Ev 26 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 Steven Salmon, Giles Fearnley and Tom Stables granted nowadays in London, but it just is not there Q112 Mr Sanders: What do you say to an outside the capital or the main cities. organisation representing people with disabilities that Giles Fearnley: No; it clearly needs willing local says that it ought to be universal and that that should authorities to work with bus companies and to provide be our aspiration? Our aim should be that everywhere the framework for that infrastructure. We are certainly is accessible for people with disabilities, and how we increasingly providing real-time information on our work towards that is what you should be looking at— buses and our services to feed into information, and, not looking at the bare minimum of, “Well, we can if it were to be available, audio systems. We would offer these stops.” How do you move from where we certainly want to encourage authorities. Increasingly, are to what people with a disability have a right to as an industry, let alone those of us who are working expect? in deeper partnership with authorities, this may well Steven Salmon: It is perfectly legitimate to want to be something that develops as time goes on as a move towards that, but, given that there is only as further output from partnership working in local much money as there is, there is just a risk—and we authorities contributing to the sort of infrastructure could have already got ourselves into a position that and information that you are talking about. said, “By 2012 or 2013, you must no longer run a bus Tom Stables: Serving locations and bus stops across that doesn’t have particular features”—that you have the country, we have a lot of local authorities to work equal access to nothing, because the economics don’t with, which we are actively trying to do. We also support running it any more. believe in the technology. As we mentioned earlier, we have Coach Tracker, which enables you to see Q113 Chair: I want to ask you about wheelchair where you are and the services, and where they are in access. We have had a lot of representations about the relationship to you. That is putting tools in people’s ability of people who are in wheelchairs to be able to hands. Clearly, the integration of our systems with the get on a bus when they want to. How do you deal with myriad across the country is a significant challenge, that on buses? Does the driver have a responsibility to as you would imagine. make sure that wheelchair users can get into the right space? What happens if somebody else is there with Q110 Mr Sanders: Does the Confederation have a a buggy or something else? How do you deal with it, view on this? Mr Fearnley? Steven Salmon: I will give you an example of Giles Fearnley: something where quite a bit of thought and joint The issue lies very much with the working has gone on in the last few years. That is driver. Sometimes it can prove a very difficult one for how you put out quite old-fashioned information at him to resolve. Thankfully, while you hear of these the bus stop about when the buses are coming. There issues from time to time, by far and away in the are a number of ways of doing that. There is the old- majority of instances where a wheelchair user wants fashioned way, which is a fantastic amount of to use a bus, even if somebody is already in that space information that not everybody understands. We and perhaps with a pushchair or whatever, it is our local authority partners are gradually moving accommodated. It really is only the very few where towards things that are in bigger print and have less problems occur, but, nevertheless, there are too many information, but are clearer. The research suggests that of them. As part of our training, we give drivers more people can make use of that. That kind of conflict training and advice as to how to deal with dialogue and development goes on all the time. situations and to try to positively encourage somebody to move for a wheelchair user. Normally that works, Q111 Mr Sanders: What about the divide between although there are occasions when there are issues. who pays for the infrastructure? Is there a view there, The one thing the driver cannot deal with is if the because local authorities are cash-strapped and wheelchair space is already full up with wheelchair companies have to look at the bottom line of what is users and there is somebody else waiting at the next effective investment? Does the Confederation have a bus stop. That is just one of those situations where view on that? we can’t— Steven Salmon: Economics always speaks quite clearly in these kinds of areas. It is a very local matter Q114 Chair: What about when the spaces are being usually about whether there are enough people who used by somebody with a buggy and a child in it? would benefit from improving a particular piece of What happens then? infrastructure to make it worth doing. You can, to Giles Fearnley: Very often, in defence of our some extent, sidestep this. If you have good enough passengers, the person with the buggy will themselves information or data on where the stop is flat and deal with the situation and move aside for the straight, the bus can get next to it and deploy its wheelchair. That is by far and away the norm. equipment—I know Tom has wonderful information Occasionally the driver has to ask. Again, normally, on all his stops—and you can find out that four of the the issue is resolved, but every so often we get that five stops in a town are accessible, provided you can very difficult case where the person absolutely refuses feed that information to the person who needs that to move and the issue becomes exposed. It is accessibility who is going to catch the bus, that is extraordinarily unfortunate for the wheelchair user, as probably a better answer than spending tens of it is for our driver trying to deal with the situation. He thousands of pounds on making the fifth of the five cannot force something when his powers of stops accessible. persuasion are failing, but in our training we try to Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 27

15 April 2013 Steven Salmon, Giles Fearnley and Tom Stables help our drivers to deal with such situations and know members was threatened with legal action on the basis how to approach people and be persuasive. Sometimes that his requirement that any pushchair brought on to we find that, while somebody with a buggy may his bus must be capable of being folded was initially be very difficult, the force of the other people discriminatory against women. There are many issues on the bus, just by glaring and everything else, will to resolve here. make the situation melt away. That can happen, but, yes, every so often we get one that just doesn’t. Q118 Chair: What are the issues that we should be aware of where the law is unclear or interpretations Q115 Chair: Do we have proper records of how vary? many incidents occur? We have had a lot of response Steven Salmon: As I have tried to say, it is not exactly from people who have talked to us about it. a matter of whether the law is clear or not, but Giles Fearnley: I do not have the number now, but precisely what should happen to protect everybody’s certainly in First we would be able to work out how rights and interests when conflict arises—that is many complaints we get on this particular subject. We disabled people, the staff who are entitled to work would also be able to look through how many drivers in a safe environment and the other passengers. It is have reported, “There’s been an issue at so-and-so bus extremely difficult to deal with legally. I do not think stop because…”. We would encourage a driver in that any of our members would have failed to recognise situation to let us know so that they don’t feel alone the scenario that Giles was talking about a few in this, and it may be we can get the wheelchair user’s moments ago, but it is very difficult to bring the law address and make an apology. We would have some in to solve an issue where there is some conflict over data. I do not think it will record everyone, but we a limited resource. would have some data. It will be very small numbers, although I realise that for those that it affects it is really big. Q119 Chair: Yes, but what are the issues that the Confederation, representing the industry, has Q116 Chair: Mr Stables, is this an issue that you deal identified? Are there any issues that the Confederation with as well? has identified and is raising? Tom Stables: It is not an issue that we believe is Steven Salmon: Only to the extent we have identified significant to us. As we have said, we operate in a with DFT that this is not something where we have slightly different way with regard to how coach said this can be sorted by law. accessibility is dealt with. Practically, we do ask people to book ahead, because in terms of the way Q120 Chair: But, as a Confederation, you have not the coach is configured we have to move seats for a taken any steps to identify issues where there are wheelchair to be fixed in if a passenger is not going problems. to transfer from their chair to the normal coach seat. Steven Salmon: We know what the issues are where So, in a practical sense, it works better. Our drivers, there are problems, but that is not the same thing as in the same way, are trained and encouraged to deal going to Government and saying, “We have identified with those circumstances. If another passenger is these problems and here are our ideas for laws to sitting in the chairs or seats that get modified, they are solve them.” asked to move. It is that position that we ask our staff to deal with. It is not something that we are aware of Q121 Chair: It is not necessarily about laws. I am causing a major problem. trying to work out what the role of the Confederation is in relation to the rights of disabled people to travel Q117 Chair: Mr Salmon, there is a dispute about the and whether the Confederation, as an organisation legal position in relation to this and in relation to the representing the industry, has identified problem areas. meaning of the provision that operators must make a It appears that they have not, unless I am “reasonable adjustment” to allow disabled people to misunderstanding what you are saying. travel. One of the areas where this is an issue is in Steven Salmon: No. We have identified the problem relation to the different use of space with wheelchairs area that there is conflict over the use of space on or other users. Is this something that the buses of a particular kind. Of course we want to Confederation is involved in? Have you raised any resolve that in the interests of our users, including issues about the lack of legal clarity on this issue? disabled people, but we have yet to come up with the Steven Salmon: I would not say there is a lack of perfect solution to that. legal clarity, except to the extent that it is always difficult to apply the concept of reasonableness to a given set of circumstances. Our main function in this Q122 Chair: You told me earlier about local has been to stimulate discussion between our authorities virtually all seeking training for drivers as members, and from time to time with the DFT on part of legislation. Does the nature of that requirement behalf of our members, to try and find a resolution to vary a great deal? what is a very contentious area. Of course we know Steven Salmon: In essence, no. It is usually aimed at what the law says. We help our members to follow raising drivers’ awareness of different kinds of the law, but disabled people are not the only people disability and appropriate ways of working with who have rights under equality legislation. One of our people who have those disabilities. Ev 28 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 Steven Salmon, Giles Fearnley and Tom Stables

Q123 Chair: Would the Confederation know about Q124 Chair: I am interested to know if the content the nature of the training that is being given and if it of the training varies from one place to another. varies from place to place? Steven Salmon: It is very similar. Steven Salmon: We don’t compile data on that, Chair: Thank you very much for coming and although, if the Committee wants it, I am sure I could answering our questions. ﬁnd some approved syllabuses for these courses.

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: David Mapp, Commercial Director, Association of Train Operating Companies, Gareth Williams, Director of Regulatory Affairs, Eurostar, and Margaret Hickish, Access and Inclusion Manager, Network Rail, gave evidence.

Q125 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the Q130 Chair: Mr Williams, what about Eurostar and Transport Select Committee. Would you give your training for staff? name and organisation? Gareth Williams: We revised and revamped our Margaret Hickish: I am Margaret Hickish from training on disability and mobility access issues last Network Rail, where I am the Access and Inclusion July. I think that is much improved and we are Manager. incorporating that in our current and future training Gareth Williams: I am Gareth Williams from Eurostar going forward. We have worked with various groups where I am Director of Regulatory Affairs. to try and get that right. There is always capacity to David Mapp: I am David Mapp. I am the Commercial improve. The big issue for all operators is making sure Director at the Association of Train Operating that the training that is given is then applied Companies. consistently in practice and trying to join up what we and our staff do with other locations where people are Q126 Chair: Are you satisfied with the degree and continuing their journey with others—and to get that interface correct. nature of the training given to your staff to enable people with a disability to be able to board trains and feel comfortable with the journey? Q131 Chair: Ms Hickish, are you satisfied that the David Mapp: Yes, broadly we are. In preparation for training given is adequate and can cover a whole range of disabilities? today’s hearing I reviewed three sets of training Margaret Hickish: Absolutely. Network Rail has just courses that three different train companies provided. reviewed all of our training, particularly in the light It is comprehensive training in terms of legislation, of what we learned from the Games. We intend to set the specific rights of disabled people, appropriate out this new programme; so we are on a journey to behaviours and practical issues like loading deliver this. We are going to use disabled people to wheelchairs on to trains and so on, and generally the deliver this training so that our staff get to talk to provision of support and information. disabled people when they are being trained. I think that is particularly important because real life Q127 Chair: Do all staff receive training? experience makes a big difference to how people can David Mapp: Staff that are directly engaged in empathise with travellers. supporting disabled passengers all receive training. Q132 Chair: When is this going to start? Q128 Chair: Do you raise awareness for the disabled Margaret Hickish: Next week, literally. traveller of their right to have a taxi to take them to Chair: That is timely. an accessible station, if the station they are at is not Margaret Hickish: Absolutely. accessible? David Mapp: Yes. If the best solution for that Q133 Chair: What form will that take? How will it particular disabled passenger is that we book an work? accessible taxi for them from the station from which Margaret Hickish: There will be a full day’s they want to start their journey to the next accessible disability awareness training, which is part of a week- station or a station where we can provide our staff long training session. People will also be trained in support and assistance, then, yes, we make them fully safety and things like putting down the boarding aware of that. ramps; so there will be the physical activity of putting down boarding ramps. We are spending a day on Q129 Chair: Are they always made aware of it or is disability awareness training so that all of our it something they have to inquire about? customer-facing staff will have the confidence to talk David Mapp: They are made aware of it if they to disabled people, but also so that disabled people specifically book assistance, but it is something that is can feel confident that this is not the first time our also generally featured in train companies’ DPPPs— staff have ever encountered a disabled person. Disabled People’s Protection Policies—which are published on websites and made freely available to Q134 Chair: What kind of feedback do you get disabled passengers. about the effectiveness of what you are doing? Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 29

15 April 2013 David Mapp, Gareth Williams and Margaret Hickish

Margaret Hickish: So far, our feedback has been account when designing our facilities, services and particularly positive. People have found that, because support for disabled travellers. it is a different type of training, it is much more about reaching people on a more emotional level rather than Q138 Sarah Champion: My idea was that it did not just telling them about the law and all the rules they necessarily have to be a disabled person taking on that must follow. It is much more about allowing people role but someone who could take on the responsibility to empathise and understand that disabled travellers for accessibility. I wonder why there could not be one want to be impetuous and be able to live life like in 2,500 stations. everybody else, but also that disabled people have David Mapp: Many of the stations are unstaffed halts some terrific lives and it is not always leisure travel. in rural areas. I think it would be somewhat That is particularly important to get across. impractical in that context. We are certainly happy to have a look at it in terms of our larger stations. Q135 Sarah Champion: I would like to declare an interest in that I am an ambassador for Whizz-Kidz. Q139 Mr Sanders: Mr Mapp, I want to ask you Both Whizz-Kidz and Trailblazers suggested in their about Passenger Assist and monitoring the numbers written evidence that accessibility ambassadors or of people that use that service. How much of an champions would be a really good thing to have in increase have you seen, if there is an increase, in the most of the key stations, if not all the stations. number of people using that service? Leading on from what you have just been saying, I David Mapp: It is perhaps worth putting Passenger wonder if you support that or if you could see a Assist, to start with, in the context of the overall danger that people might just say, “Okay, that’s their number of disabled passengers that we have on the problem,” and others can abdicate responsibility. rail network. Using the National Passenger Survey Margaret Hickish: One of the big challenges is that, and published data about passenger volumes, we if you identify a single ambassador, they become the estimate that there are roughly 72 million journeys by only point of contact. It can also be an issue that the disabled passengers every year. We estimate that that staff only really identify with the disability of that has increased by about 58% over the last five years, individual. That is a major challenge, particularly for so there has been a significant increase in the number people who have hidden disabilities. Hidden of journeys by disabled passengers. Only a very small disabilities are one of the great areas that people don’t proportion of those passengers use Passenger Assist. really understand. Parts of our training programme There were roughly 1 million Passenger Assist will bring in people who have hidden disabilities to bookings last year, but many single journeys entail talk to people about it. I already have some volunteers more than one journey. A booking may entail where people have mental health issues, and people assistance at the start of the journey, at your who have other conditions such as diabetes and interchange point and at your destination station as epilepsy can come along, as well as some blind well. It is a rather lower number than 1 million in people, who are all very keen to do this sort of terms of the number of passenger journeys. training. It is about giving people a positive We don’t specifically have data on the growth in the experience of disabled people. It is also very use of Passenger Assist. My sense is that passenger important that people have a positive experience assistance has grown more generally, but Passenger before they feel it is something that becomes a burden. Assist more recently, over the past five years. I do not That is speaking from personal experience rather than have data to support that supposition, but, by analogy, anything else. It is really important that people feel it one would expect there to have been growth, given is a positive thing to do. that we have seen significant growth in the general number of disabled passengers using the rail network. Q136 Sarah Champion: Mr Mapp, leading on from that, do you think that an accessibility champion or Q140 Mr Sanders: We took oral evidence that the model of having volunteers going to the station is suggested that some passengers with disabilities don’t something that you could advocate to others? trust Passenger Assist. Are you aware of those David Mapp: We have 2,500 stations, so you clearly complaints and those concerns from people with can’t have a champion for every station. disabilities? David Mapp: Yes. Passenger Assist, I should explain, Q137 Sarah Champion: Why? is the name of the assistance booking service that we David Mapp: It is an idea that we would be happy to introduced last year. Booked passenger assistance has look at in principle, but I share some of Margaret’s been a challenge for us in the past and we would concerns. It is important that it isn’t just one freely admit that. There has been a particular focus individual with one disability who represents the over the last three years on improving both the quality whole disability community. We clearly need to take and the consistency of delivery. A big step forward into account a whole range of disabilities. Train was the introduction of the new Passenger Assist companies at the moment do that with passenger system last year. That provided the basis for a more panels. Some of them have specific passenger panels consistent delivery of assistance to disabled just composed of disabled passengers. At a national passengers. Our sense now is that there has been a level, we retain links with a wide variety of disability significant step change improvement. We are organisations and parliamentary groups and so on as confident that we do deliver good quality assistance well. It is important to take that broad picture into on a consistent basis. Ev 30 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 David Mapp, Gareth Williams and Margaret Hickish

That is not to say that we get it right the whole time. that you might require. If you feel that you need more There are clearly challenges that remain. Assistance structured assistance, then we are happy to provide during periods of disruption is a challenge that we are that as well, but there is a 24-hour booking period at well aware of and we need to address. It goes wrong the moment to provide that assistance. in other circumstances from time to time. We very much regard our passenger assistance as something Q143 Chair: Is that ad hoc assistance something that where we need to employ an approach of continuous is seriously provided? You said you can provide an ad improvement. We have to continue to focus on hoc service. I have had an example very recently of a incremental improvements. disabled person who requires assistance at the station, We have just implemented a wave of enhancements to who booked a seat on a train the previous day late in the Passenger Assist system itself. This year we plan the evening. When she arrived, there was no one to to focus on staff training, staff behaviour and also help her. That is according to the rules. Would there passenger education. It is something that we very be no way that could be changed? much see as improving still further in the future. David Mapp: In that case it sounds as though assistance was booked, if I understand it correctly, and Q141 Mr Sanders: Will any of those improvements we failed to provide that assistance. That is an enable people to make or change their plans at short example of us failing to provide the service that we notice, which is one of the complaints? offered. That is something we would always David Mapp: Yes. We are aware of the fact that some investigate in every instance. In terms of ad hoc disabled people and groups feel that 24-hour booking assistance, there are clearly some practical constraints. is too long. It is something that we keep an open mind If a disabled passenger turns up at an unstaffed rural about. If we can find ways of reducing that pre- halt, then clearly we cannot provide very much in the booking requirement or perhaps at larger stations way of assistance, but, if they go to a staffed station, allow “turn up and go”, we are happy to do that. for instance, and approach a member of staff and ask There are two things. First of all, it is important to put for help, then, yes, we will provide that help. our passenger assistance and booked assistance into context. It is less than 1% of disabled passengers that Q144 Iain Stewart: My question follows on from the make use of that. We are to a large extent now a turn- Chair’s questioning. The Committee conducted an up-and-go railway as far as disabled people are inquiry into the future of the rail industry quite concerned. Secondly, there are some real practical recently. One of the trends we identified, because issues in terms of reducing that 24-hour booking people are increasingly buying their tickets online or requirement. For instance, we have to make sure in at machines, would be a move of staff from behind some cases that staff are rostered at non-staff stations the ticket office desk to a front-facing role in the to provide assistance. If we are providing an station. To what extent are you trying to use that accessible taxi to take a passenger from the station development as an opportunity to provide disability from which they would like to start their journey to training for everyone so that you do not have to roster the next accessible station or to a station where we specific people to be there so much for a particular can provide staff assistance, in many parts of the customer but all staff have the capability of providing country there are not many accessible taxis. We have assistance when required? to make sure that we book ahead to get the taxi that David Mapp: In general, all our customer-facing is required. We keep an open mind, but there are some staff—and that includes retail staff in ticket offices— real practical issues there that we need to resolve. would receive disability training.

Q142 Chair: I am not clear how hard you are trying Q145 Iain Stewart: So there is no additional to resolve the practical issues on providing a turn-up- programme needed when ticket staff move from and-go service. Are you trying to provide a turn-up- behind the desk to a front-facing role. and-go service where it can be done? In your answers, David Mapp: Those ticket staff, in general, will have you have spoken about situations where there are received the training that is standard for all customer- clearly problems, but it is not very clear if you are facing staff. They will already have a good knowledge trying to provide that service where it can be of disability issues and the needs of disabled achieved. passengers. If, through ticket office restructuring, they David Mapp: In essence, the improvements that have are redeployed on to stations, if there is a need for been made to the accessibility of the rail network in them to have further specialist training—for instance, recent years, both with regard to stations and rolling in the practical aspects of wheelchair loading on to stock, mean that very large numbers of disabled trains—then, of course, we will provide that training, people now feel sufficiently confident not to book yes. specific assistance. The numbers would suggest that the vast majority do just that. For those disabled Q146 Iain Stewart: Do you think the numbers passengers who are perhaps more severely disabled or involved—the redeployed staff—will deliver a step who lack confidence in using the rail network, or change in assistance for disabled passengers so that perhaps are trying it for the first time, we provide the they can have the turn-up-and-go assistance? booked assistance service for those passenger groups. David Mapp: It is certainly true that where staff are It is very much our position that, if you feel confident redeployed—and it is clear that they won’t always be enough to turn up and go, then please do that and we redeployed—disabled passengers will receive a better will provide whatever assistance on an ad hoc basis level of support than they currently do. At the Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 31

15 April 2013 David Mapp, Gareth Williams and Margaret Hickish moment, retail staff sit behind a plate glass window the precise facilities and services that should be selling tickets. There is very little in the way of offered to disabled passengers on board trains, support that they can provide, apart from providing including things like wheelchair spaces, grab rails and information if requested. If they are redeployed on to so on. There is an industry deadline of 2020 for platforms, they can take a much more active support compliance with RVAR, now superseded by PRM role. TSI. It is by that date that all rolling stock must be compliant. Q147 Iain Stewart: I would like to ask a different The impact of that on rolling stock procurement is that question on the rolling stock that is available. There all new builds of rolling stock are fully compliant with has been a significant improvement in the design of PRM TSI and RVAR. Existing rolling stock is being trains that have been introduced in the last five to 10 progressively refurbished to meet those requirements. years. There is wheelchair space, audio-visual The key determinant there is the heavy refurbishment facilities and the like. Quite a bit of the British rolling cycle. It is a six-year cycle for major refurbishment of stock is getting towards the end of its lifespan, so rolling stock. That is a long-winded way of saying there is an opportunity in the future to add in that the industry is working towards a 2020 deadline additional facilities. What sort of discussions are for full compliance with the very detailed going on with the disability groups as to what specifications for disability design and services within additional improvements could be put in place when rolling stock for the domestic rail industry. new trains are ordered? Margaret Hickish: Network Rail does not cover Q148 Iain Stewart: Thank you. I appreciate that trains. That is for my colleagues here. there are these restrictions, but there is still some Iain Stewart: I am sorry; I was looking at you flexibility for train operators to specify additional collectively. facilities within this. I visited a large railway Gareth Williams: We are in the fortunate position of manufacturer just last week. The managing director buying some new trains. was saying that they are constantly in discussions with Iain Stewart: I have just been to see them being built. TOCs to say, “Can we have this additional feature?” Gareth Williams: They are great. We have been You are the ones who will get feedback from your involved in those kinds of discussions with groups passengers. Is there a facility through ATOC whereby about improving the design and, importantly, about those can be combined and fed into the manufacturers refurbishing all our existing trains, which suffer from and the DFT to improve facilities further? many of the defects of the old rolling stock, to exactly David Mapp: It happens at two levels. As you have the same standard. One of the opportunities for us experienced, it happens at ATOC level where TOCs, coming out of that is that the new trains will have based on feedback from disabled passengers, relay better passenger information on board, which is those comments and that feedback to rolling stock available to all passengers down from the roof of the manufacturers. train. It will also enable you to plug in your own At ATOC, we have a very active disability group that devices on board the train, and either get supplemental involves all train companies, where best practice is information from ourselves provided to you or to use shared. We plan to take that to a further stage during whatever devices and apps you have yourself. When the course of this year, with the formation of the new you get a new train in, it is an opportunity not just in National Rail Accessibility Group modelled on the terms of the physical infrastructure of the train itself Cycle Rail Working Group, which has been effective but how it is used, how staff are retrained and all the in delivering improvements in the cycle rail area. The customer care elements of it. There is a really big intention is to develop that group on the basis that it opportunity there for us and we are looking to take it. will be multi-stakeholder and will include David Mapp: There are several things to say in the representatives from disability organisations and train context of the domestic railway. The first thing is that companies, as well as stakeholders such as Passenger train companies themselves are now little involved in Focus and so on. The intention would be that we focus the procurement of rolling stock. It is essentially a improvements to the services that we provide, Department for Transport responsibility in including rolling stock, around that group. That will conjunction with the rolling stock companies—the be a further way of ensuring that the views of disabled ROSCOs. passengers are taken into account. The second point to make perhaps is that this is a highly specified and highly regulated area. The RVAR Q149 Chair: Mr Williams, how do you ensure that specified in some considerable detail the facilities that there is a consistent standard of support for disabled should be provided for disabled passengers. The people going through the variety of stations that RVAR requirements have now been overtaken by the Eurostar deals with—or can you do that? PRM TSI requirements, which is the technical Gareth Williams: It is through constant training of specification for interoperability for persons with staff and trying to work on the feedback that we are reduced mobility. That particular TSI, as indeed all given. That is much the same for all our passengers. TSIs, originates from the European Commission in We want to offer the same, consistently good service Brussels, and, more specifically, from the European to all our passengers. We try surveying passengers and Rail Agency. Effectively, they are a series of technical following them through every stage of their journey. standards that have been developed and agreed at a It shows us where we need to focus. European level that now apply to all domestic rolling For instance, we did a survey recently of disabled stock. They set out in some very considerable detail passengers, and that showed a big fall-off in Ev 32 Transport Committee: Evidence

15 April 2013 David Mapp, Gareth Williams and Margaret Hickish satisfaction between your treatment on arrival at the Gareth Williams: No, we don’t. station—the assistance you get on arrival—and on departing the train. Again, that is a consistent issue Q154 Chair: You have no powers, have you? that we see across a lot of passenger groups. They say Gareth Williams: No, we don’t have powers. The we have to join up better when we are enabling people reason for part of the hesitation is that you can give, to connect or get off the train on to the Paris Metro, if you like, a technical or contractual answer. No, we or, if you are connecting through Brussels, on to an don’t have powers. We could enter into, and we do, onward journey with Thalys or Deutsche Bahn. The feedback you get, whether it is through the formal assistance service level agreements. We could agree survey or a text feedback or Fizzback—an awful lot information sharing and so on and so forth, but often of feedback now comes instantaneously on Twitter, it comes down to the training, quality and attitude of which we follow very closely—enables you to better the staff who are actually giving effect to those identify where you are having issues and try to find agreements that you have entered into. I am very solutions to that, whether that is through training or hesitant to say, yes, we could stitch together a series trying to work with our partner railways. of service level agreements and then it is solved end to end. I think it is a much more cultural issue than that. Q150 Chair: When you identify the problems, what I would echo what Margaret said earlier. One of the are you able to do to deal with them? Do you have things that was really good for us about the the authority to change things as needed in different Paralympics was that it was a fantastically positive stations in different countries? experience for people throughout the company. It is Gareth Williams: Some. One of the issues is that we something that we want to do with all our passengers. have different providers at different stations. At St We have disabled passengers, schoolchildren and Pancras International, for instance, it is all our own people from overseas, who have language issues and staff. We have different providers for mobility service so on and so forth. We want our staff to deal with at Gare du Nord and at Lille. At Brussels, it is SNCB every section of passengers in an intuitive and positive staff. More than a quarter of our passengers in any way. We need to get that kind of culturally positive case connect, so they are moving on to different approach in trying to respond to the individual needs partners. Sometimes the services that are provided are of our customers, which is the necessary foundation very good. For instance, the Accès Plus website and for the more specialist training that needs to take place service that SNCF provides is very good, but it is very on top. It is trying to get that consistently across our difficult to join that up, for instance, with something company and the companies within which we work to like Passenger Access in the UK. The systems are designed around operating in one country. Trying to ensure that more technical provisions happen in get them to work across an end-to-end journey so that practice. the passenger has a consistent experience throughout their journey requires an awful lot of engagement Q155 Chair: So it is a culturally positive approach and effort. that we need. Gareth Williams: It does not stop there, but it Q151 Chair: Can you achieve it? certainly has to start there. Gareth Williams: Yes. Q156 Chair: Ms Hickish, how does Network Rail Q152 Chair: You have mentioned an example of prioritise making stations fully accessible? How do good practice. Can you tell us where it isn’t very you decide the programme? good? Margaret Hickish: The first thing to say is that we Gareth Williams: I can certainly point to an example. definitely know in which direction we are going. We One of my non-executive directors has mobility are going only in one direction. We are going to make issues. We were arranging a board meeting that went things more accessible. We are planning to use on a visit to see where our new trains were being built. inclusive design rather than the universal design. The trip on SNCB into Brussels was very good. The Inclusive design was what was used throughout the assistance on the trip out did not arrive. At Cologne Games. It is about people thinking about everyone station, assistance was provided but for the wrong train. The taxi on arrival at Cologne was excellent. It when they design. can be a very mixed bag, even when you have put The principal way we decide on what improvements quite a lot of effort into trying to do all the pre- will be made is through the Access for All booking and talk to people at each stage of the programme. We sit with the DFT and prioritise using journey. It was echoing the comments of one of the that. That also allows us to prioritise those things that previous people giving evidence. Too often, a lot of it will not be included in the Access for All programme depends on who you happen to get on a given day. because we have had to work through all of those Trying to improve the consistency of that is really processes. That is based on the number of passengers important. and the cost, as well as the practicality of making something more accessible. Some places are much Q153 Chair: But can you do it? You are talking easier and involve less major works to make them about what needs to be done and what the problem is. more accessible than others, but it is principally based From where Eurostar is, do you have powers or do on the number of passengers that we are going to have you have influence? through a station. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 33

15 April 2013 David Mapp, Gareth Williams and Margaret Hickish

Q157 Chair: Can you tell me why only one of the Q160 Chair: This is from street to train. Are we Crossrail stations that Network Rail is responsible for talking about the same thing? has step-free access from street to train? Margaret Hickish: Yes, yes. Well, from street to train, Margaret Hickish: I have a list of the stations that no. Most of those will be step-free stations and will will be made accessible, which is quite a long list. require assistance.

Q158 Chair: But what about this? I have asked you Q161 Chair: Why is that the case? Why isn’t work about a problem. being done on more stations? Margaret Hickish: Which station is it that you are Margaret Hickish: Difﬁculties in raising platforms to saying has been made— meet the differing needs of different trains is the main challenge. The reason it was possible on the tube was Q159 Chair: I am asking you why there is only one. because all the trains are the same height on the tube Margaret Hickish: My understanding is that there is lines. Network Rail trains vary in height. As a result, not only one. That is where I am at just now. My it is more challenging on platforms to be used by understanding is that Slough and Chadwell Heath are other trains. already accessible. Maidenhead, West Drayton, Hayes & Harlington, Southall, West Ealing, Ealing Q162 Chair: We may pursue that further through Broadway, Acton Mainline, Forest Gate, Ilford, correspondence. Goodmayes, Romford, Gidea Park and Harold Wood Margaret Hickish: I will give you a fuller answer. will be made more accessible. Brentwood will be in Chair: Thank you very much for coming and the Access for All programme as well. answering our questions. Ev 34 Transport Committee: Evidence

Monday 13 May 2013

Members present: Mrs Louise Ellman (Chair)

Sarah Champion Adrian Sanders Kwasi Kwarteng Iain Stewart ______

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Bruce Thompson, Head of Transport Co-ordination Service, Devon County Council, Liz Chandler, Director of Corporate Development, Merseytravel, and Stephen Golden, Head of Equality and Corporate Sustainability, Transport for London, gave evidence.

Q163 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the it is important that we keep our eye on the ball around Transport Committee. Would you please give your those things. name and organisation? Access to information around accessibility is a key in Bruce Thompson: I am Bruce Thompson from Devon driving improvements. If people know how accessible county council. the transport system is, they are more likely to use it. Liz Chandler: I am Liz Chandler from Merseytravel. One of the things we have certainly learned over the Stephen Golden: I am Stephen Golden from last year is that the most appropriate and accessible Transport for London. information that we give can drive people’s perception of how accessible the network is already. One of the Q164 Chair: What would you say are the major challenges we face is that people continue to believe challenges that you are facing at the moment in that transport is inaccessible when, actually, it is much achieving equal access to transport for disabled people more accessible than it has ever been. Encouraging in your areas? disabled people and their organisations to recognise Bruce Thompson: One of the challenges is that, the level of accessibility that already exists there is a plainly, there is more to be done. With very difficult challenge we face. revenue budget pressures, the cost of further improvements is inevitably being weighed against the Q166 Chair: Has the Equality Act made any cost of maintaining service support. That balance is difference to what you have done? quite a tricky one to manage. There are improvements Stephen Golden: The Equality Act, its predecessor that could cost significant amounts of money, but, if Acts and predecessor duties have been incredibly that is at the expense of ongoing support for services, useful in focusing the minds of service providers, bus clearly that is a difficult one to achieve. operators, train operators and the like to say, “This is the minimum that you need to do in order to comply Q165 Chair: Ms Chandler, what are the major with the legislation.” However, from a disability challenges you are facing at the moment? perspective, the one thing that really transformed the Liz Chandler: I would agree. Budgets are a key way in which we approached accessibility in challenge at the moment. Obviously, they are revenue- Transport for London was the duty to involve disabled funded, taking it forward. It is also sometimes the people in the design and delivery of transport fragmented nature of public transport and trying to solutions. That has transformed the way we have been ensure that we move forward in an holistic and able to provide accessibility to transport in London. integrated manner for the benefit of the individual. In relation to customers with disabilities, it has to start Q167 Chair: Has the Equality Act made a difference with the individual and a personalisation approach. That can sometimes be quite challenging when you to what you are doing on Merseyside, Ms Chandler? are looking at the plethora of bodies and the Liz Chandler: Not specifically. We have a long legislation, and then trying to do what is best for all history in Merseytravel of ensuring that we engage your customers as well. with members of the community who have a disability Stephen Golden: Absolutely; there is always pressure in relation to transport. From the 1990s we have been on resources, especially where there are major doing a range of initiatives. That has provided a focus infrastructure improvements that need to be and we have obviously worked with our operators and undertaken to deliver accessibility. An issue that we other bodies to help to take it forward. It has also need to deal with is the fact that, the more supplemented the journey that we were already on in accessible we make the public transport system, the Merseytravel. more expectations are raised about what more we can and should do. There is an awful lot of work that still Q168 Chair: Has it made a difference in Devon? needs to be done to make sure that we continue to Bruce Thompson: Yes. We are at a stage whereby the involve disabled people in the design of the solutions Act has been enormously important. We are now at around accessibility rather than just see that a step- the stage where it is the soft behavioural changes that free solution is what needs to be put in. There are all need to align with that, making sure that everyone in sorts of nuances around accessibility that we can public transport delivery is fully on board with it. It deploy that will make a huge difference, and I think is quite a challenge to make sure that all the drivers Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 35

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden are aware of not only what their responsibilities are in use to see how it works. I feel it is also very much but how to deal with things positively and correctly. about ensuring that we listen to the complaints that we get. We work with our operators to take access. Q169 Sarah Champion: Mr Golden, I was very As my colleagues have said, we know that driver interested in your comments about perception. I went attitude is absolutely critical. Any transport worker to a conference a few weeks ago where disabled can make a difference, and it only takes one bad people were saying that they did not trust the systems experience for all that good work we have done in that were put in place. They would have one example getting somebody to use public transport to be undone where the system broke down for them and then they in a matter of minutes by somebody who does not would never use it again. I am aware that there are provide help or who is indifferent to somebody’s lots of initiatives being put in place to make the specific need. services more accessible, but that perception is still a big boundary to people. Could you give some Q170 Sarah Champion: Mr Golden, I am going to examples of how you are trying to challenge that? If come back and be mean to you. You said it was not your colleagues have other examples, that would be so much about perception but about reliability, giving most welcome. the impression that it has not been too reliable to date. Stephen Golden: First, I am not sure I would Is that true and is it getting better in Transport for challenge the perception that reliability is an important London? accessibility factor. The predictability of the journey Stephen Golden: Are you talking about the reliability outcome is incredibly important for all of us, and it is of the system? There is so much data around transport even more important if you are a disabled person who provision in London and its service reliability. I do relies perhaps on additional assistance to complete not have that data to hand, but I am pretty confident your journey. The engagement and involvement that that we can see an upward trend across the transport we have had with disabled people has made that network in London. I am sure we can provide the incredibly clear to us. They say, “The reliability and latest reliability figures to the Select Committee via predictability of the journey are what will make the its secretariat. difference about whether I choose to use mainstream public transport, to rely on my car, and therefore Q171 Iain Stewart: I would like to ask about the perhaps the good offices of my friends or family, or lessons learned from planning for the Paralympic and whether I use door-to-door transport so that at least I Olympic Games last year. The general consensus is know I am not going to be stranded in a place I am that they were a success in terms of planning disabled not familiar with.” access. Now that we have had a few months to reflect A lot of the work that we have done around improving on the experience, are there any lessons learned that reliability is perhaps not something, certainly within you would do differently? Maybe there was something Transport for London, that is perceived by the general that you did not provide and should have, or did population as accessibility work. Improvements in the provide but it did not quite work. signalling on the London underground are all about Stephen Golden: It is difficult to say that we would improving reliability of the service. The do anything specifically differently. One of the things improvements that we have been making in the street that we did in preparation for the Games is think about environment are about making bus journeys much the whole of the transport provision from the door-to- more predictable. In addition to that, there is real-time journey information that can give smart information door nature of the journey and how people plan their about what happens if something goes wrong. Those journeys to delivery of their journey on the day. are the things that we are putting together not only to Would we do anything differently or something more improve reliability but to deal with the anxiety that that we had not done? I do not think we have potential disruption can cause. identified anything that we should have done that we Liz Chandler: From a Merseytravel perspective, it is didn’t do. the wider physical accessibility. Older people Getting information out of people proved to be one of sometimes have perceptions, and it is about working the key successes of provision for transport during the with groups representing those who have disabilities Games anyway, whether for disabled or non-disabled and with our customers. One of the things we have people. One of the things we have learned from that found quite useful is travel training and buddying. It is the importance of reliable and proper information, is sometimes difficult because of stop-start funding, in real-time if at all possible, in building confidence which can cause challenges. We put support in place in making journeys. I would not say that there is through travel trainers or by providing buddies to anything we would do differently. I would not say build confidence, even if it is just for one short there is anything we failed to do that we should have journey that somebody does. That then enables them done, but there are always things we could have to have independence. Once people have overcome done better. that first fear, they are more confident in going We had thousands of people out there volunteering forward. and supporting people, but there were still times when We know from listening to our customers that they the transport system was absolutely packed and have a fear of embarrassment, or a fear of not people’s experience was not perhaps as comfortable knowing how to work their way around the system. as it might have been. Maybe we could have done a We have worked with our operators to try to little bit more with that, but generally I feel that we encourage people to use the bus or train when it is not did London proud in what we did with transport Ev 36 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden during the Games rather than looking for anything we sustainable transport is considered as the means to get might have done differently. to an event. There are lots of lessons that can be learned from a planning perspective about ensuring Q172 Iain Stewart: Are there any initiatives to share that due consideration is given. The element we really what you learned with other local authority transport looked at is the role that Games Makers, volunteers areas? I appreciate it was a specific demand on and colleagues in TFL played, and that personal London’s transport system and it is not replicated interaction. While it is not feasible to have volunteers elsewhere, but there must be other lessons you could working on the transport network day in, day out, have shared. there is certainly something that can be learned for Stephen Golden: There are a couple of things that I big events. We did something similar for the Capital am sure my colleagues from Merseytravel and Devon of Culture where we trained transport workers, but already do. One of the things that we did when we disability awareness and providing that support is the knew we were going to have thousands of people out key element. there volunteering on the network, whose day job was One of the other things we are really interested in, and very importantly sitting behind a desk planning the what we are working on now in the Merseyside area, transport system for the future and not usually having is the people who work in the transport sector. If you a lot of interaction with customers on the front line, think of the Games Makers, they were recruited was to make sure they had appropriate levels of because they wanted to help and provide that good training, support and access to the right information level of customer service. What we are trying to roll in order to provide services of an accessible nature to out, working with our operators through LSTF disabled people. funding, is “Recruit for Attitude, Train for Skill”— We got disabled people’s organisations involved in the recruiting people who see themselves in a customer design of the content of that training. We also used service role who want to help, ensuring that training those organisations as advocates to their own client is embedded in, including disability awareness, mental group saying, “Don’t be worried about travelling health awareness and Stop Hate Awareness, to provide during the Olympics because the volunteers out there our customers with a really good experience. That is have had appropriate training and we have been for all our customers, but obviously it has benefits for involved in designing what that training looks like.” people with disabilities. It is learning the lessons from We used our contacts with disabled people’s the Games Makers, the training they got and the type organisations to get an awful lot of the information of people who were recruited, and then rolling that out there and perhaps to people who would not out. necessarily have received it through normal means. That is certainly something that was great. Q174 Iain Stewart: I have one final question on the The other thing is that we were able to challenge some role of Games Makers. I can certainly see the of the sacred cows, such as, “Oh, you can’t do that advantage of them for specific events, but do you on the network.” Manual boarding ramps on London think there is a potential to extend that concept further underground stations where we have a gap between and have volunteers at major interchanges or railway the train and the platform were always perceived, or junctions to assist people on a more regular basis? perceived by the majority, as something that we could Liz Chandler: My personal view is that it would not not introduce operationally because of the impact it be feasible day in, day out. There are issues of would have on the flow of trains through stations, accountability and the blurring of lines. For major being too long to deploy. We tried it for the Games; it events or where there would be high levels of worked fantastically for them, by and large. We are attendance at a city or the like, then there is potentially now rolling them out across the network. You need to a role. It provides an opportunity for people to get that use any opportunities you can to challenge some of training, which can enhance their career and the sacred cows that might exist within your own employment opportunities moving forward, but I do organisation or your own transport network. not think day in, day out that would be feasible. It is mainstreaming that into all our transport workers. Q173 Iain Stewart: Can I ask the other two witnesses what lessons your authorities are trying to Q175 Chair: Ms Chandler, you just spoke about a take from London’s experience last year? blurring of lines and accountability in relation to Bruce Thompson: The legacy, as you indicate, is that volunteers. Do you think there is an issue that some of these lessons could come out. I was volunteers could be seen to be replacing paid train particularly interested in a previous session on the staff? issue of buggies sometimes taking up wheelchair Liz Chandler: Within Merseytravel, we have worked spaces. Assertiveness training for drivers to be able to heavily with our trade unions through our Merseylearn deal with the situation in the right way seems project on recruitment and training. There will be enormously helpful. Those kinds of lessons are the concerns from a trade union perspective, but the ones that we need to look at. It would be very helpful management of volunteers is very different from the for all authorities if there was a wash-up of the management of staff. I think personally that it could operational issues that came out of the Olympic cause issues in the day-to-day operations. legacy in terms of the Paralympics and disabled access that could be disseminated. Q176 Chair: Mr Golden, do you have any views on Liz Chandler: From Merseytravel’s perspective, we that, given your great experience of using volunteers were very interested in what can be achieved when during the Olympics? Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 37

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden

Stephen Golden: We made it absolutely clear at the over any accessibility inquiry, but we provide them Games time and since then that the role of the Travel with extra training and support in the hope that they Ambassador is to support and not to replace will then disseminate that knowledge among their operational staff. We already have what are known as teams, making it flow out through the whole of the incident customer service assistants for the customer contact centre. We invest quite heavily in a underground. If we have major disruption on the smaller group of people who can act as champions at underground or an event such as industrial action, we the moment. have people who are properly trained and accredited to operate on the network, on the railway side of the Q179 Mr Sanders: How would a blind passenger get ticket barrier, which is where most safety concerns to know the 24-hour passenger helpline? are. We have properly trained staff whose day job Stephen Golden: We work very closely with the might be something else but who have the proper Royal National Institute of Blind People, the London licences to work trackside, as it were. They will help Visual Impairment Forum and Transport for All. We to support the operation, but they are not Travel work very closely and have constant engagement with Ambassadors—they are contingency staff. all those organisations. We try and make sure that any The use of Travel Ambassadors in the future for new systems or new ways of getting information we Transport for London will be around key events like disseminate out through those organisations, too. the London Marathon or, as recently, Baroness Thatcher’s funeral, where we had 175 Travel Q180 Mr Sanders: Is there something in Braille for Ambassadors deployed for that. If there are the blind passenger on the bus stop? particularly busy days around Christmas, summer or Stephen Golden: We don’t have anything in Braille whatever, they might be able to support staff on the on our bus stops in London at the moment. We are front line, but they will be information and assistance- looking at ways in which we can improve bus stop providing. They will not be taking the roles of the accessibility. permanent members of staff. Q181 Mr Sanders: What about a person who Q177 Chair: Mr Thompson, do you have any views perhaps has a learning disability that makes reading on this topic? very difficult, so even real-time information is not Bruce Thompson: In a rural area, travel patterns tend accessible to them? How would they be able to find to be much more diverse. It comes back to the point out that the bus is very late or there has been a that was made at the start. It is about those bad change? experiences, wherever they happen. They could Stephen Golden: Every quarter I host a meeting for happen in quite a small town or in a city centre. To people with learning difficulties from across London cover all those eventualities with volunteers is quite boroughs. It is a very well-attended meeting. We difficult. I agree with what has been said about the usually end up with 20 out of the 30-odd London management and the blurring of lines. There is also boroughs sending representatives of learning disabled the management of aspirations as well. It is really people there. We have been working with them for important that any volunteers are on message in terms seven years. The one thing we are very proud of in of what should and should not happen. Quite often, our involvement with people with learning difficulties there seems to be the potential for that to be blurred. are the bus spider maps, which were designed by learning disabled people for use in Transport for Q178 Mr Sanders: One of the messages that have London, and they are deployed at every bus stop. come across from some of the evidence that we have We work very closely with groups of people with been given, and from people we have talked to who learning difficulties and other disabled people to have a disability, is just how important it is to be able understand what their information needs are. One of to plan their journey with confidence. How do you the things that we learned from the Games was the ensure that people of all disabilities, whether visible or vast variety of information needs that people might invisible, are able to plan a journey with confidence? have. To that end, we commissioned a research project Stephen Golden: Going back to what I said to Ms that will be delivering its information back to us this Champion, one of the things about confidence is how autumn. We are doing some extensive research across reliable the journey will be. Making the service more all disabled groups in London about what information reliable encourages people to plan their journey in the they need, how they need it portrayed and how they first instance. We have all sorts of information get access to real-time information and so on. Again, available through the Journey Planner on the I am quite happy to furnish that research brief to the Transport for London website. We have more and Committee. more real-time information and information supplied to people through third parties on smartphone apps. Q182 Mr Sanders: London strikes me as being We are not going digital by default because we also somewhat ahead of many other parts of the country. I recognise that printed information is still a key way would be interested to know briefly your answer to in which not just disabled people but all sorts of that question, Ms Chandler. customers rely on getting their information about the Liz Chandler: It is very similar to what Mr Golden transport network. We also have a 24-hour customer has said. We use new technology. We have a Journey helpline. We have recently launched something within Planner. We are rolling out and starting the process of our customer contact centre called Accessibility real-time information. We are looking at how we can Champions. These are not the people who will take develop mobile web technology and the use Ev 38 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden potentially of apps, but we must not forget the people Q183 Mr Sanders: What about cross-border element. All of our customers, including those with journeys? You say you have some co-operation with disabilities, tell us that personal contact is important. Torbay, but even in Merseyside somebody might live We have six staffed bus stations. We have travel in Southport and work in Liverpool or live in centres and a travel line that operates 364 days a year. Liverpool and work in west Lancashire. How would Our customers tell us that that is what they find they be able to plan a journey across the border? particularly useful. Like TFL, we look to engage with Liz Chandler: It would very much depend on that all members of the community. individual and what worked for them. We have the As part of our district customer forums, issues arose Journey Planner, which covers the whole of the UK with one of our bus stations. We did an audit involving and links into the north-west. We have our Traveline people with all disabilities. With their agreement, we centre, which, again, can provide personalised advice videoed that so they could give us direct feedback. and support across boundaries. Obviously the staff at travel centres, bus and rail stations will also provide Having done that audit, through capital revenue that support. We recognise that, for some people with funding, we are now in the process of putting in the disabilities, it is important to ensure there is required amendments. Some of that was quite simple. consistency and we feel that is one of the things that We are working with Guide Dogs for the Blind to give needs to be enhanced. For example, if a wheelchair an audio interpretation of what the bus station is and user is starting off at a local station and going to what it looks like. We are trialling that to see how we London, they have told us at our customer forums that can take it forward. at some stage there is often a breakdown in One of the other elements—and it is interesting to communication and they are left stranded. What listen to Mr Golden—is that we are currently should be explored on a national basis is how we can reviewing all our at-stop information because we use new technology to ensure that transport staff are recognise that that could be far clearer and more aware of somebody requiring specific support so that concise. We are looking at how we can put up there is not that breakdown in communication. simplified maps so that people can navigate their way round the bus network as well. Q184 Mr Sanders: What about somebody who Bruce Thompson: In Devon, there has been a lot of wanted to travel from Torbay to Ivybridge by bus and focus on a wide span of information. There is good- had to change from being in the Torbay unitary area quality bus information at what we call the key stops. to the Devon county area? Would that be possible to We have 5,000-plus stops across a very rural area. We do, or would they need somebody to come and hold have high-quality information at all the key stops in their hand for the journey? the main towns, which includes a map of where the Chair: Can you answer that one, Mr Thompson? other stops in that town are. There are stick maps of Bruce Thompson: There is actually a direct bus the routes and a simplified timetable so that where you between Torbay and Ivybridge. One of my are is always the top line rather than just putting the perceptions, again, is the access wallet and it has been whole timetable up. We have a website called taken up by many councils. If only it was a national JourneyDevon, which tries to be a one-stop shop for initiative and had the Government seal of approval as transport and everything is only two or three clicks good practice, I would think that all local authorities away. We have plates in the bus stops where you can would want to take it up. There again, someone with text for bus times. There is real-time information and that wallet could then enjoy a recognition of their we have a project in partnership with Torbay council communications difficulties across borders. That is to roll out information. one issue that could be quite beneficial. We work very We also have something called an access wallet to closely with our neighbouring councils anyway on supplement that. I actually have one here and a sample issues generally, so our approaches are quite similar. for you, if it is helpful. Basically anyone with communications difficulties can show it to the driver, Q185 Kwasi Kwarteng: I want to ask a broad who straight away sees that that person has question about the ways in which you are communication difficulties. Anything can be inside. It communicating with people with disabilities, how organised you find their voice and whether you have could say, “Please tell me when I get to the stop” or instituted any formal structures in trying to whatever. It cuts down the need for what might be a communicate and find out what the requirement is. very difficult communication for people with Liz Chandler: Within Merseyside we have a variety communications difficulties and reduces that stress of different methods. We have a very active factor, but it also indicates to the driver straight away, community engagement team that reaches out to all “I need to help this person.” elements of the community and works with various This came out of a discussion that we had with deaf voluntary groups, charities and representative bodies. representatives. They felt that was worth trying and We have found that incredibly helpful in helping to we have found it to be very popular across a wide shape our approach to supporting customers with range of people in that category. I would have to say disabilities. We have four customer forums held in that it is courtesy of Warrington, which started the each of our five districts throughout the year. As part original design, and we borrowed it from them. I of that, we have a transport operators’ surgery prior to know that a number of other authorities are using it. it. That is for all our customers and brings everybody So we find that a useful supplement to good together. Access issues tend to be a common theme. information. The feedback we get through those forums, which Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 39

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden helps to be linked back into our ITA, in the fullness for central Government to issue some guidelines about of time will help us to shape policy and how we take how it could work? it forward. Bruce Thompson: That is what I meant when I said We have also started to ensure that we link with our “national scheme”. I did not mean for it to be issued local district councils. For example, Liverpool city nationally; I meant it would be good practice for each council has a corporate access forum ensuring there authority to have such a scheme and use the same is regular attendance and representation. We are not design. That is really important so that drivers can reinventing the wheel, but we are linking to the bodies understand what the card is about. I did not mean that that already exist to ensure that that is mainstreamed they should be centralised. It is useful and quite and taken forward. In that way we feel that it ensures appropriate for authorities to be able to issue the cards we listen to all representatives of the community and and have the scheme as we do in Devon. those customers who have disabilities in helping to take it forward. Q188 Iain Stewart: Has it been in place long enough for you to monitor whether it has had a beneficial Q186 Kwasi Kwarteng: From your answer, it seems effect in increasing disabled people’s access to the use there is no specific provision for disabled members of of public transport? the community. You talked about the other groups Bruce Thompson: It is very difficult to identify the within the community, but in your answer you were real reasons for increased use of public transport suggesting that there was no specific provision for because it has come at a time when there are more the disabled. low-floor buses for the disabled. The other reason why Liz Chandler: No. We used to have a transport access I feel a national scheme could have some traction is panel. Linked to the Equality Act coming out, we felt because it is very difficult to reach the hard-to-reach that we wanted to mainstream because access is a groups. We are continually finding people who have wider issue. Interestingly, the feedback from suddenly found out about the pass. They think it is representatives who attended the previous access fantastic and yet it has been in place for about five or panel and now come to our customer forums has been six years. Therefore, there is always that challenge to positive because they feel it is more useful and a wider get everyone who could benefit from the pass to be range of issues is discussed. It is not a segregation. aware of it. One of the concerns was that if you have a disability you are over there and all our other customers are over Q189 Sarah Champion: You have spoken about the here. This is about mainstreaming because one of our initiatives you have to get people to engage with the key local transport goals is access of travel system. I want to look more specifically at the opportunity. transport systems in your regions, particularly buses. Stephen Golden: In London, we have developed some We had Steven Salmon of the Confederation of quite robust structures for engaging and involving Passenger Transport in front of us. He said that local disabled people. We have TFL’s Independent authorities have to specify fully accessible buses on Disability Advisory Group, which is a group of seven their funded routes. However, he claimed that there is disabled people who have expertise around transport a lack of clarity under the Equalities Act as to the and live and work in London and can give us strategic exact definition of “fully accessible”. Would each of advice. We engage with colleagues from across the you give the definition that you work to and also how business at local mobility forums in each of the many of your buses meet your definition? London boroughs when we are invited to go. We have Bruce Thompson: There are two definitions. There recently set up our own sub-regional mobility forums are the DDA requirements for buses. I believe some under the Mayor’s transport strategy, dividing London of the earlier buses are low floor but are not fully into five sub-regions. TFL has just set up a pilot DDA. They do not have high-visibility nosing on the programme in the south and central sub-region to see steps on stepping into the bus or high-visibility grab if we can engage with disabled people on the key rails—that kind of thing—but we know there are clear issues of transport planning in the future at a more definitions for new vehicles from 2015Ð16 or 2017, strategic level in each of the sub-regions. depending on the size of vehicle. All vehicles over 22 As a key way of helping disabled people scrutinise seats will be required to be compliant, and that what we do as an organisation, when we publish our definition is very clear. disability equality scheme or our accessibility The issue at the moment is that we are in an improvement plan we convene what is known as a interregnum whereby fleets are being equipped or are Citizens’ Jury. They are independent disabled people having new vehicles in to meet the DDA deadlines. nominated by, in the last case, Inclusion London. They At the moment we have a mixture, with some older call for evidence from directors and the like at TFL step-entrance vehicles still in operation. In my and scrutinise their plans and give a verdict about particular county most of the services are now what TFL is doing. virtually DDA-compliant. That does lead to problems. When an operator’s normal run-out is all low-floor Q187 Iain Stewart: I would like to ask Mr vehicles, people come to expect it. When the odd step- Thompson a couple of supplementary questions about entrance vehicle comes along because there are too your access wallets. You mentioned the possibility of many vehicles off the road for repair or whatever, that having a national scheme for those. Do you think that is an issue. would work? Would it not be better to leave it to each I would like to be able to have a conversation at an authority to develop their own version of it, but maybe appropriate time with our operators to be able to Ev 40 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden guarantee that, if someone turns up—this is before people have been clamouring for particularly, which DDA, because after DDA it will be swept up is space for assistance dogs under seats. A definition anyway—relying on a low-floor vehicle but the low- of a “fully accessible” bus evolves. All of us who are floor vehicle does not turn up, then, if necessary, a taxi working in the accessibility area recognise that. There will be provided for them unless it is a very regular are still some impairments that face barriers that we frequency route or something like that. Because we have not yet found a way of addressing on the are in this interregnum of a mix of vehicle type at the transport system. We don’t know how to deal with moment, that is a problem. people with certain autistic impairments. There are the effects of travelling in crowded spaces in London, for Q190 Sarah Champion: I understand that for the example. It is something we are still working on. We buses. How many of your 5,000 bus stops have are not a “fully accessible” fleet in that sense yet, but lowered pavement edges? How many of them have we are moving forward. clearly marked pavement edges? How many of them have enough space for the bus actually to get in and Q193 Sarah Champion: Mr Thompson, I fully lower its ramps? The bus might be accessible, but is understand the cost of converting 5,000 bus stops in the location accessible? remote parts. Is it just the money that is preventing it, Bruce Thompson: In the urban areas we are rolling or are there other barriers that you are facing, and how out bus boarders as a matter of standard design. The would you seek to address them? problem with many bus stops in rural areas is that Bruce Thompson: With enough money, any problem sometimes you are lucky if there is even a bus stop like that can be engineered out, but some of the flag. It is often on to a verge where there is no barriers in getting from where people want to go to immediate walkway from there to where the houses the bus stop or where people live to the bus stop, and are nearby, other than along a grass verge. The cost of then the same at the other end, are extremely converting all those stops to having raised bus challenging. The concept of end-to-end journey boarders and DDA-compliant walkways would be planning and awareness of the end-to-end barriers is significant, and that is a real challenge, particularly in really important. We have to look more and more not a rural area. just at the bus journey, but how people get to and from the bus. We have to look at people’s perceptions as Q191 Sarah Champion: I would like to come back well. Those kinds of problems can mainly be to the costs, but could other people tell me their engineered out, but the cost would be very definition and the percentage of their transport? considerable. Liz Chandler: In relation to our tendered services, we require two things: that it is accessible and low floor Q194 Chair: Will the devolved funding of the bus that meets the latest requirements; and that all drivers service operators grant to local authorities make any working on that route within six months have to do difference to you in supporting disabled people? Does courses that we have identified, including disability anyone have any views? awareness. We tend to work in partnership with the Liz Chandler: In relation to Merseytravel, it is like operators and local authorities. We think there needs with all the funding streams that are available. to be an integrated and holistic approach. Our focus Accessibility is mainstreamed; we are not looking has been on our main corridors and centres where we specifically at disability access. It is about looking at have the greatest usage of the transport system to the corridors, the bus fleet and the training. It is the ensure maximum impact for the travelling public. whole holistic approach. It obviously gives you an I do not have exact figures. With the bus fleet on element of greater control about what you can specify, Merseyside, we are virtually there in relation to so, yes. accessible buses. However, as Mr Thompson said, sometimes the issue will be some of the smaller Q195 Chair: Yes, it will be better. operators. Occasionally they will bring out a bus that Liz Chandler: Yes. is not fully accessible. We know from the complaints we get that that does cause a lot of distress to Q196 Chair: Are there any other views on that? customers. Bruce Thompson: The guidance is not out on the devolved BSOG in terms of supported services, so we Q192 Sarah Champion: What about the routes? are not aware of whether we will get more, less or Roughly what percentage of those would be equal to the amount of BSOG currently paid for accessible? operations in Devon. Of course, that funding is Liz Chandler: I would need to come back to the primarily revenue funding. Some of the issues we are Committee—I am happy to provide that talking about really do require capital funding. The information—but there has been considerable BSOG devolved is just moving money to operators or investment over the last 20 years and we work in the local authority area in a different way. It is not partnership with our local authorities on that. creating new money apart from the better bus area Stephen Golden: In London, since May 2005, 100% funding, which is more likely to be a successful of the bus fleet has been low-floor wheelchair concept in the larger urban areas. There are real accessible. From 2008, all buses had audio-visual challenges in what benefits BSOG devolution might information on board and other accessibility features. bring. Those challenges are of course at a time when With the introduction of the New Bus for London, we the rising costs to the industry—transport inflation— have also introduced something that visually impaired have been much higher than normal inflation. The Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 41

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden increased costs have not necessarily been met by at a community card pilot, where taxis can help to contract rates over the recent years because of the support people going to day centres. That gives spending review. That leads to further challenges if greater personalisation and at a reduced cost, which is we are going to try to pull more BSOG off operators obviously beneficial. and to use it for other purposes, which is the whole idea around devolution. There are some real Q202 Chair: Mr Thompson, do you have any challenges around that. complaints about taxis and private hire? Bruce Thompson: Yes. We work closely with the taxi Q197 Chair: Are you making a bid to the better bus licensing offices, which are of course in the district areas fund? councils. One of the issues in a rural area is that the Bruce Thompson: We have not been able to secure number of wheelchair accessible taxis can be quite sufficient support from our major bus operator, which small. The concept that somebody can go from is a requirement of a bid. I think the jury is out for wherever to wherever, perhaps by train, and then pick Stagecoach as to whether better bus areas would be a up a disabled taxi at the other end is not always good thing for the company and, as a result of that, possible. There is no requirement that there will be we have not been able to secure support for a bid. wheelchair accessible taxis within a taxi or private hire fleet. That is one of the main sources of complaint Q198 Chair: Mr Golden, do you have any views on we get. The other is that wheelchairs are not always how these changes in funding would affect you? secured correctly in a taxi but sometimes sideways, Stephen Golden: The arrangements in London are which could be highly dangerous. different. Q203 Chair: Mr Golden, what about London? Q199 Chair: It is a different arrangement, so it won’t Stephen Golden: TFL is the licensing authority for affect you. taxi and private hire in London. We have a very robust Stephen Golden: No. complaints procedure. We also carry out spot checks on driver behaviour, the deployment of ramps and Q200 Chair: Do you get any complaints about taxis their ability to use ramps. If they fail those spot or private hire vehicles? If you do, what are they? Ms checks, they are not allowed to operate until they Chandler, do you get any? either provide ramps that work or learn how to use Liz Chandler: Within Merseyside, it is each of the them. district councils that are the licensing authorities. We In terms of the complaints, we monitor them around have worked closely with each of the district licensing a number of categories. In 2007Ð08 to 2010Ð11, we authorities, starting back in 2005. One of the things had a specific disability discrimination monitor. The we recognised was that the lack of consistent training most number of complaints we received was 12 in one for taxi drivers was causing an issue, particularly for year—in 2010Ð11. However, we understood, through customers who have a disability. We have anecdotal evidence given to us by disabled people, implemented a two-part training programme. There is that complaints were being put into other categories. one prior to entering the trade, and then an NVQ for Failing to take a fare is something that we hear more when people enter the trade. That has been adopted often certainly than 12 times in a year. We have by the district councils in Merseyside either wholly or worked very closely with the taxi trade in London. in part. We work with the trade bodies and the We are in discussions with them now about providing licensing authorities to look at the complaints that further accessibility training. We are seeing a year-on- they are getting, particularly around disability, to help year reduction in the key issues of refusal to take. In them shape the training provision that people get. The 2011Ð12, we had 327 complaints, and in this last year, feedback we have had from the licensing authorities 2012Ð13, it had gone down to 189. We are working is that training has had an impact on the complaints closely with the trade to reduce those. received and also the ability to send people to be retrained if a specific issue has come to light. Q204 Chair: What about wheelchairs on buses? Who should be responsible for making sure that wheelchair Q201 Chair: What are the major complaints made users can use the designated spaces and that are there and major issues? enough of those spaces? Ms Chandler, do you have Liz Chandler: When we started it was about any views on that? wheelchair accessibility, ramps not being used, people Liz Chandler: It is interesting and it is an issue that not being secured correctly and the way people were has come up at our customer forums—we are debating spoken to. When we spoke to the drivers—and we it in July. As far as we are concerned, the primary worked with the trade unions on this as well—there purpose of the spaces on the bus is for people who are was a small percentage of drivers who just didn’t care, wheelchair users although, if there is not a wheelchair but we discovered that there was an embarrassment user, people with prams and buggies are more than factor with some of the drivers. They didn’t know welcome to use them. We see that as the responsibility what to do, so that is why they would sometimes drive of the bus operators to take it forward. by a passenger. They felt they didn’t have the ability There is an education job to be undertaken with or the skills to do what they needed to do. That is customers though, because customers do not always where the training has been particularly important. clearly understand. What TFL has done to make it There are obviously business benefits to them. We are clear is something that we can all learn from. When now working with one of the local authorities to look we speak to the main operators in Merseyside, what Ev 42 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Bruce Thompson, Liz Chandler and Stephen Golden they say is that their drivers are advised to speak to more wheelchair use, so there is a positive there as customers, but if there is a conflict situation at a well. certain stage, they will back down. We do feel that there is an education element that needs to be done Q208 Chair: Is there any one thing you would like with all customers. the Government to do to assist you or the operators to help disabled people access public transport more Q205 Chair: Mr Golden, there are fewer wheelchair easily? spaces now that bendy buses have gone. Is that an Stephen Golden: One of the things we can issue? congratulate the Department for Transport on is that Stephen Golden: I would not say there were fewer last December it published its Accessibility Action wheelchair spaces. The articulated bendy buses Plan. I would make a huge plea to the Government to enabled wheelchair users to travel in spaces on that deliver on those actions in the action plan, because if bus that were not designated wheelchair spaces. you do that, you will move accessibility forward on the transport network quite considerably. So provide Q206 Chair: Let us say more wheelchair users were the appropriate funding for the delivery of that able to travel on the buses before than they are now. action plan. Stephen Golden: We recognise that this is a particular Apart from funding, what would we like Government issue. We carried out lots of research last year. We to do? If you do not have funding at the moment, launched a new campaign in November that, working please consider funding in the future, as it is still with colleagues at the Department for Transport and something that needs to be discussed and debated with disabled people’s groups, we have deployed because you can’t make some parts of the network around the network. There is new signage on buses accessible without significant investment. and at bus stops that we are piloting this year to see its effectiveness. We have done some additional briefings Q209 Chair: Are there any further views or with our bus operators. Most importantly—what Ms comments on that? Do you agree? Chandler said is absolutely right—one of the things Liz Chandler: I would endorse what Mr Golden has that we learned from the Olympics is that if other bus said. Obviously there is planning legislation but, users understand the needs of disabled users, that has although there is a view about getting rid of some of a huge impact on how accessible their journey is. the bureaucracy with planning, we must ensure that Mumsnet has been looking at this campaign and transport accessibility is considered. We learned from working with us in the research that we did for it. It the Paralympic Games that there was sustainable and the people who comment on Mumsnet are very transport. We know that that will benefit customers supportive of the wheelchair users’ priority for the who have disabilities. We must ensure that the profile space. Although there is perhaps sometimes still of transport and the importance of accessibility are conflict between people with child buggies and mainstreamed into other Government Departments. wheelchair users, I think there is a growing We must not just focus on the Department for recognition that the space is the priority for Transport, but consider other Government wheelchair users among other users. Departments as well and get the message out.

Q207 Chair: Mr Thompson, do you have any other Q210 Chair: Thank you. Mr Thompson, you have comment on that? the final word. Bruce Thompson: Not at length. The issue about Bruce Thompson: At a time when bus support might buggies is a problem everywhere. There is buggy again be under threat with difficult budgets next year, rage. Signage is part of the answer and, as was said, there is a growing realisation of the value of bus trying to ensure that the public generally are much services generally. Bus services are an equality issue. more aware of that. On the plus side, our buses are The importance of maintaining supported bus services now carrying a lot of wheelchair users compared with and having the funding to do so is absolutely vital. a few years ago because people know that they are Chair: Thank you very much. Thank you for coming virtually all low floor. That is really enabling a lot and answering our questions. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 43

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Ewan Jones, Director, Community Transport Association, and Lord Sterling of Plaistow, Chairman, Motability, gave evidence.

Q211 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the maintain the input of disabled people themselves in Transport Committee. Would you give your name the design and delivery of services. and organisation? Lord Sterling: Lord Sterling, chairman of Motability. Q214 Chair: What about funding for community Ewan Jones: I am Ewan Jones, acting chief executive transport? Is it feasible for community transport to of the Community Transport Association. operate as a not-for-profit service, or should there be some other way of running it? Q212 Chair: Could you tell us what you see as being Ewan Jones: Community transport takes its funding the main challenges to giving access for people with from a number of areas. It will get grant funding. It disabilities to the transport network? will raise funding through fares. In some cases, it Lord Sterling: In the area in which we have been raises it through contracts. That varies from one area involved for 35 years, which I had the pleasure of co- to another. In particular, there is a split between rural founding with the late Lord Goodman, it is mobility. and urban. In rural areas, service providers rely much It has to be realised that for most people, listening to more on generating income through fares than is the the conversation just now, when you have a disabled case in urban areas. person, the whole family life revolves around it and The Community Transport Association and a number for many of their friends as well. It is never one of other areas of the sector have been promoting the person you are dealing with. If you have one, you social enterprise model for a number of years so that probably have five or six people involved in their operators can try to generate income through contract lifestyle. That is often not remembered when it comes relationships with local authorities or other service to it. I cannot comment on the wider front but, in the providers. In that way, they are perhaps slightly more area we are in, mobility is, frankly, absolutely key to masters of their own destiny because they are not the general lifestyle. Also, there is the recognition of beholden to the precise grant conditions that apply. the public at large that people have to be very There is no doubt that grant funding is being squeezed conscious to give them natural help and not being more and more tightly and is more difficult to achieve. pushed to help. I heard just before various comments At the same time, local authority funding for being made that, hopefully, there is this increasing supported bus services is being pressed very hard. trend following last year with the Paralympics of That means that there are fewer supported bus people being more conscious of disability. We support services and also fewer commercial services, because 50% of all the Paralympians, who have cars from us, they are not profit making in rural areas, which means and all the veterans as well. One sees it on a wider there is more demand for community transport. The front, Madam Chairman. funding is being pressed, the demand is increasing and that is creating problems. Q213 Chair: Mr Jones, what do you see as the main Community transport can develop new business challenges and main issues for community transport? models and can be funded, providing it can engage Ewan Jones: Community transport is very much with service providers. Local authorities are about giving people access, mobility and choice. The sometimes keen to do that, but we still have problems challenges fall into a number of categories. outside the transport network. There are still issues Information on services is a problem, which is why we are trying to work with Transport Direct to provide engaging with the Department of Health, the NHS or information on community transport that will be the Department for Work and Pensions. We could do accessible through the national and public transport with a lot more cross-sector talking and benefits. planning website to try and help there. Accessibility of services physically in relation to vehicles is still an Q215 Chair: What are you doing to find different issue. There was an interesting question earlier on the business models? You have spoken about the definition of “fully accessible”. There is no such thing problems of local authority funding. If they continue, in my view. as they may well continue, what other ways are you Access to services in terms of the geography and the looking for? location is still a big issue in rural areas. People may Ewan Jones: From our point of view, it is trying to well be quite close to services, but if those services educate, inform and train operators in new business are not flexibly routed, very often they cannot access practices. For instance, we ran the rural social them. Cost is still an issue as well, again particularly enterprise programme. That involved bringing in rural areas. We have problems with people who together almost £1 million of funding from a range of may well be entitled to and eligible for concessionary different funders to put business development travel, but if there is not a vehicle they can get on or managers in place in different rural community a service they can use, that entitlement is of little use transport organisations. That was not just, “Here’s a to them. That is potentially discriminating against grant.” The majority of the funding that each got was their needs. loan funding, so they had to pay that back. We are Service planning and governance of service are less trying to bring them into a situation where they are of an issue now, but certainly have been in the past. not just grant-reliant all the time, but developing There are a lot of people who are professional longer-term, sustainable financial relationships with transport planners or engineers, but we need to service commissioners. Ev 44 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Ewan Jones and Lord Sterling of Plaistow

Q216 Chair: There are some very significant the transition side, but you can’t get away from the changes in benefits for disabled people under way at fact that a sizeable percentage of people will lose their the moment. Lord Sterling, how do you think the DLA and they will not be able to continue to be on introduction of personal independence payments is the Motability scheme. There is no getting away from going to affect the provision of the Motability that. The numbers will pick up in a different form in scheme? the years to come, but that is what is going to happen Lord Sterling: It has become very obvious, and the over the next five years. Department has issued figures—they are not private any more—on what the effect is going to be. Over 3 Q217 Chair: If people have their current benefits million people are going to be interviewed in the next withdrawn because of the new assessments and they five years, as you well know. It is an absolutely are on the Motability scheme, will they be able to enormous number. How one is going to handle that is maintain keeping their vehicle while they ask for a going to be absolutely crucial. There are obviously reconsideration or an appeal? Is the vehicle withdrawn going to be quite a number of people—to say the at that stage? least—who use Motability cars affected. They are Lord Sterling: The Government have agreed that, going to be affected, frankly, because the 20 metres once it has been decided that somebody has not against 50 metres rule—I still call it yards—does have reached the requisite number of points to be allowed an effect on the basis of, “Can you walk more than 20 to go on to PIP, they will have one month to try to metres?”, because that is the question that is being rearrange their affairs. We have already told Iain asked. Duncan Smith in meetings we have had of late—well, We always think of people in wheelchairs and so over many months now—that we at Motability would forth, but it is worth remembering, as I am sure you extend that for another month. One has to remember know, that probably almost the largest number of that, when you are looking at the sheer size of the recipients in percentage terms have rheumatoid fleet, if one is extending and you are getting no arthritis or forms of arthritis. Although you might be income in at all on a major leasing scheme, that runs able to walk 20 metres or more if you want with into tens of millions of pounds very rapidly indeed. arthritis, blimey it is painful beyond belief for many. We will be able to do that, but they will lose the car. Of course if it is rough or windy, you have these The car will then have to be returned to the dealer. various areas to be considered. Some people will just have to acquire the car from us As the rules are being changed, the view of our if it is possible. They may well be able to club disabled governors—ever since the very beginning together with families to buy another car. The they have been trustees of Motability—is that, once it problem—it is a challenge; I prefer that word—is that has settled down, PIP will be better for disabled most disabled people, other than those who have people. It will be a fairer outcome than what it is at reasonable jobs, are right at the bottom end of the the moment, but we have to get to that stage, if you economic scale and therefore do not even have a see my point. There will be a large number of people borrowing position of £50 to walk into a bank, who are going to be affected. There will probably be whereas what the Motability scheme does is in effect quite a sizeable number who will be expecting to create triple A credit. appeal against whether they should or should not lose it on that front. Q218 Chair: I would like to pursue this issue a little Sadly, you have to go back to the 1990s to remember more, Lord Sterling. You said there were some short- that, in practice, a huge surge of recipients of DLA to term steps that you could take. Can you give us any a degree was due to almost a form of self-assessment, more information? What steps can you take, if any, to to use the expression. The numbers went up mitigate the problem for individuals? dramatically from that period of time for those who Lord Sterling: What we cannot do is provide them received that disability allowance as it is at the with a car once they have lost their allowance, moment. There will be large numbers. Later on, if you because the whole basis of the Motability scheme is wish, I can give you a little bit of background as to on the basis of committing the higher rate DLA, if what we are going to do as an organisation. We have you want, irrevocably over a three-year period, and been examining this for over two years now because they get provided with a car. In many cases, we now of the effects. It is worth remembering that we have have nearly 3,000 different models to choose from. 620,000 cars on the road and we are over 12% of the There are over 200 plus models. In practice, if we whole of the British market. It is the biggest fleet of were to hand over a car, you give somebody a key its type in the world, so we are obviously going to and the only thing they have to do in that three years have a lot of people who will be affected. That affects is buy their own petrol. We are even examining the families, and that is why I keep coming back to it. whether there is a way in which we might be able to What affects somebody when they do not have their help with that. mobility comes back to: who is going to take dad up Once that flow of money, in cash flow terms, does not the pub; who is going to get his newspapers; how is exist, there is no way they can continue to be on the he going to get to work and back again? These are the scheme. That is what I call the general fleet. As you sorts of questions to which we have to try and help to know, we deal with these special converted cars called find answers. WAVs. We reckon we are going to be able to find a As I have said, later on, if you would like, I will try way to help on that. These are the cars that are very to give you an idea of the sorts of things we have been heavily adapted. In practice, it is better to try to help discussing as to where we might be able to help on them to retain that vehicle in some format. We have Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 45

13 May 2013 Ewan Jones and Lord Sterling of Plaistow already had discussions with the Government. Quite a instance, section 19 permits at the moment are the number of them are on the Mobility scheme as against most common form of operator licence that the Motability scheme, which is where the community transport operates under, but you must not Government play a major part. operate on a profit-making basis, or incidentally to another activity that is carried on with a view for Q219 Iain Stewart: I want to ask Mr Jones a couple profit. You need to be careful there. That is why we of questions about community transport. You deal are seeing growth in community buses run under with a large number of local authorities. Are there any section 22 permits, which is a slightly different form good examples of a local authority that has the model of operator licence. For instance, there was a right in terms of engaging locally with disabled people commercial service that was not generating much about shaping the service and informing them of any passenger growth or revenue and it effectively ceased. changes—issues like that? Are there any authorities Something new was then developed in its place by you can hold up to light the way? Third Sector Services in Gloucestershire called the V Ewan Jones: Yes, there are a number. The Service, which is run as a community bus. It is Community Transport Association is a national body. primarily taking people to the hospital and shopping It has members up and down the country who deliver centre. It has seen significant growth because they services. What we are seeing now is the development have developed the service around what passengers of a number of regional or local authority area need and it can then access funding. consortia, networks or forums—call them what you Earlier on we heard mention of the bus service will. In some areas the local authorities are engaging operators grant. We were delighted that the work the quite significantly with some of these organisations, community transport sector and the Community which in effect means that the groups that develop and Transport Association has done means that the bulk run services, and who will liaise on a local basis and of the bus service operators grant, which is nearly £5 be influenced or driven by disabled people and million in England that goes to community transport community transport passengers, are heavily involved groups, will still be available direct from the in that. A number of these groups are even developing Department for Transport, rather than it being to the extent that they are legal entities in themselves. devolved to local authorities. We understand the logic In both Norfolk and Suffolk, the local authorities are behind localism, but that does mean in our sector, to engaging very heavily with the regional forums. an extent, a bit of a postcode lottery. If you have a Devon is another one where Transport for Your good example of a local authority, as you mentioned Community has developed and the local authority is earlier on, that is engaging well with the sector, that engaging in a very meaningful way. is all well and good, but ultimately there are examples A number have made good use of the £10 million that of authorities there that take a different view in terms was made available for rural community transport, of how they want to develop. That makes life a lot both last year and the previous year. Rather than just more difficult for the CT sector to provide services for disappearing into deficit reduction or something else, disabled people. that money is being used to develop community transport. The Community Transport Association Q221 Chair: The future of the Disabled Persons would argue that, by its very nature, it is about being Transport Advisory Committee is being reviewed. Do inclusive. It is not necessarily specialising in transport you have any comments on that? Do you think it does for disabled people. In terms of developing services, a good job? Would you like to see it changed? Would as I did for many years up in Edinburgh, it is about it matter if it was not there? making sure that all the services that are developed Ewan Jones: I had better declare an interest. For five are as accessible and inclusive as they can be. Yes, years I was a member of MACS—the Mobility and there are a number of authorities. I have mentioned Access Committee Scotland—which was the Devon, Norfolk and Suffolk. Gloucestershire is equivalent north of the border. I have worked with another one that has been quite innovative in the way DPTAC, and indeed representatives from the CTA it engages in terms of contracting with community have been members of DPTAC for a number of years. transport. We can certainly provide more information We have found it a very useful way of engaging the on any of these and others, if you want. disabled community with Government and making sure that views are discussed, distilled and brought Q220 Iain Stewart: That would be helpful. As you forward to the Department for Transport in particular. mentioned in an earlier answer, funding constraints While the model itself is not exactly sacrosanct, there are a reality of life at the minute. To what extent do is a need to make sure that there is an independent you explore funding opportunities with Government body that can advise Ministers on the needs, views agencies and private companies to help to support and wishes of the disabled community. While DPTAC these schemes? I went on a journey in Milton Keynes will not be carried forward in its previous form, I on a PlusBus with a lady in a wheelchair. She often would certainly hope that a mechanism will exist to requires a bus to get into the shopping centre in the allow the disabled community to articulate its views centre of Milton Keynes or to go to Jobcentre Plus. and needs. Is there scope for commercial retailers in the centre, Jobcentre Plus or similar organisations to help to fund Q222 Chair: Lord Sterling, do you feel you have the PlusBus system that we have? access to an appropriate body to give you views of Ewan Jones: Yes, there is in my view. There are people who need Motability or consider your issues? sometimes challenges on the legislative front. For Is this the way it is done or is there any other way? Ev 46 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Ewan Jones and Lord Sterling of Plaistow

Lord Sterling: From day one we have always had avenue of discussion and information and a link with very senior members of the disabled community as the politicians who have an interest in transport and trustees—literally from the very start. In fact, they disability could be lost. I would want to know how have usually been the chairman of the whole that was going to work. We have submitted evidence; organisation, and they still are, one after the other. we have attended meetings; we have made They are people like Bert Massie, whom many of you presentations and provided information to DPTAC as will know, and others. I should have mentioned before part of the work that they have been doing over the that, behind me, we have Sir Gerald Acher, who heads years. We know that that has contributed to up the whole of the major committee that runs most information that has gone forward to the Department. of Motability on our side, and our director Declan We have also worked with the different ofﬁcials in the O’Mahony. They are in total touch. Only recently we Department who have worked with DPTAC over the had meetings with all the major disabled groupings to years. We feel that it has always been a very good discuss the various ways in which we thought we relationship. There has been something there, and we might be able to help in this transition period. I am know that, if things come forward through things like rather pleased to say that their reaction was that it was the recent series of road shows that CT has run round unexpected that we would be able to supply the sort the country with 400 or 500 people attending, with of support we are doing, which is probably going to issues coming up about funding and accessibility of be at least over £100 million spread over the period services, we can feed those into the Department. of time. In particular, what DPTAC has done is to take a step One of the most important things they feel that they back and say, “Right, that is what the operators want, want—and which we are going to be setting up—is a but what do the disabled people who are travelling special unit to advise people. We have people who need?” They have been challenging to us over the turn up and say, “I have never had an insurance policy years as well and made us think about where the in my life. How do I set about it? How do I have a boundaries lie in terms of the services we want to discussion about how to buy a car? What can I do?” provide. It is as simple as that. Therefore, there are various One of the key issues is the ability to communicate ways in which we can help. with Government at a range of different levels. It has We have also had discussions with our disabled people been very good on the transport and disability side. It and all the manufacturers and SMMT on the basis of has been very poor with regard to the Department for different ways of helping. I know how often people Work and Pensions, the Department of Health and talk about car dealers, but it is worth remembering others, where we have struggled to have that degree that our dealerships right throughout the country are of communication. My concern is that, if something the salt of the earth. They are the ones who have direct like DPTAC does not exist or there is no successor, contact with most of the disabled people who are we may lose some of that very good communication using cars day to day, if there are breakdowns and that we have. they have to help and so forth. A lot of discussions have been going on with all the dealerships right Q224 Chair: Lord Sterling, do you have any views across the land as to how one might be able to deal on this? with some of these problems in due course and to help Lord Sterling: On all these operations, the them relocate, or how they and their families get the Department we deal with, of which Iain Duncan Smith form of mobility that they want. That is a constant is Secretary of State, has consulted very deeply over operation and we have a very close working the last year or so. One could not fault the amount of relationship on that. consultation that has gone on, not just with the It is worth remembering that Motability was started— advisory group but with different areas such as care it was something I insisted on—with all-party support. homes or the blind, or whatever the area is. I can’t It has never ever been one party in any form. The comment on this particular grouping because we are senior members such as David Cameron, Ed Miliband not involved in that, but on the other hand we are and Nick Clegg have all handed over cars. They know making sure that everybody is in the picture as much it backwards. We have had meetings with them on as possible. We have been in contact with every single various fronts and with all the senior members of the MP in this House and in the House of Lords. There Cabinet on the basis of people understanding what is have been workshops. Many of them, of course, are going to happen in their own constituencies when out in their various constituencies. In fact, only these changes take place. yesterday or last Friday, Gerry and Declan were with Can we do more? Of course, as much as we possibly George Young doing a handover in his constituency. can; but we are in very close contact with all the major Of course we have invited everybody, if they wish to groupings on that front. At the moment I think it is do that, because we think it is particularly important fair to say that the reaction has been very favourable. for Members of both Houses to have an understanding of what this transition is going to mean in their own Q223 Chair: If the Disabled Persons Transport constituencies. As much as possible we are trying to Advisory Group was disbanded and subsumed under get that message through. Are we perfect? Of course a group looking at general needs, what would be lost? not, but we are having a go. Would that be of concern to either of you? Chair: Thank you very much, both of you, for coming Ewan Jones: My concern from the community and answering our questions. transport sector’s point of view would be that an Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 47

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Iain Osborne, Group Director of Regulatory Policy Group, Civil Aviation Authority, Peter Duffy, Marketing Director, EasyJet, and Mark Hicks, Head of Passenger Services, Heathrow Airport, gave evidence.

Q225 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the the information about the passenger’s level of Transport Committee. Could we have your names and disability to the airport so that they can provide the organisations, please? appropriate services to take them to the plane and to Iain Osborne: My name is Iain Osborne and I am take them from the plane. That would be the area that group director of regulatory policy for the Civil we would focus on and would make the biggest Aviation Authority. impact. Peter Duffy: I am Peter Duffy. I am the marketing Mark Hicks: From us as the airport operator, I would director for EasyJet. absolutely agree with Iain regarding confidence. We Mark Hicks: I am Mark Hicks, head of passenger are also looking at three things. We are looking at our support services at Heathrow Airport. people. Last year, some 900,000 passengers came to our airport, making us one of the largest providers of Q226 Mr Sanders: What are the principal challenges special assistance in Europe and also globally. It is of achieving equal access for disabled people in air about making sure that when people get to our airport, travel? they are received by people who are well trained and Iain Osborne: We think that the legislation— educated in assisting our passengers to the best of regulation 1107—is a good piece of law. It has their ability, and asking our passengers what they need improved the situation. The principal challenges that of us rather than us making an assumption of what we we encounter through our role as a designated think they need. complaint handler and enforcement body are many The second thing is making sure the process is as and various. They arise to a large extent from transparent and as open as possible. When people are individual people at an operational level taking researching their journey, which they often do via unfortunate decisions. On one level we are talking their airline’s website or through that of Heathrow about social change and it takes a while for people’s airport, the standard of service they will receive attitudes to change. should be as exceptionally transparent as possible. The biggest barrier that we have heard about from Lastly, we must make sure that our infrastructure our discussions with disability groups is confidence. supports them through our airport. For example, in People with disabilities do not always know about the terminal 2, which is just about to open, we have the support that is available to them and are concerned arrivals all on one floor. I am convinced that, when about travelling. Only about 1% of flights are by passengers travel back through terminal 2, they may people with disabilities, when about 10% of the have requested assistance on the way out because they population have those disabilities. People with have been used to using one of our older terminals; disabilities do not travel so much. but, when they see that the arrivals are all on the same floor, I think they will need less assistance than those Q227 Mr Sanders: Isn’t that a missed opportunity who maybe have to travel a distance. for revenue for the airlines or the airports if people Going to Peter’s point, pre-notification is absolutely with disabilities lack confidence to buy their tickets essential for us as the airport operator to facilitate our and travel? airlines’ needs. At Heathrow, of course, we have 80- Peter Duffy: EasyJet flies 300,000 customers with plus airlines now, assisting up to 20,000 passengers disabilities across Europe. To answer your first a week. We can do that only if we get really good question, I would say there are three things that are information. We must also make sure that we are open important in terms of accessibility. The first thing is to those travellers who want to be spontaneous. It is making sure we get clarity of information for the not all about the pre-notification. We want to make customer so they don’t feel stressed, as Iain describes, sure that people who have genuine needs through an and they really understand what service is going to be accident while travelling are able to receive a good offered. The second thing is getting to the point where level of support once they get to the airport. there is proper pre-notification of the services they require to enable them to travel so that the airlines and Q229 Mr Sanders: Mr Osborne, you mentioned EU airports can work together to make sure that that is regulation 1107. How much do you think that is delivered effectively for the passengers and to make driving change, or is it people with disabilities their journey as easy as possible. The third thing is a themselves wishing to travel who are driving the wholesale improvement and awareness through change? training so that people can increasingly understand the Iain Osborne: The customer is always king. issues that customers with reduced mobility face when Legislation supports social changes; it is not change it comes to travelling, to ensure that they can make itself. We think that regulation has been very valuable, those journeys as smooth as possible. They would be particularly in simplifying things. As has been said, it the three areas I would point to. makes it really clear that, on the ground in the airport, it is the responsibility of the airport operator right up Q228 Mr Sanders: Presumably that involves a good to the gate. That has reduced the number of handovers deal of co-operation with competitor operators to and it also makes it reasonably clear that people, ensure that that can happen. subject to safety, have a right to fly and makes clear Peter Duffy: The core services are provided by the the kind of assistance that operators are obliged to airports. The fundamental role of the airline is to get provide. That does provide a baseline. It still leaves Ev 48 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Iain Osborne, Peter Duffy and Mark Hicks us with the confidence problem, because travellers richer source of information about what the issues are. may not know that they have those rights. I think it is fair to say that it has caused us to step up and invest more effort into this area. Since then we Q230 Mr Sanders: Is it not the fact that if you are have set up an advisory group. The access to air travel flying from Heathrow, you can be fairly confident that group is a number of the disability organisations, and there is assistance there, but it is the airport you are we are currently carrying on a market study of the then flying to? My question to Mr Duffy, simply as an levels of compliance across the industry. While the operator, would be: how do you ensure that each work we have done in the last year has been useful— airport that you go to has the appropriate facilities to for example, on Guide Dogs, we have made sure that give the customer the confidence that they need to buy all the airports have facilities—in the future we will your ticket? be looking to take a more systematic stance. Peter Duffy: Before I answer that, on your last question, this is where regulation has helped because Q232 Iain Stewart: During the course of our inquiry it has clearly laid out the requirements that airlines we have received quite a bit of evidence about damage and airports need to begin to follow. Organisations done to wheelchairs that have been transported. They such as ours can begin to audit ourselves against a set have to go into the hold as they can’t be stored in the of criteria to understand if we are providing the right cabin. I understand that the geography of an aircraft level of service. To that very question, the services cabin prohibits the use of wheelchairs, but is there not will vary by airport. We have to be absolutely on top a way that wheelchairs could be stored in the cabin of what is available at individual airports. We need to during the flight rather than having to go into the understand the facilities they have, but we also need hold? to be highly conscious of the quality of the service Peter Duffy: I would suggest not. We simply do not that they are providing and be feeding back where have the space within a cabin to store such a specialist improvements can happen. It isn’t always about and—in a number of cases—such a large piece of kit. infrastructure. It is about the way some of these It can happen from time to time. Thankfully it is an services are provided on a day-to-day basis. infrequent thing, but it is very inconvenient for the We need to understand what is happening across all customer when that does happen. We refund any costs the 130-odd airports we fly to in Europe, and we need incurred, but if you have got to a destination and your to make sure that we are then able to tell the wheelchair is not working in the way you need it to, customers with some level of confidence about the that doesn’t cover some of the inconvenience. It is the service they can expect to have. We have set up a inconvenience factor that we need to bear in mind to special group of people to look at these customers try and make sure that the passenger has the trip that specifically, to identify their individual needs, to work they need to have. It is a complex issue and it can with them in terms of requirements for their journey happen from time to time, but I don’t think the answer and to make sure that on a route-by-route basis we are is to put the wheelchair in the cabin. able to provide the service that they require. Q233 Iain Stewart: One survey that we saw showed Q231 Chair: Mr Osborne, what has the Civil that 60%—three out of five—of wheelchairs carried Aviation Authority done to raise awareness of were damaged. That suggests there is a fundamental disabled people’s rights and to enforce compliance problem with the way that they are handled. I am not with operators? saying it is an EasyJet problem but— Iain Osborne: We have two roles now. Since last Peter Duffy: I can’t comment. They are obviously not October we have become the designated complaint- handling body, and for some years we have been the EasyJet passengers, so I can’t comment on that. enforcement body. I would like to mention that the powers we have to enforce the legislation are criminal Q234 Iain Stewart: It is across the industry. Are powers, which means that they are about sanctioning there any discussions going on in the industry about past failures rather than about changing behaviour, how you might be able to transport wheelchairs forward looking; and they set a very high bar. So we without damaging them? are working with DFT to get the same kind of Iain Osborne: There have been some discussions with forward-looking enforcement powers that we have for regard to electric mobility aids—wheelchairs—which other consumer legislation, which we think would be is coming from the converging point of view both of a very good thing. keeping the chair undamaged and also keeping the We have been working with airlines and airports on a aeroplane safe. In our role as safety regulator, we have whole number of issues. On pre-notification, we have recently put out guidance about not piling baggage on encouraged travel agents to audit their processes and and around these chairs. That has made some improve the robustness of pre-notification. We have contribution. It creates knock-on discussions about worked with providers in airports to hand out credit how you fit everything into the hold, but we will card-sized cards to passengers to remind them about manage those. That does not really provide a solution the importance of pre-notification. In the run-up to the for the smaller wheelchairs, which are effectively Paralympics, we did a lot of audit work with the handled like other baggage. It isn’t immediately industry to make sure that arrangements were in place obvious to me why such a large proportion of as they should be. wheelchairs will be damaged, but we all know that That is what we have done so far. Since we took on stuff does get damaged sometimes in transit in the complaint-handling role, it has given us a much aircraft holds. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 49

13 May 2013 Iain Osborne, Peter Duffy and Mark Hicks

Peter Duffy: Just to give you a sense of the scale, as as possible. What are the lessons that you have I understand it, it is about one a month for EasyJet. learned and are you continuing with that negotiation? We fly 300,000 PRMs a year, so the percentage is out Mark Hicks: Absolutely. A huge lesson that we of kilter with our experience. learned in the run-up to the Paralympics around Iain Stewart: I was not alleging that you— wheelchair repatriation was to ensure that the Peter Duffy: That is just to give you some context. passenger is able to have essentially what are their We are the biggest airline in the UK, so it is just legs all the way up to the aircraft door, and then interesting that we don’t see that. certainly on their return back into the UK or to any Iain Stewart: The survey came from members of destination airport they should have the wheelchair Trailblazers. They said that three out of five reported made available to them. Through working with our a problem, which suggests to me that there is an ground handlers and all the airlines at Heathrow, and issue there. indeed in conjunction with the CAA, we did a lot of work and a lot of training to educate people around Q235 Chair: Mr Duffy, I would like to clarify what why it was so important and why the chair going to you said about reimbursement for damage to the baggage reclaim hall was a problem for the wheelchairs. I think you said there was full passenger. It wasn’t, “We will just take you in an reimbursement, but isn’t there a limit of £1,080 airport chair; it is fine; you are going to get there.” through the Montreal convention? We wanted to protect the dignity and respect for the passenger. Peter Duffy: We look at it on a case-by-case basis. If It is fair to say that the Paralympics was an absolute we have caused damage to a customer’s wheelchair, impetus for us to dive into some of these areas and we are not going to quibble. We are going to try to realise that it was happening on more occasions than put it right. We want to do the right thing for the we would have liked. There was either a breakdown passenger. We will look at it on a case-by-case basis. in communication, where the passenger may not have said they wanted the chair repatriated to them, or Q236 Chair: You are saying that you don’t when offloading an aircraft it may have gone speedily necessarily keep to that limit if you think it is more. with the baggage to the reclaim hall. We worked as a Peter Duffy: No. We look at it on a case-by-case community at Heathrow for the Games and were able basis. If we have caused some damage and it is really to reduce the occurrences from, I would say, around clear that it is our fault, we will do our utmost for the 15 occasions per month to two or three through customer to put it right. It has to be our fault of collaborative work. When we are talking about 80,000 course; we have to have created the damage. PRMs travelling a month it does not sound an awful lot, but what we were trying to do was make every Q237 Sarah Champion: We have received evidence journey better for everybody, and those 15 or 20 that there is lack of clarity between who is ultimately occasions were too many. responsible for ensuring that a traveller with a We write to each airline. We make them aware of what disability has a smooth journey through the airport. I has been brought to our attention, and we work with am interested to see if you differ on this. Who is that airline and ground handler on an integrated plan ultimately responsible for ensuring that a traveller to make sure it doesn’t happen again. I would say with a disability has that smooth transition from the that for the passengers at Heathrow that has been a airport to the plane? noticeable improvement as part of the legacy of the Iain Osborne: Perhaps I can start as the regulator. It Games. is the airport’s responsibility from a designated point outside the airport where the passenger can call for Q239 Sarah Champion: Mr Duffy, what Mr Hicks help—hopefully, they have pre-notified, but even if says sounds wonderful. Is that your experience as an they haven’t there should be a help point identified— airline? through to the gate, where they hand over to the Peter Duffy: By and large it works reasonably well. airline, which is responsible for the passenger through There can always be issues with travelling and to the gate at the other end, where it is the airport transporting that number of customers. It is a question again. of how we act on those issues and learn from those Peter Duffy: While Iain is 100% right, from the issues. It is how we do something about it. customer’s perspective you have to understand the confusion. Essentially, you book a seat with an airline Q240 Sarah Champion: Do you have a particular and you provide all your information about your regular forum in which you do that or is it on an ad- individual requirements to that airline. You would hoc basis? think that perhaps it was the airline that would be Mark Hicks: At Heathrow we have various forums. responsible for seeing you through that process. I said The main one is the AOCA to the airport—airport at the start about getting clarity in terms of the operators and control authorities—where I will services offered and who provides that. It is crucial present to all my airlines across all four terminals because I can absolutely see how that confusion what has been happening in the previous month, how arises, but the accountabilities are as Iain describes. many passengers we have assisted and if there are any generic things that are not going as well as we would Q238 Sarah Champion: Mr Hicks, I am sure that like between ourselves or anything the airport has with the Paralympics you had an awful lot of liaison done that may have had an impact with lifts being with various airlines to make that transition as smooth refurbished and so on. We also have a quarterly forum Ev 50 Transport Committee: Evidence

13 May 2013 Iain Osborne, Peter Duffy and Mark Hicks where we invite all of our airlines and ground handlers checking in online—but if you can’t check in online to a review of what is happening. That is separate for whatever reason, you can continue to check in at from other forums, such as work with the RNIB to the airport just as you did before. But when you start understand it exactly. to do it you find it is much easier. That obviously It is very easy for me and my team to work with our applies for our PRM customers in the same way. If service provider to think about what we should be they don’t want to wait in the airport, particularly if doing, but we want to speak to the disability groups they are not taking hold bags and they want to go to ask, first, if we are doing the right thing, and, straight to security and on to the gate, they will check secondly, if we are not, what we should do to adjust. in in the same way. If they want to check in at the Someone mentioned autism earlier. At Heathrow, we airport, they can do that. are very much aware that that is a group of passengers we want to look at in more detail to see what Q243 Chair: So you are not going to phase out adjustments we can make to their journey through the manual check-ins. airport to make their journey better. As I say, there are Peter Duffy: No. You can still check in at the airport, various things, but certainly monthly and quarterly we but the process is to do it online first. If you can’t do review with all our airlines and also disability groups. it online, of course we will help you at the airport.

Q241 Sarah Champion: Going forward, are there Q244 Chair: And you don’t plan to change that. specific issues that you are going to address? Peter Duffy: There are no plans at the moment to Mark Hicks: Yes. We were doing okay, for example, change that. with blind and visually impaired passengers. Through some feedback we received just from passengers Q245 Chair: Mr Osborne, would the CAA be travelling, it became clear that we were not doing a involved in looking at the practices of airlines in that good enough job. We wanted to understand where our respect? shortcomings were and to work hard to fix those. We Iain Osborne: If it emerged as an issue, it could be. now have an action plan in place, which we are Having seen press coverage, I am always aware that reviewing frequently, by inviting visually impaired what passengers believe about transport is mostly and blind passengers for whom we had got it wrong from the media. If there are stories about it, we take to come and tell us and also to tell our service it seriously, whether or not there is anything behind provider. We also speak to our blind and visually the stories. We have been monitoring our complaints. impaired passengers for whom we got it right to So far this has not really featured as an issue in the understand where there was inconsistency. It is fair to complaints that have been coming in to us but, if it say that what was happening was that we were being emerges, potentially it is something that we could inconsistent with our blind and visually impaired pick up. passengers. That is an absolute focus for us at Peter Duffy: It is a helpful thing. Normally nine out Heathrow in the coming months. of 10 people can check in before they get to the Peter Duffy: At the airline, we have set up our own airport. Going to an airport is a stressful event for advisory group, which is chaired by the Rt Hon David many people, and having one less thing to do when Blunkett. It also has a series of experts from the sector. you get there is good. If you still want to check in There are people like Ann Frye, who used to be a there you can, but most people don’t want to do that. senior civil servant at the Department for Transport, That is what we are trying to do. and Ann Bates, who was on DPTAC. Not only do they advise us on the areas we should be focusing on but Q246 Chair: How many more disabled people are they also act as our conscience, essentially, where we using aviation over the last decade? Do you have can begin to review real customer experiences. We information? look at our customer satisfaction from those groups. Iain Osborne: I do not have that but we can write to We look at the complaints in those groups. They begin you with the numbers. to help us in terms of our areas of focus and where we need to begin to improve. Q247 Chair: Do you keep the information? Iain Osborne: I can try and find out. Q242 Chair: Mr Duffy, EasyJet wants to phase out manual check-ins—assistance with luggage—and Q248 Chair: Can you find out, because we would be have automatic drop-ins, doesn’t it? Have you thought interested to know that? about the impact for some disabled people if they are Iain Osborne: Yes, I am happy to do that. in wheelchairs? Chair: Thank you very much for coming and Peter Duffy: Of course we have. We have moved to answering our questions. online check-in—93% of our customers are now Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 51

Monday 3 June 2013

Members present: Mrs Louise Ellman (Chair)

Sarah Champion Adrian Sanders Karen Lumley Iain Stewart Karl McCartney ______

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Bob Crow, General Secretary, RMT Union, Manuel Cortes, General Secretary, TSSA Union, and Siobhan Endean, National Ofﬁcer for Equalities, Unite the Union, gave evidence.

Q249 Chair: Good afternoon and welcome to the Siobhan Endean: Our disabled members have Transport Select Committee. I wish to declare that I reported to us that, for a limited period, they were am a member of Unite. Can I have your names and often greeted as almost national heroes. As people had the organisations you are representing, please? seen those with disabilities participating and Bob Crow: I am Bob Crow, General Secretary of the competing, there was a perception of capability rather RMT. than disability. The difference in perception was Manuel Cortes: I am Manuel Cortes, General important in how they were treated while they were Secretary, TSSA. in their communities and travelling on public Siobhan Endean: I am Siobhan Endean, National transport. But I think they believe that that national Officer for disabled people at Unite. celebration of disability has been short-lived and it is now back to business as usual. Q250 Chair: Thank you very much. How do you feel Our disabled members are saying to us that, during the the Paralympics changed the experiences and Olympics, the ability to travel was greatly enhanced perceptions of disabled people to travel, Mr Crow? because there were temporary adjustments made; Bob Crow: It was a fantastic opener for people to see there were more staff available to help with them; and those with a disability, who were probably looked at they felt they were able to rely on the transport system before as secondary, applying themselves in the field and so were more confident about using it. Their of sport. In some areas it became the most exciting expectations have been raised and they feel it is part of the Olympic games to see these people with possible to have more of an accessible transport disabilities who could compete and show that having system, but very few of the temporary improvements a disability does not mean you have to pack up shop— that were put in place remain, such as the extra staff that you can compete with the rest. It was a fantastic available. advertisement for what you can do if you are disabled. The work that the DFT Transport Direct team did with The only shame was that, as they were doing that, the spectator journey planner really helped them so they were shutting down the Remploy offices. These that they were able to plan journeys and know where fantastic people who produced fantastic goods for us they could get on and off. They would like to see us were having their factories shut down and the work build on that legacy from the Paralympics to make sent to other parts of the world for cheap labour. sure that we make the structural changes necessary to transport stations but also to retain greater Q251 Chair: Mr Cortes, what are your views? improvements in staff. Manuel Cortes: Just to add to what Bob said, I think it has provided excellent role models for disabled Q253 Chair: How much training was given to staff people going forward. The danger in this is that, then, and how important were the volunteers as well having had a very good Paralympics that everybody as the permanent staff? thought went really well, we just forget about issues Bob Crow: There was loads of training given to staff, of disabilities afterwards. The cuts agenda that the not so much on how to help the disabled but more Government are introducing, in our view, is having about where to point people with foreign languages disastrous effects on disabled people, in particular who could not understand how to get to the sites when you look at public transport. At the moment around London and the rest of the country. But the many stations only have one member of staff, whether contradiction that has taken place, Chair, if you don’t it is somebody who works on the platform or in the mind me saying, is that on the one hand we are being booking office. One of the outcomes if the McNulty told we want disability champions—we are all for review is implemented in full, if that member of staff that—but on the other hand they want to do away with is taken out of the station, is that there will be no staff on stations. It seems a nonsense. The best way is one left behind to lend a hand when somebody has to make every member of staff a disability champion, mobility problems. and then every member of staff would have to help every single disabled person in their time of need. Q252 Chair: Ms Endean, what do you think was the achievement of the Paralympics in relation to Q254 Chair: Was any specific training given to staff disabled people? in relation to dealing with disabled people? Ev 52 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Bob Crow, Manuel Cortes and Siobhan Endean

Manuel Cortes: Not that I can recall. To emphasise and that is never good enough. We need to be able to the point that Bob has made, I will give you a good see disability training, wherever it is provided, which example of some of the challenges that disabled is user-led, as Bob has said, such as getting in a people face when trying to get on a public transport wheelchair and experiencing what it is like to use network. If you go to Birmingham New Street at the transport as a disabled person. We try to build moment and want to use a suburban line, what will networks between our transport workers and our happen if you are in a wheelchair, for example, is that disabled members so that by learning from each other they will put you on a train to the nearest staffed they can find ways to build their awareness. I do not station and from there onwards they will put you in a think it is something you can cover in a one-hour cab to take you to the station that you want to go to. training event. It has to be an ongoing partnership In future, if we have no staff in the suburban between the two groups to build understanding rather networks, what will be the point of people trying to than just training. use our train services? All you will have to do is cab Manuel Cortes: I want to give you a positive example them from Birmingham New Street to whatever of where training was undertaken. Unfortunately, it station they want to go to. To me, that exemplifies that was not on this side of the Irish sea but in Northern there are some real issues regarding access. Ireland, with the advent of Londonderry being the The other thing I have heard from my members is European city of culture. We had a joint approach with that, whenever, for example, you put lifts in stations, Translink, which is the publicly-owned train and bus there is a notable increase in the amount of people operator in Northern Ireland, where we used money with mobility problems—not just disabled but also from the Union Learning Fund to train people in sign elderly and infirm people—who use stations. If you language. To me, that was a good example and one are going to be taking out of stations the staff element that should be followed in other areas. that provides support for some of those people to use Chair: Thank you for that information. the lifts, for example, that is just going to deter people. Bob Crow: The point as well, Chair, is that the Q256 Sarah Champion: All three of you have McNulty report, as Manuel referred to, makes it so spoken very powerfully about the need for people to hard for a disabled person or worker. Now you are help with accessibility. Do you think it is possible to going to take out ticket office staff, so there will be have accessibility without staff? no one on the stations to sell tickets, and no guards, Bob Crow: Not really. A new station being built, for so no guards on the train as they have taken them out example, for Crossrail at the moment will be built to completely. The best way for MPs to get a real taste disability requirements of the law. The problem you of what it is like to be disabled is to get into a have as well is that, in northern England, Northern wheelchair today, go round the tube network and see Rail are the biggest training operating company and how hard it is for you. All these committees are fine— all of its stock is going to be illegal after 2017 because and we want to play a full part in it—but you could it does not meet the requirements of the Disability do your own thing: get in a wheelchair for the day Discrimination Act. But you can put a lift or an and go round the system. escalator in, for any one means, for a disabled person to get from service level to platform or platform to Q255 Chair: Ms Endean, do you want to comment service level, but when it breaks down who is going on this? We will pursue the issue of staff availability to be there to help them? in the ticket offices and the points that you have all made in your evidence, but, in relation to the success Manuel Cortes: I suppose it is a one-word answer: of the Paralympics, as far as you know, were staff no. I do not think it is possible. trained in disability—in being able to help disabled Siobhan Endean: I would add that all of our disabled people—or was it just that there were a lot of staff members want to be able to travel independently on around? an accessible transport system. We are all sharing the Siobhan Endean: Unite did quite a lot of work around aim to get to a stage where our trains and stations organising staff who were at the Olympics and are accessible. Our members say to us that they are Paralympics. We were aware that many of them had confident about travelling, but they do not use the been recruited at the last minute and we were not transport system because they might be able to get in completely convinced that all of the training was in to one underground station but they have no idea place. I am not aware of any training that was whether or not they are going to be able to get out at specifically given around disability awareness and the other end. They do not have the confidence in the would be surprised at how much training was given system and they need the access to staff members to in terms of disability awareness. I would like to see support them, to be there for them when things have more training across the board for transport staff gone wrong. around this issue. We organise bus and taxi drivers Of course staff need to be trained, and it would be within Unite, and I am not aware that there was really helpful if they were trained in British Sign specific training given even for volunteers around Language, though I do not think we are anywhere near access. But that is probably a broader issue in terms there, but also it acts as a deterrent particularly around of the co-ordination of what was a huge event, as we hate crime. We did a survey through the Action for know, and it is amazing that we were able to pull it Rail campaign and found that one in three disabled off in the way that this country did. passengers that we surveyed had experienced hate However, the quality of training around disability crime, but 70% of them were concerned about hate issues is quite often no more than the fire regulations, crime. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 53

3 June 2013 Bob Crow, Manuel Cortes and Siobhan Endean

The physical presence of staff means that they know was: are you doing anything to support your members that at least they have someone to report it to, so that they do get the training they need? somebody who is aware that disability hate crime is a Bob Crow: We want all staff to have training. We are crime, but also somebody whom they can turn to for not opposed to it; we haven’t put up any barriers. Staff support if that occurs. It would be great if they were have to have proper training. Some of the companies able to travel independently across the transport have a concern about giving training that, if their system, but I do not think we are anywhere near that members of staff have an accident, then they will be yet. On that basis we do need staff. liable for that person who is going to be off work. Manuel Cortes: Can I come back because I did give Sometimes, moving someone about in a wheelchair a very short response? It might be useful if I was to can be a particularly arduous job. Our staff do not lodge with you some specific examples of the mind doing it and, so long as they are given sufficient challenges that our front-line members work with day training, are only too happy to help disabled people. in, day out in stations up and down the country—some Manuel Cortes: I have two points on that. We as a of the challenges that they see from the perspective of union support the demands of the A2B campaign, disabled passengers trying to get on to our transport which is arguing for the industry to fund a regulator network. I would be quite happy to lodge that with so that we have a good grasp of what training needs the Committee if you think it would be helpful. to happen, ensure that training does happen, that there Chair: If you would like to send us some information, are regular refreshers across the industry, and, in it would be helpful. addition to that, that we have a central point where all complaints by disabled passengers are lodged so that Q257 Sarah Champion: Building on from the points everybody has a clearer picture of what is happening you have made, as part of this investigation we have within public transport and people having access into had various people come in with evidence. Some the network. people are saying they have had fantastic help from The other thing we have done is some work around staff; others are saying it has been appalling, and that disability training. This is not to detract from the very very much colours how they view transport systems important point that Bob made. At the end of the day, and whether or not they are going to use them in the it is the responsibility of the employers, but we have had a couple of projects funded via the Union future. We have been speaking about training. What Learning Fund looking at neurodiversity, looking at support do you give your staff so that they feel trained dyspraxia, and at issues like sign language—the and confident if they have a disabled passenger that example I gave in Northern Ireland and so on. At the they need to deal with? end of the day, this will not change unless the industry Bob Crow: They are not our staff; they work for the takes it seriously. Unfortunately, it is going to cost employer. money. Sarah Champion: I meant your members, sorry. Bob Crow: We carried out a survey and it was carried Bob Crow: We don’t give them training in disability; out by all the rail unions, the National Pensioners it is up to the employer. It is their company they are Convention and also by Transport for All. The three running. They are quick enough to reap the benefits key outcomes of that survey were that 39% of in share dividends; they should be able to put disabled passengers said they rely on staff assistance, something back in. But we aren’t just talking about a further 32% found it helpful, and the report has said trains here, are we? We are talking about buses as that over 75% say the loss of staff will make train well. travel difficult, with over a third saying that it would deter them from making some journeys or may make Q258 Sarah Champion: Mr Crow, is that something, travel impossible. therefore, you are lobbying for on behalf of your members so that they do get the support and training Q260 Chair: I think, Mr Crow, we do have some of they need? that information. Ms Champion was really pursuing Bob Crow: At this moment in time, if a person is on what the unions were doing and we have had a a station and needs help or there is a disabled person response on that. on a train who has given prior notice, the station staff Bob Crow: But, looking at the end, Chair, 27% of put ramps on the train and get the disabled person off disabled people have experienced abuse due to being the train or put them back on the train. If you do away disabled. with station staff, there is going to be no one there to put the ramps on the train. Q261 Karl McCartney: I have a question, and I am Secondly, for buses, it is even worse, because in some sorry to interrupt you, Mr Crow. Mr Cortes, taking of the rural parts of the country they cannot even get you back to something you said in your opening on the buses. They have cut them back so much that remarks, you mentioned that a problem might be when the buses turn up, particularly when it is school staffing at stations. Surely any organisation would runs, they cannot even get on the bus. We think it is realise that staffing is the biggest cost. Even in a absolutely scandalous that persons, because of their union, some of your staff wage bills will be quite high disability, cannot have access to the transport system and you might look at redeploying your staff. the same as anyone else would. Therefore, would you welcome perhaps the technology that makes driverless trains a reality, Q259 Sarah Champion: I completely agree, but that taking those people who are the drivers and putting goes back to my first question. What I was asking them on station platforms instead? Ev 54 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Bob Crow, Manuel Cortes and Siobhan Endean

Manuel Cortes: I do not see what driverless trains east coast, or Virgin on the west coast, if a disabled have to do with people getting access to the transport person gives notice that they are travelling, ramps will network. be put up and people will be there. But there is a contradiction taking place that they want to do away Q262 Karl McCartney: It frees up staff. with the staff. Manuel Cortes: With respect, Mr McCartney, it is neither here nor there. Q270 Iain Stewart: Forgive me. We have had an airing about the staff issue. With regard to the staff Q263 Karl McCartney: You would not welcome who are in place today, the companies say they get that, then. disability awareness training. I am asking, from your Manuel Cortes: Driverless trains, no. perspective, whether there is a particular training scheme that a bus or train operator has in place that Q264 Karl McCartney: Yes, and freeing up staff to is good and that other companies may be able to be on station platforms. emulate. Bob Crow: Would you like your wife or daughter to Bob Crow: Most of them are adequate that have to be on a driverless train that breaks down? deal—

Q265 Karl McCartney: I was addressing my Q271 Iain Stewart: But is there a good one? Is there question to Mr Cortes, Mr Crow— one that is up in lights about which you could say, Manuel Cortes: I have answered the question and “Company x has got this absolutely right. We wish all have told you it is neither here nor there. It is just other companies could follow suit”? completely irrelevant. Bob Crow: Not absolutely right, no. Chair: Wait a moment. Mr Cortes, one speaker at a time. Mr Cortes, you have given your answer. Q272 Iain Stewart: Who is top of the line? There must be one. Q266 Karl McCartney: I have a second question Bob Crow: The problem for disabled people is that regarding something Mr Crow said, I think. You there are restrictions put in their way because of the mentioned that MPs should have experience. I think I barriers. They ﬁnd it particularly hard to get through am speaking for all of us—although I am not sure barriers. It isn’t the same person who is walking what everybody has done—when I say we all have through like me and you, who can get the ticket and spent some time as a disabled person would have. walk through the barrier. Bob Crow: I’m glad to hear it. Karl McCartney: I wonder if you have had any Q273 Iain Stewart: Forgive me, Mr Crow, but you personal experience you might pass on from a time are missing the point of my question. you might have spent in a wheelchair using public Bob Crow: Have I got someone— transport. Bob Crow: Yes, because my brother has been in a Q274 Iain Stewart: Is there one training scheme wheelchair since 16 years of age. that— Bob Crow: London Underground. Q267 Karl McCartney: But, you yourself, have you done what we have done or not? Q275 Iain Stewart: Is that the best one? Bob Crow: Have I actually been in a wheelchair round Bob Crow: In my opinion, yes. the tube network? Q276 Iain Stewart: What about the other panellists? Q268 Karl McCartney: I just wondered if you had Siobhan Endean: We are doing partnership training or not. with bus companies in London and developing an Bob Crow: No, I have not been in a wheelchair round accredited system of training on leadership and the tube because I have dealt with people who have equality issues. We can certainly forward you the to deal with this— details of that training. That is organised jointly by the Karl McCartney: I’m sure you have, but I just employers and the unions. Particularly with regard to thought I would make that point. disability awareness, we are working with a bus company in Plymouth where there is a campaign Q269 Iain Stewart: To pick up on the staff training around disability hate crime. That is really about points that we have been discussing, I accept that it is awareness among drivers and also passengers of the the employers’ responsibility to provide training. issues of hate crime and what to do; it is about Some of the bus and train operators that we have provision of information and awareness training. We heard give evidence say that they do have disability can certainly forward you the information about that awareness training for their staff. Are you saying that if that would be helpful. that is not the case or the training is inadequate, or Manuel Cortes: One of the biggest barriers for people could you point to a particular company that has a getting on the public transport network is that at the good programme in place? moment, particularly on the rail side, nobody wants to Bob Crow: There is disability awareness training that be responsible for putting the investment in, for goes on for most of the staff for the services that the example, for lifts and so on. Disability campaigners— companies require to have them on. For example, if and there are plenty of them behind me today—are you look at the East Coast Main Line, travelling the very frustrated that sometimes they are being told, “It Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 55

3 June 2013 Bob Crow, Manuel Cortes and Siobhan Endean is the local authority,” then, “It is Network Rail,” and what station you are just about to pull into. What then, “It is the train operator.” What happens in the made that change? Was that regulation? That is really end is that nobody puts in the investment. If you want quite national, isn’t it, on trains, but it certainly is not to make a tangible change, you need to look at how on buses. How do we make that improvement? you resolve that conflict because nobody wants to put Bob Crow: I don’t think it is regulation. Certainly if the money in. That is the problem. you go to Wales, it is announced in both Welsh and Bob Crow: They just want to take money out. English. So it certainly wasn’t regulation; it was more information. That is the real issue. At the end of the day, what the disabled— Q277 Iain Stewart: You mentioned Plymouth, I think. We had a representative from Devon county Q279 Karl McCartney: But can we force bus council at one of our previous sessions and they had operators to do it? I know it is your representatives introduced a card scheme that people, particularly who are driving the buses, but obviously it is the with hidden disabilities, can present to the bus driver companies themselves— or whoever to say, “I have a condition.” Do you think Bob Crow: Yes, if they are prepared to spend on it or that is a worthwhile scheme? Would you prefer to see the Government are prepared to give more subsidies. a national scheme, or is it best left to each local You can be at some bus stations in London and be authority to implement their own one? told the next bus that is coming, and you can be at Siobhan Endean: We would like to see a national other bus stations where they cannot afford it. If you scheme and we would particularly like to see are in rural parts of Britain, there is no information at something around the focus on hidden disabilities. all. Disabled people have to stay there and wait for One of the issues that our members have particularly something to turn up. But one thing is for sure: putting is with the concessionary travel cards. People say to all the differences to one side, disabled people feel them, “Why have you got that card? You are not safer when there are plenty of visible staff around disabled because you do not have a wheelchair or a them. stick.” The hidden disabilities issue is absolutely crucial. It would be helpful if there was a national Q280 Chair: Do you think the point that Mr framework, particularly around reporting and McCartney has made is something that is the monitoring hate crime and the issues around access. responsibility of the operators—for buses, bus Obviously, delivery would need to be at a local level operators, or for trains, the train operators? anyway, and one of the issues is about ensuring that Bob Crow: Yes, because Mr McCartney made a point people are engaged with it and feel participative. about train drivers. My union represents train drivers, Particularly around taxi driving, we would like to see and I cannot see how the hell it would help the local taxi boards where you include the taxi drivers disabled, if a train with no one on it is going to break themselves, but then also people who experience down in the middle of a tube, that a robot is going to disability, such as user-led disabled groups. It also jump out and all of a sudden help the disabled person. would be important for the local authority so that there Manuel Cortes: Announcements help people who can be a joint responsibility around these issues. That cannot see. That is blatantly obvious. It works on the would be really helpful. railway, so I think bus operators should be adopting that as well. But it is interesting to look at the Manuel Cortes: Under hidden disabilities—because I Passenger Focus survey of passenger attitudes. To think it is a very important issue that you have raised back up what Bob said, disabled people feel much there, Mr Stewart—one of the big issues when you more vulnerable when they travel. That came out in have ticket machines is that people with dyslexia, for the Passenger Focus survey. If you take staff out of example, find them very difficult to use, never mind stations, in my view, you are going to deter even someone who is blind, for whom they are absolutely greater numbers of people from travelling. useless. By taking out that staff interface, you are making it very hard for certain groups of disabled Q281 Chair: Who should be responsible for making people to use our public transport network. sure that disabled people with wheelchairs are able to use the allotted spaces on buses? We have had a lot Q278 Karl McCartney: On the point you have of representations from people who say that they brought up there, Mr Cortes, I would like all three of cannot get the wheelchairs in the designated spaces you maybe to give your feelings about what I noticed because sometimes buggies are there and the staff on when I caught a bus while wearing a blindfold and the bus—the bus drivers—are not enforcing the with a guide dog. Most buses do not have automated regulations. Who do you think is responsible for that? announcements or even drivers who announce what Bob Crow: It is the responsibility of the bus company the stop is or where they might be on the route, and that runs the bus because the drivers are on their own, you certainly do not know when you cannot see. Most driving a bus and responsible for taking fares, driving trains either have automated announcements or the a bus safely and being aware of those around them. conductor comes over and tells you where you are or What happens is that people pile on the buses. If you cut back on bus subsidy there will be fewer buses, more people are going to pile on those buses with more buggies, more carrier bags, and someone turns Ev 56 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Bob Crow, Manuel Cortes and Siobhan Endean up with a wheelchair and can’t get on. The only till a bus stops for you,” but, if that person is member of staff on that bus is the bus driver. If he or responsible for the ticket office as well, then if he she cannot cope, all they can do is stall the bus and got into disciplinary action, the first thing the train ask for assistance, and then people are waiting 15, 20 operating company would say would be, “Why did or 30 minutes for someone to turn up. So it is the bus you leave your post?” companies: they should put more buses on and make Manuel Cortes: I have nothing to add. more buses disabled-friendly. Siobhan Endean: This is the one issue that causes our Q285 Chair: Ms Endean, do you have any views on members who are bus drivers the greatest concern and that? frustration, and they do raise this issue, as you say, Siobhan Endean: We have looked into this a little bit quite a lot. We would like to see a return to more bus and, particularly from the bus driver’s point of view, it is an issue about whether there is awareness about conductors so that the driver was not the only person different rail connections if you are driving a bus, on the bus. But, also, there needs to be a clearer because, of course, we do not have a joined-up understanding, and I am aware of the campaigns that transport system. Bob is absolutely right that it would are going on in London to make sure that everybody be great if you could have that door-to-door transport is aware that it is regulation that requires the bus and you were aware that there were connections; that drivers to ensure that the wheelchairs have priority would be really good. But we think that the and sole use of the disabled spaces. complexities of timetables would make it pretty There simply is not an awareness out there among the difficult for bus drivers to be aware of all those public yet and we have a long way to go. We are connections. developing strategies with our disabled members and As a minimum, training could be built into the route bus drivers to look at how we can increase awareness training so that when a driver learns the route they are of that issue. But, at the end of the day, if there were going to be taking there is information about where bus conductors—or more bus conductors—as well as accessible stations are so that they are aware of that the driver, it would inevitably help with that situation. information. But, of course, they have other responsibilities, and it would be important that that was then built into their job description and also their Q282 Chair: What about people using different training. A structural shift would be needed to ensure modes of travel? Let us say a disabled person who that that happened. may have been on the train gets off and wants to catch a bus. Should it be the responsibility of the transport Q286 Karen Lumley: I want to go back to the buses. worker at the station to take them to the bus or make I spent some time on a bus last week with a friend. sure that they catch it? The bus driver did not actually seem to have the Bob Crow: If that was part of their job, our members confidence to ask people to move their buggies. What would not oppose it. They can only have that if there more do you think could be done to help the training is a joined-up transport system, but the reality is that for them? once the person— Siobhan Endean: There could be training but also awareness campaigns. At the moment there is a lack of awareness among the public. All they are Q283 Chair: As it is at the moment, whose concerned about is the fact that their bus is going to responsibility should that be? be late, and all the people with buggies are concerned Bob Crow: At the moment, it is the responsibility for about is the fact they have waited till 10.30 to avoid the landlord—e.g. the person who owns that particular the rush hour and cannot then get on a bus. It is that train operating company—to get them to the access kind of conflict, at which point the wheelchair user point of that train operating company, and after that it and the bus driver become the focus of a debate, is either left to good will or they make their own way. which people do not understand, when legislation or We would like to see one joined-up transport system regulation is required to be put in place. There is a so that, whether you went from John O’Groats down campaign on in London at the moment that makes to Devon or from Brixton to Clapham, it would be the sure people are aware of that; and I think it is just an responsibility of the transport network to get you awareness among the general public. there. Perhaps a campaign on Mumsnet and involving parents in that campaign would be helpful. It is something that we are looking at at the moment. From Q284 Chair: I want to focus at the moment on the our perspective, it is about us connecting up bus driver current situation. Are you saying that it is a matter of members with our disabled members to ensure that good will—that it will not be anybody’s they are working together to spread that awareness; responsibility? but it is community-based campaigning that we need Bob Crow: Yes. It is a matter of good will. On the to do. London underground, if you walk down to Westminster station across the road here, you will see Q287 Karen Lumley: In most of our towns we have station staff taking someone who has visual local disabled access groups and things like that. Do difficulties to the train and putting them on. But once you think it would be useful for bus drivers to take they get to the barrier of the door, yes, no doubt, there part in that kind of activity? It does not happen in my will be good will from people who say, “I will wait town—I know that—but it may be that sort of thing— Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 57

3 June 2013 Bob Crow, Manuel Cortes and Siobhan Endean

Bob Crow: When is the bus driver supposed to do that well, because it is the registered taxi drivers in the when they have been at work all day? main— Mr Sanders: No. Q288 Karen Lumley: In their spare time. Bob Crow:—who have spent a hell of a lot of money. Bob Crow: In their spare time—I wonder— We are talking about hailing down.

Q289 Chair: Mr Crow, we want you to give your Q292 Mr Sanders: You cannot hail a minicab. views; you mustn’t ask the members. That is okay, Bob Crow: No, you cannot hail a minicab down, so but— what happens is, at the end of the day, it is left for the Bob Crow: I have given you my views. A bus driver taxi drivers purely to carry disabled workers, which has done 45 or 50 hours’ work and then you want they do not mind doing. They spend and invest a hell them to go and do this in their free time, in the rest of a lot of money, have a lot of security checks into of their time. Why don’t we see the managing themselves, and, by the same token, they are the ones directors of these companies doing a bit of access as who are expected all the time to pick up disabled well? workers, where the minicabs do not do it because their cars are not appropriate to pick up disabled workers. Q290 Karen Lumley: Quite right. I am not saying What we should be looking at is more disabled-access that they should not do that as well. cars or taxis to pick disabled people up and more Siobhan Endean: Bob has raised an important point. schemes such as those Computer Cab and Dial-a-Cab In a project that we did between a local community have so that disabled workers can be picked up and in Blackpool and the bus company, it was the chief taken from door to door. executives who took the lead on that. It was a joint awareness between the disabled community and the Q293 Sarah Champion: Do you think that a national bus company, from chief executive down, about the accessibility code of practice for taxi drivers and needs of disabled people in ensuring that they had minicab drivers would help clarify the expectations? access to the transport. It is only an agreement, but Bob Crow: Yes. I would like to see that come in and whether or not it leads to action by that company is also the same checks on criminality that apply to yet to be seen. registered taxi drivers being applied to minicab drivers. Also, how would you get on with rickshaws? Q291 Sarah Champion: Mr Crow, through That would be another one, wouldn’t it? experience and also evidence we have had here, we have had a number of examples of taxi drivers who Q294 Chair: The question is— just keep on driving when disabled people are trying Bob Crow: One of our friends got strangled by one in to hail them. They just keep on driving. What is your Edinburgh; a scarf got caught round their neck and a position on the Law Commission’s interim proposals scaffold pole and hanged them, so that is why we for a duty for taxi drivers to stop to pick up disabled don’t like rickshaws. passengers? Chair: If there are no further questions, thank you Bob Crow: We would support it as long as it is fair very much. and equitable and that minicabs do the same thing as

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Dai Powell OBE, Chair, Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC), and Chris Holmes MBE, Disability Commissioner, Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

Q295 Chair: Welcome to the Transport Select Chris Holmes: I want to cover a couple of the issues Committee. Could I have your names and raised in the previous session in terms of the organisation, please? Paralympic games, the impact and all the questions Chris Holmes: Good afternoon. I am Chris Holmes, around training. Though not specifically linked to Disability Commissioner at the Equalities and Human some of the transport staff, we did a huge amount of Rights Commission. Before that I was director of the work in terms of training with all of our volunteers, Paralympic games at London 2012. the London Ambassadors, and also with a number of Dai Powell: Good afternoon. I am Dai Powell, chair the staff particularly across Heathrow and all the of DPTAC, the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory transport there. The point could not come across more strongly that training is absolutely at the core of so Committee. much of this stuff, enabling the staff to have the comfort to have an understanding of the issues, which Q296 Chair: Thank you very much. What would you then gives them the confidence to be able to act and say have been the main achievements in improving perform their role absolutely superbly for disabled as transport facilities for people who have disabilities well as non-disabled passengers and customers. That over the last five years? is an important point from the previous session. Chris Holmes: If I may—and feel free to say no if In terms of the last five years, there have certainly you want— been a number of significant improvements. Our DHI Chair: Yes. inquiry showed particularly things like the 995 Ev 58 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Dai Powell OBE and Chris Holmes MBE stations that now have safe station status, so disabled not so good? Who should take on the job, first, of people can feel much more comfortable and confident passing on best practice and, secondly, putting that to access those stations because they are covered by best practice into practice in the areas that are not CCTV and the like. Again, the crucial point there is practising it? that, whenever a change is made that benefits disabled Chris Holmes: The crucial point is that there are a passengers, it will absolutely benefit all passengers, as number of organisations who have this, from the DFT again was discussed in the earlier session in terms of down to individual private companies and other bus the iBus system and the “talkie” announcements on services that are run by public authorities. So it is a the buses. That is fantastic for me if I am on a bus, shared responsibility, but everybody has to take that. but it is just as useful and effective for so many One of our recommendations that came out of the passengers, particularly if you take the London Disability Harassment Inquiry was the sense that example, where pretty much nobody knows where probably the key point is that everybody does take they are; to have that information coming to people ownership for this. There has to be leadership from benefits everybody. When a change is made that the top, but everybody has to take ownership for this, benefits disabled people, it benefits everybody who is otherwise it will just become a constant inspector kind using that transport mode. of regime, which will never deliver best practice on the ground and never enable more disabled people to Q297 Chair: Thank you, Mr Holmes. Mr Powell, use public transport because it will not have been what do you see as the main achievements? taken on board. Dai Powell: The main achievement in the last five, 10 or even 15 years has been in the infrastructure itself. Q300 Mr Sanders: Chris, when you say “the top”, The hard infrastructure for public transport has who do you see as being the top? improved beyond recognition from where it was 15 Chris Holmes: If you took the top, you would have years ago. What is left now is how we join that all to look to the Department. up—what happens next? The big issues lie in what comes once the infrastructure is accessible or on the Q301 Mr Sanders: You would see it as a task for the way to being accessible. What do we do to make more Department for Transport. disabled people feel comfortable and able to travel? Chris Holmes: I think they have an important role, yes, and the Minister to lead that. Q298 Mr Sanders: In terms of priority areas requiring action to improve access to transport, how do these differ in different parts of the country? Q302 Chair: Mr Powell, what is your view on that? Dai Powell: There is a huge difference in different Is enough done to promote best practice? parts of the country. There is a huge difference Dai Powell: It should be driven from the Department. between urban and rural, and there is a difference The Department has a responsibility to both collate across the geographical areas. While localism can be and disseminate best practice. It is an area where we very good to get things done on the ground, for have not been that successful over a number of years. disabled people there needs to be a level of If we want to look at what the criteria is, what we are consistency within the system. If you have a certain aiming for and what the outcome is, the outcome has disability and need access to information, that to be more disabled people travelling, more disabled information needs to be consistent wherever you are people in work and college, and fewer doctors having in the country if you want to be able to plan your to treat people at home because they can go out and journey. One of the most important things is to try to about. get consistency of information, delivery and design We need to be able to monitor how you get to that. wherever you are in the country so that people feel While we have done a lot with the infrastructure, we confident. At the end of the day, it is all about more have not shouted that loudly about what the disabled people being comfortable and able to travel. improvements in the infrastructure have been. The We need that level of consistency across the country. DFT has a very strong role in disseminating that. I Chris Holmes: To build on that—it comes out of the agree that it has to be leadership at a local level to localism agenda, really—there are great pieces of understand what can be done. It is not always about practice out there, but it is then about mainstreaming extra financial resources; it is about how you that, making localism go global so that you learn from rearrange something, how you take that responsibility those good practices and enable them to go and get on top of it. country-wide. Certainly there are massive differences geographically and across different transport modes, Q303 Karl McCartney: I want to go back, if that is but there is great learning that can be shared across possible, Mr Holmes, to something you brought up as the piece—stuff that is already happening at the referring to the previous session, where I perhaps did moment—which would make a massive difference if not get as constructive answers as I was hoping to it was shared across the country. after some of the political sparring and point scoring that had gone on earlier on in that session. I asked a Q299 Mr Sanders: Given that there are probably specific question about trains and the fact they have some very good examples out there, who has the announcements, which help those who are blind and responsibility to get that across to the areas that are visually impaired and, as you have said, help all Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 59

3 June 2013 Dai Powell OBE and Chris Holmes MBE passengers. I want to find out how it came about that have to have AV. It will concentrate the mind and virtually right across the nation all trains have that but improve the passenger journey. we do not have that on buses. I want to find out if you think, from some of the things you have said now, it Q305 Karl McCartney: You will see certain is a localism agenda or whether it is something for the standards set. I do not think it is just an announcement Minister to do, or that it really does need some of when a bus is stopping. Talking to people who regulation. work with and those who are guided by dogs, they Secondary to that, my experience with a lovely young say that part of the problem is when the bus does not guide dog was that the design of the bus was not stop somewhere; it just shoots past. The driver does particularly helpful. I know that all buses are not have lots of things to worry about, but obviously then designed the same in that first 12 or 15 feet, and, a blind person gets off the bus not knowing where maybe, if there was regulation to make sure that buses they are and has to get back to the point where they were mostly the same, it would help those who are wanted to be. disabled or unfortunately cannot access transport as Dai Powell: One of the hardest things is when a bus— much as others. I am sorry that was quite a long it comes over on audio-visual—is on diversion. If you question; there are loads of things in there. have a learning difficulty or you are blind, that does Chris Holmes: It is only fair for you to be able to not tell you anything. So, yes, we are agreed. We have have some words in this session, having not been able the technology and that can be done. If we set an end to get them all out in the previous one. date for it to be done, the industry will work towards What you see on the rail and across the vast that and will, in general, as it has in the past, work majority—if not the totality—of the bus network in with us to achieve that. London is that excellent system of announcements, Chris Holmes: With more training, I believe that that which, as you say, benefits everyone. One would hope can better assist as well to enable drivers to feel they that this could come about through everybody are providing a quality service to all their passengers, watching that, seeing that it works, not just for which will make them feel better about their working disabled people, but it benefits everybody and people day. They may feel they have done a great day’s feel more comfortable and more confident to use work—they have assisted somebody. But there has to be that spark, training and ability to enable them to public transport. When you get those announcements, see somebody else’s perspective and to understand people feel a greater sense of safety in that there is a that they can have a positive impact on that. sense of more control on that public transport, which is a really important point as well. One would hope Q306 Karl McCartney: I fully agree—though with that all transport operators would see the benefit and the previous three witnesses who were in front of us want to have that on their system. If they do not, then I had not been able to say it to them—that it is actually it does very much go to the question of regulation to the bus driver’s bus, that they should take ownership, enforce that. and, if there are buggies that need to be moved or things that need to be done, in my mind it is the bus Q304 Karl McCartney: I am going to interrupt you driver’s bus, though I know perhaps other passengers to say that not only would there be benefits but also feel it is their bus. the management will see a cost implication. It will not Just going back on the technology aspect, quite a lot happen by osmosis, I think, that they will willingly of people now have various types of phones—I am spend that money to improve the service that they trying not to do product placement—with maybe the provide for all their potential passengers. Do you think possibility for an app for individual bus journeys. I there needs to be regulation to force them to spend am sure, as you have mentioned, that the technology that money? must be there to bring that forward to help people, Chris Holmes: If they are not able to see the benefits but that is something bus companies have to pay for, on the other side of the costs—you are right that there isn’t it? is a cost implication—such as the increased Dai Powell: Yes. passengers, thus more in the fare box, and if that does Chris Holmes: Yes. not come about, it is a legitimate area to look at regulation. Q307 Sarah Champion: Just building on your point, Dai Powell: The PSVAR—the regulations—for buses Mr Powell, you have mentioned AV, but are there missed a trick when they were passed. The cost of other technologies that you think would be readily and retrofitting audio-visual in a bus is around £2,000. A reasonably cheaply available that could help? new double-decker bus in London would cost Dai Powell: There are technologies. We have to look £190,000. There is a cost to industry—and I am in the at things like journey planner, which we have in bus industry, so I understand that one—but the London, or other sorts of electronic ways in which benefits far outweigh it. As to what has happened with disabled people can plan the whole journey. One of the accessibility regulation, it is very good that the the huge difficulties we have is that every journey has Department is putting an end date on when something gaps. Who is responsible for the gaps? Who fills in? should happen. There is a lead-in time by which the If a person has come into a train station and is then industry knows that it has to get up to speed and get going off on the bus, who is responsible for the bit in this in place. There is no reason why we cannot have between, particularly when that breaks down? With a lead-in time on AV—audio-visual—on buses and set good technology, we can have a journey planner that that agenda, that, by a certain date, all buses should works. There is still work to do on Transport Direct Ev 60 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Dai Powell OBE and Chris Holmes MBE and it is not anywhere near where it could be, but if time; it was people’s first and last impression of the it was that sort of thing in real time a disabled person games. It has always been tricky in the past for would know exactly what is happening and what disabled passengers going through Heathrow because options are available. there are so many different providers there. We developed alongside them the concept of “Team Q308 Sarah Champion: To answer your own Heathrow”, where we got together the heads of all of question, who do you think is responsible for filling the organisations who were in the airport—94 airlines in those gaps? in there—as well as the ground staff, the passengers Dai Powell: It depends where the gap is. It has to be with restricted mobility service, all of them, to the provider of services, so where does it stop and understand how we could lay out a strategy for people where does it start? But what about a disabled person going through that airport in a seamless way. Getting who is lost or when the system goes wrong? There the people at the top and then having that filtered was one case recently in a mainline station not very down through the operation is the only way that you far from here where there was a diversion for can smooth over those gaps. passengers and they all had to go down quite a steep ramp. For elderly people or those with a mobility Q311 Chair: Is that being continued now? impairment it was almost impossible. Whose Chris Holmes: At Heathrow, yes, there have been a responsibility was that? It was the station’s lot of legacy benefits from that. Crucially, it is so responsibility, but no one took it on. That is, again, a much about what we are talking about now. When I leadership issue from the station provider. It is things was putting together the vision for the Paralympic like that that make disabled people less confident games, it was not just to have an extraordinary about travel. If they have a really bad journey, they celebration of sport in the summer of 2012. What I are much less confident about trying to undertake that believed we could do if we got that right was make a journey again. fundamental difference—have a fundamental shift— in attitudes towards and opportunities for disabled Q309 Chair: How often does this happen, where people. Sport was at the heart of it, but that had to people’s responsibilities are not pointed out clearly? flow through into transport, employment and Dai Powell: An awful lot. There are an awful lot of education. At Heathrow, you are seeing those legacy gaps in the service where it breaks down. It is one of benefits from the work that we did with “Team the largest issues. Very few journeys are single modal Heathrow”. for anyone. You usually have to do one, two or three modes. The amount of time it has taken before we Q312 Iain Stewart: To follow on from that example have got anywhere near any accessible taxi regulation at Heathrow, I also undertook a bus journey is just huge. In a lot of modes people use taxis at blindfolded from the centre of Milton Keynes to an either end. So it is the whole journey side of it. outlying part. My colleagues have rightly highlighted Chris Holmes: You are driving at such a significant the issue of audio announcements on the buses. One point here because it goes to whether something is of the initial problems I encountered at Central Milton viewed as just an individual provider’s operation or Keynes bus station, where there are many stands, was you get people together to view this experientially finding the appropriate stopping point in the first rather than operationally. This was a massive piece of place. I appreciate that Heathrow is one big example, work that was obviously tied into the Paralympic but there will be many bus stations or interchange games, but it bears witness to this area as well that, if stations where the physical lay-out of the stops will you are a passenger, a customer, irrespective of not be immediately apparent to someone with a visual whether or not you are disabled, you do not care who impairment. Are there any particularly good schemes the service provider is; you just want an end-to-end in the country where that sort of geography is mapped service. out in some way for visually impaired people? If the tickets are provided by one company, the cab Chris Holmes: There are a number of good bits of by another, the train by another, the bus by another work. The RNIB are heavily involved in this area and and then the final buggy by another, you should not there are a number of technologies coming on stream have to care about that as a passenger or a customer now. Again, I think technology has to be seen as an at all. But it requires the joining together of that important element but always only an element of the end-to-end experience. That requires all the operators process, alongside staff, physical structure, attitude and the individuals to get together to enable that, to and approach—all of that stuff. So there are good see that as a seamless service, so that passengers can examples, but it is about taking what is done well— smoothly move through that rather than having jolts. such as some of the bus system in London and what Things will always go wrong in any operation where we did at Heathrow—and allowing other you have those joins and handoffs. organisations or providers across the country to get a glimpse into this to enable them to understand that Q310 Chair: Mr Holmes, who do you think should often this is not as difficult as they think it is. be responsible for ensuring there is that seamless It is not about trying to be glib and pretending there service? is not any cost or training attached to doing this, but Chris Holmes: You have to get together the it is enabling people to see that it is possible, to show companies at the top level. Take as an example what them what good looks like. It does take them some we did at Heathrow. Heathrow was always going to way down the track to seeing that they can get be such an important element of the Olympic games towards it. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 61

3 June 2013 Dai Powell OBE and Chris Holmes MBE

Dai Powell: Information and training are key to Dai Powell: No. We have been working on the interim making the whole system work and also involving ones. When the full recommendations of the Law disabled people in that training. Particularly if you Commission come out, we want them implemented in have somewhere like Milton Keynes, there will be a full to make the taxi service accessible. DPTAC works group or association of disabled people there. So with the trade, so we have done a lot of work with the involve whoever is running the bus station in how the taxi trade on this, to make sure the taxi trade are on signage should work. People are very happy to give board, as well as working with other organisations and their time to do that. It is not a resource issue. People the Government and now the Law Commission. are happy to get involved. The sort of thing that we DPTAC has that ability to work in that space at—dare need to make sure of is that staff at stations, at any I say it?—a ridiculously low cost to the state to enable interchange, as well as staff on the modes of transport that to happen. themselves, have a level of training, understanding and empathy. Q316 Chair: In relation to taxis, do you think that Going back to what your colleague said earlier about local licensing and local supervision is important to the buses, the bus is a service industry and we should keep standards adequate? look at it as a retail industry. That is what we should Dai Powell: Yes. We are looking for a mixed fleet for look at it as. Everyone in any retail industry is very any local authority area. We do not want to put any polite, good and helpful to their customers, otherwise sort of extra costs on the trade itself, but there are the customers will not use the service again. We need ways that you can increase the number of accessible to get the base strongly. What is the industry we are taxis. If a person wants to start running a taxi and talking about? It is not a heavy engineering thing; it there is only a certain percentage of accessible taxis, is actually customer service. then you can say, “Yes, you may have a licence so long as it is accessible,” or, where taxis pay a charge Q313 Chair: Mr Powell, if DPTAC—the Disabled to use railway stations, you could have a differential Persons Transport Advisory Committee—was charge between an accessible taxi and a abolished, what would be lost? non-accessible taxi. The local authorities can use Dai Powell: I thought that might come. A lot of those fiscal measures without putting any burden on expertise would be lost, obviously. DPTAC is pan- them or even asking the state to increase the number disability. It is not a lobbying group; it is there to of accessible vehicles. advise Government and Ministers and work with industry to bring all parties together to improve Q317 Chair: In relation to airlines, do you think the transport for disabled people. By having the remit it regulations are adequate to enable disabled people to has, it can work with a lot of other disabled organisations, but it is not controlled by anyone. That travel when they wish to? There have been a number impartiality would be lost because, with any changes of highly publicised cases, have there not, where you are going to make, there is conflict within a airlines have refused access? disability as well—among certain impairments, as Dai Powell: Yes, there have. Personally, the answer to there is bound to be—and there is conflict with the question is no. There has been a lot of resource and with industry and what can be afforded. improvement made. It is a very difficult mode to work What DPTAC does is very unique in that it has been with, partly because it is international, so you have to able to hold that middle ground and advise the get international agreement for anything to do with Government, the Department and industry as well on airlines. We still need a lot more training done with what the needs are, both now and in the future, and airline staff. We need a lot more training done with what can be done. It is under threat and it has been certain chief executives of airlines to understand that under threat for quite a few years. We have had two disabled people are passengers like anyone else and reviews of DPTAC, both of which have said that it should have a right to be on them. should remain, but we still wait and see. Q318 Chair: Are there any specific aspects of Q314 Chair: Can you give us any examples of what aviation policy that are problematic for disabled DPTAC has achieved? people? Dai Powell: Good Lord, yes: accessibility on the rail Dai Powell: Usually everything, from booking to network, the bus network and hopefully soon on the getting on the plane. There are some good airlines out taxi network. The taxi network is the crucial one. If there—don’t get me wrong—who are very helpful and there is one question I would like to be answered it is very helpful on assistance, but there are not enough. that currently we are working with the Law There still seems to be a discrepancy among different Commission on a review of all taxi legislation, and airlines. There does not seem to be a standardisation. obviously the recommendations will come out of that. We could do with some research as to exactly how What we would like to see then and will recommend many disabled people travel on which airlines. That is that the Minister, whoever it is at the time or would tell us an awful lot. We need to do some sort however long the process takes, actually enacts that of number-crunching on how many disabled people and enacts the recommendations of the Law travel per se and whether it is increasing. Are we Commission. measuring the right thing? We measure the number of accessible vehicles, but that is just the input. What is Q315 Chair: Are the interim recommendations the the outcome? It is the outcome that we need to ones that you support? measure. “How many more disabled people are Ev 62 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Dai Powell OBE and Chris Holmes MBE travelling, going to work, college or whatever?” rather quite often goes completely, whereas other people than, “How many more accessible taxis do we have?” might try two or three times to get it right. But how are we capturing that information? There might be Q319 Chair: Has any work been done by either of some much smaller things that we need to do to plug your organisations on collating the benefits and the gaps to enable these people to use it, but we need importance of transport for disabled people in, for to find out that information. That is the same with example, getting to employment or to educational or quite a few things. We do not know how many social facilities? Has any body of work been done that mobility scooters there are. Until you know that brings together the benefits of travel? information, even informed advice, let alone informed Chris Holmes: We have not undertaken any specific regulation, becomes much harder. work on that, but the point is quite clear. If you want to get more disabled people into employment, Q320 Mr Sanders: On mobility scooters, that is a inevitably you cannot just look at the barriers in the growing area and our planning system insists that employment, in the workplace. In getting disabled certain developments should have so many parking people work-ready, you have to look at transport as a spaces. Shouldn’t our planning regulations look at key measure. I have two statistics, to keep my mobility scooters, particularly in sheltered statistical references to a minimum. accommodation, and have storage facilities and A third of disabled people say they have difficulty in charging points for people with mobility scooters? My accessing good facilities, services and employment as casework bag is increasing with complaints about a result of transport. So you have the economic benefit people who are either having them stolen or damaged of the spend you will get from that. In the employment and are not able to store them securely. context, if employment rates for disabled people were Chair: Is that an issue that DPTAC have taken up? truly equal to non-disabled people of working age, Dai Powell: We have taken up quite a lot of the issues, there would be 2 million more disabled people in not on the planning side, but we are very happy on work. Transport has to be a key part of that equation. that, because that is something we would agree with Dai Powell: We have not specifically done any work. and it seems to make logical sense. There is quite a That is not DPTAC’s role because we have never been lot of work being done currently by the Department funded to carry out research. We know the research on mobility scooters and how you can carry them on is out there. We know that Passenger Focus is now public transport to enable people to get out and about surveying disabled people alongside its passenger a lot more. That is an issue that we would be very surveys. The problem is who is surveying the people happy to take forward because that is excellent and who cannot use the transport? Where are we getting logical. the information from about people who cannot use it? Chair: Thank you very much. Thank you to both of If a disabled person uses the system once and it falls you for coming and answering our questions. over, their confidence in their ability to use it again

Examination of Witness

Witness: Norman Baker MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport, gave evidence.

Q321 Chair: Good afternoon, Minister, and welcome on that matter. I would like to have been able to do to the Transport Select Committee. Is there any so today but internal Government processes have statement that you would like to make to us before we meant that I am not able to do so. I will be making an ask you some questions? announcement very shortly. Norman Baker: I have not planned one and I do not want to take up your time unduly. I would just say Q323 Chair: Are you sure you are not able to do that this is an important matter for the Department. It it today? is obviously a long, slow process to make the whole Norman Baker: I am afraid so. of the transport system as accessible for everybody as it should be. There has been good progress made over Q324 Chair: We would be very willing listeners to successive Governments, I think, and we are hear what you have to say. Have the Government continuing that progress. You will have seen the collated information about the importance of transport accessibility action plan that I published on behalf of to disabled people in terms of getting to employment, the Department last year, which I hope further educational and social facilities? Is there any reinforces our wish to make progress in this area. information that has been put together that shows in detail how important this is? Q322 Chair: Thank you. Have the Government taken Norman Baker: I will have to reﬂect on what we any decision yet on the future of the Disabled Persons could let you have. We certainly monitor these Transport Advisory Committee—DPTAC? matters. I am not 100% certain whether we have done Norman Baker: That is a matter that has been subject, it in a coherent way that makes a single document. as you know, to considerable representations. I have There was a great deal of work done on that area for looked at those representations exceedingly carefully. the publication of the accessibility action plan. We We have to be very careful what we do in this area also took evidence from groups presenting to us with and I will be making an announcement very shortly access issues and challenges as part of that process. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 63

3 June 2013 Norman Baker MP

We have also talked to bus and rail companies about challenge, but we are determined to make progress their policies. I am not sure whether or not I can give and we are making progress. Around 75% of all rail you a deﬁnitive, composite picture, to be honest with journeys, for example, by the end of 2015 will start you, but we are happy to try and put something or end at a fully step-free station. That compares with together that would be helpful to your Committee. 50% in 2005, which is very good progress.

Q325 Chair: It would be helpful. It is something that Q328 Karl McCartney: Minister, congratulations on we all know is important and it is important to know what has been done to the public network so far and that information has been put together. Minister, you on the improvements to the public network. Do you have referred to the Government’s accessibility action know what costs to the taxpayer Motability currently plan. How will you know if that has been successful? runs at per annum off the top of your head? Norman Baker: We are monitoring it. We have a Norman Baker: The Motability? number of key points where we want to see some Karl McCartney: Yes. What are the savings, if we progress, which were the recommendations—the talk about savings, with the decrease, if there were action points—from that plan, and we are monitoring 180,000 people who are no longer eligible? those on a regular basis. We will publish an interim Norman Baker: As I mentioned, Motability is largely statement later on this year, and we will publish a a DWP issue. Therefore, we have not been engaged, fuller statement next year so that people are able to as a Department, in working out the savings or costs see what progress we have made on the areas of of that particular aspect. Our job is to try to make sure interest to us. that the public transport network is as accessible as You will appreciate that these are, in some cases, possible. In terms of the detailed savings for DWP, actions for the Department and in other cases actions that is a matter you will have to ask them about, I for individual transport operators or local authorities am afraid. and so on, so we have to collate that as we go on. But I am very determined that this should be an action Q329 Karl McCartney: You have no idea of any plan, not a document that sits on a shelf somewhere. figures whatsoever. As far as I am concerned, it is a blueprint for the Norman Baker: No, because it is not in any way a future and a way of going forward. That is why it was DFT matter. very important to me, as part of the preparation of the action plan, to make sure that first of all we got Q330 Karl McCartney: Is it a DFT matter as to engagement from all relevant parties, including those what sorts of cars are provided to use in Motability who are users of public transport services, but also the or not? operators. They have all signed up to it and we expect Norman Baker: No; nothing to do with Motability is each to deliver its own part as we will try to deliver a DFT responsibility. Our responsibility relates to the ours. accessibility of public transport and also making sure that the general emphasis from public transport Q326 Chair: It is thought that approximately operators is one that is encouraging to those with 180,000 people may no longer be eligible for disabilities to access. Motability cars because of changes in disability. Is that something that concerns you and are you going Q331 Mr Sanders: The Government have decided to monitor the situation? that they will only offer one month’s Motability Norman Baker: As you will appreciate, that is largely funding following a PIP assessment concluding that a a matter that has been originated by changes from the disabled person is no longer eligible for a higher level Department for Work and Pensions rather than from living allowance. Is this something that has been the Department for Transport, but it would concern through your Department? Were you consulted over me if someone who has been able to get around is no this and do you have any input into this? longer able to get around. Clearly, we cannot deal with Norman Baker: We have not particularly been the Motability issues at the Department for Transport. involved, as I mentioned a moment ago, in any What we can do—and we are doing—is to try to make Motability discussions, which are ones which have sure that there are alternatives available through been handled by the Department for Work and public transport and to make sure that they are as Pensions. You will appreciate that the Department for accessible as possible. That is part of our way Work and Pensions is engaged upon changes to benefit forward. regulations, the introduction of PIP as opposed to DLA and so on. Q327 Chair: What sorts of things are you looking at? Our only engagement with the Department for Work Norman Baker: Some of it is the action plan I have and Pensions has been where there is a direct referred to, but we would like to get to the stage where relationship with the Department. For example, there people are able to use a bus, train or a taxi with is a small knock-on consequence for Blue Badge confidence; that when they come to a station they have holders from the changes that DWP is bringing step-free access; when they get on a train it is one that forward. We have sought to make sure that the meets their needs; and when they hail a taxi it is one consequences for Blue Badge holders are as minimal they can get into. That is where we want to get to. as possible. We may have to look at the guidance on As I mentioned at the beginning in my opening concessionary fares to local authorities because DLA statement, trying to change, for example, Victorian has been replaced by PIP. That should not change the infrastructure on the railway network is a huge number of people who have access to a disabled Ev 64 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Norman Baker MP person’s bus pass, but we have to change the guidance but sometimes there are historical inheritances that slightly. Where there is a direct interface among the make that slightly more difficult and challenging. Departments, we become involved. But where there is a matter that is solely for another Department then we Q334 Sarah Champion: We have had evidence that have not been involved in that way. people do not feel that Crossrail is as accessible as it could be, so you would agree with that. Q332 Mr Sanders: In relation to transport for people Norman Baker: I would not agree it will not be as with disabilities, you clearly have some accessible as it could be, because we have tried very responsibilities in that area. If another Department of hard to make sure it is as accessible as it could be. Government has decided that the disabled person will There are a very small number of stations on have to rearrange their living and transport Crossrail—I think it is about five, from memory—that arrangements in just a month, irrespective of how will not be fully accessible in terms of step-free many appeals, is that not something that your access; but the vast majority of stations on Crossrail Department ought to have an interest in and be will be and we have tried to ensure that is the case. lobbying on behalf of disabled people for? Step-free access will be available at all new stations Norman Baker: We have an interest in making sure in central London and for the Crossrail platforms at that people have access to the public transport system. Abbey Wood, and 30 of the 37 stations served by That is our responsibility, I think. We do not have a Crossrail will have step-free access from street to responsibility for making sure that access to the platform covering a further two stations with partial private car in the same way is dealt with in terms of step-free access. So 32 out of 37 will be there or what the DWP would do. almost there, which is quite a high proportion. The I will happily make sure that my officials pass on the new Crossrail train fleet will, of course, be fully comments that have been raised here—because it is a accessible. matter of concern to the Committee—to the Department for Work and Pensions and they can Q335 Sarah Champion: Hearing that and the respond accordingly. We generally try to encourage limitations, what assurances can you give that the HS2 cross-departmental working, and we encourage network will be fully accessible? Departments to think about the consequences for other Norman Baker: Again, first of all the trains will be Departments of any steps that they take. I accept your fully accessible. It is easier with HS2 and I would point that it would have been perhaps more helpful if anticipate that it will be fully accessible because we there had been a bit more engagement than there has are talking about new stations all the way down the been on this issue. line and about new rolling stock. It becomes much easier to fit in accessibility criteria, to make sure that things are fully accessible, than it is to retrofit into an Q333 Sarah Champion: Minister, you briefly existing network, which is part of the problem with touched on infrastructure when you outlined your some of the Crossrail stations. vision of a system where you could be guaranteed I should say that the House of Lords Select step-free access and so on. Do the Government Committee, as you may be aware, Chair, looked at the specify that all new transport infrastructure has to non-provision of step-free access at two East London meet the universal design criteria? stations on Crossrail as part of the Crossrail Bill Norman Baker: We specify vehicles that should meet process. The position whereby we have tried to standards, and those are set down in the Public maximise the step-free access was accepted and they Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000. That accepted that there were limitations that could not be is a position we have inherited; we have not changed sensibly overcome on a minority of stations. that. We are still keeping to the dates that were set by a previous Government for the time when all buses Q336 Sarah Champion: Going back to your original and trains will be fully accessible. We have made it vision—that you would like step-free access across very plain to the industry that those dates are not the whole transport system—would this still be a negotiable and we expect them to meet them. So we driving vision for you? specify that for vehicles. Norman Baker: Absolutely. You will have seen that We try to make sure that when new infrastructure is in the rail forward plans for Control Period 5, which provided, such as Crossrail, for example, we have as is 2014 to 2019, we have allocated a further £100 fully accessible an arrangement as possible. The million for the Access for All arrangements to build difficulty sometimes comes about when you have a on the £370 million that is already being, has been or situation like Crossrail where some of the stations are will be spent by 2015. A further tranche of stations not brand new but in fact share usage with existing will be improved as a consequence of that; we will train operations, where the rolling stock has been seek to do so based on the footfall of the stations and around for a while, but the new rolling stock will be the particular aspects of disability that may apply in a of a particular nature and will be specified to be particular area—if, for example, there is a high fully accessible. concentration, that will be a factor—and also to get a The platforms may not be entirely on a line with the geographical spread. Of course there is also the platforms that would be on fully accessible platforms National Stations Improvement Programme, which elsewhere in the network. That is quite a long way of Network Rail control, and that will also have some saying that we try to make sure that we make marginal benefits for rail users. We also have an everything that is new as fully accessible as possible, arrangement whereby there is an expectation as part of Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 65

3 June 2013 Norman Baker MP the franchise that there will be steps taken to improve simply a physical point; it is also about training, accessibility as well. which you quite rightly refer to. Bidders for the That is an onward-going challenge. I look forward to franchises receive credit for their approach to the day—I am not sure I will be here, or certainly not improving access when bids are being assessed. In in the Department of Transport—when we do not have future franchises, a points score for plans will be a somebody with an accessibility issue finding it contributory factor in selecting the winning bid. difficult to get on to a train or a bus. We will be looking at what rail franchise bidders are doing in terms of improving access as part of the arrangements and evaluating whether any franchise Q337 Chair: When do you think that day will come? should be awarded to a particular company. The bid Norman Baker: I hope that day will come. assessment process we are now engaging on is Chair: When do you think it will? encouraging those train companies to come forward Norman Baker: I do not know when it will come with innovative ideas to improve franchises, to because retrofitting Victorian infrastructure is a huge improve access for those with disabilities and challenge. If you have some stations where there is generally to improve the passenger experience. We very little footfall, you have to ask whether that is the want them to come up with the good ideas. That will best way of dealing with an access issue for such a also be a driver, in fact, for better access in years to station. But I am confident that we will get to a stage come. in the not too distant future where the vast majority of train journeys will be undertaken in a way that is Q341 Iain Stewart: Are you planning to give a fully accessible to people. greater weight to that element of the franchise bid, or is it the same as it has been? Q338 Chair: Is there a target or objective that says Norman Baker: No. The franchise arrangement when you hope to achieve that? hitherto has been one where the Department for Norman Baker: There is not a target date by which a Transport has tended to specify things very minutely certain number or proportion of journeys will be in some cases and there has not been much flexibility for the train companies to innovate. They just have to made, no. But there is a driving forward, to use Ms bid against a specification. In one way that has Champion’s term, to make sure we make as much produced a result whereby at least you can measure progress as possible. We will continue to do that by everything equally. But we are rather keener, I think, the allocation of sums of money. now on having an arrangement whereby we encourage the train companies to come up and in fact bid Q339 Sarah Champion: I have one final question. upwards against each other, as it were, in the interests You mentioned rail franchises. What is the of the passenger and, in this case, in the interests of Government’s position on specifying access for the disabled passenger. disabled people in the tendering process? Norman Baker: Typically, franchises mandate Q342 Iain Stewart: I have one slightly different something called a Minor Works Fund, which is up to question but also relating to rail operators. A number £500,000 per annum mandated by the Department to of operators currently use rolling stock that is 20 or support accessibility improvements and to ensure that 30 years old. Particularly Northern Rail, I believe, franchisees have funds to match-fund local authorities. have diesel units that are not DDA-compliant. Do you That is because, often, local authorities come forward have a view on how that stock should be replaced in with a scheme that says, “We want to do this at our the future? station,” and then we expect the train companies or Norman Baker: We are, of course, engaged in a Network Rail to help towards that, either through the massive electrification programme and therefore the mandated sum in the franchise or the National amount of diesel stock that we have will not be Stations Improvement Programme. They tend to be required in the future. I would anticipate that some of for more minor improvements across the network, and the diesel stock will be removed because it is no the major improvements tend to come from the longer required. Others will be cascaded to other lines Access for All arrangements that I mentioned a where diesel operation is still necessary. moment ago. Generally speaking, of course, all new train units being ordered are electric at the moment and I would anticipate that that would remove diesel stock. Of Q340 Iain Stewart: Following on from Ms course, all new units being ordered will be fully Champion’s questions about using the review of rail compliant—by definition, they have to be under the franchising as an opportunity to improve accessibility, rules—but in any case it is a requirement for all train I appreciate your comments on the infrastructure part, vehicles to be fully accessible by 2020. That is what but that is only one part of the equation. A lot of the was set in the regulations in 2000. Those regulations issues relate to staff training and their ability to deal still apply and the train companies will either have to with different disability needs. Do you see an withdraw their stock or modify it to the degree that it opportunity in the review of franchising to evaluate is fully compliant by that date. different bidders on disability-awareness criteria? Norman Baker: Yes, and that is very important. I Q343 Chair: You have just said, Minister, that you should say that we do use a franchise contract to will encourage people bidding for franchises—I think support good practice and increase access. It is not the phrase you used was—“to bid up” in relation to Ev 66 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Norman Baker MP improving facilities for passengers. How will that I have indicated to the bus industry in particular, bidding up in improving services be assessed in however, that I expect them to make good progress relation to financial matters when it is decided who to voluntarily. There are now about 75% of drivers who award franchises to? are already receiving training. I want the bus industry Norman Baker: When it will be assessed against to go further, and I have said I will review it again in what—I am sorry? a year to see how they are getting on. Chair: How will it be assessed against financial issues when you are deciding who to give franchises to? Q345 Chair: The Confederation of Passenger Norman Baker: The financial aspect of a franchise is Transport told us that they had lobbied the important, but so is the passenger experience. What Government on this issue. Was it their influence that we are trying to do is to make sure that the passenger led to you deciding to do this? experience is factored in. After all, if passengers are Norman Baker: Of course they lobbied because we happier on their trains, they are more likely to use listen always, when we want to take steps on them and that will drive up passenger numbers, which transport, to all sides. We will receive and indeed we in turn potentially reduces subsidy from the taxpayer. invite representations from the industry, passenger The equation is that happy passengers equal more groups and local authorities. We do that on any issue income for the train companies and for the on public transport. So, yes, it did lobby, but so did Government in terms of reduced subsidy. The others. We have to take a rounded view as to what is equation is not quite as straightforward as either/or. finally in the interests of the passenger. There are benefits from driving up passenger I have said to the industry, as I mentioned a moment experience on the railway, but, of course, it is an art ago, that I expect them to make progress, I am looking rather than a science. We will look at each bid as it at what they are doing and will look at it again in a comes in, see what it offers and make a judgment as year to see how much progress has been made. We do to which is in the best public interest, the interests of not rule out taking further action on a monetary basis the taxpayer and the passenger when the franchises if I perceive they are not taking it seriously. I think are evaluated. they are taking it seriously, but we are keeping a close eye on it. Q344 Chair: The Government have postponed the implementation of some EU requirements for training Q346 Sarah Champion: This Committee has heard in disability for staff who deal directly with from a number of people about how a journey from passengers. It has been delayed for five years. A to B tends to involve a number of different forms Norman Baker: On buses. of transport. It might be a taxi to the bus station, then Chair: Training for staff. Why has that been done? a train and then a taxi at the other end. If one part of Why did the Government take that decision? that chain breaks, then the disabled person is stranded Norman Baker: There is a difficult balance to be and is often put off travelling again. We have heard struck with the bus industry in particular. First of all, that during the Olympics and Paralympics there was we want to make sure we advance the accessibility of a lot of work done to join all those different forms of all public transport vehicles as fast as we sensibly can, transport together to create a cohesive system. What because nobody will want to see someone who has a role do you think Government have to echo that and particular disability barred, effectively, from getting join up all the transport across the whole country? on a train or the bus they want to get on. That is on the one side. On the other side, we have to recognise Norman Baker: I very much agree with that analysis. that any imposition that you put on a bus or train A journey for an able-bodied passenger or a disabled company has a cost and that may affect the viability passenger—it is the same thing, in a sense—is only or profitability of that particular operator or service. as good as its weakest link. I have seen instances It may well be argued that bus and train companies where people have not carried out a journey by public can, overall, absorb the costs of such training, but transport because they are worried about the last two there are a number of things you could add on and miles from the station they arrive at to their final impositions you could make, all of which add up, destination and therefore they drive the whole way. I including, for example, the requirement to replace am concerned about that, both in accessibility terms vehicles by a particular date, which is a very but also in carbon terms, as a matter of fact, and I expensive business. would like people to be encouraged to use public I am conscious that, if you put a requirement on, it transport. would not necessarily affect the profitability of the That is why I recently published a document on company in the sense that it drives the company door-to-door journeys, which again, like this under, but what it may do is make a marginal route accessibility document, was embraced and endorsed that is important to people no longer viable. If the by a whole range of people—Network Rail, the train consequence of putting extra burdens on industry is to companies and the Confederation of Passenger withdraw routes and leave people stranded, that is not Transport. You name it, they have endorsed it, which a good outcome. They are the kind of calculations you means they and we have to get on and deliver it. We have to make as to what the industry can sustain at will hold others to account for the actions that they any particular time and what the consequence will be have got to do, and again, a bit like the accessibility of extra financial impositions on the industry. They action plan, there are action points there for individual were the thought processes that led me to conclude companies, operators or authorities to take forward. that that was the right way forward. You might want to have a look at that because that is Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 67

3 June 2013 Norman Baker MP designed to address precisely the point you have I am not, at the moment, inclined to make this a raised about the weakest link. mandatory requirement because of the costs and the We have, however, of course been keen to learn from impact on services it could have. But I have again the Olympics, and, if I may say so, I thought the encouraged the bus industry to take forward the Olympics and Paralympics went quite well in terms provision of audio-visual information and I have of access. We have sought to improve Transport indicated that I will monitor how they are getting on. Direct, our journey planner, to make sure that is more accessible. We have been taking feedback on that and Q349 Chair: Are the Government taking any have asked stakeholder organisations to review and measures to provide step-free wheelchair access to comment on what we are doing to upgrade that. We trains at all stations, or to require those facilities to will be making further statements on that in the near be there? future, I hope. Norman Baker: Did you say to stations? Chair: Yes, to railway stations. Q347 Chair: What work has been done on looking Norman Baker: I mentioned to you a moment ago at the impact on disabled people of removing that the intention is to continually improve the personnel from the transport network? A lot of accessibility of rail stations, and the Access for All concerns have been expressed to us particularly about programme helps to achieve that. Whereas 50% of rail moving and perhaps closing down ticket offices or journeys were undertaken at step-free access stations reducing staff generally on transport networks and the in 2005, the figure for 2015, we think, will be 75%, impact on disabled people’s ability to travel easily. so we are continually improving that across the rail What work has been done on that? network and are eating into the residual stations that Norman Baker: I do understand that concern. I should need to be dealt with. We are doing so largely by say that this is, to a large extent, a theoretical issue at footfall, so we are dealing with the stations that have the moment because there have been very few ticket the most footfall first. offices that have been subject to any closure or reduced hours compared with the last Government, Q350 Chair: Where bus services are provided under where a great many were closed. But I do not want to a contract with a local authority, should there be minimise the issue because I understand that people requirements written in there on accessibility? regard it as something that concerns them. Norman Baker: That is a matter for the local There remains a duty—this is talking about trains— authority, as you will appreciate; it is not a matter for on train operators to make sure they have proper us to specify that. It is perfectly possible that we will regard to the needs of all their passengers, including see improvements, and indeed we do encourage that those with disability or accessibility issues. That so far as we can do so. For example, Sheffield is the remains the case. We are not in any way going to first city to benefit from the Better Bus Areas concept, preside over an arrangement whereby there is a of which you will be aware. As part of the BBA plans scorched-earth policy for train stations and people are for Sheffield, there are accessibility improvements just left to get on with it. That is not how the that have been built into the bus network there as part Government is approaching these matters. As you of that overall package. I would expect, as we roll may know, Chair, I am heading up a review on fares out Better Bus Areas, that that will have beneficial and ticketing for the Department, whose results I will consequences for access arrangements across the be publishing later this year, and I can assure you that network. that particular issue has been factored into our consideration. Q351 Chair: Local authorities, as you say, decide, but will you be issuing guidance to them in this area? Q348 Chair: Should audio-visual facilities on buses Norman Baker: The guidance in a sense is the Better be compulsory? Bus Areas guidance. As I say, I fully anticipate that Norman Baker: That is a bit like the question on what will occur from the roll-out of Better Bus Areas training for drivers as a matter of fact. The same is access improvement as part of the conditions that considerations apply to that as apply to whether or not are set for those Better Bus Areas, but I would to make something mandatory. The evidence is that certainly encourage local authorities to have full that would be a significant cost to the industry, and regard to accessibility issues in contracts that they let. they have provided evidence, which I take at face Indeed, there are of course back-stop residual value, that there is not a commercial case for it. After responsibilities from local authorities under, for all, if there had been a commercial case for it, they example, the Equality Act. would have introduced it themselves. I happen to think it is very helpful to have audio-visual Q352 Chair: Who should be responsible for ensuring information on buses, and not just, by the way, for that wheelchair users are able to use designated spaces people with disabilities but for people who get on a on buses? bus and do not quite know which stop to get off at or Norman Baker: You may know there has been a where they are on the journey. It is quite a useful recent court case on that matter, involving Arriva, and aspect to have that information around. London buses, the judgment in that, if I reflect it correctly, was that of course, have that, but other buses, by and large, the Department for Transport’s guidance was tend to have it less across the country. appropriate. It was right to designate wheelchair Ev 68 Transport Committee: Evidence

3 June 2013 Norman Baker MP spaces on buses but not to require that they be used than by trying to pass laws to force people to be by wheelchair users only. That, essentially, as I considerate. It is common sense that, if you are in a understand it, was the judgment. Therefore, it should wheelchair space, perhaps with a buggy, and be perfectly plain to users of buses that, where a somebody wants to come on with a wheelchair, it is wheelchair space is provided and a wheelchair user good manners to fold that buggy up and to make that wants to use it, it is ideal if that user is able to do so. space available for a wheelchair user. We should not However, we are not planning to provide compulsory need to legislate to do that. That is a matter of good legislation to evict people from those spaces if they manners as much as anything else. are not wheelchair users. So much can be done by Chair: Thank you very much, Minister. people being considerate towards each other rather Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 69

Written evidence

Written evidence from Disability Rights UK (DAT 51) About Disability Rights UK 1. Disability Rights UK is led, run and controlled by disabled people. We work to create a society where everyone with lived experience of disability or health conditions can participate equally as full citizens. 2. Disability Rights UK was formed through a merger of Disability Alliance, Radar and the National Centre for Independent Living on 1 January 2012. 3. Disability Rights UK’s objectives are to: — mobilise disabled people’s leadership and control; — achieve independent living in practice; — break the link between disability and poverty; and — put disability equality and human rights into practice across society.

Introduction 4. Our submission has been shaped by the combined expertise of our predecessor organisations and the evidence from our helpline and members. We have also drawn from our experience of writing “Doing Transport Differently”1, which aims to build conﬁdence to travel amongst people with lived experience of disability or health conditions. 5. We strongly welcome the Transport Select Committee’s inquiry into the effectiveness of legislation to transport for disabled people. An accessible public transport has many beneﬁts: it encourages independence, reduces isolation and promotes social inclusion, enables a healthier lifestyle and it is a means to get to school, college or work.

Key Issues Public transport has improved signiﬁcantly over the last 20 years, however there is still much to be done before we have a fully accessible, affordable and reliable transport system 6. Transport is one of the biggest issues that our members have raised for action. Our guide Doing Transport Differently shows how far access to public transport has improved in the last 20 years. Yet there is still a lot of work to be done before disabled people can move around the same as non-disabled people. For example, only 41% of trains and 65% of buses meet accessibility regulations; 61% of taxis and fewer than 3% of licensed Private Hire Vehicles are wheelchair accessible.2 In their inquiry “Hidden in Plain Sight”, the Equality and Human Rights Commission identiﬁed public transport as a “hotspot” for disability-related harassment, despite low levels of recorded incidents.3

When developing policies and legislation, government departments do not take sufficient account of the importance of transport in realising their policy objectives nor the impact on disabled people’s independence and ability to make a contribution to society. 7. An accessible public transport is essential for government departments to realise their objectives. In order to implement government policies to support disabled people to achieve their potential in education, skills development, apprenticeships and employment it is essential that public transport is not a barrier. For example, the Government expects the Children and Families Bill to improve transition of disabled young people into skills, training and employment. But this will not be achieved without an adequate transport infrastructure (as well as funding for students once they have left school). 8. We are also anxious about the impact of government policies on the ability of disabled people and their families to move around and to sustain their independence, in particular the introduction of the Personal Independence Payment (PIP). For example, the Department for Work and Pensions estimates that 428,000 fewer disabled people will be in receipt of the enhanced mobility component of PIP which is needed to qualify for Motability, than the number that would have been expected to be in receipt of the higher rate mobility component of DLA. Motability is a scheme to help disabled people with a car, scooter or motorised wheelchair. Other impacts include access to Blue Badge and Taxi cards. 9. We are concerned that the Government is failing to assess the impact on transport for disabled people, and this is likely to be a breach of their public sector equality duty. In any case, these measures mean that the need for accessible, affordable and available public transport is higher than ever before. 1 http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/publications.htm#transport 2 Department of Transport (December 2012) Accessibility Action Plan, p. 9 (Figure 3).—https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/file/36213/accessibility-action-plan.pdf 3 http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/disabilityfi/ehrc_hidden_in_plain_sight_3.pdf Ev 70 Transport Committee: Evidence

10. We call on the Transport Select Committee to urge the Government to explicitly include transport issues in their assessment of the impact of government policies. 11. Furthermore, we would suggest that a cross-departmental transport working group—possibly at ministerial level like the disability employment group—might be one way of promoting understanding of the importance of public transport in realising policy objectives, achieving joined-up working, and ensuring that transport receives the priority it needs (for any equality group).

Government should implement the 2010 Equality Act powers 12. The 1995 Disability Discrimination Act gave the Secretary of State for Transport the power to issue taxi accessibility regulations. Yet, despite evidence that the taxi industry is still failing disabled people nearly 20 years on, and that local authorities are not doing enough to require accessibility, the Secretary of State has not used these powers. 61% of taxis in England are wheelchair accessible, meaning they meet the minimum standards—but ﬁgures vary from 72% in the Midlands to 26% in the South East of England. Our members have complained that it is a common occurrence that taxi drivers do not stop; or if they stop then they do not know how to use the access features, eg the ramp (if it has been maintained—sometimes they’re broken) or smart card readers. The same problems arise in relation to other modes of transport in particular buses. 13. In the accessibility regulations we would like to see compliance and a complaints mechanism being part of the licensing framework; as well as the framework encouraging a variety of vehicle types in order to best meet the diverse needs of disabled people. 14. We recognise that the Law Commission is currently reviewing the regulation of the taxi industry and we hope that the Transport Select Committee will encourage the Department for Transport to take legislative steps to ensure consistency across the country.

The Department for Transport needs to review the Accessibility Regulations for buses and trains 15. As the deadline for the accessibility regulations for buses and trains approaches (2017 and 2022 respectively) we believe that now is the right time to review the accessibility regulations. That is because since their introduction, there have been many technological developments that would further improve accessibility. For example, providing real time information on buses and coaches is now much easier than it used to be. Yet audio-visual passenger information is provided on only 41% of the fully accessible rail vehicles, and 22% of buses in the UK provides next stop visual information and 19% next stop audio information.4

Government does not do enough to use the levers that they have to promote access to public transport 16. Disability Rights UK strongly welcomes the Accessibility and Equality action plans that the Department for Transport published in December 2012. We are particularly pleased that the plans recognise the importance of changing the attitudes in public transport and the Department is proposing steps to tackle prejudice and change behaviour towards people with visible and hidden impairments or health conditions. We believe that these are a step change towards making further progress. However we are disappointed that they do not mention: — The use of procurement and franchising powers to promote access to disabled people (and subsequent performance management). The procurement framework (no longer on the website since the Department for Transport migrated to Gov.Uk) does not require equality as an award criterion. This means that the Department for Transport misses a real opportunity to drive change in the transport sector and that they are not rewarding transport providers who put genuine effort into improving accessibility and inclusion of public transport. — The role of Local Transport Plans in providing a holistic transport infrastructure locally; in particular providing guidance to local authorities, monitoring and accountability. Our members have told us that local authorities do not always appreciate the transport issues for disabled people, for example that disabled people are more likely to be poor and that community transport initiatives such as Dial- A-Ride are not an inclusive approach, especially as they also want—or need—to travel with families and friends. The importance of information before and during travel often goes unrecognised. Furthermore some local authorities require large amounts of paperwork, either to assess eligibility or to provide subsidised transport. For example we have anecdotal evidence that subsided cabs such as dial-a-cab do not stop for disabled passengers because of too much bureaucracy within the local council that leads to payment delays for cab drivers. This should also be reviewed, either as part of the Local Transport Plan or as part of business planning.

The Department for Transport must continue to harness disabled people’s experience and expertise so that they deliver better transport policies and practice. 17. We welcome the commitment that the Department for Transport will continue to work in partnership with disabled people and our organisations to ensure the most effective steps are taken. 4 Accessibility Action Plan, p. 15 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 71

18. The Department has consulted about the abolition of the Disabled Persons’ Transport Access Committee (DPTAC) and successor arrangements. We have urged the Department that they retain the statutory duties to consult disabled people (in the shape of DPTAC or not). DPTAC has brought many benefits, for example their advice has contributed to more efficient booking, meeting, handling and awareness of individual’s needs which greatly speeds up waiting times of buses and railways, resulting in a more efficient use of scarce infrastructure. 19. If DPTAC is abolished then it is imperative that any successor arrangements ensure that: — the Department for Transport continues to access disabled people’s expertise—both on a strategic as well as technical level; — the Department for Transport has regard to the voices of disabled people across the whole spectrum of impairments and long-term health conditions—and empowers particularly the groups who have hidden or fluctuating conditions; — disabled people can influence the Department for Transport’s priorities for the development and delivery of transport infrastructure; — the arrangements support the formation of joined-up policy and implementation across the government departments, in particular education, skills and training, employment, health and in local communities; and — they support the effective monitoring and evaluation of the impact of transport policies and practice on disabled people’s full inclusion in the society.

Written evidence from the Whizz-Kidz Kidz Board (DAT 24) Whizz-Kidz Whizz-Kidz is a national charity and leading provider of mobility equipment, including powered and lightweight wheelchairs, sports chairs and adapted bikes and trikes and has provided over 16,000 young disabled people with mobility equipment since 1990. Whizz-Kidz’s aim is to ensure that every disabled child and young person has the same opportunities as others their age and giving a disabled child a wheelchair is just the start of their journey with Whizz-Kidz. As well as supporting young disabled people to access the right mobility equipment to ﬁt their young lives, the charity also delivers wheelchair skills-training, work placements, residential camps and youth clubs to give children full and active childhoods, and bright futures.

Whizz-Kidz Kidz Board The Whizz-Kidz Kidz Board is a group of young representatives who are all beneﬁciaries of the charity and represent each region in the UK. They are actively involved in the charity’s work and campaign to raise awareness of the importance of mobility and related issues affecting their lives. Ambassadors are appointed onto the Kidz Board after an application and interview process, and sit on the Board for two years, during which time they meet quarterly and are actively involved in decision-making pertaining to the charity’s direction, aims and campaigns.

Executive summary This memorandum sets out views submitted by members of the Whizz-Kidz Kidz Board about their experiences of using public transport, and their recommendations for improvement. The memorandum uses a number of quotations from Kidz Board members and Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors which are displayed in single inverted commas and italics. The submission focuses largely on the accessibility of information; the provision of assistance and awareness of the needs of wheelchair users by transport staff and the provisions made for disabled people travelling to and from the Paralympics and what can be learned from them. The Kidz Board, as representatives of Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors across the UK, contributed the submission views of Ambassadors in their regions as well as their own experiences, opinions and recommendations. The submission also incorporates some of the feedback from the Kidz Board’s Travel Challenge Day held on 20 May 2012. On the day, the Kidz Board travelled from Kings Cross rail station to the Olympic Park at Stratford and back again, using buses, overground, Docklands Light Railway, riverboat services and the Underground network. Film interviews of the day made by Channel 4 can be viewed online at http://www.channel4.com/news/young-disabled-test-london-transport-ahead-of-olympics_ With a number of Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors, including several member of the Kidz Board attending the Paralympics, a range of experiences of travel during this time have been included in the submission. Ev 72 Transport Committee: Evidence

Evidence has also been taken from the Kidz Board’s “Whizz Wheel Challenge” day in Glasgow, on 22 September 2012, in which the Kidz Board travelled around Glasgow assessing how provision in the city fared for wheelchair users ahead of the 2014 Commonwealth Games.

Section 1: The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares 1.0 The Kidz Board would like to stress the importance of the right information to allow them to make the right transport decisions. Accurate information needs to be readily available in appropriate formats both at the point of delivery and remotely and needs to be easily accessible for wheelchair users, whose eyeline is often lower than those on foot. 1.1 The Kidz Board feels that improvements could be made to improve provision of signposting of information for disabled passengers, particularly in train stations, underground stations and at busy interchanges. The Whizz-Kidz Kidz Board think that providing better and clearer signage would make a real difference to disabled travellers, allowing them to make their journey independently without asking a companion or staff member for assistance. 1.2 “The signs for the lift weren’t very clear, so I followed everyone else and ended up having to turn around and go back as I had not gone via a wheelchair accessible route. If there hadn’t have been a staff member nearby who could help me, I would have been quite scared.” 1.3 “The signs that are up really high in train stations, often from the ceiling, are too high for a wheelchair- user like me to see very well. I found this was a problem at Stratford station.” 1.4 The Kidz Board recommends that it would be helpful to have more signage at lower eye level in all stations so that it is easier for wheelchair users to see it. In particular, the Kidz Board feel that more could be done to improve signposting to facilities that are of more use to wheelchair-users, such as lifts. 1.5 In terms of accessing information about accessible routes and connections, the Kidz Board reported that the system across the board is largely helpful, but sometimes they have felt let down by individual staff who do not appear to have received adequate disability awareness training to provide the correct information to young wheelchair-users. 1.6 In particular, the majority of Kidz Board members found that online facilities provided by individual transport organisations to help plan their route make it a lot easier to plan an accessible journey but found that this experience was not always the same when trying to seek information on the phone about accessible routes for wheelchair users. 1.7 “I have had mixed experiences getting information about accessible train routes on the phone— sometimes they have been really helpful, other times I have been made to feel that I am a nuisance and once I was even told a route was accessible when it wasn’t!” 1.8 The Kidz Board recommends that transport providers ensure that all call centre staff have comprehensive disability awareness training—preferably with part of this training delivered by a disabled person, so that they have a full understanding of how they can assist plan an accessible route. 1.9 The Kidz Board also recommends that transport operators introduce more auditing of public transport information services by disabled people to ensure that information is available and accessible in multiple formats and in a way which is helpful for disabled people. Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors would support transport organisations regularly inviting disabled people to audit facilities and provide feedback to improve accessibility and information.

Section 2: The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 2.0 The Kidz Board thinks that public transport staff at all levels would beneﬁt from a greater understanding of the needs of disabled passengers. The Kidz Board also feels that taxi drivers should receive better disability awareness training, so that they can transport wheelchair users safely and treat them with the respectfully and courteously. 2.1 “I would like to see drivers of taxis and buses put down the ramp straight away without you having to ask and without argument or being made to feel as though you are a nuisance.” 2.2 “The bus driver told me there was room for two wheelchair users to travel on the bus but once we got on, there wasn’t and I had to transfer to a seat. I think the driver was being nice because he understood we wanted to travel together but didn’t really know whether one or two wheelchair users would actually ﬁt!” 2.3 “I think that as many drivers and staff as possible should get disability awareness training so that they are happy to help wheelchair users so everything runs smoothly and everyone is happy.” 2.4 The Kidz Board recommends that disability awareness training is undertaken by all transport staff and taxi drivers. In particular, the Kidz Board would like to see transport operators inviting disabled people to deliver disability awareness training. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 73

2.5 Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors across the UK think that easy access to staff is very important because they are often required to ﬁll in the information gaps or arrange assistance. A young disabled person may present themselves at any station or stop and wish to use that service and all staff need to be able to offer the right assistance, information and signposting. 2.6 “I’d like there to be clearer roles for staff and for them to have better training about disability awareness; often when I ask one person for help or assistance, I get passed onto lots of other people.” 2.7 The Kidz Board recommends that all staff receive comprehensive disability awareness training, so that any member of staff is able to assist a disabled person. Members of the Kidz Board also suggest that they would like to see larger stations have a “Disability Awareness Champion” who would be able to provide other staff members with information and guidance in the event that they have any queries about how best to assist a disabled passenger.

Section 3: What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 3.0 Most members of the Kidz Board and a large number of Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors across the UK attended events at the Paralympic Games in August 2013 and reported that they found the whole experience— from travelling to the Games, to being assisted by Games Makers and of course, seeing Paralympic events live absolutely brilliant! 3.1 “I had great experiences travelling to the Paralympic Games!” 3.2 “It was fantastic—there were lots of practical things in place to help disabled people get to the Games.” 3.4 One of the changes that the Kidz Board thought made a huge difference to disabled people during the Paralympics was the use of manual boarding ramps on the London Underground network, which made some previously inaccessible stations, accessible for wheelchair users. 3.5 “It was great to be able to turn up at London Underground stations and travel using the ramps—you didn’t even have to book ahead! I’m glad they kept the ramps after the Paralympics as it will make getting around London a lot easier for wheelchair-users.” 3.6 The Kidz Board are really pleased that Transport for London decided to keep some of these ramps in place after the Games and recommends that ramps continue to be available to allow wheelchair users to access carriages at platform level. It’s also important to ensure staff are trained to be able to use this equipment safely where it already exists. 3.8 The Kidz Board were really pleased by the accessibility of transport in London during the Games—so much so, that they would like to see these improvements in other parts of the UK, especially more rural areas. 3.9 “Visiting London for the Paralympics was really good and it made me realise that in London they are much better prepared for disabled people than in smaller towns and in the countryside.” 3.10 “I would like all buses to be power wheelchair and manual wheelchair accessible.” 3.11 The Kidz Board recommends that efforts are made to make transport network across the UK, and particularly in rural areas, as accessible as possible for disabled passengers, and would like transport operators to introduce more accessible busses outside of London. 3.12 The Kidz Board and Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors across the UK have observed that accessing train and London underground platforms remains an issue for wheelchair-users and the modernisation of stations and introduction of more lifts would enable better access to rail and tube services for disabled passengers. 3.13 “The addition of an automatic platform (similar to some buses) to bridge the gap between the train and platform would be useful, to make access 100% safe and level.” 3.14 “It would be fantastic if accessible transport could become a recognised part of the Legacy. Ideally, working toward things like a level access underground and graduated platforms and curbs—as the norm rather than the exception.” 3.15 “I understand that it’s difﬁcult for all of the underground stations to be made accessible because they are so old, but I’d be pleased if they promised to make as many stations as possible step-free.” 3.16 The Kidz Board recommends that efforts are made wherever possible to make train and underground platforms step free, and that transport operators invest in new technologies used in other countries to modernise facilities to make them wheelchair accessible. 3.17 Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors who travelled to the Paralympic Games reported that they felt staff and public on the transport network were really helpful, polite and proactive about providing any assistance needed to disabled passengers—Whizz-Kidz Ambassadors were delighted by this! 3.18 “The Paralympics was the ﬁrst time I felt transport staff were there to proactively help disabled people.” Ev 74 Transport Committee: Evidence

3.19 “It was like the Paralympics made the transport staff and other people on the Underground realise that disabled people were just like everyone else, and that we should be treated fairly. I think this was a really good thing and hope it has a lasting effect! “ 3.20 The Kidz Board recommends that everyone responsible for delivering Paralympic Legacy seeks to ensure that accessible transport is a signiﬁcant part of this and that transport operators, Government, Parliament and other organisations continue to engage with young disabled people and provide them the opportunity to help shape the Legacy. January 2013

Written evidence from The Mental Health Action Group (DAT 69) 1. The Mental Health Action Group is an independent service receiver-led organisation whose purpose is to campaign for improvements which will beneﬁt the lives of people living with a mental health condition. Although based in Derbyshire and working extensively on local issues we have regularly campaigned over the years on a national level as well. 2. Our campaigning on public transport began back in 2008 when the Concessionary Bus Travel Act came into force. We noticed immediately a level of discrepancy and discrimination which alarmed us and, as we peeled back the layers, we discovered that the treatment of people with a mental health condition in that piece of legislation is simply the tip of the iceberg when it comes to public transport. Underneath it lays a level of ignorance and misunderstanding of mental health which at times has been quite shocking. In most cases this is not deliberate but rather the result of genuine ignorance about how a mental health condition impacts on people’s mobility. However it is unacceptable in this age of the Equality Act and the Disability Discrimination Act for this lack of awareness and therefore discriminatory behaviour to be allowed to continue. 3. Our campaign work was extended in 2011 when we carried out a national survey of people living with an enduring mental health condition about their experience of public transport. We suspected that our experience in Derbyshire would be echoed around the country but even we were surprised by the strength of feeling expressed by our respondents. (We have included as additional evidence a copy of our Mental Health & Public Transport report published in Sept 2011 and presented to Norman Baker). Following a presentation of our report to DPTAC we were invited to attend future DPTAC meetings as observers providing the Committee with much needed knowledge and understanding of mental health. 4. We would like to present evidence to the committee under three main headings: A. The scope and effectiveness of legislation in relation to mental health sufferers. B. The awareness of transport staff of the needs of passengers with mental health problems and the availability of appropriate assistance. C. Accessibility of information and its importance to mental health sufferers. 5. We feel it is in these areas above that we can offer most useful evidence and observations. All quotations are taken from our national survey undertaken from April to June 2011. We would strongly urge the Committee to make use of the extensive additional evidence contained within our report from over 200 respondents.

A. Legislation Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007 6. Back in 2008 when the Concessionary Bus Travel Act came into effect we had our first indication that the Government’s understanding of the relationship between mental health problems and mobility was not all that it should be. In that particular piece of legislation and previously in the Transport Act 2000 mental health (despite being the largest single area of disability) was not included within the six specific disability criteria for a concessionary pass. It was only included in category (g) which is effectively a catch-all category for anything that hasn’t been included in its own right. Secondly we discovered that if your disability happens to be psychological rather than physical you cannot access a concessionary pass on the same grounds as most other disabled people. You can only have access to a pass at times when you are deemed medically unfit to drive. This means that when you are at your most unwell and most in need of accessing support you are faced with the process of surrendering your driving licence and applying for a concessionary pass. By the time that process has been undertaken your health could have deteriorated to a point where you don’t want to go out or even worse you are in hospital! 7. When someone with a mental health condition looks down the list of disabled categories they feel that they are somehow being treated as a second class of disability, not quite worthy of a qualifying category of its own and made subject to additional qualifying criteria. For example if you have a physical disability you can choose to drive an adapted car or to travel on the bus. You are allowed to choose according to your wellbeing on that particular day and according to the type of journey you need to make. The same flexibility is not accorded to you if your disability is a mental health condition and yet there are journeys which are less stressful by car and some that are less stressful by bus or train. Many people who live with a mental health condition Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 75

already suffer from low self-esteem and any legislation which implies a double standard against them only convinces them that they are less deserving and less important to society! 8. Many people who force themselves to drive a car, even at times when they’re not well enough, do so not because they wouldn’t prefer to use public transport but because they don’t feel safe on it or can’t afford it! If a concessionary pass was granted to them purely on the grounds of their condition (as it is for many other disabilities) then they could choose the best option for them on any particular day. Similarly there are many sufferers who cannot afford to drive a car and are not qualifying for a pass but who desperately need one to access the support and recovery programmes that will help them to recover: “Everybody has to budget for transport, of course. But I’m often forced to make choices about how I spend my money, which CAN and HAS been: food or transport? In the past I’ve missed appointments, cancelled visits, and slowly shrunk back into my flat becoming increasingly reclusive and, then, increasingly ill. Wellness and recovery are fragile. It only takes one journey missed to ruin a day, which can ruin a week, then a month, and before you know it you’re ill all over again”. 9. Transport costs are a seriously de-motivating factor for anyone who suffers from debilitating anxiety, depression etc. We believe that anyone living with a severe and enduring mental health condition should automatically qualify for a concessionary bus pass and not be subject to a driving licence test. Not only does it alleviate cost barriers it actually alleviates some of sufferer’s symptoms which prevent travel in the first place! “It is better for me (being agoraphobic) to be able to suddenly say ‘I would be able to go out today’ and go and visit my mother. To be able to just hop on a bus and not have to worry about the fare is so ‘freeing’. It enables my mind to relax and not panic, I can go where I want, when I want and it gives me much more confidence and keeps me going out thus helping my debilitating condition.”

Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970—Blue Badge Parking Scheme 10. The Transport Minister has recently announced his decision following the DfT’s consultation into Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Blue Badge Parking. We had welcomed this review which not only sought views on the future relationship between PIP and Blue Badge but also asked whether the DfT should broaden the eligibility for Blue Badge parking. However, despite a great deal of evidence from many disability organisations urging the Minister to extend eligibility beyond physical mobility issues to psychological and cognitive mobility problems the Minister has decided not to introduce any change. 11. We believe very strongly that the DfT should be following the lead of the DWP in this respect. The Committee may be aware that the mobility component of PIP has been expanded to include people who have difficulty “Planning and Following a Journey” (Activity 11) as well as those whose difficulty is about the physical act of “Moving Around” (Activity 12). By doing this the DWP has recognised that “mobility” in its true sense is simply about being able to move around freely and easily whereas the DfT are still defining mobility as a physical ability to move around. PIP will enable people with severe autism, severe mental health problems etc to have their mobility problems recognised for what they are—severe psychological difficulties in getting from one place to another (usually from the safety of their home to destinations which produce anxiety and fear for them). 12. It should be no different with the Blue Badge scheme and it is extremely disappointing to find that the DfT are unwilling to embrace all severe mobility problems and to learn from the work of other Government Depts. It feels as though the DfT has gone with the easiest and least disruptive option instead of having the courage to stand in the shoes of people whose difficulties are less familiar to them and until they do that they will not be truly serving the transport needs of many severely disabled people. This applies not just to Blue Badge but to many other aspects of transport accessibility. “If we were in a wheelchair they can see we have trouble with our mobility but you cannot see the crutches we use for our minds and how easy they are knocked from under ourselves.”

Equalities Act 2010 13. We are concerned that mental health seems so often to slip under the radar when it comes to applying the requirements and the spirit of the Act. In relation to public transport we have found many instances where mental health has simply not been considered, for example:- 14. Over the last couple of years we have approached many transport providers most of whom do not include mental health in their staff disability training and are therefore, inadvertently, affecting accessibility for those customers. This includes for example Transport for London where there will be such a high percentage of passengers with a mental health problem. It includes Abta training for travel agents/tour operators where mental health does not appear at all even in the non-visible disability section! But it also includes most of the large train and bus operators and yet mental health is one of those disabilities where the stress of travel will usually increase symptoms. 15. Mental health is not included as a category for advanced travel assistance bookings on trains. When one of our members phoned to book assistance she was told that he would have to put her down as “mobility impaired—no ramp”! and indeed when the member of staff came to meet her he turned up with a wheelchair Ev 76 Transport Committee: Evidence

which was very embarrassing for her. When he discovered she did not need a wheelchair he then assumed she was ok and left her. 16. Disability signage is in general based on physical disabilities (wheelchair sign) so that if a person who is clearly able-bodied sits in a disabled seat on a bus or train they are likely to get short shrift from other passengers. This is understandable but could be addressed by signage which reminds passengers (and drivers) that not all disabilities are visible! Many people suffering from severe anxiety or paranoia would need to sit near the front of a crowded bus to feel safe and would like to access a disabled seat if that is all that is available. 17. Brochures and leaflets advertising travel assistance such as those produced by Passenger Focus always include examples of people who are physically disabled and elderly. We have never seen any examples of someone with autism or mental illness receiving travelling assistance. 18. Mental health is also not specifically identified within the annual passenger surveys carried out by Passenger Focus or the Department for Transport. This means that the needs and experiences of this category of disabled people are being missed; their unmet needs are not showing up on Government statistics and reports and therefore remain unaddressed.

B. Awareness by Transport Staff of Passenger needs and Availability of Assistance 19. All of the above of course means that so many people living with a mental health condition experience a lack of understanding and support when travelling and therefore withdraw from using it or use it only when unavoidable. A good example of this ignorance and lack of training is that many people with a non–visible disability such as mental illness are questioned by bus drivers about their concessionary pass. This is a common occurrence reported to us, drivers challenging passes or even worse asking the person in front of other passengers what their disability is because it’s not visible to them:- “On a number of occasions they have even questioned why I have got a disabled bus pass because I ‘don’t look disabled’. Obviously this causes me to feel very self-conscious, panicky and annoyed. All bus drivers should be reminded that ‘disability’ can mean different things and especially in relation to bus passes is not always a physical impairment”. 20. In our national survey carried out from April to June 2011 respondents placed awareness training for staff as their second highest priority just behind improved eligibility for concessionary fares. They shared with us some of the lack of understanding and, at times, downright abuse that they suffer both from transport staff and the travelling public. We know from the recent “Hidden in Plain Sight” report that public transport is a domain that still attracts hate crime towards disabled people. 21. The plea of our respondents was that whilst it is difﬁcult to control the behaviour of other passengers it should be reasonable to expect understanding and support from transport staff. “The understanding and support of staff is vital as we cannot expect the general public to understand all of the time. But good well trained staff can then help and advise the public of what is happening and waylay any fears that they may have.” 22. As already mentioned the Assisted Travel schemes available for train journeys is not well publicised towards mental health sufferers. Most respondents seemed unaware of any assistance or support and those few who reported having tried to use it were often disappointed: “Tried to use disabled assistance at train station, I booked explaining that I needed help in getting to the right platform and on the right train. The man looked at me, said you’re not disabled and walked off and left me—not at all good for my mental health!”

C. Accessibility of Information 23. Respondents to our survey stressed how vitally important accurate and timely information is to their experience of public transport. In some areas of the country where real time information is available at bus stops this was much appreciated. It helps to allay mounting anxiety while waiting for the bus, offering as it does constant reassurance that a bus is on its way. Many sufferers feel a great sense of anxiety when attempting anything except very familiar journeys. The availability and reliability of advance information is key here. 24. Concerns regarding information seemed to fall into the following main categories: (i) Lack of joined up information across boundaries between one transport operator and another particularly on bus routes. There was a call for a less territorial behaviour for the beneﬁt of the customer. For many sufferers it is vital that all journey information is available in advance in order to allay fears. If it is not available the journey, in most cases, won’t be made or at best will be very stressful: “Having a mental health issue can be like an army moving base. They would plan every part of that trip making sure that there was support from land, sea and air to make it to their destination. This is the same for us”. (ii) For the same reason as above, information at bus stops and on transport websites needs to be up to date and reliable. This was variable from one operator to another and a signiﬁcant number Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 77

of people complained about timetables at bus stops not being up to date. Audio information on buses is also a great comfort but not always available. (iii) There needs to be a concerted effort to improve awareness of assistance schemes and concessions to mental health sufferers in particular. As previously mentioned it needs to be made absolutely clear that mental health is included and that must be demonstrated by operators both in their publicity and at every customer interface point along the journey. (iv) Great anxiety is caused by unexpected delays, amendments to schedules and cancellations. Operators need to be mindful of giving out timely information, explaining clearly what alternative arrangements are being made for passengers and offering assistance to all disabled passengers who ask for help and reassurance. It may have taken huge courage and effort to attempt the journey in the ﬁrst place so if help is unreliable in this situation it will have an effect well beyond that particular journey: “Delays, cancellations and poor service can increase my anxiety and lead to panic attacks and if i have a bad experience it makes it harder for me to repeat the journey in the future”. (v) Our survey indicated that only a very low percentage of our respondents were aware of the Disabled Railcard and that they might be eligible for one. This is very disappointing and concerning since so many of them state that the cost of train travel is totally prohibitive for them. Again there needs to be a concerted effort by ATOC to improve awareness for this sector of disabled people.

Additional Concerns Future of DPTAC 25. Before finishing our submission we would like to express our grave concerns to the Transport Select Committee at the Government’s proposed abolition of the statutory voice of disabled people in relation to transport issues. We believe it is vital that the statutory obligation for the Department for Transport to consult disabled people remains enshrined in law. That is not to say that DPTAC cannot be improved further but it would be dangerous and in the end costly for the Government to resort to consulting with disabled people as and when it sees fit. We ourselves have experience both as an outside stakeholder and now currently as a voice on DPTAC. There is no comparison between the two options in terms of being able to voice our concerns and influence transport policy. We have fought hard for change on a couple of transport policy issues and this has only been possible because of the recognition we have been accorded via DPTAC. 26. It is clear to us that there is much educating to be done and the danger of leaving decisions about consultation to transport officials and Ministers is that they may not realise when they have missed something vitally important. Part of DPTAC’s role is to be pro-active in pointing out to Ministers potential pitfalls and areas where improvements need to be made. For all of these reasons we would urge the Committee to do what it can to ensure that this statutory voice is protected for the benefit of future generations of disabled travellers.

Changes at Department for Transport 27. Finally we are alarmed at the reduction in numbers of Department for Transport staff who hold responsibility for disability and inclusion issues. This again seems counter to the Government’s pledge to disabled people and indeed to the Department for Transport’s own recently published “Accessibility Action Plan”. It is hard to have any faith in ﬁne sounding aspirations when all other indicators suggest that there is less and less priority being placed on pursuing the travelling needs of disabled people. It is certainly even more reason why DPTAC must be protected and supported in its independent role of advising the Department for Transport and advocating necessary improvements. February 2013

Supplementary written evidence from Mental Health Action Group (69A) 5. What should the DfT, local authorities and transport operators do to raise awareness of the concessionary entitlements of travellers with disabilities? We wish to draw to the Committee’s attention the need for a broader understanding of mobility within the Department for Transport. At the present time the Minister is choosing to restrict some important concessions (eg blue badge parking) to those with physical and sensory impairments. This is despite extensive evidence presented by organisations such as ourselves and the National Autistic Society about the vital need to extend concessions equally to those who face extreme psychological barriers to their mobility. In contrast to the DWP, the DfT is only planning to recognise points awarded to physically disabled people for the PIP mobility criteria as pass-porting eligibility for the National Bus Concession and Blue Badge Parking. So effectively they will be recognising the mobility needs of people with physical impairments (“Moving Around” Activity) but not the needs of people with cognitive/psychological impairments (“Planning and Following a Journey” Activity). We feel very strongly that this restricted interpretation of mobility must be Ev 78 Transport Committee: Evidence

changed because it is leading to persistent inequality and to the deprivation of concessions for whole sectors of disabled people with non-visible disabilities. We are not advocating that everyone with a mental health problem should automatically be eligible for concessions any more than everyone with a physical impairment. But we are asking for a system which recognises the mobility impact of all disabilities. Eligibility for a concession should be assessed on the basis of the difﬁculty experienced in getting oneself out and about with no preconception that a psychological disorder is necessarily any less of a barrier than a physical impairment. It will necessitate that not only does transport legislation enshrine that equal recognition of need but also that local authorities carrying out assessments have appropriate and relevant assessment tools to use.

12. Does DfT’s Accessibility Action Plan go far enough? —What more should have been included? —What are the consequences of not delivering the actions described in the plan? Whilst we welcome the publication of an Accessibility Action Plan by the DfT we are concerned that proposed staff reductions within the Dept will undermine the potential impact of this Plan. We are aware that the DfT’s current Disability Team is about to be dismantled and subsumed into the Equality and Diversity Team. This will inevitably dilute resources which would otherwise be directed towards the achieving the objectives of the Action Plan. Clearly any action plan is only worth having if there are people directly charged with executing and monitoring the actions. There is a real danger that the Accessibility Action Plan will raise hopes and ambitions which it then has little chance to deliver on. The withdrawal of the Disabled Living Allowance and its replacement with the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) by 2015 will mean a reassessment of a holder’s entitlement to a Blue Badge parking permit and to the Motability scheme (by which a disabled person can lease a new car, scooter or powered wheelchair in exchange for their mobility allowance). The criteria under PIP is that an eligible person must be unable to walk more than 50 metres. Charities have expressed concern that this criteria overlooks people with psychological and cognitive mobility problems.

13. To what extent will the implementation of the Personal Independence Payment make it harder for people with psychological and cognitive mobility problems to travel? We do very much welcome the inclusion of a mobility component which is speciﬁcally geared towards those with cognitive and psychological difﬁculties. However our main concern is the threshold of “overwhelming psychological distress” which is being used for this activity (“Planning and Following a Journey”) and how that will be interpreted by assessors. A recent survey by major mental health charities found that 20% of people with on-going mental health conditions who currently get DLA mobility are expected to lose out with Personal Independence Payment. This will have a huge impact on isolation which is a major cause of deterioration in people living with a mental illness. March 2013

Written evidence from Brandon Trust (DAT 80) Brandon Trust is a Bristol-based charity which provides services and support to people with learning disabilities and autism. The following is additional evidence supplied to the Transport Select Committee for the Disabled Access to Transport Inquiry, in addition to the oral evidence already provided. This written evidence consists of: 1. A summary of the ‘100 Voices on Transport’ report, created from information presented to us by the people we support. 2. Two examples of good practice (in the form of the Travel Buddy and the Safe Havens schemes). 3. Two case studies. 4. Quantitative data on public attitudes towards disability collated through a market research exercise.

1. Summary of ‘100 Voices on Transport’ report 1.1 The report was created from evidence presented by people with learning disabilities (LD) and autism at a Brandon Trust conference in Bristol, UK, on 8th September 2012. 1.2 Four ‘forums’ of people with LD supported by the charity Brandon Trust and facilitated by independent advocates met during a period of 12 months to discuss their experiences of public transport. The four forums covered the areas of London, Gloucestershire, Bristol, North Somerset, BaNES, Cornwall, Devon and Wiltshire.

1.3 Why is public transport so important for people with learning disabilities and autism? 1.4 Most people with learning disabilities don’t drive and rely on others or on public transport to get to places. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 79

1.5 Transport is needed to go to work, college, visit family and friends, access the local community, have a social life, go shopping, use leisure facilities. 1.6 Without transport, people with LD become isolated.

1.7 What are the problems with transport, for people with LD? 1.8 It is too expensive. 1.9 Lack of routes and suitable times. 1.10 Lack of accessible vehicles, stations and other facilities. 1.11 Lack of accessible timetables and signage. 1.12 Fear of being mistreated. Some delegates reported frightening experiences. 1.13 Lack of understanding. 1.14 Restricted use of concessionary passes. 1.15 Lack of appropriate training and support on how to use public transport for people with a moderate LD

1.16 How can these problems be solved? 1.17 Better transport solutions provided by different organisations working in partnership. 1.18 Wider time coverage of concessionary travel passes. 1.19 Training for bus and taxi drivers, and other transport staff, on the needs of people with LD. 1.20 More public awareness of learning disabilities and increased acceptance of disabled people on public transport. This can be achieved through media coverage and campaigns. 1.21 Better accessibility on buses and trains, fewer environmental barriers. 1.22 Easy read complaints procedure. 1.23 Easy read timetables. 1.24 A telephone number displayed at stops and stations, that people can call if they require info/assistance. 1.25 Working cameras on buses to capture abusive behaviour. 1.26 More travel training for people with LD, like the ‘Travel Buddy’ scheme. 1.27 More engagement with local MPs and people who can inﬂuence social policy.

2. People with Learning Disabilities can Travel Independently: The Success Stories of the Bristol Travel Buddy Scheme and the Safe Havens Scheme 2.2 The Bristol Travel Buddy Project, run by Brandon Trust, is funded by Bristol City Council, Quartet Community Foundation and Simplyhealth. 2.3 During the last three years, the Travel Buddy Team have supported over 70 people with their travel in and around Bristol and the surrounding areas. No one is too old or too young or too inexperienced to receive support from the Travel Buddies. 2.4 The unique feature of this team is that it is made up solely of people who have a learning disability, ie those who know best what it is like to face challenges in their daily lives. This truly adds to the success of this small but highly effective team 2.5 Travel Buddies train people to use public transport safely, planning their route, rehearsing it and putting in place emergency procedures if something goes wrong. 2.6 A Safe Haven is a place for people with LD who travel independently to go to if something goes wrong. It can be a shop, café, or other community place which displays the appropriate sign and where people can be reassured and helped to make a phone call.

3. Case Studies 3.1 Jamie had support from the Travel Buddy Project to help him to gain independence to get to his course at the Elm Tree Farm Nursery in Bristol. 3.2 Jamie had never travelled by himself before and his parents were understandably nervous. But with everything in place for him to learn the route and practice it at the times of day that he would be using it, he became an independent traveller and no longer has to rely on lifts to and from the Farm. 3.3 He also learnt and gained independence on the journey to the local Charity shop where he volunteers. Ev 80 Transport Committee: Evidence

3.4 Sarah had support from the Travel Buddy Project to help her learn the route to her new work placement in Bristol. 3.5 Sarah used to travel by herself a long time ago but over the years and after a couple of moves, she had got out of practice and did not feel conﬁdent to explore her new area. 3.6 She decided she needed some help to become independent again and called the Travel Buddy Project. Sarah once more became an independent traveller and was then able to start a work training course.

4. Quantitative Research on Attitudes to Disability on Public Transport 4.1 This was a medium-scale (2,000 respondents) UK-wide quantitative study on experiences and perceptions of disability on public transport. 4.2 The breadth of the study is limited by the number of questions asked during this market research carried out pro-bono for Brandon Trust. 4.3 Date carried out: 28/01/2013 to 29/01/2014. 4.4 Number of respondents: 2,000. 4.5 Demographics: UK adults who use public transport. 4.6 Research question (in each instance): “Which of the following statements do you agree with?” 4.7 Which of the following statements do you agree with: Choice % Responses I think the Government should be spending more time looking into public 30.05% 601 transport issues faced by people with disabilities. I think that public transport providers DO enough to make travelling 25.85 517 accessible for people with disabilities. I think that public transport providers DO enough to make people with 17.00% 340 disabilities feel valued as passengers. I would support changes implemented by the Government if it meant 37.50% 750 access to public transport was improved for people with disabilities. None of the above 18.25% 365 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 81

4.8

4.9 Which of the following statements do you agree with: Choice % Responses I would intervene if I saw someone getting bullied on public transport. 19.10% 382 I would like to think I would intervene if I saw someone getting bullied 56.45% 1,129 on public transport, but concerns about my own safety might prevent me from doing so. I get frustrated when my journey is delayed by other people. 30.35% 607 I have witnessed bullying on public transport among adults. 7.45% 149 I have witnessed a person with disabilities being bullied on public 3.60% 72 transport. I have witnessed bus drivers/transport staff being insensitive to the needs 16.90% 338 of others. I have witnessed other passengers helping people with disabilities onto 24.90% 498 public transport. I have witnessed public transport ofﬁcials helping people with disabilities 20.55% 411 onto public transport None of the above 12.15% 243

4.10 Ev 82 Transport Committee: Evidence

4.11

4.12 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 83

4.13

4.14 Ev 84 Transport Committee: Evidence

4.15

4.16 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 85

4.17

4.18 Ev 86 Transport Committee: Evidence

4.19

4.20 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 87

4.21

4.22 Ev 88 Transport Committee: Evidence

4.23

4.24

March 2013 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 89

Written evidence from the Alzheimer’s Society (DAT 16) Summary — Alzheimer’s Society would like to highlight the particular challenges to people with cognitive impairment accessing public transport. — Small amounts of assistance can mean that people with dementia are able to access public transport for longer, enabling them to remain independent and active in their communities. — Several transport companies have recently been investigating ways to make their services ‘dementia friendly’. Alzheimer’s Society would welcome further commitments from companies to do this. — The level of visible staff support available and improved signage during the Olympics and the Paralympics was welcomed.

About Alzheimer’s Society Alzheimer’s Society is the UK’s leading support services and research charity for people with dementia and those who care for them. It works across England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Society provides information and support for people with all forms of dementia and those who care for them through its publications, dementia helplines and local services. It runs quality care services, funds research, advises professionals and campaigns for improved health and social care and greater public awareness and understanding of dementia.

About Dementia The term dementia describes a set of symptoms that include loss of memory, mood changes and problems with communicating and reasoning. These symptoms occur when the brain is damaged by certain diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease. Dementia is progressive, which means that people with dementia and their carers are coping with changing abilities over time. These changes in ability include a reduction in the person’s capacity to make decisions about major life events and circumstances as well as day to day decisions. Eventually they will need help with all their daily activities.

How dementia affects ability to use transport Difﬁculty with transport is not just affected by physical disabilities, but also by cognitive impairment, which can leave an individual with dementia totally dependant on someone else if they are to be mobile. Symptoms of dementia such as aggression and anxiety, a tendency to walk about and confusion can make any journey a very challenging undertaking. Problems with perception and comprehension also mean that it may also be difﬁcult for a person with dementia to make an unfamiliar journey unaccompanied, or cope with changes to the journey, such as delays and cancellations. As such the disease can present particular problems when using public transport. In addition, dementia is not a visible disability, and it may not be immediately apparent to those around the person that they have dementia, leading to further mistakes and confusion. It is also likely that as their cognitive impairment worsens the person with dementia may lose their driving licence, which will leave them more reliant on public transport, or transport provided by others. In addition, the eligibility criteria for a parking ‘Blue Badge’ is still based on how far a person can walk, which does not cover many of the issues faced by people with dementia. In Wales, the eligibility for ‘Blue Badges’ now covers people with a severe cognitive impairment. We would welcome a similar change in England.

In the Numbered Paragraphs Below, Alzheimer’s Society Provides Comments on the Specific Areas where Evidence was sought by the Committee 1. The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufficiently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? Dementia is a disability and as such is protected under the Equalities Act. Despite numerous initiatives to make public transport more accessible for disabled people, many people with dementia still find it inaccessible and rely on friends or family to provide lifts or accompany them. Alzheimer’s Society still hears numerous reports of people restricting their movements because transport is not available, such as when bus routes have been cancelled in rural areas. We also hear of facilities designed to help disabled people not always being available, such as people booking assistance on national rail services, yet assistance not being provided at the station. We also hear of difficulty using facilities on the transport, such as difficulty using the toilets on some national rail services. In particular, we hear of numerous occasions where with minor assistance people may have been able to continue using transport, but this assistance is not provided which then restricts what the person with dementia is able to do. For example, assistance with automated ticket machines, or in understanding routes and timetables would enable more people with dementia to continue to use transport. In addition, insufficient staff understanding can lead to exclusion of people with dementia from transport due to misunderstanding of their symptoms, for example staff mistaking the symptoms of dementia for alcohol intoxication and excluding the person as a result. As dementia is not a visible disability, this may contribute to confusion. Ev 90 Transport Committee: Evidence

2. The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares It is important that information on transport is available in a variety of ways. Dementia can affect the comprehension and retention of information and it is often this which can cause problems in people accessing transport. Particularly, it is important that information for planning a journey is not just available on the internet. The Office of National Statistics report that age has a sizeable effect on whether someone has ever used the Internet. Whereas almost all adults aged 16 to 24 years (99%) had used the Internet only 30% of adults aged 75 years and over had ever used the Internet (Office of National Statistics 2012). This constitutes 3.24 million people over the age of 75 in the UK, making up 43% of the 7.63 million people in the UK who had never used the Internet. As dementia affects predominately an older age group, in combination with the difficulty dementia presents to comprehending and retaining information, it is therefore likely that information available on the internet will not be accessible to them. It is also important that information on delays or service alterations which occur while the journey is ongoing are communicated clearly, and that there are staff available to assist people with dementia who may not have understood the communication. There should also be support for carers who are supporting people with dementia in their journey.

3. The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities As mentioned previously, the provision of assistance by staff trained in dementia awareness can make the difference between someone with dementia being able to continue to use transport, or this not being possible. As part of the Dementia Friendly communities strand of the Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia (Department of Health 2012a), numerous transport organisations have been working with the Alzheimer’s Society to develop a dementia friendly approach: First group plc are proving 17,000 of their bus drivers with dementia awareness training in order to improve understanding of dementia and some of the challentes people with dementia face in using public transport. They are developing a new training module component on dementia for their Driver Certificate of Professional Competence. They are also developing their safe journey cards for passengers with dementia. This mens that First Group staff will be aware of people with dementia using their buses and can ensure that they can use the bus service safely and get to their destination. (Taken from The Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia Delivering major imrovements in dementia care and research by 2015. A report of progress) Transport for London has launched the Travel Support Card aimed to make travel easier for people with hidden disabilities. It is particularly useful for those with communication learning of cognitive disabilities who may find it difficult speaking to staff or asking for assistance. (Taken from The Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia Delivering major imrovements in dementia care and research by 2015. A report of progress) Alzheimer’s Society would welcome greater commitment from transport companies to make their services dementia friendly.

4. What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? Alzheimer’s Society is keen to highlight the transport difficulties faced by people who have non-physical disabilities. By its nature, the Paralympics focused predominately on physical and visual impairment. However, many of the measures put in place, such as more visible signage, was of particular benefit to people with dementia, whilst also being of benefit to the public in general. The level of visible staff support available during the Olympics and the Paralympics was welcomed. As highlighted above, support such as this from staff who understand dementia can make the difference between someone with dementia being able to access transport and them not being able to.

References Department of Health (2012a) Prime Minister’s challenge on dementia: Delivering major improvements in dementia care and research by 2015. Department of Health, London. Department of Health (2012b) The Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia Delivering major improvements in dementia care and research by 2015 A report of progress. Department of Health, London. Ofﬁce of National Statistics (2012) Internet Access Quarterly Update, Q3 2012. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/ dcp171778_286665.pdf January 2013 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 91

Written evidence from Contact a Family (DAT 52) Summary (i) Transport is a major barrier that stops disabled children and young people and their families being able to access employment, play and leisure activities. (ii) Families with disabled children and young people highlight a number of problems with transport, including accessibility, availability, high costs, staff attitudes, lack of accessible information and feeling intimidated by how busy public transport is. (iii) Families with disabled children report that many public transport staff are not trained or conﬁdent in enforcing rights of disabled people across the system. (iv) School to home transport policies remain problematic for families with disabled children. (v) Contact a Family is concerned about the impact of changes to mobility rules under Personal Independence Payment. We urge analyses of these measures on independence, isolation and disabled people’s ability work and participate in everyday life.

About Contact a Family 1. Contact a Family is the only UK-wide charity providing advice, support and information to 320,000 families with disabled children—regardless of disability or health conditioneach year. 2. We develop policy and campaign on issues based on what parent carers tell us through our research and what we have learnt from working with them for over 30 years. This submission is focused on improving the rights of parent carers, which from our experience is central to improving the outcomes and participation in everyday life for children and young people with disabilities. 3. Contact a Family welcomes the opportunity to respond to the transport committee.

Evidence 4. The isolation of caring and poor access to services including transport can result in the social exclusion of families with disabled children. In a report by Contact a Family two thirds of families caring for disabled children reported feeling isolated frequently or all of the time. 5. Forgotten Families 20115 shows social, emotional and ﬁnancial isolation causes almost three quarters (72%) of families with disabled children to experience poor mental health such as anxiety, depression or breakdown. Almost half (49%) reported feeling so unwell—they have asked their GP for medication or to see a counsellor.

Experiences of Public Transport 6. To gather feedback on experiences on public transport from parent carers across our network we post information about the Committee inquiry on our Facebook page on Wednesday 2 January 2013. We received a very good response rate. Comments can be summaries as: — General ignorance toward disabled children and people, particular those who have “hidden disabilities” experienced across the transport network. — Additional disadvantages faced by families with disabled in accessing transport in rural areas. — Users of disabled buggies/wheelchairs not being given priority use of disabled spaces on buses and trains. — Staff not enforcing rules associated with disabled spaces on public transport (in particular for those that use disabled buggies). — Pushchairs occupying spaces for a wheelchair user and refusing to move for wheelchair users or disabled buggies. — Disabled children using special disabled buggies being told to fold down buggies/threaten or abused by staff/general public if this is not possible. — Restricting use of disability bus passes to non-peak times. 7. Section of comments from parent carers: — Buses are a nightmare here also as my son is 6ft 4 looks ok but has epilepsy and autism and we have been asked to move from disabled seat as someone with walking stick needed to sit hello ...... needs to be lots of disability awareness training given. — I never use public transport because the staff are awful and unhelpful. Had to carry child and wheelchair up steep steps alone several times (Wimbledon). Stressful and dangerous, plus humiliating for my son. 5 http://www.cafamily.org.uk/media/381636/forgotten_isolation_report.pdf Ev 92 Transport Committee: Evidence

— We went up to the Paralympics with a group from work 2 wheelchairs and a severely autistic gentlemen and they were fantastic on tubes holding doors, getting other commuters out of our way but I’m afraid to say I was obviously all for show went up at Xmas and it was horrendous. — The buses up here were a nightmare even though my son was young enough to ﬁt in a pushchair he was hooked to machines still I couldn’t put the pram down so they refused to let us on! — I took my child onto a bus in her maclaren elite disabled buggy and some of u r aware they do not look like a normal baby buggy anyway when i got on the bus there were already a lady on with a buggy leaving 1 more space for me, i got on and as we waited another woman came on with a pram and driver asked if i could fold my “buggy” down as i was in a disabled space!!! i explained and the pram woman was absolutely disgusted that she couldnt get on, my child may not look disabled but she is registered blind and couldnt walk at that point, puts me off going on buses especially while people these days r so ignorant when it comes to disabled people and children and as i might add the pram lady stormed off in the direction of the ofﬁce to complaint. See all comment http://www.facebook.com/contactafamily/posts/10152362575025214

Home School Transport Issues 9. We have heard from local parent groups across England that discriminatory practices have been used when issuing home to school transport policies, including: — Local authorises using Higher Rate Mobility as a criteria for not receiving school transport. — Children in termly/yearly residential schools only receiving transport when going to and from school—issue being if the child is in a 365 day placement they will only get transport at the start of school life and then when they ﬁnish—no support for families to get help with visits or no home visits for the child. — Waiting times—transport only waiting 3 minutes then leaving and if it is a re-occurrence transport will be withdrawn. — Children with SEN and/or disabilities who are not in the school named by the local authority will not receive transport. — Transport removed if child’s behaviour is too challenging—for many children this is why they get transport.

Changes to Mobility under Personal Independence Payment 10. The purpose of the mobility component of DLA is to provide financial support to compensate disabled people for the fact that they have high unavoidable costs relating to mobility, for example, it is prohibitively expensive for them to travel or to access leisure facilities. 11. The assessment criteria published in the regulations for the mobility component of PIP were significantly different to the criteria consulted on. The Government’s own figures show an additional 148,000 people who would have been receiving the higher rate of DLA will not now receive the enhanced rate of PIP. The total number of people being removed from the enhanced rate of the PIP mobility component is now given as 428,000. 12. The previous criteria proposed that people with physical walking difficulties (who have no difficulty planning and following a journey) will only qualify for the enhanced mobility component if they are unable to walk more than 50 metres. However, despite no prior indication it was being considered and none of the consultation responses proposing it, this distance has been slashed to 20 metres in the final criteria. 13. Many wheelchair users may be able to move as far as 20 metres, but not more than 50 metres, and face significant barriers and costs in remaining mobile, including powered wheelchairs, scooters and adapted cars. If these regulations are passed, such people will no longer receive the highest rate of the benefit, meaning a reduction to their income of over £3,600 a year. 14. In addition, being in receipt of the enhanced rate of the PIP mobility component will mean people remain eligible for a Motability vehicle. This is their means of independence and participation, the lifeline that enables them to get to work, to GP appointments, to the shops or to take their children to school. If the regulations are passed in their current form then an extra 148,000 people will lose out on the enhanced rate and potential access to a Motability vehicle. 15. Contact a Family is very disappointed by the Government’s decision to end payments of the Disability Living Allowance higher rate mobility component to in-patients that have a Motability vehicle. Our report “Stop the DLA Takeaway: fairness for families when their child is in hospital”6 details the significant financial strain that having a child in hospital already puts a family under. At the moment the retention of the Motability car enables some form of normal family life to continue at what is often an extremely difficult time for many 6 Contact a Family and The Children’s Trust, Tadworth (2010) Stop the DLA Takeaway: fairness for families when their child is in hospital Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 93

families. It allows weekends at home and day trips to take place. These will have a signiﬁcant impact on the quality of life for many children with disabilities and complex health needs. 16. We call on the Government to reconsider both these policies as we believe it will signiﬁcantly increased isolation and reduced participation in everyday life for disabled young people and their families. January 2013

Written evidence from the National Pensioners Convention (NPC) (DAT 13) 1. Introduction 1.1 The National Pensioners Convention (NPC) is Britain’s largest pensioner organisation representing around 1.5 million older people, active in over 1,000 afﬁliated groups. The NPC is run by and for pensioners and campaigns for improvements to their income, health and welfare. 1.2 Since 1 October 2010, the Equality Act replaced most of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) and aims to protect disabled people by providing legal rights in a number of areas including access to land based transport services. The NPC welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to this inquiry and would be available to provide witnesses to appear before the committee if required.

2. Is the legislation working for disabled people? 2.1 Regrettably, we have found that there are a number ways in which the legislation is not working for many disabled people. These can be summarised as follows: (a) Many of the issues that make accessibility more difficult for disabled people, (eg reduction in staff at stations) are not covered by the legislation, yet can cause very major problems for disabled and other transport users. (b) There are geographical variations in the provision of accessible transport. As one would expect, urban provision is more frequent and the equipment more modern (Kneeling Buses etc) whereas rural provision is less frequent and often cascaded down equipment from larger conurbations. Once again, the legislation does not provide for the impact of such variations. (c) Where no suitable public transport is available, particularly in rural areas, disabled travellers with concessionary passes now have to pay for the only transport they are capable of using. Not only therefore are these users faced with the problems of physical inaccessibility of public transport, but also that of economic and financial inaccessibility with some unable to afford to go out as regularly as they would wish. (d) There is also a specific age dimension to understanding the problems faced by people with reduced mobility (PRM). It should be noted that the proportion classified as having mobility difficulties increases markedly with age. The relevant 2010 data shows that 38% of individuals aged 70+ had problems walking or using a bus, as compared with just 4% of those aged 16–49. Problems of inaccessibility are therefore also largely problems linked to age.

3. What issues affect disabled travellers that are not effectively covered by the legislation? 3.1 Persons of reduced mobility (PRM) have speciﬁc needs when travelling. Fundamentally, they need to feel safe and know that help is available when needed. However, this does not happen at many railway stations because many are unstaffed, or only partially staffed. In addition, not all rail stations are fully accessible to disabled travellers and information is not available. 3.2 The whole question of information for the intending disabled traveller really demands a separate investigation by the committee. Essentially, there is too much reliance on online information which can leave most disabled (older) people isolated and unaware. 3.3 Unsupervised and hostile security checks at airport terminals are also a problem. For example, the removing of footwear, maybe essential, but rarely is help provided. 3.4 In all these areas of concern, there also needs to be an acknowledgement that staff training in the needs of disabled travellers is often insufﬁcient.

4. How effectively is the legislation being enforced? 4.1 We believe the application of the legislation can vary between locations, but the real problem is that there appears to be little monitoring or audit of the legislation and hence it is almost impossible to assess how well it is being applied. January 2013 Ev 94 Transport Committee: Evidence

Written evidence from Trailblazers (DAT 17) About Trailblazers Trailblazers is a group of disabled campaigners from across the UK who tackle the social issues affecting young disabled people, such as access to higher education, employment, and social and leisure opportunities. We aim to ﬁght these social injustices experienced by young disabled people and to ensure they can gain access to the services they require. Trailblazers have been working with the Department for Transport on a number of topics including improvements to railways, access on trains, blue badge reform. We provide the secretariat for the All party Parliamentary Group for young disabled people, chaired by Paul Maynard MP. We would also be very willing to provide oral evidence at the select committee.

Question 1 What are the problems or barriers that prevent disabled people participating in society and leading independent, full and active lives? The Muscular Dystrophy Campaign and Trailblazers know that there are many factors that prevent disabled people participating in society and leading independent, full and active lives. Barriers that prevent disabled people participating in all the activities they would like to include; a lack of access to education, employment, public transport, housing, ﬂexible personal care that ﬁts around their needs and the higher cost of living for disabled people. After speaking extensively with individuals suffering from a range of disabilities, the Muscular Dystrophy Campaign and Trailblazers have highlighted these issues in the following recent reports. We have also attached a report by the All Party Parliamentary Group for Young People, titled Removing barriers, promoting independence.

Public Transportation 2012 - issues and suggestions In this section we focus on the issues disabled people have encountered when travelling on public transport. Although there have been a number of different pieces of legislation passed concerning the fair treatment of disabled individuals and speciﬁcally the expectations for transport accessibility, such legislation relies on the proper enforcement of these standards. The Equality Act 2010 highlighted important requirements for transportation services such as providing proper assistance to disabled travellers by staff members and ensuring that up to date travel information is made readily accessible. Undoubtedly these are welcomed changes; however information provided by many disabled travellers implies that such legislation is not always properly enforced. Information about changes to services or problems with facilities is not always updated and people report a lack of information regarding how to ﬁle a staff complaint. In the document “Accessible Train Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice” (Nov 2011) it states that all transport staff, maintenance staff and engineers must be provided with the adequate disability awareness training. However without ensuring that the staff is abiding by this training, improvements in services can’t take place. Often disabled travellers report unfair treatment by staff and this can deter them from using this transport in the future. We strongly believe that once such systems are not only put in place but also enforced, this legislation will become much more effective in promoting fairer and easier travel for disabled individuals.

Rail and London Underground Inadequate station accessibility Although we appreciate attempts are being made to improve the accessibility of Underground and rail stations, the number of fully-accessible stations still remains very low. Sulaiman Khan from Woodford Green says “I was on the way to the cinema when I got stuck at Leytonstone station for over 40 minutes as I couldn’t get off the train because they didn’t have a ramp.” In the end a ramp had to be brought all the way from his home station so that he could ﬁnally exit the train. Disabled travellers have reported issues with the level of accessibility available in each station, with some offering street to platform accessibility but not platform-to-train accessibility. This type of inconsistency forces wheelchair users to travel only between a limited number of stations and makes travelling inconvenient, costly and time consuming. It also renders some facilities useless. We believe more emphasis needs to be placed on making each station fully-accessible as opposed to making multiple stations only partially-accessible. As a result of the current limited number of accessible underground and rail stations, many disabled travellers are forced to take longer and less convenient routes to their destinations. This can often require taxis or multiple buses which is very costly. Until a time when all stations are made fully accessible to wheelchair users we believe that some form of disability discount should be provided to prevent journeys from becoming very expensive. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 95

When stations are designed/re-structured, there must be consultation with disabled people. Lifts must be of a size to allow for number of passengers to travel together- e.g prams, families and wheelchair users may all need to use a lift at the same time. This should be considered. Staff at stations is crucial to a disabled persons safety and conﬁdence. Train stations should be open for disabled passengers to use in the same way as non disabled passengers. Lifts should not be turned off early, as disabled people may be travelling late at night just like anyone else.

Service delays and alterations Disabled travellers have frequently reported incidents in which information about changes to services and broken facilities haven’t been made available, forcing them to change their plans last minute and causing severe delays. This often involves lifts being out of order or stations being closed. In order to prevent disabled travellers from having to travel a long way out of their way, up to date information about any maintenance or problems should be made available to travellers. Managers and staff should also make a conscious effort to get these facilities back up and running as quickly as possible.

Inter-station communication and the Assisted Passenger Reservation System Jagdeep Kaur Sehmbi from Birmingham says “a couple of times there has been no one with the ramp to help me get off the train at my destination platform, even though I had informed them at the other station and been assured that somebody would have the ramps ready.” Despite the existence of an Assisted Passenger Reservation System (APRS) which enables disabled passengers to book assistance in advance, many travellers report incidences of staff not turning up on time, or at all. On other occasions assistance is provided on one end of the individual’s journey but not on the other. This can lead to cases where wheelchair users are unable to leave the train at the planned station and are left on the train with no means of getting off. The anxiety of encountering these experiences makes individuals reluctant to use the trains. We therefore believe that a better level of staff communication is necessary between stations in order to provide a reliable travelling experience. In cases as above, when the planned assistance is not provided and passengers are unable to exit the train, some form of passenger-driver communication should be made available. This will allow the passenger to alert the driver that they need assistance and allow for help to be called. The public should also be made aware of the purpose of these facilities so that disabled passengers are not reluctant to use them. Due to the fact that the APRS requires 24hr advance booking, disabled passengers are unable to travel at short notices or to alter their travel plans. This significantly restricts their freedom to make day-to-day plans and limits their overall independence. We believe that with adequate numbers of available staff at each station, such advanced notice would not be necessary and disabled passengers will be able to be more spontaneous and flexible with their plans. If a rail replacement is underway the buses must be accessible, we have found on a number of occasions that disabled people are left alone in a vulnerable position due to an inaccessible rail replacement being used. Contingency plans should be put into place for when a lift doesn’t work, and information should be communicated well before a person arrives and finds the lift out of order. Drivers/staff on board should be notified in advance of any trouble and notify disabled passengers travelling.

Staff attitude and training “Trailblazers feel that it is not necessarily the physical barriers which cause problems for disabled passengers, but the attitude or lack of disability awareness of the transport staff.” Many disabled travellers have reported incidents where members of staff are rude or unhelpful towards them. We believe that in order to prevent these incidents from occurring, all staff should be properly trained not only in assisting disabled passengers with the necessary facilities but also in the necessary disability awareness training. This will create a less stressful travelling experience for disabled travellers and improve the level of service provided. We also believe that the travelling experience of disabled passengers can be improved through a better complaint management system. Information about how to ﬁle a staff complain should be made more readily available to passengers and staff should also be made aware that providing certain services to disabled passengers is an integral part of their job.

Backup facilities and replacement services Many disabled travellers report experiences of facilities being out of use and as a result interfering with their journeys. Often broken lifts or ramps prevent them from completing their journey and force them to return home or to travel out of their way to reach one of the few other accessible stations. In order to avoid this, a greater attempt should be made to keep station maintenance up to date or to ensure the existence of manual ramps and available staff who are trained to use them. Ev 96 Transport Committee: Evidence

We have found that, due to the variation in stations, ramps differ signiﬁcantly and often members of staff are trained to use some but not all ramps. In the many cases where automatic ramps are not available or out of service, we believe that staff should be trained in the proper use of all types of manual ramps so that passengers’ journeys are not inconvenienced.

In the case of train diversion in which passengers journeys are interrupted, the necessary replacement services should be made available to disabled passengers. Often these passengers are left stranded as stations that they did not intend to stop at and in many cases these stations have little or no disabled accessibility.

Fares

Although disabled railcards are available, the price for disabled people to travel is still higher than for non- disabled people, as those requiring a carer are also forced to pay for their carer’s ticket. Nick Baker from Harrow says “I had to pay for my PA to travel too so even with my Disabled Person’s Railcard it meant I ended up paying more than a non-disabled person”. Some disabled individuals even have two carers, making travelling even more expensive. Either such carers should be provided with free travel or a discounted price should be given to minimize the extra costs to disabled travellers.

Buses

The problem of attitude

Matilda Ibini from London describes how “the negative attitude some bus drivers give off is upsetting” and how even simple requests such as pressing a button to lower a bus, or deploying a ramp, are frequently met with annoyance.

Disabled travellers continue to report negative attitudes from bus drivers and passengers when requiring assistance. We hear frequently of cases in which bus drivers have driven past stops without stopping or of drivers who are reluctant to provide the necessary assistance to wheelchair users. In other situations drivers do not stop close enough to the curb to allow for ramp access or are unwilling to adjust their position for wheelchair users.

These incidents demonstrate a general lack of disability awareness and care shown by staff towards disabled passengers. To combat this we believe that all drivers should be provided with proper disability awareness training and that it be a requirement of their employment. We also suggest that complains of cases of improper treatment should be taken very seriously so as to prevent future problems.

We have also found that it is very common for disabled passengers to have to wait for the next bus to arrive as a result of limited space on each bus. Laura Merry from Roehampton says “travelling with my sister, who is also a wheelchair user, is impossible in London as there’s only ever one wheelchair space available on a bus.” In the majority of cases, individuals with pushchairs have already taken up the available wheelchair space or are unwilling to make the adjustments necessary to ﬁt a wheelchair passenger. In order to prevent this, more space needs to be made available to wheelchair users and bus drivers need to be more willing to provide the necessary assistance in creating space for the disabled passenger.

Accessibility

We have learned that in many cases the automatic ramps that allow access to buses are out of service and disabled passengers are forced to wait for the next bus. Such cases should be given higher priority and assistance or replacement buses should be provided to allow disabled passengers to continue their journey.

Bus designs should allow for pushchairs, wheelchairs and people with luggage to all travel simultaneously, disabled people should not feel victimised and have to wait in the cold. The confrontation should be addressed by the driver, and policies should be enforced. Penalties or ﬁnes should be given to bus operators who fail to enforce policy. This should be investigated/made accountable by looking through complaints made.

Another issue that disabled individuals have highlighted when using buses, is that of timetables. Carrie-Ann Fleming, 24, of Kendal, says it is ‘pointless’ using her free bus pass from Cumbria County Council as she sometimes has to wait for more than one hour for a wheelchair accessible bus. Jennifer Gallacher of Middlesbrough also states how “wheelchair buses do not run on every route every day, making the idea of hopping on as a quick way of going on a journey, unrealistic for a wheelchair user.”

To avoid these types of delays, timetables should ensure that there are more frequent disabled-accessible buses, that all routes have such buses on a daily basis, and that bus’s accessibility is taken into consideration when drawing up timetables. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 97

Taxis The attitude of drivers A lot of evidence we have gathered points to a problem of taxi driver disability awareness. Taxi drivers have ignored disabled customers and driven straight past making disabled people feel they have to get an able- bodied friend to hail a taxi on their behalf. Taxi drivers have also charged for the time it takes to secure a disabled passenger which unfairly discriminates due to the extra time involved. Taxi companies should ensure that drivers receive regular and relevant disability awareness training which emphasizes the importance of providing a first rate service for disabled passengers. Disability awareness training should help drivers understand the ramifications and wider context of their actions rather than just what they can and must and must not do by the law. Other disabled individuals have encountered situations in which they were charged extra for using a taxi as a result of being in a wheelchair. Steve Ledbrook from Weston-Super-Mare explains how he was charged time and a half when using a local taxi, simply because he was in a wheelchair. Considering the deployment of the ramp took no longer than it would to load suitcases into a boot, there should be no reason why he was charged such a significantly higher rate.

Access problems Judith Merry from Buckinghamshire, on one occasion said “it took one hour to order a disabled accessible taxi which was really irritating.” The system for ordering accessible taxis should be made easier and information regarding booking processing etc should be made more available so such delays don’t occur. We have had reports that taxi drivers have claimed their ramps are broken or that they are unable to use them. Taxi ramps should be regularly checked and vehicles not be allowed in service if they have a problem with their equipment. Our evidence has also shown that outside major metropolitan areas such as London accessible taxi provision is often poor with some areas relying on a few accessible vehicles. This can mean that at the busiest times disabled people are unable to hire a taxi. We recommend taxi ﬁrms and licensing authorities should work and meet with disabled people in their area to highlight where the gaps are in current service provision and identify ways these should be ﬁlled.

Information and the Complaint Procedure Our evidence indicates that many disabled people ﬁnd it hard to get accurate information about accessible transport. It is also clear that disabled people often don’t know the best way to make a complaint if they receive discriminatory or poor treatment from a taxi driver and they don’t believe the complaint will be taken seriously. We recommend that taxi ﬁrms make it clear on websites and vehicles how a passenger should make a complaint. Websites should also explain how the complaint will be dealt with and describe a timeline for the complaint to be responded to and addressed.

What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? During the Paralympics a number of transport provisions were made to enable easier Games access by disabled individuals. These included the provision of manual boarding ramps and the necessary staff needed at 16 key Underground stations. Transport for London has stated that these additions are to remain in place, and claim that the Paralympics have changed their approach to disabled users. Overall the Games highlight a greater potential for improving transport accessibility and we hope such improvements will continue and expand. January 2013

Written evidence from Guide Dogs (DAT 46) 1.0 About Guide Dogs 1.1 Transport, and in particular public transport, is essential to allow disabled people to live independent and active lives. As an organisation dedicated to improving the mobility of blind and partially sighted people, Guide Dogs has developed a considerable body of evidence on the experiences of this group in using transport.

2.0 Summary of Evidence 2. A 2002 survey showed that 40% of disabled people were fearful of travelling by public transport.7 Accessibility has improved since then but provision remains patchy with disparity across modes and geographic areas. Compounded by insufﬁcient availability of information and inadequate staff training (see survey evidence below in point 7.2), this means that many blind and partially sighted people still lack the conﬁdence to travel alone. 7 Attitudes of Disabled People to Public Transport, DPTAC, p 74, 2002. Ev 98 Transport Committee: Evidence

3.0 Definition of Accessibility 3.1 The term “accessibility” does not have a universally recognised definition and its use can be too wheelchair-centric, focused on ramps, lifts and step-free access. The Department for Transport’s Accessibility Action Plan states that “by March 2015, at least 75% of rail journeys will start or end at a fully accessible station”8 but it is not clear exactly what determines a fully accessible station. In many cases accessible information systems and blister paving on the edges of platforms are not included in rail accessibility improvements: Clapham Junction station underwent a significant upgrade, with new lifts installed to make the station “accessible” but only some of its 16 platforms now have blister paving. 3.2 This is also borne out in the London Underground—the only reference to the accessibility of the underground in the Accessibility Action Plan is “66 stations out of 270 are currently step free from street to platform level.”9 It is estimated that there are between 640,000 and 710,170 wheelchair users10 whilst there are 360,000 people registered blind or partially sighted and almost two million people living with sight loss.11 Given the numbers involved, there is a disproportionately large focus on wheelchairs in accessibility documents. Wheelchairs are the most visual symbol of disability and are seen by some as symbolic of disability in general. This is something the department should try to move away from as wheelchair users have very specific access needs and the Department’s approach to accessibility, when viewed purely in terms of step-free access, may fail to take account of the varied needs of other disabled passengers. 3.3 Guide Dogs believes accessibility should be seen in terms of usability—a fully accessible transport system brings benefits not only to disabled people, but to older people, parents with children, tourists and others. For example, if all buses were equipped with audio visual (AV) information systems, this would give many groups of travellers the confidence to use buses when they might otherwise have opted for a different form of transport.

4.0 Is legislation sufficiently comprehensive? 4.1 Effectiveness of transport legislation would be improved by greater consistency of application across transport modes and geographical areas. Provision and regulation of transport is carried out on a mode-by- mode basis, however Guide Dogs finds that disabled passengers use and think about transport in terms of the end-to-end journey, often encompassing several modes of inconsistently regulated transport and infrastructure. Guide Dogs recognises that the Department is moving towards looking at transport from a holistic mobility perspective which we hope will encompass an inter-modal approach to accessible transport. 4.2 Disparity in provision is illustrated through an issue on which Guide Dogs campaigns: AV information systems. These are essential to blind and partially sighted passengers for orientation, to obtain travel information and to know when they have arrived. The Rail Vehicles Accessibility Regulations state that all rail vehicles have to be equipped with audio and visual information systems by 2020. The corresponding regulation for buses, the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations, does not include provision for audio information systems. This means that whilst blind and partially sighted people can use regulated rail vehicles with confidence, this is not the case when they cross modes to travel on regulated buses. 4.3 There is also disparity within modes as illustrated by the Maritime Regulation EU1177/2010. The regulation is designed to protect the rights of disabled people travelling by sea and inland waterways. The scope of the regulation is too limited in that it would fail to protect the rights of a guide dog owner on a river taxi in London, as crew levels for these vessels mean they fall outside the scope of the regulation.12 We hope the Government will take this into account when considering the UK implementation of the regulation as outlined in the Accessibility Action Plan.13 4.4 End-to-end journeys include elements which go beyond public transport. Guide dog owners report concerns around other aspects of travel which impact on their ability to undertake safe and successful journeys: 4.4.1 Poorly managed streets with overhanging branches, cars parked on the pavement, poorly managed road works and street furniture can make a blind or partially sighted person’s journey hazardous. 4.4.2 Shared spaces, where pedestrians and traffic share an area and delineating elements such as kerbs are removed, are a major concern for blind and partially sighted people, to the point where some blind and partially sighted people report anecdotally they no longer travel through these areas. 4.4.3 Quiet hybrid and electric vehicles cannot be heard approaching and present a real danger to blind and partially sighted people crossing the road. These vehicles are not audibly detectable at speeds lower than 20 mph and are twice as likely to be involved in a collision with a pedestrian when performing certain manoeuvres. Guide dog owners report that the presence of these vehicles on the road increases their concerns about travelling independently. 8 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p.11, 2012 9 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p.11, 2012 10 The Social Implications of Increases in Wheelchair Use, Lancaster University, 2004 11 RNIB Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk/aboutus/Research/statistics/Pages/statistics.aspx 12 EU Regulation 1177/2010 concerning the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterway. 13 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p. 12 2012 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 99

4.5 Provision is affected by legislation lead-in times and some legislation is yet to fully come into effect— for example only 41% of rail vehicles are fully compliant with the Rail Vehicles Accessibility Regulations.14 Guide Dogs understands that lead-in times reduce the regulatory burden upon operators; however, blind and partially sighted people’s mobility is affected when they cannot be assured that the infrastructure will support their needs across the whole journey.

5.0 How effectively is legislation enforced? 5.1 The Equality Act 2010 makes it illegal for taxi drivers to refuse access to a guide dog owner with their dog; charge a higher fare for taking a guide dog; or refuse to take a booking for a party that includes a guide dog. Guide dog owners across the UK report that their access rights under this Act are not observed by all taxi drivers. Between 2008 and 2011 Guide Dogs received 91 reports of taxis refusing to carry a guide dog owner with their dog or charging extra for the dog. Furthermore we believe the vast majority of cases are not reported and that these figures represent a small proportion of the problems faced by guide dog owners using taxis. 5.2 The Equality Act is difficult to enforce as blind and partially sighted people’s limited sight stops them from providing details to local authorities about the make and model of the vehicle, registration and licence number, the location of offence and the validity of any exemption certificates displayed by a driver. Similarly it is hard for people with sight loss to know whether they are being overcharged (though a possible solution could be through installing talking taxi meters). Beyond these identification difficulties, it is anecdotally reported that when prosecution does occur magistrates can be lenient in sentencing as they may be reluctant to take measures that would damage the livelihood of a taxi driver. 5.3 Taxis are especially important for the independent mobility of blind and partially sighted people who cannot drive themselves. This is an area where it is essential that legislation works effectively through proper enforcement.

6.0 The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares. 6.1 Guide Dogs welcomes the commitment in the Accessibility Action Plan to improve information for passengers using public transport. In particular we would like to see an amendment of the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations to require AV information systems to be installed on all new buses. For a sighted person getting off a bus at the wrong stop is an annoyance; for a blind or partially sighted person it can be a frightening experience which leaves them feeling unsafe and isolated. Navigating an unfamiliar area without sight is difficult and hazardous. The fear of this situation can put some people off taking public transport altogether. AV information systems would give blind and partially sighted people greater confidence in using buses as well as helping other bus users such as tourists. Only 19% of buses in the UK provided next stop audio information in 201115 and Guide Dogs survey evidence has shown bus companies are failing to make adequate provision for the blind and partially sighted people who want to use their services (see paragraph 7.2). 6.2 Guide Dogs welcomes recent technological developments which allow blind and partially sighted people to plan their journeys through the internet, SMS and smart mobile devices. We welcome initiatives such as the ATOC Stations Made Easy website which provides station accessibility information to disabled train passengers. However, most of information on the website is aimed at people with physical rather than sensory disabilities, making it less helpful for blind and partially sighted people than it could be. 6.3 The Accessibility Action Plan includes plans to provide data sets to allow third parties to develop travel apps which could help to improve accessibility for disabled travellers. We welcome these moves towards greater information provision, but we urge the Government to work with developers to ensure the apps are fit for purpose and accessible to blind and partially sighted users. 6.4 Information provision at transport hubs can be improved. The Accessibility Action Plan states that Customer Information Systems have been put in place in around 2,000 rail stations.16 We applaud the rollout of these systems but are aware of inconsistencies, for example the majority of bus stations have visual timetable information but few make audible announcements about bus departures. Some electronic information boards are located in the wrong place at stations: too far away from the view of passengers, reflecting light from glass ceilings, using poor tonal colour contrast between displayed text and background, or not rendering standardised information. 6.5 Automated ticket vending machines can be problematic for blind and partially sighted people as they are often touch screen activated devices with no tactile or audible feedback. Partially sighted people report problems with the size and tonal contrast of text on the screens, glare caused by reflective light sources, and hard to understand information. Whilst a blind or partially sighted person can pre-book a journey online, they are required to use their credit card and enter a pin number on the inaccessible ticket machine to retrieve their 14 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p.11, 2012 15 Information provided by the RTIG (Real Time Information Group) 2011 Annual Survey on Audio Visual system uptake around the UK—from Accessibility Action Plan. 16 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p. 15, 2012 Ev 100 Transport Committee: Evidence

tickets. The problems with ticket machines are a real concern as, with a proposed reduction in front line staff, dependence on ticket machines will increase.

7.0 The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 7.1 The Accessibility Action Plan states that “good progress has been made in ensuring that transport staff have the appropriate disability equality awareness training to support disabled passengers, and enable them to travel confidently and in comfort”.17 Feedback from blind and partially sighted people suggests that there is still a long way to go before they are able to rely upon transport staff to travel in comfort and confidence without the support of a third party, like friend or family member. 7.2 Guide Dogs is aware of many incidences where drivers fail to provide adequate support for passengers, often due to their being distracted by the responsibilities of driving or because they lack a sufficient standard of English. Survey evidence showed that 87% of blind and partially sighted respondents had missed their bus stop because a driver had forgotten to tell them where to get off after being requested to do so. 29% of blind and partially sighted respondents reported a driver has simply refused to tell them when they had reached their stop. Feedback showed drivers could be “patronising and impatient” and “regularly forget” to announce the correct stops, leaving one passenger “at the depot in unknown parts of town, not knowing where I was or how to get home.” One respondent explained “a bus driver refused to believe I was blind even though I had a guide dog, many a time I have been put off at the wrong stop and got lost or left behind.”18 This attitude amongst staff explains why some blind and partially sighted people decide not to use their local bus services and rely upon significantly more expensive taxi services to travel. 7.3 The Accessibility Action Plan includes a reference to a disability module extending the Certificate of Professional Competence for bus driver training and a disability equality awareness module for accredited training courses for taxi drivers.19 Anecdotally, Guide Dogs has been made aware that the standards of these modules is variable. Some operators encourage their drivers to fully participate in physical activities and engage with disabled people as well as undertaking classroom work. Other operators only require a driver to attend classroom based activities and will certify the drivers simply for staying in the room for the whole day with no requirement for examination. January 2013

Written evidence from Transport for All (DAT 60) Transport for All represents London’s older and disabled transport users. We are the only UK organisation campaigning exclusively for an accessible transport system.

Summary Transport legislation in the UK appears to be strong. It is unlawful for a transport provider to refuse service a member of the public because of their disability. It is unlawful for them to offer service at a lower standard to a person because of their disability. It is unlawful for them to offer a service on different terms to a person because of their disability. Where it is impossible or unreasonably difficult for a disabled person to use a service, the transport provider has a duty to make anticipatory reasonable adjustments. However, in reality, disabled people regularly find that we are refused service and we are offered service of at a lower standard. Services which are meant to compensate for the inaccessibility of public transport, such as passenger assistance and provision of door-to-door transport, often in practice have a high eligibility bar. Even those who are eligible find that the service provided is poor, and varies greatly from place to place. “It’s like apartheid—you can’t get on the bus and someone else can. As a wheelchair user I am deterred from travelling to Central London because of the bad experiences.” Ibby, wheelchair user These rules are rarely enforced. Complaint systems are unwieldy and the legal route relies on well-informed individuals with the time and attitude and crucially, in an era of legal aid cuts, money to pursue claims against transport providers. In practice, this rarely happens. Cuts to transport staff, a rise in rail fares and a reduction in the number and frequency of bus routes have affected all passengers, but the effect on the freedom and independence of disabled and older transport users has been much worse. Disabled people are half as likely to have a car compared to the general population and options such as cycling and walking are not open to all of us. So when disabled people lose a local bus service, there is often no “back-up” option, save becoming dependent on the goodwill of neighbours or family. Being able to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life—including public life, family life and work—are rights enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled People. Disabled and older 17 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p. 17, 2012 18 Guide Dogs, Forgotten Passengers Survey, 2012 19 Accessibility Action Plan, Department for Transport, p.17, 2012 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 101

Londoners are being prevented from enjoying these rights because a great deal of transport is inaccessible, and providers are not making the necessary adjustments to change this.

Key Recommendations — A joined-up, independent complaints body for all modes of transport to genuinely address concerns, and compensation where providers have let down disabled passengers. — A league table of transport providers by number of accessibility complaints to be made public. — A system of disabled and older “mystery shoppers” to annually monitor train, taxi and bus providers, making their findings public and providing recommendations to providers. — Legislation akin to the PSVAR and RVAR regulations governing vehicles to ensure transport providers make transport infrastructure—ie stations and bus stops—is 100% accessible by a fixed date. — Accessible and available information in a variety of formats, available at transport hubs and through health and social care services. A recognition that online information on its own is not adequate. — A poster campaign publicising disabled people’s right to a taxi as a reasonable adjustment where a station is inaccessible: this is little known. — No access—no money: Accessibility written into the franchising process, so that transport providers bidding to run a service will have to compete in terms of promised accessibility improvements and their record on access. — No training—no contract: regular and robust Disability Equality training for all frontline staff, designed and delivered in partnership with disabled people, must be a condition of all contracts. — Fair and transparent assessment for transport services and benefits based on the social model of disability. — Updated DfT guidelines on bus design to ensure that buses are spacious enough to meet the challenge of an aging population and increasing numbers of wheelchair users. — The expectation that staff will be available at all stages of a journey written into contracts with transport providers. — A Passenger Assist service which requires 24 hour notice only at Category F stations, and provides unbooked assistance at Category A—E stations. — Audio-visual information on every UK bus.

Is transport legislation effective? Do you feel that you are treated equally as a disabled person? Is it comprehensive enough and is it enforced? Disabled people are not treated equally. Transport for All, through our advice and advocacy service, receives many complaints. Transport providers might comply with the law in what they have in place, but the reliability and ease of using these systems means that in practice, their transport is difficult or impossible to use with confidence. The consequence is that in view of the stress of planning and making a journey with the risk it will go wrong, disabled people then decide not to make a journey. I travel an awful lot, all around the UK and when I book assistance, one time out of four it will actually work without any problems, so 75% of the time I will have some kind of trouble. I think there’s quite a big gap between legislation and regulation of transport to make it accessible and how that turns into accessibility in reality as a user. Most vehicles have some degree of accessibility but how the companies operating those vehicles and systems choose to run them generally means that access becomes a hit and miss experience. For example, most trains have an accessible toilet and a wheelchair space. I’ve been on trains in the last three weeks where the accessible toilet has been out of order and there’s no other option to sit anywhere else on the train. I’ve been on a train for three or four hours without having access to the loo and no means of getting hold of a member of staff to see whether I can sit anywhere else on the train. I’ve been on buses where the bus is accessible but the bus stop isn’t. To improve access to transport and making regulations and laws, work for transport accessibility you need to take a holistic approach to what transport and travel actually mean. You can have a wonderfully accessible train but if you can’t get into the train station, you can’t get to the assistance office or you can’t book assistance then that train’s not accessible. (Zara, wheelchair user)

Train and Tube — Disabled people arriving at a Tube station, (where assistance does not need to be booked in advance) to ﬁnd that there is no-one to offer assistance. This is especially common among visually impaired and blind people. Ev 102 Transport Committee: Evidence

— In recent months, since the introduction of manual ramps, we have received a number of complaints from wheelchair users expecting to be met off the train with a ramp, and finding this information has not been passed on, thus getting stranded on the train. Used Tube for the first time the other day (electric wheelchair) no one met me with ramp as arranged at Earl’s Court. Had to go on to King’s Cross, where I got told off for being in the wrong carriage for their built up platform. I explained I thought I had arranged to get off about 15 stops earlier! (Katharine_T, via Twitter) — In London, less than one in four stations are stepfree to platform, with even fewer stepfree to train. This physical infrastructure underlies the basic inequality of access to people with impaired mobility. — Lack of properly signed, clean, accessible toilets is an often overlooked aspect of accessible transport, especially because individuals are less likely to “make a fuss” about this. I am a wheelchair user as a result of a spinal cord injury in which my neck was broken. And I have bowel and bladder problem as a result. So when I plan a journey to travel I have to plan for toilet. I use public transport quite a lot and I happened to wet myself because of luck of toilets on stations. I once was at Caning Town Station and I needed to use toilet urgently, unfortunately the toilet was closed and the customer service office was closed—so could not access the toilet. I have RADAR Key but this particular toilet is not adapted with RADAR Key. And when I try to access toilets at nearby shops they would not let me use it stating that it is for customer use only. So without access to toilet I would not be able to travel. (Youcef) — Many stations (especially mainline stations) do not have the tactile markings by platforms and staircases and the high-contrast lines along the platform that make them safe for VI and blind people to negotiate; or sometimes the tactile has worn down over the years. — It is not clear whether the train industry will even comply with RVAR legislation. In 2011, ATOC (The Association of Train Operating Companies) stated that they did not think they could meet the 2020 deadline without creating a shortage of rolling stock, and were waiting to see whether DfT would maintain a “flexible” approach to this. They were considering “Plan B”—ie non-compliance. The industry has known about RVAR legislation since 1998. To disabled people, “Plan B” sounds like hoping that Government will look the other way and not enforce legislation, because the cost of buying RVAR-compliant rolling stock by 2020 would be more expensive than making the move to accessible rolling stock later than 2020. This belies the rail industry’s claim to take access seriously and is an insult to disabled people.

Buses — In London, every bus has audio-visual information which is a huge boon to VI, deaf and hard-of- hearing people. However it does not always work: The i-bus system has greatly improved my travelling experience on buses. I no longer worry that I am relying on the driver for assistance and that he might forget to tell me when I need to get off. I feel anxious when the i-bus system is not working or not switched on. (Jessica, VI person) — Though it is unlawful for wheelchair users to be refused service on the grounds of their disability, it is extremely common for wheelchair and scooter users to be turned away by bus drivers on the grounds that the wheelchair bay is occupied. This is especially true in rush hour, so disabled people who work ofﬁce hours or wish to pick their kids up from school face extra challenges. This is despite clear guidance from DfT that bus drivers should ask people, including those with buggies, to move if occupying the space. Here, the lack of provision in PVSAR regulations has led to a situation where disabled people are regularly refused service and legislation does nothing. One of the biggest issues that is raised, week in, week out, by older and disabled transport users, is the behaviour of bus drivers. Together with Age UK, we surveyed buses. We found that: — One in four buses did not pull in tight to the kerb at bus stops. — 42% of buses drove off from stops before passengers were safely seated. Age UK have estimated that 800 people a day fall on buses in the UK—many suffer injuries that will result in hospital stays or even death. We receive many complaints that bus drivers do not pull right up to the stop. This impacts particularly on visually impaired people, who cannot easily read the number of a bus if it is a bus length away from the bus stop. Those who have difﬁculties in walking too are inconvenienced if they must painfully rush away from the stop towards the bus, worried it will pull away before they get there. Furthermore, we get regular complaints that bus drivers do not ask pushchair users to give priority to wheelchair users in the wheelchair space. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 103

In London, the ComRes survey showed that 37% of disabled people felt they had been discriminated against by a bus driver and 32% had been ignored by a taxi or bus they were trying to hail. In general, the guidance in the Big Red Book, the manual used by all London bus drivers, is good. The problem is it is not enforced and that training on disability does not do enough to include disabled and older people directly. I have problems with the buses all the time. Sometimes the buses don’t stop, sometimes they don’t take me because there’s another wheelchair on board. I’m always fighting with bus drivers about that. It’s not easy and it happens a lot. Sometimes I’m waiting a long time in the street where it’s cold. I’m waiting and the first bus, second bus, third bus goes past. For a wheelchair user the ramps are not always working. Some bus drivers are ok but some are rude. Sometimes the bus driver will say I can’t get on because there is a buggy even before I have asked. It’s not as easy as for anyone else to just go outside and get a bus or a train. I think the driver should not just ask people to fold up their buggy to allow me on the bus, they should put on the announcement. When they hear it, people move. When the driver speaks to them, people say they don’t want to move. But it’s different when they hear an announcement. They say it’s the law and you have to move for the wheelchair. People always say no if they are just asked by the driver. I always ask the driver to press the button for the announcement but he doesn’t do it. (Iman, wheelchair & scooter user) Since the campaign on buses asking people to fold their buggies in the wheelchair space came into force and the extra training that they’re giving staff and bus drivers around that campaign, I haven’t been denied entry to a single bus because of a buggy. Previously it happened maybe four out of 10 journeys so it’s much better. (Zara, wheelchair user) We welcome TfL’s improved signage of these bays, but this is unequal to the task, as many buggies do not fold and few buggy users will agree to getting off the bus altogether. We would like to see the minimum size of the wheelchair space substantially increased, potentially with folding seats (as on Brighton buses). The wheelchair space in the New Bus for London was a huge disappointment for wheelchair users and pushchair users in the capital. Having to rely on a driver to police who gets to use the bay is not enough, even if a wheelchair user successfully gets on they have “caused a scene”. A bigger bay would minimise the conflict that puts off many wheelchair users from using the bus. It would also enable wheelchair users to travel together; or for a wheelchair using parent travelling with a buggy to use the bus. You can’t get on a bus in the rush hour. Drivers don’t ask people to fold up a buggy or to evacuate a wheelchair space. They just refuse to do so. If you ask them to use the PA system or the Ibus system they just refuse and say sorry you’re not getting on this bus. Sometimes I have to wait for up to five buses and sometimes I had arguments with buses. Once I even held onto the door of the bus. I think this was about the third or fourth bus. I just said, “Look if I’m not getting on this bus then you’re not going to drive” Some passengers were sympathetic and asked the driver to let me on the bus but some passengers were saying “Look I need to go to work.” Ninety nine per cent of the time if the driver intervenes and uses the PA system or I-bus system then you don’t have any problems to travel. I think there should be better training for bus drivers. I think there should be tougher action against the driver. I have been discriminated against by some drivers repeatedly. I made complaints at least 3 or 4 times about the same drivers. I think there should be something in place if a driver is complained about 3 or 4 times. Not only against the drivers but against the companies who are getting away with it. (Youcef, wheelchair user) — Discrimination against scooter users is rife, they are refused even more than wheelchair users. TfL have introduced a Mobility Card to identify scooters which are approved, but not all bus drivers know of it yet, or stop to look at it. We have also taken complaints from scooter users denied access to riverboats and to the Cable Car, despite the fact that many scooters are smaller and as manoeuvrable as electric wheelchairs. — In London, around one in three bus stops are not accessible, because of street furniture in the way, or a kerb that is too high or low or broken to work with a ramp, or a pavement camber that wheelchair users cannot push up, or positioned so that bus drivers cannot pull tightly into the kerb. Happily, TfL recently agreed to work towards 100% bus stop accessibility. However, this needs to happen across the UK. PSVAR legislation on accessible buses is useless if you live in a village where it is a mile to the nearest bus stop where a bus ramp will work. The current legislation divorces the vehicle from the infrastructure it is used with. A bus is only as accessible as the bus stops it stops at, and until bus stops are accessible, disabled people will continue to be locked out the bus network. I cannot see if a bus is coming until it is very close to the bus stop. At request stops, there is not enough time for the bus to stop so I often have to wait for many to go past until somebody is getting off the bus at that stop so it is stopping there anyway. I find it very difficult to know which number bus I am getting on if I am at a bus stop where many different buses stop at. Ev 104 Transport Committee: Evidence

Buses will often stop in a line behind each other so I do not know that my bus is there. I ﬁnd that members of the public are more helpful than the bus drivers when I’m trying to ﬁnd the bus I need. (Jessica, VI person) — We hear frequent complaints from people with a hidden impairment that they are challenged on production of their Freedom Pass—“you don’t look disabled to me!”. — People who are less steady on their feet are frequently not given enough time to sit down. The On the Buses report and survey TfA carried out 2011 with Age UK London and GLFOP found that 42% of drivers did not give passengers time to sit down. Buses not pulling right up to the stop is also very common, especially when multiple buses use the same stop. In addition, — These issues, relating to bus driver behaviour, we believe are best tackled through improving bus driver training. The Government has been pushing for the full 5 year delay on the EU Bus and Coach Regulation coming into force. These regulations would make disability equality training mandatory for bus drivers. — The quality of bus driver training relating to disability is very patchy, and not covered by legislation. We have observed training which is dry, wordy PowerPoint presentations; as well as practical training delivered with disabled people which relates to bus drivers’ experience.

Door to Door Transport — In London, door-to-door transport provision is not adequate in compensating for the inaccessibility of mainstream public transport. Dial A Ride does not go further than ﬁve miles, entails long waits on the phone and frequently is unavailable. Taxicard does not give subsidised rates beyond three to four miles; and in most boroughs Taxicard members have just one return journey a week—not adequate to meet the needs of a full life. In many boroughs it is less. For people who need to travel daily (for example for college) door-to-door transport is not sufﬁcient. — In addition, eligibility criteria for joining Taxicard are exacting and does not recognise the needs of people with cognitive and behavioural impairments such as severe autism or Alzheimer’s which leave them unable to use public transport. Such people often end up quasi-housebound.

Complaints System — At the moment, there is a widespread feeling among disabled people that we complain, but the complaints are not taken seriously, and eventually people give up complaining out of exasperation. Responses seem standardised and leave one in doubt that any real action has been taken. I think there should be tougher action against driver. I have been discriminated against by some drivers repeatedly. I made complaints at least three or four times about the same drivers. I think there should be something in place if a driver is complained about three or four times. Not only against the drivers but against the companies who are getting away with it. (Youcef, wheelchair user) “I’m just drained. I don’t have the energy to complain any more. I feel like a third class citizen in my own county. There’s no compassion, there’s no sympathy from some of the bus drivers. Some go out of the way to help you but not all. When it comes to complaining, TfL and the bus companies are not doing anything about these bad apples. The bus drivers are still driving and still having an attitude towards me. They aren’t told off in a manner in which they won’t do it again.”—Ibby, wheelchair user — However, complaining requires unusual persistence. Firstly, knowing who to complain to is no mean feat in a complex contracted-out system. Then one must either be online or being able to negotiate an often complex, user-unfriendly telephone self-service voice recognition service, a feat which many older and disabled people either won’t be able to do or will give up on. Paper freepost comments forms available at every station and bus station would be preferable. [As part of my job]I book assistance for young people to enable them to attend events I run. Most come a long way and they and their families are not experienced transport users. Occasionally things go wrong and the young people ask me to complain. However First Great Western has refused to even ﬁle my complaints because I am not the named person on the booking, despite being the person who made the booking and paid for the tickets. Unfortunately the named person due to age under 16 and impairment was unable to place a written complaint meaning basically they have no means for redress. (Zara, wheelchair user) I would like there to be an easily accessible list of who is responsible for providing assistance at stations. For example if I’m travelling from Wimbledon to Norwich and I’m going through Wimbledon, Waterloo, Stratford and Norwich. If a part of my journey I’ve failed to get the assistance I’ve booked which train company do I complain to? Do I complain to the train company that put me on the train at the ﬁrst point or to the company that runs the station at my second point. If you’re making long distance journeys for example between London and Edinburgh, to my knowledge there are three different train operators operating out of Edinburgh. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 105

Which one has the responsibility to get me off my train? And on to another train if its two different operators. (Zara, wheelchair user)

Information — Much of the online information is wrong and out of date. Buses—outside of London knowing whether a bus is accessible or not is a bit of a magical mystery tour. It’s like a detective service. Outside of London you can have three buses that go between two places but are run by three different bus operators. If I want to go from Nottingham town centre to Nottingham University there are three bus operators that go there I have to look up three different operators websites to see if the bus is accessible. Transport Direct is a brilliant website but it can’t tell me if the buses suggested are accessible. I’d give up using the buses if I lived outside of London or only use the trusted one that I use all the time. I think there should be a national rail service for buses where they say if at least 75% of the buses they put on will be accessible. (Zara) When travelling by bus outside London, there are websites like www.traveline.org.uk that carry national bus timetable information. They also state that a wheelchair symbol will be shown on the timetable where ramped buses are used. Almost two thirds of the UK’s buses are now fully accessible, but few of these are shown on Traveline’s site. I have emailed them twice with long lists of bus routes that should be shown with the wheelchair symbol. Their information is still inaccurate and out of date. (David, wheelchair user) — There is much excellent information online, but those without internet connection are disadvantaged. Older people are disproportionately likely to lack internet access: Ofcom say that half of those aged 60–69 have no access to the internet at home but this falls to one in six (17%) of those aged 70 and older. In 2008, only 42%, 32% and 35% of those with visual, hearing and mobility disabilities respectively, had broadband access compared with the then figure of 56% of the general population As older people stand to benefit most from information about access, it’s important that they can find out about services like Taxicard, travel mentoring and Dial A Ride; and the toilet and step status easily. But transport providers appear to think that if their access information is on their website, their job is done. “We have been trying to obtain some the travel support cards with the user guides and placed an order in July with TfL. We have regularly telephoned asking TfL about them and are always told that they are out of stock. We are aware that these can be downloaded via the internet but as service users explained not everyone has access to a computer.” (Received October 2012 from a member in Redbridge) — In going out to speak to groups, I often speak to disabled people for whom transport benefits and rights such as TfL’s Taxi Policy and Capital Call are unknown, even if they have been in touch with council social workers for years. Giving disabled people information about transport services when one receives the forms to apply for disability benefits, in the same way that everyone applying for a driving licence receives information about organ donation, would do a great deal to reduce isolation. — Few older and disabled people know that free travel mentoring is available. It is an excellent service and has the potential to relieve some of the burden on overstretched door to door services; as well as improving people’s independence and freedom to travel. TfA would like to see TfL promote it with a poster campaign and leaflets at every station. — Many transport providers have their timetables as a PDF which is unreadable to visually impaired people who use screenreaders. — Transport providers should have a duty to give information and maps about their transport accessibility services at local bus and train stations, in paper format as well as online, and in accessible formats if needed, and post them. — When lifts are broken, there needs to be clearer communication about when they will be fixed. At Brixton, Lambeth Transport Action Group members protested when a lift was out of service but no information at street level informed people whether this was a temporary situation for an hour; or for weeks. This was rectified, but lessons should be learnt. TfA hope that the introduction of electronic signboards will aid this information dissemination. — Many of those people without internet access use the TfL phone service to find travel information. We believe the phone service has got worse in the last couple of years. The much publicised change to an 0843 number made it more expensive for some mobile phone users. Furthermore, instead of an easy-to-use menu which quickly got the enquirer through to a member of staff, there is now a bewildering voice recognition menu system where default enquires are given recorder information instead of a helpful human being. This makes it more confusing to use, particularly for some older people. — Few older and disabled people know that travel mentoring is available. It is an excellent service and has the potential to relieve some of the burden on overstretched door to door services; as well as improving people’s independence and freedom to travel. TfA would like to see TfL promote it with a poster campaign and leaflets at every station. Ev 106 Transport Committee: Evidence

Do staff provide adequate assistance for you and are they aware of your needs as a disabled person? Tube and rail staff are generally well trained and helpful. However, availability is poor. Many stations are entirely unstaffed for hours, and proposals in the McNulty review could result in reductions to staff all over the network. When stations are unstaffed, they become no-go zones for many disabled and older people. Visually impaired and blind people often require assistance to safely get from street onto a train or from a train out to the street. Transport for All regularly hears from blind or visually impaired people who have arrived at stations where no member of staff is available to assist them. For wheelchair users too, when there are gaps or steps between the train and platform, it’s more than frustrating when no member of staff is available to help negotiate the gap. It can mean missing a stop, or feeling unsafe, or even being stranded on the train. Rail companies, while platforms and trains are not compatible with RVAR standards, are obliged to provide staff assistance as a “reasonable adjustment”. Currently, with the numbers of available staff slashed, this is not happening. People who can’t manage steps, or who can’t walk long distances, need to be able to ask about journey planning. Many people with learning disabilities, some older people and many visually impaired people cannot use oyster machines. At times when the ticket office is closed and when no staff members are available at the gateline, it becomes impossible to buy a ticket. Even when ticket offices are open, fewer members of staff means longer queues and many disabled and older people can’t stand for long. Deaf people who need the loop at ticket offices are left without information when staff outside the ticket office have no loop system. And especially when disruptions mean a planned journey must be adjusted, it’s immensely frustrating to find that no members of staff are available. TfL’s Taxi Policy means that when a lift is out of order or a stepfree station is closed, and there is no alternative bus route available, TfL provide a taxi to the nearest accessible station. However, if no members of staff are available to ask, the policy is next to useless. TfL has suggested that Help Points can go some way to filling the gap left by staff. But calls on the Help Points are not always answered. In addition, the amplification at Help Points can make them embarrassing to use, particularly if the query relates to a disability which the passenger might not wish to broadcast to the entire station; or for a desire to use a toilet. Finally, visible station staff are a deterrent against crime and reassure people that they are safe. While a survey commissioned by Scope shows that nearly half of disabled people have experienced abuse while travelling, this is vital. In addition, at station interchanges, the discontinuity of staff assistance between transport modes makes transfer between different transport operators and modes difficult. We would like TfL to appoint a member of staff to act as an “accessibility champion” across modes, as recommended in the London Assembly Transport Committee’s report on accessibility. When I ask members of staff for assistance they are generally helpful but it is not always easy to find a member of staff. I frequently use London Underground and do not require assistance at familiar stations. If I am going somewhere unfamiliar or have had to change my journey along the route, I find that staff at Underground stations will approach me and ask if I do need assistance. When making longer journeys outside London, I book travel assistance especially if there are interchanges on the journey. There is always somebody to help me get on the train and to find my seat but often there isn’t anybody there at the interchange. (Jessica) I travel an awful lot, all around the UK and when I book assistance, 1 time out of 4 it will actually work without any problems, so 75% of the time I will have some kind of trouble. Last month I had to use my wheelchair to physically stop a train door from shutting to ensure that I could get off at that station and not be left on the train to go hundreds of miles to the next station. It’s quite stressful and I’m quite confident on transport so I know that if I’m travelling on a suburban train in London if I sit next to the guard, unless something happens to the guard I will be got off the train. It’s their responsibility to do it, or I can send a member of the public to talk to them. I do things like that to minimise the impact of the lack in the system to actually cater for my needs. So I minimise it by doing things like insisting that I’m put next to the guard when I’m on a suburban rail service whereas somebody who is less experienced in travelling or less knowledgeable about how transport works might just let a member of train staff put them on anywhere. I have a lot of experience of shouting to get attention or asking other members of the public to help me. I have an advantage in that as a wheelchair user with just mobility issues I don’t have any of the other barriers that might make it difficult for me to talk to a stranger. I can see the other passengers on the train, I can talk to the other passengers on the train without either anxiety or communication difficulties. If I had any of those in addition to being a wheelchair user I’d probably be quite stuck because I am reliant on the general public a lot more than I’d like to be. (Zara) Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 107

Passenger Assistance The Passenger Assist system, I believe unlawfully, provides service on different terms to a person because of their disability, in that it requires people to book onto a particular train 24 hours in advance and prevents any ﬂexibility or spontaneous travel. It is also extremely unreliable. While I can appreciate that at the smallest stations there may not be staff available to offer assistance, TfA believe that at larger stations, train companies should offer a turn-up–and-go system as the Tube does which would not discrimate against disabled people.

Have you noticed any improvements to travelling since the Paralympics? What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics? — Signage on the Tube during the Games was fantastic. — Wheelchair users were delighted at the use of manual ramps on the Tube, although it is disappointing that TfL have not committed to using ramps at every station where they would enable wheelchair users to overcome the gap between train and platform. “The ramps made my journey time to the Olympic Park signiﬁcantly shorter; instead of an hour long bus trip it became a 12 min tube journey. I would love to see this initiative rolled out across the network meaning other wheelchair users can get across London for work & leisure with the same ease as their neighbours currently do every day.” (Elizabeth, wheelchair user) January 2013

Written evidence from Passenger Focus (DAT 42) Introduction and Background 1. Passenger Focus welcomes the opportunity to present evidence to the Committee as we and our predecessor bodies have long been concerned with many aspects of transport accessibility. We undertake the (rail) National Passenger Survey (NPS) and the Bus Passenger Survey (BPS) to gauge passengers’ views during the journey being made at that time. The results of recent waves are discussed below. 2. We acknowledge the huge strides made in enhancing accessibility of the public transport network in recent years; this improvement is borne out by our research findings, yet parts of the network remain inaccessible to some people—or those people believe it to be so. Even where it is technically accessible, potential passengers may not be able to obtain sufficient details to assure them that the journey is possible. Some disabled people have attempted to make journeys by public transport but found the experience too difficult to repeat, or the expected assistance has proven ineffective or has failed entirely. Demand for accessible public transport can only increase as the population ages and people still wish to retain their ability to travel, especially if age, disability or resources prevent them from using private transport. The general increase in population will fuel further demand for public transport. 3. We welcome the publication late in December 2012 of the Department for Transport’s (DfT’s) report Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all. It echoes many of the points which we make in this response 4. We are convinced of the benefits which sound guidance, specialist advice and knowledge can bring to disability matters in the field of transport. DPTAC currently performs this function but Government is consulting on future arrangements. Whatever the decision we believe there is a need for a forum which can harness collective expertise and knowledge on disability matters and give advice based on that experience. Such a body must have an over-arching concern with all forms of transport and interchange arrangements.

What Passengers Tell Us 5. We undertake the twice-yearly National Passenger Survey (NPS), seeking rail passengers’ views on train services and facilities. We have extended this work to buses and undertake the Bus Passenger Survey (BPS) to obtain the views of bus passengers. As part of both surveys respondents are asked to indicate if they have a disability or long-term condition affecting their ability to use public transport. Two reports (one each for rail and bus) based on these responses from disabled passengers were drawn up in autumn 2012—copies are enclosed with this submission. 6. Rail (based on an analysis of 6,730 disabled respondents’ views from the autumn 2010-autumn 2012 NPS): — Around 5% of passengers surveyed considered that they have a disability or long-term illness with half of these journeys being made by those with impaired mobility. — While the majority of trips were for leisure purposes around 40% of journeys were in peak time (30% commuting and 10% for business) — Almost 75% of disabled passengers travel alone, although this ﬁgure drops to 36% for passengers with wheelchairs. More than half of passengers with wheelchairs travel with other adults. Ev 108 Transport Committee: Evidence

— Only 43% of respondents used a Railcard although 62% travelled at a time when a Railcard discount would have applied. 7. Bus (based on an analysis of 5,506 disabled respondents’ views from the autumn 2011 wave of BPS) — Around 20% of journeys are made by passengers with a disability of which 37% were being made by passengers with impaired mobility. — Passengers with mobility issues were most likely to be retired and using the bus for a shopping trip while passengers with a speech or learning impediment were more likely to be younger and in full- time work. — Disabled bus users are less likely to have access to another means of transport. — Particular concerns apply to bus driver behaviour: eg facing passengers as they board; not pulling away from the stop until older/disabled passengers can sit; stopping adjacent to the kerb; general driving style, avoiding jerks. 8. In both surveys the levels of satisfaction were similar between those with disabilities and those without, with the obvious exception of the ease of getting on and off trains and buses. 9. While these views are highly informative it must be noted that they do not reﬂect the views of all disabled people since many cannot use public transport at all. We know that some potential passengers cannot reach bus stops or stations because, for instance, path or pavement conditions do not permit.

Question 1: The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufficiently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? 10. The effectiveness of legislation is difficult to establish as it is hardly measured. Use of Disabled Persons Railcards and concessionary bus passes for disabled people gives a slight indication of the numbers of people travelling; holders of these travel documents form an excellent base for future research. As we mention above, our own on-train and on-bus research can be used to analyse feedback from disabled passengers. 11. Effective enforcement is equally difficult to assess. For instance, it seems to us that no records are kept of the frequency of bus ramp breakdown; neither are details of car-parking restrictions at bus stops maintained. It is unclear what checks are made on rail’s recently-introduced Passenger Assistance booking service. We have pressed for train operators to contact at least a percentage of booked passengers within 48 hours of the journey for feedback on the effectiveness of the assistance arrangements. We also want the rail industry to publish figures for the number of bookings taken and the number delivered. Perception of accessibility is important; were the industry to publish what we believe would be a favourable score it could well act as a spur to persuade others to trust the system. Satisfaction measures alone, however, do not tell the whole story as we know that some disabled passengers’ expectations are low and they are grateful simply to have been able to undertake the journey irrespective of the level of service provided. 12. The design of buses, trams and trains is strictly specified to ensure a compromise satisfying, as far as possible, the mutually incompatible needs of different categories of passenger within a single vehicle. Operators are abiding by the requirements of the law as far as vehicle layout and facilities are concerned, seeking legal exemptions where layouts cannot comply. However, even where the letter of the regulations is scrupulously observed, the spirit of them can be missed. The outcome for the disabled passenger may be worse than it might have been if more sympathetic consideration had been applied at design stage: eg the height of door controls varies between trains; controls may be on different sides of doorways from one vehicle type to another; over- complex toilet-door locking mechanisms; a wheelchair space may be provided, but without any provision of room within it for a companion, with the result that the wheelchair user travels in total isolation—which may be tolerable on a 15-minute bus ride but not on a long train journey. Not all trains and relatively few buses have both aural and visual information facilities. 13. One particular area that needs addressing is the application of the legislation regarding wheelchair spaces aboard buses. There is a clear requirement for buses to have such spaces and for signs to be displayed indicating this, but little clarity regarding who has priority and how to enforce this. Signage must comply with the regulations and the intended purpose of specifically marked areas within vehicles should be clear, as should those categories of passenger who have first call upon such accommodation. Applicable signage must be visible at all times—not obscured once a seat is occupied—and explain entitlement, which it often fails to do. 14. We welcome the fact that adapting the system to simplify travel for disabled passengers also benefits the wider travelling public. Use of an empty wheelchair space by a push-chair must be permitted. What order of precedence applies, however, should a wheelchair user seek to board that vehicle later in its journey? Conflict is arising over the priority of allocation of space, especially aboard buses where space is at a greater premium. Bus staff and passengers require clarity and guidance. In the rail domain, a wheelchair user has automatic priority in the dedicated space; on trains “pushchairs/carrycots” are carried free of charge but must be “capable of folding”.20 20 National Rail Conditions of Carriage, May 2012 edition: Appendix B, page 29. Full details are available at: http://nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/nrcc/NRCOC.pdf Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 109

15. The differing interpretation of the law by some bus companies, some operators’ failure to enforce the apparent intention behind the legislation and some passengers’ failure to understand and observe the arrangements to ease travel for disabled people are combining to cause difficulties. This inconsistency has led to a situation whereby wheelchair users in Swindon, for instance, face the diametrically opposed policies of the two operators which provide the vast majority of services in the town, often on overlapping sections of route: — Thamesdown Transport: wheelchair spaces are provided on a first-come, first-served basis; a wheelchair user can only occupy it if passengers already in it can be accommodated elsewhere aboard the vehicle according to its Conditions of Carriage.21 — Stagecoach Bus (which operates many routes in Swindon): by way of contrast, its Conditions of Carriage, Section 5, show the exact opposite.22 16. Inconsistency and lack of clarity on priority has led to a court case, currently underway, in north-eastern England. We await the outcome of this case with interest, as it could set a legal precedent. (Although beyond our remit, we note the campaign begun recently by London Buses to highlight that wheelchair spaces are intended for wheelchair users—not for prams, luggage, standing passengers etc.) 17. A similarly blurred arrangement applies in the enforcement of priority seating; the law requires that it be provided, and specifies the ratio of such seats in regulated road and rail vehicles. Yet no mechanism exists to evict from such seating those whose need is less than those for whom it was installed. Staff need to be empowered and trained to deal with such situations. We understand the difficulties of proving greater need— especially if “hidden” disabilities are involved. An innovation intended to reduce such friction, introduced by Southern Railway several years ago and since adopted by some other train operators, is the Priority Seat Card.23 A major component of the scheme is the much-enhanced identification of priority seating, both within the carriage and from the exterior. Prominent station posters further support the scheme. 18. We encourage all transport undertakings to introduce schemes such as travel support cards which, for instance, passengers with learning or communication difficulties can use to indicate their needs to drivers. These are particularly helpful in the case of “hidden” disabilities. Several larger operators, eg First Bus, offer such help.24 19. Increasing use of mobility scooters further confuses the picture. We recognise that they are a major mobility boon to many people, but the size and weight of some scooters deny them access to trains and buses. The rail industry has now almost fully resolved the issue of which scooter models can be carried on which types of train, with various schemes in place. However, many journeys cross franchise boundaries and clarity is needed to help scooter users to travel without incident if their machines conform to the various rail companies’ regulations. It is less clear to us how bus operators deal with carriage of mobility scooters. 20. The law calls only for “reasonable adjustments” to be made to ensure the disabled passengers’ needs can be addressed. In the rail sphere, much has been achieved in recent years, a good deal as a result of the Department of Transport’s Railways for All funding, to ensure a step-free network of hub stations. Unlike in many countries, rail-service companies in Britain must provide a taxi to/from an inaccessible station at no additional cost to the passenger. While not ideal, it does at least make the rail system as accessible as possible as not all stations have yet been adapted and not all stations will be. Such facilities and schemes offered by rail companies are largely not available to bus passengers. We commend those bus companies who provide a taxi for wheelchair users if an advertised low-floor bus is unavailable and recommend that other operators follow such good practice. 21. For bus passengers, the law requires reasonable adjustments to the “road landscape” and that the driver does not discriminate against a person on the grounds of disability. The situation for bus users is further hindered as “streetscape and furniture” are generally dealt with by council highways departments not transport departments and therefore can suffer from a lack of co-ordination. Furthermore, while legislation requires buses to be fully accessible by 2017, no such requirements apply to the accessibility of bus stops. 22. We recognise the enormity of the task in relation to bus stops. In rural areas especially, bus stops may not be on pavements, requiring a higher step up/down between the vehicle and road level than would otherwise be necessary and which may be too steep for a wheelchair ramp to be deployed. Even where Kassel-style raised humps have been installed, failure to create and/or enforce parking restrictions around bus stops often means that vehicles cannot pull up against the kerb which hampers or even prevents access. 21 Thamesdown Transport’s Condition of Carriage 65 states: “A wheelchair user does not have any priority over any other passenger on the bus and the space designated to accommodate wheelchair is available on a first come, first served basis.” The full Thamesdown Transport Conditions of Carriage can be found at: http://www.thamesdown-transport.co.uk/index.asp?m=207&s=231&c=1473&t=CONDITIONS+OF+CARRIAGE. 22 Stagecoach’s Conditions of Carriage (Section 5, paragraphs 4 and 5) state: “You are, however, required by law to ensure that the designated wheelchair space is made available if a customer wishes to board with a wheelchair or approved mobility scooter” and ”You are required to co-operate in allowing proper use of the designated wheelchair space by vacating this space if it is required by a customer in a wheelchair or approved mobility scooter including repositioning small prams, folding any buggies and storing them in the luggage space.” The full Stagecoach bus Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.stagecoachbus.com/conditionsofcarriage.aspx 23 Fuller details can be found at http://www.southernrailway.com/your-journey/accessibility/priority-seat-card/. 24 Fuller details can be found at http://www.firstgroup.com/safejourney. Ev 110 Transport Committee: Evidence

Question 2: The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares. 23. The law requires information about services and facilities to be available in many formats. It is vital that such information in accessible formats is available to enable disabled passengers to plan their journeys. They need details, not only of timings and perhaps of fares, but also of the accessibility of the stations, bus stops and vehicles which they will use. Also important to many are details of suitable toilets en route. This latter information is usually readily available for rail journeys but less obviously so for bus journeys. 24. Such advance information is available to rail passengers in print, Braille, audio or other format and online. Bus information tends to be less readily available; leaflets can be obtained from bus-station travel offices but at bus stops, by their nature unstaffed, usually little beyond theoretical timetable information is offered. Information is not available generally about bus-stop accessibility: is the pavement to reach the stop usable?; is the footway surface on which to wait paved?; does it have a shelter?; is the shelter accessible by a wheelchair user?; is a seat provided?; is real-time running information provided?; and, perhaps most important of all, will the bus stop for me if I cannot distinguish it amongst other traffic, or recognise its route number, as it approaches? Some local authorities (eg Cheshire for passengers with impaired vision and Devon for all disabled passengers) provide fluorescent bus-pass wallets for pass holders to show as they wait at the stop, alerting drivers to their needs. 25. The rail industry is required to produce detailed descriptions of the arrangements and the level of assistance which can be given to passengers travelling by train. Each rail company’s website gives details of train times and fares. So does the National Rail Enquiries website, its telephone information line and an ever- expanding range of new options and “apps” for checking theoretical and/or actual timings. In addition, the National Rail Enquiries website’s Stations Made Easy database25 illustrates the layout of each station, indicating the features and facilities available there, complemented by photographs to enable potential passengers to better assess whether the station will be accessible for them. Text panels offer additional information about features such as ticket-office opening times; the times when staff are available to assist; if blue-badge parking spaces are provided, etc. This is welcome but must be kept up to date—we have found a number of instances when this has not been the case. If passengers are relying on the information it must be accurate. 26. The bus industry cannot provide the same uniform level of detail as the railway. Some individual operators are better than others at providing information. Planned timetables are usually quite easy to find, but details of point-to-point fares are quite difficult to come by,26 a point reinforced recently by regional representatives of the Youth Council, whose ability to access all sources of information—printed, telephonic and digital—failed to enable them to find fares. Information for journeys involving more than one operator can be even more complex to find unless the enquirer is referred to Transport Direct. 27. Information at many bus stops consists only of a printed timetable or a telephone number to contact (usually by text) for details of planned next services, at best. Many bus stops lack even this basic level of information. Many urban bus stops have no means of advising passengers of delays to services. Even where information is provided, virtually none at bus stops is aural, only visual, putting passengers with sight loss at an immediate disadvantage. In saying this we do recognise and appreciate the challenge and scale of attempting to improve the quality of, and facilities at, bus stops. Manchester alone, for instance, has considerably more bus stops than there are railway stations in whole of Great Britain. 28. Details about service alterations and delays, especially where short-notice changes due to unforeseen circumstances occur, can be difficult to obtain by all passengers, but especially so by disabled passengers. A wider problem for disabled passengers is the format in which such information is given. Aural announcements alone are of no benefit to passengers with hearing loss, who may be wholly unaware that any disruption has occurred. Passengers with learning difficulties may need assistance in continuing their journey if their intended arrangements are interrupted. Bus passengers are in a worse predicament as, unless at a bus station, no staff are available to advise of an alternative means of travel. 29. Greater use of social media would be of benefit, although we recognise that not all passengers rely on, or even have access to, such media—at least at present. Some companies “tweet”, but not all. Research27 which we have undertaken with rail passengers involved their requirements from such media, especially when services were disrupted. 30. In cases of disruption, rail passengers with booked journey assistance will need to have the arrangements altered to reflect their revised journey plan. Depending on where the disruption occurs, insufficient number of staff may be available to undertake these tasks—or worse still, no staff at all. In areas such as these the new assistance-booking scheme should provide better assistance than was previously the case. Unplanned disruption 25 Further details are available at http://nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/ 26 Passenger Focus has experienced difficulty in finding basic bus fares in England; few are shown online and details of telephone contacts are hard to come by. Conversely, point-to-point rail fares are much easier to find, by telephone or online. 27 Passenger Focus has undertaken research into rail passengers’ experience of and needs from social media (such as Facebook and Twitter). It looked at social media’s role in communicating with passengers when trains are disrupted, as well as other ways in which train companies use social media. The report from this research, Short and Tweet, is available at: http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/research/publications/short-and-tweet-how-passengers-want-social-media-during-disruption Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 111

seriously inconveniences all passengers but disabled people are particularly vulnerable in such situations and have not always been afforded the care and attention they require. Rail has the beneﬁt that most—though not all—trains have on-board staff other than the driver and many stations—though not all—are still staffed for at least part of the day.

31. Where passengers intend to continue their journey by a different mode, the lack of joined-up information presents another obstacle and the potential for passengers to be stranded. At London termini, for instance, liaison arrangements between National/Network Rail and Underground staff are well co-ordinated allowing easy interchange. However, the same smooth intermodal transfer does not often apply at other places where a journey continues by bus, especially if the bus stop is not actually situated on the station forecourt.

Question 3: The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities.

32. Training of staff is paramount to ensure appropriate assistance. Each company and industry would still need to concentrate on the particular aspects of its own operation and policies, but some universal basics apply across the entire transport industry and also apply to shipping and airlines. Perhaps some basic national standards/NVQ-style training would be appropriate. The amount of time spent on training and its content varies. The development of national guidelines on best practice would be helpful in relation to understanding disabilities and communicating.

33. We stress the need for transport operators to include disabled people and their representative organisations28 in drawing up suitable training. It is vital to ensure that transport staff and bus drivers understand the needs of disabled passengers and learn how to best meet them. To a certain extent also, passengers need to understand the extent to which assistance can reasonably be provided.

34. Staff training and attitudes are arguably more important than detailed legislation. Legislation cannot ensure that bus drivers pull up against the kerb; or allow passengers to reach a seat before driving away; or advise passengers that the bus is approaching their intended destination if automatic information systems are not in place or unsuitable for the passenger. Circumstances such as these demonstrate the beneﬁts of full training.

35. We welcome campaigns such as RNIB’s “Stop for me, speak to me”29 to highlight the difﬁculties faced by passengers affected by sight loss when trying to catch buses. It is disappointing that operators’ behaviour still requires such initiatives. We also recognise the support provided by local-authority independent-travel training schemes, such as that in Devon.30 We have concerns that increasing pressure on shrinking local authority budgets must raise doubts over the possibility of maintaining such schemes.

36. Rail service operators must provide an assistance service, details of which are set out in its DPPP. While disabled passengers are not obliged to give notice31 of their journey, and are assisted as well as possible if they present themselves unannounced, better assistance can usually be provided if it has been booked. We welcome the best practice of some operators by reducing the amount of notice required for travel within their own network. Until spring 2012 bookings were made using the Assisted Passenger Reservation System (APRS) which was not wholly fit for purpose. Due to the known failings of APRS, in 2008 we undertook field research with volunteer disabled passengers on dozens of journeys covering a wide selection of trains and stations of all franchised operators, of trains of all open-access operators and of all stations managed by Network Rail. The survey results showed that while some journeys passed off smoothly, more progress was necessary as the industry still had some way to go to give disabled passengers confidence about using the railway.

37. In 2010 we undertook another broadly similar survey. This showed some improvements, but inconsistent provision of both information and assistance persisted. A major obstacle was still the failure to inform frontline staff of passengers’ needs or the failure of staff to react to such bookings. We recommended and looked forward to a purpose-built booking and communication system to help deliver much-enhanced assistance, especially to cater for the demands of the Olympic Games. We welcomed the industry’s Passenger Assistance service launched in 2012 in time for the Games. We shall seek details from the rail industry on the performance of Passenger Assistance’s operation so far. We would like to undertake our own further mystery-shopping research in 2013 to assess the situation for ourselves—if funding permits. By that time the new system will have been in place for about a year. 28 Some organisations take the initiative—e.g. the Royal National Institute of Blind People’s good practice and standards guides to help the rail and bus industries better understand and meet the needs of passengers with sight loss. 29 Royal National Institute of Blind People’s Stop for me, speak to me campaign on bus use. For further details see: http://www.rnib.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/gettingaround/buscampaign/pages/stop4me.aspx 30 Further details are available from www.devon.gov.uk/index/transportroads/public_transport/independenttravel.htm. The scheme helps young people develop skills for safe, independent travel. Two accredited Travel Trainers work with students from mainstream and special schools, pupil referral units and colleges of further education. 31 Most rail companies recommend at least 24 hours’ notice for assistance. . Ev 112 Transport Committee: Evidence

Question 4: What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 38. The success of transport during the Paralympic (and the Olympic) Games on the railway can be attributed largely to several key factors, some which cannot be reproduced under general operating conditions at other times: — Overall planning: undertaken in good time; thorough; involved all relevant stakeholders. — Staff training: trained to assess disabled passengers’ needs and how best to help them. — Availability of staff: the success of the arrangements must be at least partially attributable to the availability of larger-than-usual numbers of staff at stations and for a longer part of the day. This included not only assistance staff but also those providing information and way-finding help. Behind- the-scenes staff also assisted in ensuring that services ran. It should also be borne in mind that the success was also attributable to the large number of volunteer staff. — Improved assistance-booking service: early indications suggest that the recently-introduced Passenger Assistance service operated by the rail service companies lived up to expectations and no significant failures were reported during these two busy periods. — Installation of equipment to create step-free environments: facilities were in place to ease disabled passengers’ journeys—mainly physical features such as lifts and fixed ramps. Some 90 National Rail stations benefited from access improvements for the Games. — The total absence of planned engineering works: all booked arrangements should have been unaffected as far as could be predicted. If any unexpected work did take place more staff could concentrate on assisting the passengers affected. The absence of disruption through planned engineering works enabled the system to run with unparalleled ease. This was a unique phenomenon. — Fewer passengers travelling the peak: many trains were noticeably quieter than usual. ODA’s travel demand management scheme to encourage passengers to alter their journey, the time of their journey or not to travel at all was heeded. — Additional signage: way-finding was made much clearer, reducing the need to ask staff, and thereby releasing those staff to provide fuller assistance where it was most needed. — The nature of the occasion: all transport operators understood the need to ensure ultra-efficient operation under the glare of worldwide media to avoid the international opprobrium which would arise from any significant failure. — The sum of the parts: the combination of these factors working in concert. 39. While the fixtures and fittings remain in situ as a Games legacy, it is less obvious how soon in future, for instance, lifts will be repaired or whether staff will always be available to assist wheelchair users to board or alight at some stations. This is especially of concern where only the ticket office is staffed and where trains operate with no on-board staff but the driver. The proposals to remove ticket-office staff from many stations as a cost-cutting measure will jeopardise current assistance arrangements at these places. While as a last resort a taxi is provided between an inaccessible station and a staffed, accessible station, some journeys can be very long; a taxi does not have the same facilities aboard as a train. 40. The importance of training staff to assist disabled passengers properly was a major element in the success of the arrangements. We cannot emphasise too strongly or too often the need for fully-trained staff at all levels to effectively assist disabled passengers when planning their travel arrangements and throughout their journey.

Passenger Focus APPENDIX 1 BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES FROM APRS RESEARCH As a result of the research which Passenger Focus had undertaken, we proposed the following measures, many of which have been incorporated into the Passenger Assistance system:

Basic functions which the rail industry should undertake — Fulﬁl DPPP requirements to train staff in disability assistance, disability equality, use of equipment and clear communication. — Ensure that NRE gives callers an appropriate number on which to book assistance. — Monitor the quality of assistance and highlight both good practice as well as shortcomings. — Consider a freephone number for passengers to book assistance, if not already provided, in line with best practice. — Provide practical means for staff to share and update station/train facility information between rail service companies. — Review how the existing booking system can be improved. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 113

— Ensure that any new assistance-booking equipment can create a database of passenger details to accelerate frequent bookings by the same passenger, especially for identical journeys. — Enable passengers to request assistance and receive conﬁrmation online. — Ensure any new system can retrieve full journey details from the reference number. — Provide APRS staff with the means to contact station staff immediately (eg in case of journey disruption). — Share good practice to help in locating “missing” passengers. Comparison with previous experience. — Refund the passenger’s (and any companion’s) fare in full in the case of assistance failure which disrupts or delays their journey. — Ensure that on-train staff receive booking details, especially in case of: — unstaffed stations or — trains without reservable accommodation.

APRS Booking staff duties — Ensure that staff are fully trained: to handle calls effectively; to be familiar with existing systems; and to provide accurate information about facilities at stations and on trains, especially regarding their accessibility. — Familiarise themselves with how to access other train operators’ information about train layout and on-board facilities. — Quickly ascertain the level of information which passengers need—frequent users will require far less detail as a rule than ﬁrst-time/infrequent travellers. — Provide information to passengers on how to alert staff of their arrival at the starting station. — Ensure that passengers understand when on-train accommodation had been booked in addition to assistance. — Ensure that passengers understand whether station or on-train staff will assist. — Provide a booking reference and any other relevant detail for booking retrieval by staff and for passenger conﬁdence. — Advise passengers of whom to contact and how if assistance is not provided. — Improve communication between APRS and train/station staff to ensure booking details are available to them. — Call back at least a percentage of passengers for their feedback after the journey within 48 hours.

Assistance by station or on-train staff — Staff should be trained to recognise passengers with “invisible disabilities” and assist them appropriately. — Check with each passenger the type and level of assistance required. — Ensure that ramps for boarding/alighting are deployed in accordance with the regulated process. — Contact the alighting station to conﬁrm that the (named) passenger is travelling and his/her location aboard the train. — Provide assistance with luggage. — Assist disabled passengers to the reserved seat/wheelchair space; where not reserved, ﬁnd them suitable accommodation. — On-train staff to identify themselves to disabled passengers and ascertain their needs. — Staff must assist disabled passengers to a point where they can board their onward train or continue their journey by other means. — Staff to remain alert to disabled passengers’ needs, eg in the event of disruption, last-minute change of departure platform or train delays once underway. — On-train staff to be alert to disabled passengers’ destinations and to provide assistance should station staff fail to do so. January 2013 Ev 114 Transport Committee: Evidence

Written evidence from Leonard Cheshire Disability (DAT 50) Leonard Cheshire Disability is the UK’s leading pan-disability charity and one of the largest voluntary sector providers of social care. We provide a wide range of services, including support to disabled people to enable them to live in their own home, as well as support into education, employment and entrepreneurship. We work for a world in which every person is equally valued both here in the UK and in 54 other countries. Campaigning is at the heart of what we do, working together to create a society where disabled people have the freedom to live their lives the way they choose with the opportunity and support to live independently, to contribute economically and to participate fully in society.

Key Points The evidence we present here is the result of surveys and interviews with disabled people detailing the experiences of many disabled people using buses, trains, taxis, ferries, coaches and underground systems. Based on their experiences we have identiﬁed three main areas for improvement that cut across the different transport types: — Journey planning—the need for reliable and accessible information and support; — Disability awareness—the need for improved training of transport staff; and — Access—better use of existing accessibility features and improvements to station and network access.

1. Journey Planning 1.1 In an online survey that we conducted to help inform our response to this inquiry, 55% of respondents found it either “very difficult” or “quite difficult” to find out about routes, tickets and fares when booking public transport.32 In interviews people told us that it was difficult to find out if a journey would be genuinely accessible to them. For example, one wheelchair user told us that even though the website for Transport for London (TfL) said that certain stations were accessible, when she arrived at her destination she often found there were steps, making it impossible for her to get out of the station. “So few stations are genuinely accessible that it makes taking a journey on the underground a very unsettling experience; I never know if I can get off at the station I need to. I was once going to Brighton and needed to get the tube from Liverpool Street to Victoria. However, when I tried to get off at London Bridge and called emergency assistance to get up to the exit, I was told to get back on and go to Borough station where I could get assistance and there would be a taxi to help me get to Victoria station. However, when I got to Borough the man in the ticket office said he knew nothing about it and I had to wait quite some time before a taxi could be arranged. By the time I made it to Victoria station I missed the train I had been planning to get to Brighton—the one I had booked assistance for. I had to wait a long time before the ticket office could arrange assistance for me to board another train. By the time I got to Brighton I was over two hours late.” 1.2 Respondents with a visual impairment reported that websites do not provide accessible information on where routes run: “Pdfs are generally not usable or accessible for blind people even with access adobe because they are never tagged properly by the creators. All documents need to be made accessible, not just websites. Timetables and stop listings are really helpful. Traveline sites need standardising and making accessible.” 1.3 When booking train tickets disabled people can face a number of barriers as a direct result of their disability. Spontaneous travel is all but impossible. To book assistance on a train with Journey Assistance, a service train operators offer to help disabled passengers plan their journey and book extra support, at least 24 hours notice is requested. In addition, respondents reported that in order to access Journey Assistance you had to call a premium number which was prohibitively expensive. 1.4 We note that during the Olympics the Games Spectator Journey Planner was developed to enable disabled people and people with reduced mobility to plan an accessible journey from a range of accessible stations and stops in Great Britain to all the Olympic venues. During the period of the Games, users were able to specify their accessibility requirements (level access, assistance, avoiding the underground) and plan an accessible journey to any venue on the days of operation at that venue. We welcome this development. 1.5 Many disabled people also find they are excluded from the savings offered by advance fares. These typically come with a fixed transfer time when changing trains which fails to allow for the extra time it may take someone with access needs to change trains or stations. Some train companies now reflect this in their booking options and we recommend that all remaining companies follow this practice. “I recently had to change at Kings Cross and I had to get 5 separate lifts, it was very stressful and exhausting.” 32 This survey was conducted in December 2013. This was a small scale survey and should not be treated as representative of all disabled people, however the results reflect consistent reports we have received during our years of working with disabled people. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 115

Recommendations — To ensure that information available on public transport websites such as TfL and National Rail are accessible for people with visual and hearing impairments. — To ensure that information on the accessibility of stations is accurate. — Calls to book Journey Assistance to be free of charge. — Advance fares to include an option for an extended transfer time. — The roll-out of IT programmes like the Games Spectator Journey Planner across England to enable disabled people to plan an accessible journey.

2. Disability Awareness 2.1 The evidence from disabled people highlighted a lack of staff knowledge, training and empathy. For example, one person with a debilitating condition said that, when no ramp could be found, train staff picked her up and lifted her off the train, despite her and her husband remonstrating that this would cause her to suffer a lot of pain. “If I cannot get someone to help I cannot access train travel. In addition, if there is luggage etc in the wheelchair space, no one from staff will help me to move it, or ask passengers to move their luggage so that I can sit safely. My world has gotten smaller and smaller because of these issues, and I feel helpless and depressed because there is nothing I can do to help myself.” “I am severely sight impaired, I told at least three staff members what train I was catching. I was assured by the station supervisor that he would put me on the train. I had taken my guide dog’s harness off in preparation to get on the train. My train came in, but by the time I fumbled to put my guide dog’s harness on the train had left. I had been forgotten. The station was not a busy one.” 2.2 Overall, 64% of respondents to our online survey felt that transport staff did not demonstrate disability awareness33. Another large scale survey found that 83% of respondents who had experienced problems on public transport said that the problem was due to negative or unhelpful attitudes from transport staff.34 “Some of the service bus drivers are nice but others let you know that it is a major inconvenience to have a wheelchair on the bus. You have to develop a rhino hide and just insist on your right to travel and to put up with the tutting.” “Often staff do not seem to understand how to handle or push someone’s chair.” “I can never be certain someone will be there to get the ramp out and help me off the train and I always dread the train coming to my stop. I have noticed that there are less and less staff at stations to help me. It is often the ticket office staff who are the only people around to help me and they are often very reluctant to help as they have to shut their office to come out and assist. When I am coming back late at night it is even worse as it is even less likely there will be people to help me off. Often late at night there are people who have been drinking and they get quite agitated when their journey is delayed because I cannot get off the train. Once they were shouting for the train driver to come and get me off and I felt quite threatened. There was another time when a member of staff from the ticket office was forced to come out to help me off the train but his attitude was very negative “it’s not my bloody job”, he said.” 2.3 It is significant to note that when staff had displayed sensitivity and supported disabled passengers throughout their journey it had transformed their experience even when not all stages of the journey had been physically accessible. This highlights the importance of disability awareness on the part of staff. 2.4 Issues with wheelchair spaces being occupied by pushchairs and prams were widely reported. Despite signage clearly indicating that wheelchairs have priority, this is often poorly enforced and on occasions this has led to wheelchair users being denied access to the bus. “I was already at the bus stop waiting for a bus. When the driver was approaching the bus stop, I hailed my hand to let the driver know that I wished to board, however, before the bus driver gets the wheelchair ramp out for me to board the bus, the driver opened the front door and lets in a pushchair. I went to the bus front door and I asked the driver to deploy the wheelchair ramp but he told me that there is no room for me and refused to deploy the wheelchair ramp. When I explained that he should have allowed me to board the bus and position myself safely before he opened the door to other passengers he was very rude towards me and came out of the bus to shout at me. He said I was ignorant and this was why I was in a wheelchair. At this point I was in tears.” 2.5 We recognise that TfL has issued new guidance to bus drivers to help improve journeys for wheelchair users which includes a reminder to bus drivers that the wheelchair bay on a bus is primarily for the use of disabled passengers and that they should announce this on the PA system if necessary. We would be keen to see evidence of the effectiveness of this measure and further steps taken, both in London and across the UK to avoid the position where the investment is made in accessible transport only for disabled people to still be denied access. 33 Ibid 34 Leonard Cheshire Disability (2009) Disability Review. 2009 Ev 116 Transport Committee: Evidence

2.6 Wheelchair users have also reported being refused access to trains, despite booking in advance, because the train was too busy and there was now no space for them. One respondent told us that they had been given a ﬁrst class ticket by the train company but was unable to use it as there was no wheelchair access to this carriage. Most trains only have one or two areas accessible to wheelchair users, it is therefore vital that disabled people are given priority in these areas. — Because of the barriers to public transport disabled people are often forced to use taxis to make essential journeys. This is problematic as they are often prohibitively expensive with disabled people regularly charged more if they are a wheelchair user and drivers unprepared or unaware how to use their vehicle’s ramp. This is addressed by section 165 of the Equality Act which prevents taxis from not picking up or assisting disabled passenger as well as charging disabled people an additional charge for this basic right. However, the Government has yet to bring this into force.

Recommendations — To ensure that all staff working in public transport undergo robust, regular disability equality training, led by disabled people, as part of their induction and ongoing development. — Ensure that bus drivers are instructed to announce to other passengers that they must move to allow space for wheelchair users in the bay and enforce this when people have pushchairs taking up the space. — Ensure disabled passengers travelling with Passenger Assistance have a designated contact point for each stage of their journey. — Implement section 165 of the Equality Act for taxis. — Introduce mandatory disability awareness training for all registered taxi drivers.

3. Access 3.1 Our survey to inform this response found that 59% of respondents had been refused access to public transport because of their disability.35 Almost all respondents of our survey (96%) said they had had to rely on family or friends because public transport is not accessible; 64% had had to cancel or miss an appointment because public transport was not accessible; and 75% said they found using public transport “quite difficult” and or “very difficult”. This is further supported by the findings of a previous survey in which 58% of disabled respondents say that the station or terminal was inaccessible and 64% report the mode of transport as being inaccessible.36 “When calling to book tickets, the staff do not seem to be aware of which [rail] stations are wheelchair accessible and which ones are not and book your tickets regardless. I have had nightmare journeys where the station I am booked to start my journey at doesn’t have wheelchair access to the necessary platform. I then have to get on a train in another direction or to another station, wait for staff to find the ramps, switch platforms, wait for another train, and start my journey again (usually missing my original connecting train).”

3.2 Issues with ramps to get on buses, trains and taxis pose a repeated problem. Passengers cannot rely on the fact that staff will be around to get the ramp out and support them to board or get off, even when this is pre booked. Moving around at the station itself can also be problematic as there are no lifts to get from one platform to another and getting some refreshments whilst waiting for a train is difficult as stations and its facilities are rarely wheelchair accessible. 3.3 Once boarded on public transport, disabled people often find that the space allocated to them is inappropriate: “When I sit on a train, I often have to sit in the doorway, the train moves around a lot and people are pushing past me. I would like to see a lot more space for wheelchairs on the train.” “If I can get on this bus, it is not comfortable, I have to sit with the buggies and people all around me and I can get very squashed.” “Many buses have a pole in the way of the wheelchair space making it difficult to manoeuvre into the space.”

3.4 One respondent describes a journey which was ideal: “On Eurostar I can go in ﬁrst class where I have a table and I can access the toilet. It is about feeling digniﬁed. Most of all the staff are amazing, and look after me from beginning to end. I felt that it was a policy of theirs to not make disabled people feel different, or a burden.”

3.5 Wheelchair users also told us that when travelling in taxis they did not feel properly secure as very few had a mechanism which enabled them to be anchored in the vehicle. 35 Please refer to footnote 1. 36 Leonard Cheshire Disability (2009) Disability Review. 2009 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 117

Recommendations — To incorporate audio-visual announcement systems in new designs of buses, trains and tubes, and to build the systems into existing buses. — To check the accessibility features (such as ramps) on buses daily, thus reducing the instances of them failing. — For improvements to accessibility to become a mandatory part of all new franchise agreements— making accessibility a key requirement across the rail network (and for other forms of transport where applicable). — For all train operating companies, and Network Rail where it owns stations, to ensure that improvements to accessibility are factored in to any refurbishment or redevelopment in station infrastructure. — For London Underground to ensure that platforms on lines where the rolling stock is not due to be replaced in the near future, such as those on the Jubilee line, are adapted to ensure there is level access between the platform and the train. For more information about this response please contact Rosanna Singler, Policy Ofﬁcer, E: [email protected], T: 020 3242 0269

APPENDIX A few case studies illustrate the points we have made in our response. People with visual impairments and hearing impairments disembarking from buses: “Buses don’t talk so I can easily miss a stop unless I recognise a landmark on the journey and drivers can forget to mention when we get there even when I ask. Also many don’t stop at a bus stop when they see a cane.” The ability of staff to provide helpful and appropriate assistance: “When I arrived at Moorgate station I rang for assistance to get help to leave the train but when the staff arrived they said they did not know how to use the ramp and were really unfriendly. I tried to do it myself but I nearly fell. In the end two fellow passengers helped me off, it was really quite embarrassing.” “Once I got the train to Stratford during the Olympics and when I arrived they said they were expecting me to be blind, not in a wheelchair, despite the fact I had told Journey Assistance 48 hours before I travelled what my access needs were and when I was arriving. The assistant had to get a key for the ramp and it took about 15 minutes for her to organise this and help me off the train which was very frustrating.” “When commuting from St Albans to Tooting I was rushed off the train at Kings Cross due to engineering works. When we got to Kings Cross the information wasn’t sent correctly and the staff were prepared for an escort rather than a ramp. The special assistant staff stood there complaining at me and made me feel vulnerable in front of an entire train. When she ﬁnally went to the opposite end of the platform to get the ramp the driver decided the train had been held up for too long and with no warning he and another member of staff physically lifted my chair (with me in it) off the train. My partner attempted to restrain them knowing the pain it would cause but they carried on anyway. This caused me severe pain and trauma. I was dumped on the platform and just left with my partner without anymore assistance! Then we had to continue on 2 more train journeys in this agony and fatigue that it caused me.” January 2013

Written evidence from FirstGroup (DAT 75) About FirstGroup 1. FirstGroup plc is the leading transport operator in the UK and North America. We employ approximately 124,000 people and we transport more than 2.5bn passengers every year. Our company is comprised of five divisions—UK Rail and UK Bus here and First Student, First Transit and Greyhound in America. 2. As ever, we are pleased to submit evidence to the Committee’s inquiry. Following the Committee’s request, it focuses on our UK Bus operations. 3. We are one of the largest bus operators in the UK with a fleet of 7,500 vehicles, and operate more than a fifth of local bus services. We carry approximately 2.6 million passengers on our buses every day. The UK Bus division employs approximately 21,000 people. 4. We operate in communities across the country, including 40 of the UK’s largest towns and cities. The majority of our operations are in urban areas where the bus is the most effective means of tackling traffic congestion. Ev 118 Transport Committee: Evidence

Information and Awareness 5. Last year we launched our new brand promise in UK Bus—Better Journeys for Life. It is a reﬂection of the journeys we all make and seeks to place our customers, communities and partners at the heart of everything we do. As part of this, we have been actively looking at how we can improve the way we assist those living with disabilities, and their carers, to help make bus travel more accessible. 6. Our starting point in June 2009 was the introduction by FirstGroup of our Safe Journey Card in partnership with Age UK (then Help the Aged). This is a simple product, using a tri-fold bus ticket holder with specially designed inserts carrying information for drivers, such as: — “Please be patient—as I am visually impaired”. — “Please speak slowly—I am hard of hearing”. 7. There are also inserts designed to allow the user to write in their destination, so drivers can alert the passenger at the appropriate stop, or insert other relevant advice for drivers. 8. The Safe Journey Card allows customers to privately let our drivers know if they need additional help or assistance. It is an easy way to break down communication barriers and aid understanding. It has become extremely popular with customers and drivers alike, so much so that we are developing additional versions of the card for speciﬁc needs in consultation with a range of disability organisations—including Brandon Trust, Guide Dogs, Mencap and Action on Hearing Loss. 9. Our Industry body, The Confederation of Passenger Transport, is exploring whether this type of card could be used across the bus industry in the same way as the mobility scooter code developed in partnership with the Department for Transport. 10. We are keen to ensure the voice of our customers is heard throughout the business. Our Customer Service and Communications Director in UK Bus ensures the voice of the disabled user is at the hearts of our on-going programme of customer satisfaction research and works with focus groups to supplement this research in order to understand how we can deliver products and services that better meet customers’ needs. 11. In 2011, to further develop our understanding of what we could do to help disabled people, we worked closely with the charity Disability Rights UK on its ‘Doing Transport Differently’ publication. 12. This is a guide written by, and for, people with experience of a disability or health condition who would like to access public transport. It shows how far public transport has improved and how to make use of it. It brings together a wealth of information in one place and uses real-life experiences to illustrate themes and issues.

Vehicle Design and Accessibility 13. We have also worked to develop buses which can be easily used by people with limited mobility and wheelchair users. Whilst low floor easy access buses are popular with everyone, there are occasions when the area around the designated wheelchair space becomes congested and conflict can arise between customers— particularly wheelchair users and passengers with buggies. 14. FirstGroup acquired a new fleet of 200 double deck buses to use on our spectator transport contract for the Olympic and Paralympic Games last year. We used this opportunity to work over a number of months with vehicle manufacturers on a more flexible seating layout for these vehicles. 15. Different options were tested with a range of bus users including disabled customers and parents with buggies. This helped us to develop a more flexible area at the front of the bus which maximises the available space and reduces the potential for conflict. 16. Following the Games, these vehicles were cascaded to be used in our day-to-day operations in Manchester, Leeds and Plymouth. This new layout will be included in all the vehicles we buy in the future. In addition, we have just announced a new order for 464 new vehicles worth £76 million for delivery in the 2013–14 financial year. This order will bring First’s investment in new buses to around £240 million in three years; more than 95% of this order will be manufactured in the UK.

Staff Training and Awareness 17. We are committed to growing our business and encouraging more people to use our services and use them more often—including people with disabilities and their carers. A key factor in the success of our service delivery is the training and performance of our frontline teams. 18. FirstGroup’s 16,000 drivers in UK Bus have the opportunity to make a real difference for our customers every day through the care and support they offer. We are determined to develop our driving teams so they know how to help disabled people feel conﬁdent about travelling with us. Our ongoing partnership with Disability Rights UK, and other disability organisations is helping us to do that by improving our understanding of what we can do to meet the needs of those living with disability and health conditions. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 119

19. We have also developed over the past year a relationship with the Alzheimer’s Society, which has brought together providers across a range of public and private service sectors to help create the organisation’s goal of Dementia Friendly Communities. This campaign has been stimulated by the Prime Minister’s challenge in this area. 20. Last year we worked with the Alzheimer’s Society to produce a training module that guides our drivers on how to support customers with dementia. One of our regular customers, Trevor Jarvis, is an Ambassador for the Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia. We worked with Mr Jarvis to produce a DVD which supported our driver training programme on dementia awareness. This module is now a regular part of the annual 35 hours of Certiﬁcate of Professional Competence (CPC) training our drivers have to undertake every year. Other CPC courses include modules on a general refresh of disability awareness, assisting customers in wheelchairs, and helping those who are blind and partially sighted. 21. We are also working with the national charity Guide Dogs to develop a new training package to enable us to deliver sighted guide training to all our drivers starting in the autumn. This follows a successful trial in Leeds last year where we trained 50 hosts on our new Hyperlink service between Leeds and Bradford. This initiative proved highly successful and our team in Leeds enjoyed learning a skill that they can use both in and out of work. February 2013

Written evidence from National Express Ltd. (DAT 22) 1. Background 1.1 National Express is the UK’s leading coach company and the largest provider of scheduled express coach services. We operate circa 1,500 services per day and serve around 1,000 locations. We are proud to be part of the regions where we operate. We employ great people and have a proven pedigree and heritage as a travel operator. 1.2 Coaches offer great value transport, keeping ticket prices accessible to all and providing the lowest carbon form of passenger transport. Coach is the most environmentally friendly mode of transport. The carbon dioxide per passenger kilometre is only 29g37 which is far below even electric trains. This is based on average occupancy and not full coaches. 1.3 The average age of our fleet of 550 is currently under three years old and over the last three years alone more than 370 new coaches have entered service. This means that most meet the latest emission standards (Euro 4 and 5) minimising particulates (PM10) and NOX outputs. This greatly improves the air quality as well as cutting carbon emissions. 1.4 All new coaches are fully accessible and fitted with an easy access passenger lift. During early 2013 the entire fleet will become accessible, six years ahead of the statutory requirement. All new coaches also have leather seats, at-seat power supply, and some also come with WiFi. We have recently launched a real time travel information system which allows passengers to identify where their coach is and the estimated time of arrival at their stop. 1.5 Coaches also help reduce congestion; a full coach can remove the equivalent of one mile of motorway traffic from the road.38 1.6 Continuous improvement in the service we provide to our customers is a priority for National Express. We are focussed on being market leaders in safety, customer experience, innovation and operational excellence. We also have the advantage of being able to respond quickly to changes and offer new and improved routes and services.

2. The Effectiveness of Legislation 2.1 National Express believes that there is adequate legislation although we have concerns about the UK Government’s proposal that all possible exemptions within EU Passenger Rights are enacted. We consider that this is a retrograde step and does not ﬁt with our own aspirations. 2.2 Our perception is that the legislation is generally working well but we have no information as to whether it is being applied consistently across all industries and organisations. We have worked with organisations such as RADAR (now Disability Rights UK) to help us develop best practice. 2.3 We are not aware of any direct enforcement. In conjunction with disability groups we strive to make sure that we get it right but no government agency has ever checked on what we are doing. This is a concern as we are sure that there will be some businesses who will do the minimum possible and this leads to inconsistency. 37 Ecometrica April 2012, Independent audit report commissioned by National Express—available on request 38 Monbiot, G (2006) Heat: how to stop the planet burning. Penguin, London Ev 120 Transport Committee: Evidence

2.4 In effect we are self policing. We know that we do not yet always get it right but we strive to continuously improve. The challenge is that we often come across situations we have not handled before and no training manual ever covers it.

3. Accessibility of Information 3.1 National Express will provide information to customers to meet their needs. For example, whilst we do not produce large print timetables, we will enlarge them on request or provide bespoke information 3.2 For over ten years we have operated a dedicated support service to assist people with additional needs. The team can be contacted seven days a week by either phone or email. This service has proved very popular with customers and the team can help with all information in advance of a journey. 3.3 We have staff at the main coach and bus stations who are also able to guide passengers. Passengers also have direct access to drivers during their journeys. 3.4 Information is available to all passengers in real time using our recently introduced Coach Tracker system. This is available online and through Smartphones. Our station and contact centre staff also have access to this information and can respond to queries. 3.5 During the course of a journey drivers are able to inform passengers about progress and any delays. They are also able to contact our support centre and make arrangements for any passengers with connections or special needs in the event of a delay. 3.6 We also provide an emergency help number on all our tickets which allows customer to access our contact centre 24 hours a day, every day (except Christmas day) 3.7 We have also had a Code of Practice for some years providing useful information regarding their journey and assistance we can and cannot provide.

4. The Provision of Assistance and Staff Awareness 4.1 As already referred to, National Express does have a dedicated support team available by phone and email. They are able to arrange any special requirements that passengers may have and ensure that staff based at bus and coach stations are made aware of what is required. 4.2 All staff are given training in disability awareness and this will be refreshed on an annual basis. The greatest challenge is not the obvious disabilities but rather those which may not be immediately apparent. It is likely that, even with the very best training, circumstances will arise which staff have no prior experience of. This is why we consider it essential to work with disability organisations to broaden our knowledge. However this invariably comes at signiﬁcant cost, particularly when we have over 2,000 drivers and 400 customer service staff spread all around the country. No external funding is available for this type of training and the costs have to be met internally or passed onto all customers. 4.3 It is important to state that we are only able to provide assistance where it is safe to do so and cannot undertake anything which either involves physical handling of the passenger or offering medical assistance. We are however generally supportive of the provision of a free ticket for a carer as per Regulation 181/2011 (Passenger Rights 2013) 4.4 Unlike many other transport operators we have a dedicated Accessibility and Inclusion Manager who’s main role is to focus on and improve the service we offer our disabled customers

5. Lessons Learnt from the Paralympics 5.1 We believe that there were few lessons to learn from either the Paralympics or the Olympic Games in terms of disabled transport requirements. 5.2 However we do believe that the key legacy of the Paralympics is that it brought much greater public awareness of many disabilities and how people could overcome them. 5.3 National Express is working with one Paralympic Gold Medal winner and using her to assist with our training. She is able to inspire staff in a way which is not always possible with normal training. We have also made a Disability Awareness DVD in which she has participated. This will be used as a training tool in 2013.

6. Other Challenges 6.1 National Express, and all transport operators, cannot alone deliver the perfect service and it needs a joined up approach by all organisations involved. 6.2 For example, it is no good operators having accessible coaches and buses if passengers with disabilities cannot easily access stations or stops. Whilst some local authorities are very good, others do not see it as their responsibility or take actions without consultation. These authorities then tend to provide sub standard facilities. Another related issue is that stops can be blocked by parked vehicles, in some cases leading to the stop Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 121

being inaccessible. We believe that more enforcement should take place to ensure that vehicles can correctly access stops. 6.3 Perhaps the largest other challenge is the very small minority of other passengers who are intolerant or will not assist staff in making space available for disabled customers. 6.4 Whilst we have a disability awareness module in our Customer Care section of our CPC training, this equates to two hours once a year. The challenge is doing more with a geographically fragmented workforce. Some Government support would make this easier.

7. Conclusions 7.1 National Express wish to do everything possible to assist disabled people, and over recent years we have made signiﬁcant investment to ensure our services are accessible. 7.2 We perceive legislation to be effective, although we believe that EU Passenger Rights should also be fully implemented without delay. 7.3 We need local authorities and others to work with us to ensure that station and stop infrastructure meets our accessibility requirements. 7.4 National Express wishes to engage with disabled users and continually improve our service delivery. January 2013

Written evidence from the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) (DAT 66) 1. Introduction 1.1. ATOC represents train operators in Great Britain and provides services for the passenger rail sector, such as National Rail Enquiries and the Rail Settlement Plan. We welcome the chance to submit evidence to the Committee’s inquiry into the effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people. 1.2. ATOC’s work around accessibility focuses on: — improving the quality of services delivered to disabled passengers; — working closely with TOCs to facilitate the sharing of best practice and new ideas; — working with stakeholder organisations in order that we achieve a better understanding of the needs of disabled people and to foster a common understanding of the challenges faced by the industry; — ensuring that legislation and regulation is fit for purpose and does not conflict with TOCs’ broader obligations in terms of franchise standards or regulation; and — developing and promoting the Disabled Persons Railcard (DPRC). 1.3. Our work is driven by the belief that disabled passengers represent a valuable source of revenue, and improvements to the services that we offer will help to attract more disabled people to rail. This work is underpinned by the legal framework but legislation in itself does not drive our work in this area. 1.4. We believe that growing numbers of disabled people have used the rail network in recent years, reflecting both improvements to accessibility and a growing confidence on the part of disabled people in using rail services. 1.5. The National Passenger Survey published by Passenger Focus measures the proportion of rail passengers with a disability. By applying this proportion to the total number of rail journeys made, we have estimated that around 72 million rail journeys were made by disabled people in 2011–12. By applying the same methodology to historic data, we have estimated the number of journeys made by disabled people in 2006–07 was 45 million, suggesting that use of the rail network by disabled people has grown by 58% over the last five years. 1.6. Given the methodology used, these numbers should be taken as indicative. Nevertheless they are supported by data on use of the DPRC, usage of which we are able to measure precisely. This shows that journeys using a DPRC discount have increased by 172% over the ten years from 2002 to 2012 and 81% over the last five years.

2. Disability Legislation and its Application to Rail Services 2.1. The most important aspect of the legislative framework, as far as travel by disabled passengers on rail services is concerned, is the Equality Act (2010) which incorporates the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act (2005) (DDA). 2.2. From a rail perspective the DDA, as well as setting out the general obligations of train companies with regard to disabled people, also established 2020 as the date by which all rolling stock had to be compliant with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Requirements (RVAR). In addition, through the related Code of Practice on Station Design for Disabled People, it established design standards for rail stations. Ev 122 Transport Committee: Evidence

2.3. It is important to note that in addition to the provisions of the Equality Act, train companies are also bound by European legislation. Where there is a conflict, European legislation takes precedence. 2.4. The most important element of European legislation is the European Technical Specification for Interoperability for People with Reduced Mobility (PRM-TSI), which sets requirements for train and station design. The PRM-TSI, which came into force in 2009, has now replaced the RVAR as far as rolling stock is concerned. In order to avoid confusion, we will refer to rolling stock design requirements as the RVAR/PRM- TSI requirements in the rest of our written evidence. The PRM-TSI has also been incorporated into the UK Stations Code of Practice. 2.5. The PRM-TSI itself is currently being redrafted to extend its scope to include the whole European rail network. The European Rail Agency has also asked that the re-drafted TSI reflects the requirements of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled People and the European Passenger Rights Regulations. 2.6. In addition to the legislative and regulatory framework, train companies also have legally-binding obligations with regard to disabled people within their franchise agreements. Typically these stipulate that train companies must: — maintain a Disabled Persons Protection Policy (DPPP); — participate in the national assistance scheme for disabled people; — provide printed and other information on accessibility; — provide alternative transport where assistance can’t be provided and provide dedicated parking spaces for disabled travellers; — hold a minor works budget for minor accessibility improvements (this is typically £250k or more pa); and; — participate in the Disabled Persons Railcard Scheme. 2.7. In our view the current legislative and regulatory framework for rail travel by disabled passengers strikes the right balance between general, over-arching requirements, and the more detailed requirements set out in the RVAR/PRM-TSI and Stations Code of Practice. Overall, this amounts to a quite comprehensive legislative framework, supplemented by franchise obligations. 2.8. We also believe the framework to have been effective in ensuring that disabled people have been provided a reasonable ability to travel on the National Rail network, and to ensure that there is a continued focus on and impetus towards improved accessibility. 2.9. Enforcement works both through the courts, where the more general provisions of the legislative framework can (and are) tested, and through DfT/ORR monitoring of franchise compliance. However, in general it ought to be highlighted that over the last decade there has been very little in the way of enforcement activity, reflecting a high level of compliance with legislative, regulatory and contractual obligations, but also the fact that, in many areas, train companies have gone further than the strict requirements of legislation and franchise agreements. 2.10. The 2020 deadline for full compliance by rolling stock with RVAR/PRM-TSI remains a challenging target. When this target was initially established in 2005 nobody envisaged the delays which have subsequently occurred in respect of ordering new rolling stock. As a result, we understand that the DfT has agreed with rolling stock leasing companies (ROSCOs) that for some types of rolling stock there will not be a requirement for full compliance by the 2020 deadline. 2.11. However, we also need to highlight that the majority of the rolling stock fleet is now compliant or close to compliance, a position that will improve still further when the new Inter-City Express Trains, Thameslink, Crossrail and other new rolling stock enter service. 2.12. In this context, we would like to see an overall industry plan published by the DfT in partnership with, ROSCOs, individual train companies and ATOC, with adjustments to the deadline on routes or for specific types of rolling stock where it may be more cost effective and advantageous to disabled passengers to delay full implementation to allow for new, higher quality builds of rolling stock to be introduced or more extensive refurbishments to take place. 2.13. Finally, there is one area of strong and growing concern for train companies that we need to highlight; that of motorised scooters. Motorised scooters are becoming increasingly popular and train companies have come under considerable pressure to convey them on train services. This they have tried to do but there are significant problems; perhaps most importantly that motorised scooters have a larger footprint than wheelchairs (wheelchair spaces on trains are based on a standard “reference wheelchair space”), but there are also significant safety and practical issues (staff cannot generally, physically load scooters/passengers on trains where the combined weight is in excess of 200kg for instance). 2.14. The DfT are aware of our concerns and have been undertaking research into the area. There is an urgent need to define formally what constitutes an acceptable “scooter” from a rail service perspective (there is currently a wide range of models on the market), and then to develop and adopt network-wide policies that Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 123

address the future conveyance of scooters. This is an area in which the DfT needs to lead, but ATOC and TOCs are willing to engage constructively with the DfT on this issue.

3. The Services we Currently Provide to Disabled People Information on accessibility 3.1. The Committee has indicated that it is speciﬁcally interested in the accessibility of information and the assistance provided by public transport staff. This section describes the activities of train companies and ATOC in these two areas but also provides information on the other areas of assistance provided to disabled travellers. 3.2. We recognise that accurate and reliable information for disabled passengers is essential if they are to use the rail network effectively. This cannot be achieved by any single organisation but by partnership working between the Department for Transport, Network Rail, TOCs and relevant stakeholder organisations. This philosophy underpins our approach to the provision of information. 3.3. Train operators are obliged to produce a range of information for passengers as part of their franchise agreements. This includes information about timetabled services, station facilities, network route maps and fares information.

Pre-Journey Information 3.4. At a national level, the National Rail Enquiries website (nationalrail.co.uk), operated by ATOC on behalf of its members, provides online information and details about train travel including timetable information, access to train services and fares information. Fares information includes Disabled Persons Railcard (DPRC) discounts. Information is also provided by telephone and textphone. 3.5. In 2008 ATOC developed a new service for disabled and other passengers within the National Rail Enquiries website—Stations Made Easy. This allows passengers to: — view an interactive plan of stations, complete with photographs providing exact details about access facilities—for example the number of steps on a particular staircase; — plan a route within stations, avoiding objects which may be particularly difficult (such as steps); and — see details that summarise station opening hours, times when staff are available and information about accessible parking, toilet provision, and so on. 3.6. Stations Made Easy is available for every station on the GB rail network. The project involved a detailed access audit of all 2500+ stations, together with photographs of key objects. As such it is, within Europe, a unique tool, well regarded by stakeholders and a facility which the European Rail Agency and other Continental train operators are considering providing. 3.7. Stations Made Easy allows personalisation of station usage by giving passengers the ability to assess stations based upon their own particular access needs. The Stations Made Easy pages on nationalrail.co.uk receive around 500K unique visits per annum. 3.8. We are currently evaluating the effectiveness of Stations Made Easy, drawing upon the views of TOCs, stakeholder organisations and others. This will help us decide how we develop the service in the future. 3.9. In August 2012 we introduced a new web-based tool for disabled passengers (and other passenger groups needing special assistance, such as the elderly) called Rail Travel Made Easy. This brings together a range of information which aims to give passengers a better understanding about the range of support, help and information available when using rail services. 3.10. The Rail Travel Made Easy pages are still being fully developed and information is currently high level. In spring 2013 we will be adding impairment-specific pages to the website along with tips and information from disabled rail travellers about how to make journeys work successfully. 3.11. The development of the Stations Made Easy facility and the Rail Travel Made Easy website were supported by part funding from the DfT’s “Access for All” fund “Small Schemes” budget, with additional funding from Network Rail and Transport Scotland. 3.12. TOCs also provide comprehensive information on their own websites for disabled passengers, including their DPPPs, which every TOC publishes online, and which are now in a standardised format. TOC customer contact centres also provide telephone-based advice, which is also generally available via textphone. 3.13. In addition to online information, train companies and ATOC also provide comprehensive printed information, which is racked at stations and distributed to a range of organisations such as Citizens Advice Bureaux and libraries. This includes ATOC’s Rail Travel Made Easy leaflet, which incorporates a DPRC application form, and of which 400,000 copies are produced each year. Printed material is generally available in large print and braille formats. Ev 124 Transport Committee: Evidence

At the Station 3.14. Once passengers have commenced their journeys a range of information is available for them on stations. There have been significant improvements in recent years in the provision of real time information at stations, particularly through Customer Information Services (CIS) systems but also through improved public address systems. 3.15. However, the primary focus at stations has been physical improvements to accessibility; in particular step-free access through the provision of lifts and ramps but also other improvements such as tactile platform edges, disabled toilet facilities, automatic doors, hearing loops, handrails, step-free side entrance gates and adjustable height/accessible ticket office counters. 3.16. The driving force behind this has been the government’s “Access for All” fund, which has provided £380 million of funding from July 2006 through to the end of the current rail control period in March 2014. Since the fund was introduced in excess of 120 stations have been upgraded to make them party or fully accessible. 3.17. We believe the Access for All programme represents good value for money and has delivered real improvements for disabled passengers. We are keen to see the programme further developed and note that a budget of £100m has been earmarked for the next five-year control period starting in April 2014. 3.18. However, we are concerned that this lower rate of investment will result in a reduction in the pace of improvement, and believe that there may be opportunities to make greater use of third party funding to augment DfT financial support. There are a range of potential partners including local authorities, Transport for London, and major sport and entertainment venues. 3.19. It is worth stressing that, as drafted, the forthcoming revised European PRM-TSI will require national governments to implement a detailed implementation plan for station accessibility. This itself may drive the need for further investment and needs careful consideration by government. 3.20. Finally, we need to emphasise strongly that making the station estate fully accessible remains a very significant challenge. Some of the stations that remain to be made fully accessible will need virtually complete re-building whilst many will require very extensive works. This will take time and very significant further investment.

On the Train 3.21. Over the last twenty years there have been very significant improvements to rolling stock to facilitate the carriage of disabled passengers, particularly those with mobility impairments. Improvements to the visual display of information on board trains and PA systems have also helped hearing and visually impaired passengers. 3.22. The vast majority of the rolling stock fleet now complies fully or largely with the RVAR/PRM-TSI. This figure will further increase once the planned, new Inter-City Express trains, and new rolling stock for the Thameslink and Crossrail services (including the additional rolling stock recently ordered by Southern) are brought into service over the next 5 years.

Assistance provided by rail staff 3.23. In general, there is now a much improved level of understanding of the needs of disabled passengers by rail staff. This reflects a significant cultural change over the last twenty years underpinned by training undertaken by train companies, supported by ATOC. For instance in 2008 ATOC produced an industry wide training DVD—“Everything you ever wanted to know about disability but were afraid to ask”—which has been widely utilised and adopted by our members. Following on from this ATOC has developed on line training facilities and also supported TOCs with the evaluation of their existing disability training. 3.24. The majority of disabled travellers now feel sufficiently confident about using the rail network to do so without the need for specific assistance. Approximately 250K journeys were made where assistance was provided in the past 12 months, representing a very small proportion of the journeys made by disabled people in total (although a higher proportion of those with mobility impairments). 3.25. It is also worth highlighting that the assistance provided to disabled passenger in Britain compares well when benchmarked against the service provided in other developed countries. For example in Germany and Spain assistance is only delivered at stations on the high speed network. Britain is unique in delivering assistance or a reasonable alternative at all stations. 3.26. Nevertheless, a sizeable minority of disabled passengers continue to need assistance and much industry effort in recent years has been focused on improving the assistance provided to those passengers that need specific help. 3.27. In March 2011 train companies, through ATOC, adopted a new passenger assistance strategy. As well as delivering a new booking system, we also set two further priorities: for passengers to better understand how assistance works in practice; and, secondly to ensure that operational staff delivered consistently high quality Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 125

performance when providing assistance to passengers. This work is on-going and involves a close working relationship between ATOC and its members. 3.28. The centre piece of the new strategy is a new booking and information system called “Passenger Assist”, which provides a number of improvements, when compared to its predecessor system, APRS: — all bookings can be traced to the member of staff who made the booking thus increasing accountability; — passengers receive confirmation of the assistance booking made with a unique booking reference number; — passengers can repeat book the same frequently made journey; — assistance can be booked on-line via the Disabled Persons Railcard website; and — station staff can receive information through e-mail, direct on to hand held devices or by fax machine and Passenger Assist provides much better quality management information. 3.29. So far Passenger Assist has delivered 860K assists in the first year of operation; equating to approximately 250K annual passenger journeys. At the same time the reliability of booked assistance has improved. For instance, where errors occur we are able to trace the booking back to the member of staff who initially entered information on to Passenger Assist, and corrective action can be taken to prevent mistakes being repeated. 3.30. The recommended advance booking period for Passenger Assist is 24 hours before a journey starts. Although, on average passengers book assistance for their journeys 10 days before travel, ATOC is aware that a number of advocacy organisations believe that the 24 hour pre-booking recommendation is seen as unnecessarily prohibitive. 3.31. Whilst we understand this point of view (and Passenger Assist now allows us to take some bookings at less than 24 hours notice), we would stress that the reason for recommending 24 hours advance notice is so that journey logic can be checked. For example, a passenger may be intending to travel to or from an unstaffed station. In these circumstances we would either provide a taxi to transfer the passenger to the next accessible station or roster staff so that they are available at the relevant point of the journey. However this cannot be achieved at short notice as, for example, accessible taxis are not available in all parts of the country. 3.32. ATOC in conjunction with train companies is currently reviewing the 24 hour pre-booking recommendation and we will retain an open mind on ideas for making the assistance service more flexible in the future. However, in terms of priority, we believe that the greater immediate challenge is making sure that passengers know about the assistance that is available, that access to booking assistance is made easier, and that assistance is delivered as consistently as possible. 3.33. We are currently in the process of developing common training strands and formats for TOCs to utilise in respect of Passenger Assist with the objective of using training resources to support standard behaviours that consistently deliver better quality support and assistance to passengers.

Disabled Persons Railcard 3.34. The Disabled Persons Railcard, which is managed by ATOC in conjunction with TOCs, has been a particular success story as far as the privatised rail industry is concerned. Since 2002 the number of DPRC holders has increased from 64,000 to 140,000 and the number of journeys made by these Railcard holders has increased by 172%. There are now over 4m DPRC-discounted journeys every year. 3.35. In 2006 we introduced a three year DPRC and we are currently reviewing eligibility criteria as a result of the introduction of Personal Independence Payments, which are due to replace Disability Living Allowance over the next few years.

Railway Technical Strategy 3.36. Finally, it is worth noting that future industry planning is taking into the needs of disabled travellers. The Railway Technical Strategy published in 2012 is strongly focused on the future needs of passengers and explicitly recognises the importance of accessibility, and the continuing need to improve accessibility at stations and on trains.

4. Lessons Learned from the Olympics and Paralympics 4.1. Overall rail performed exceptionally well during the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Spectator satisfaction levels with transport were extremely high. LOCOG research found that 74% and 83% of spectators respectively rated the “ease and efﬁciency of public transport around London” and “getting home after your event” as “extremely good”. 4.2. Around 15,000 pre booked assists and many more un-booked assists were delivered to disabled passengers travelling to Games events. During the Games, we received no reports of pre-booked assistance Ev 126 Transport Committee: Evidence

having failed. The small minority of disabled passengers who experienced problems tended to be those who had not planned their journeys in advance. 4.3. This success was not achieved by accident but through design. We worked with colleagues in Network Rail, Transport for London (TFL), the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) and the London Coordinating Committee (LOCOG) to ensure that highly unusual patterns of demand anticipated were planned for in considerable detail. 4.4. Operational performance was exceptional with large numbers of additional rail staff available to assist disabled passengers. The additional staff were a combination of TOC head office staff, re-deployed onto customer-facing duties during the Games, and temporary staff. Whilst we are proud of the level of support and assistance provided as a result of this, we need to emphasise that this level of resourcing can be only be provided in exceptional circumstances and for limited periods. 4.5. Nonetheless, the high level of operational efficacy achieved will provide some lasting, legacy benefits, in terms of the improved teamwork, more widespread understanding and experience of assistance issues, and the improved planning that underpinned it. 4.6. We are also looking to ensure that the benefits of greater collaboration and co-operation between transport operators are not lost. Perhaps the most tangible example of this is that we have agreed with Transport for London to form a new, senior joint body to build on the partnership working developed during the Games. This new body will include accessibility issues within its remit 4.7. Finally, there are physical legacy benefits including station improvements, the Passenger Assist system, re-audited stations and over 200 additional information screens at stations in and around London. We ought to acknowledge the financial contributions made by various agencies to support these improvements, particularly the ODA.

5. Conclusions 5.1. Overall, we believe that the legislative framework is both comprehensive and effective. Our only concerns are the need for a more transparent DfT/industry plan as far as RVAR/PRM-TSI is concerned and the need for the DfT to take the lead in developing a new, industry-wide approach to the issue of motorised scooters. 5.2. The significant growth in use of the rail network by disabled people suggests that the legislative framework has successfully supported a progressive move to a more accessible railway. 5.3. There have been significant improvements in the way that information as assistance are provided to disabled travellers, but both areas are “work in progress” and we acknowledge that more needs to be done. 5.4. In a wider sense, whilst the industry has taken many steps forward in facilitating and supporting rail travel by disabled travellers, we would fully accept that there is still some considerable way to go before the railway is fully accessible. 5.5. In this context, whilst we are committed to moving towards a fully accessible railway over time, it is nevertheless important to be realistic about what needs to be achieved. For instance, many of the stations that remain to be made fully accessible, will require complete re-builds to achieve this. Necessarily, the cost involved in doing this can only be supported over an extended period of time. 5.6. The 2012 Games were an important learning experience and will have some important legacy benefits, in terms of: greater staff understanding and awareness of the needs of disabled passengers; improved teamwork; more effective co-operation between transport operators and; the Games-specific investment in physical accessibility improvements. January 2013

Written evidence from Network Rail (DAT 101) Following the evidence session on 15 April, I would like to explain in greater detail why street-to-train step free access is much more challenging than street-to-platform, and why we have taken the approach we have. Unlike London Underground, Network Rail operates a mixed-use railway, with a range of passenger trains as well as freight trains operating. The combination of different heights of rolling stock, freight gauge clearance and curvature of platforms can make it impossible to deliver step free access from the platform the to the train without assistance. Track height can vary between stations on the same route and even along an individual platform in some cases. We would not, of course, design stations like this today, but have to work with the network as we ﬁnd it. We face the challenge of making the network as accessible as possible for as many people as we can within the funds available. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 127

Crossrail is of course seeing new rolling stock procured, and as a result has excellent platform-to-train access in the tunnel section because this is the section of the track with new stations and a single type of rolling stock. This is more complex at stations that already exist, especially where they are not going to be exclusively used by Crossrail trains. The substantial obstacles to delivering platform-to-train step free access do not stop us from making stations much more accessible, with beneﬁts to a wide range of passengers. Making stations accessible from street to platform also does not preclude later improvements to make step-free access to trains possible, assuming rolling stock changes allow this. Street to platform accessibility combined with our improved training for staff is, we believe, the best way to deliver much greater access across the network in the short to medium term. Delivering street-to-platform step free access makes it much easier for a wide range of passengers to use the network, including many who can manage a step to the train but struggle with Victorian-era stations. Our training programme represents a relatively fast, effective and value-for-money way to improve how we meet, greet and help passengers who need assistance to access the network. Disabled people who have hidden impairments are a particular focus of this training. Network Rail is now ensuring all our customer facing staff are receiving training from disabled people. In the longer term, the physical improvements to stations will improve matters substantially, but this is much harder and slower than the more immediate strategy of training and street-to-platform accessibility. We are following both approaches. I hope this explains the challenge the railway industry faces and why we have taken the approach we have. May 2013

Written evidence from Merseytravel (DAT 20) Context 0.1 Merseytravel is a public body comprising the Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority (ITA) and the Merseyside Passenger Transport Executive (PTE), acting together with the overall aim of providing an integrated transport network for Merseyside which is accessible to all. 0.2 Integrated Transport Authorities have a statutory requirement to produce Local Transport Plans (LTPs) as a result of the Local Transport Act 2008. Via the Local Transport Plan, the ITA is responsible for multimodal transport policy issues. However the Passenger Transport Executive (PTE) remains responsible for delivery of passenger transport, concessionary travel, ticketing and so forth, and as a result, works in partnership with the local authorities and other partners to deliver the LTP. The new Local Transport Plan and its associated documents came into force on the 1 April 2011 and form the transport policy framework for Merseyside. 0.3 The Local Transport Plan referred to above includes a speciﬁc goal of improving the accessibility of the transport network, and ensuring easy travel for disabled people. Merseytravel has an adopted Equality Scheme, setting out its approach to securing compliance with the Equality Act 2010 as a service commissioner and provider and as an employer. 0.4 Merseytravel has an established track record of promoting and designing infrastructure, services and facilities that are fully accessible to all sectors of society, as part of its corporate vision of delivering world class customer services. This has included pioneering work in trialling low ﬂoor buses in the early 1990s, the development of accessible bus boarding points, codes of practice on disability issues, access guides, accessible rail stations and audible announcements on board local electric train services, as examples. It also operates one of the most comprehensive travel schemes for disabled people in the country, in addition to the demand responsive Merseylink service, for people with the greatest mobility needs. 0.5 Merseytravel’s comments on the questions raised by the Committee are as follows.

Questions 1. The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufﬁciently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? 1.1 Overall, Merseytravel considers that sufﬁcient legislation exists in relation to transport and access for people with disabilities. The principal problem concerns the myriad of powers, and the fragmented nature of roles and responsibilities across different modes of transport and across networks. Road, rail, private hire vehicles, public buildings and the public highway/public realm are all subject to different regimes or differing timescales for compliance. This makes lines of accountability from a member of the public’s point of view ambiguous, especially when it comes to responsibility for enforcement. 1.2 For example, the Equality Act 2010 consolidates the legislation previously set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 to increase access to transport services and infrastructure by disabled people. Ev 128 Transport Committee: Evidence

1.3 Under the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998, all rail vehicles must be compliant and fully accessible by 1 January 2020, except for those which are specifically exempt under Order. The United Kingdom’s leadership in the area has now been recognised at a European level, and the European Commission has come forward with new standards for the accessibility of trains. 1.4 The Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998 have now been superseded by European Directive 2008/ 164/EC which applies Europe-wide standards of rail accessibility. These were adopted by the UK on 1 July 2008. These new standards represent a step change in the accessibility of trains on mainland Europe. In 2010 the Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Non-Interoperable Rail System) Regulations 2010 came into force and brought light rail into line with other rail vehicles, including an end date for compliance of 1 January 2020. There is also an ongoing programme to refurbish rail stations to make them accessible for all. 1.5 Accessibility requirements for buses and coaches are set out in the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000, as amended, that came into force on 30 August 2000. They require all buses and coaches, both old and new, to comply from 2017 for buses and from 2020 for coaches. There is a further question as to the extent to which disabled passengers can and should be assisted into a vehicle. There are also questions regarding accessibility of bus stations and terminals, which are largely the responsibility of local authorities in enforcement terms. 1.6 Accessibility of buildings and the street environment tends to be covered by the Town and Country Planning Act and the Building Regulations. Aviation and shipping are covered differently as well. Access champions also differ from mode to mode with various bodies such as Passenger Focus, CAA, Passenger Shipping Association, local authorities and transport authorities all having some remit on these issues. 1.7 As such, in terms of door-to-door journeys, there is a myriad of legislation covering accessibility, which can be confusing. There is no single regulator or accountable body for transport accessibility. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) provided a valuable role as a “champion” for disabled people previously, but Government now wishes to abolish this body. This is considered a retrograde step. 1.8 This complex legislative framework prevents the holistic implementation of access for all to buildings, streets and individual transport modes in a consistent way. As a result there is no single, coherent system or accountability across the door-to-door journey and standards often differ. The same is true of information and support that is provided by public and private sector bodies. 1.9 Finally, although there are significant moves due to the Equality Act 2010 legislation and related legislation to improve the accessibility of all modes of transport, to buildings and the general environment, there remains a lag between the introduction of legislation, and the delivery and mainstreaming of legislative requirements. This raises the importance of non-statutory codes of practice and best practice guidelines in the intervening period, with a view to legislative requirements being satisfied or exceeded, wherever possible.

2. The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares 2.1 Legibility and information on accessibility of the transport network is crucial to enable disabled people to have the knowledge, confidence and support to use it. Unfortunately there are still gaps and weaknesses in provision currently. There is often a lack of universal, real time information across the network on the availability or running of accessible buses on a particular bus route at a particular time. This uncertainty can frequently discourage disabled users from the transport network. This can vary by franchise or by operator, as standards are rarely consistent or stipulated at a national level. This is not conducive to promoting more use of the public transport network by everyone. 2.2 Timetables can be difficult to navigate and there is a need to be creative when engaging with people who struggle to understand the network. This can include one-to-one support through travel advisors and travel “buddies”, but which are typically reliant on scarce revenue funding sources to sustain. The Traveline telephone helpline service is often the most accessible option, being easy to use, and personalised. 2.3 Increasing the use of web-based technology, and mobile web-based technology is a powerful way in which to make travel information available in alternative formats for people with a range of disabilities. Allied to this is the need for all service providers to make information available in a consistent format, and there is a role for government in co-ordinating such requirements. 2.4 In terms of service alterations, through correspondence with disabled transport users, Merseytravel is aware of serious difficulties arising when bus operators switch vehicles without adequate, or indeed, any warning. This can come as a result of emergencies such as vehicle failure, and where an alternative, accessible bus with a ramp or level access is not available. However, if an anticipated, accessible vehicle does not arrive, disabled passenger are left unable to board the vehicle and make a journey. This is a particular problem on services operated by smaller operators, who have smaller fleets and no back-up vehicles. Affected passengers have advised Merseytravel that the consequences of such changes could be resolved by a simple requirement for the transport industry to make information about service changes available to disabled customers in advance, or as soon as problems become known. This need not be costly or arduous, and could be in the form of a help line number, text message or a telephone “app” which could inform disabled people (or else via bodies such Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 129

as Merseytravel) of changes planned in the next 24 hours to bus fleets or routes which would affect a person’s ability to travel. This would at least allow alternative, informed arrangements to be made by passengers. 2.5 Bus services that are procured by Merseytravel must be accessible, as per the conditions of contract. Merseytravel can thus assure users of a minimum level of service and accessibility. On the commercial network, Merseytravel recognises the need for a consistent level of quality, as demonstrated by its commitment to Statutory Quality Partnerships, in partnership with the local authorities and bus operators, to commit all parties to high and consistent standards. 2.6 Looking at local action being taken to improve the accessibility of information, Merseytravel for example is currently working with the charity “Guide Dogs for the Blind”, who are developing a downloadable MP3 file which will audibly describe the layout of particular bus station on approach. 2.7 Access audits of transport interchanges such as bus stations, or road crossings are of great importance for many reasons, not least to help identify issues that need to be communicated or publicised to disabled passengers. The importance of regular audits needs to be promoted by government. 2.8 As noted in Q1, DDA legislation in 2017 will require bus companies to have compliant vehicles across their fleet and many operators are in the process of upgrading their fleets to accommodate this. However this is a phased process and for smaller companies, there is a lag in the intervening period. This can result in the practical problems outlined in the example above and which can render disabled people unable to travel or be disadvantaged, potentially at short notice. As such, the role of technology is considered critical, coupled with a requirement for transport operators to make information available in a consistent and timely way.

3. The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 3.1 Staff attitudes and behaviour play a large part in passengers’ ability and willingness to travel. It is essential that transport staff are fully trained on equality and customer service to World Host standard (or equivalent) to deal with these issues. Good progress has been made in ensuring that transport staff have the appropriate disability equality awareness training to support disabled passengers and enable them to travel confidently and in comfort. Merseytravel, through its Merseylearn programme, has developed specialist training for bus operators and taxi operators. Such training also needs to be recognised by government as a core element of the licensing regime, and potentially, as part of the Public Service Vehicle (PSV) system. It is considered that knowledge of peoples’ differing needs and customer care is as important a skill as having the required competence to drive a PSV vehicle. To this end, Merseytravel recommends that the new system associated with Certificates of Professional Competence (CPC) for PSV licence holders should include specific training around disability awareness and also customer care. 3.2 The Secure Stations Scheme is designed to improve security standards at overground and underground rail stations for passengers and staff. While the Scheme is essentially about improving security at stations, it also encourages rail operators to work with partners to improve the whole journey experience for passengers, including disabled passengers. But there is no equivalent scheme for transport facilities for other transport modes. 3.3 Disabled people can suffer from harassment and hate crime and this is a barrier both to themselves as travellers and to their guardians who fear for their safety. Merseytravel is an active supporter of the Stop Hate campaign through its TravelSafe. Working in partnership with Merseyside Police, Liverpool, St Helens and Wirral Councils, and the Stop Hate charity, which provides 24 hour support and information to people affected by Hate Crime. The campaign will result in 800 buses and 200 poster sites carrying the Stop Hate UK branding across Merseyside. There will also be local awareness raising events across the region. 3.4 Merseytravel administers a small travel training programme which seeks to enable people with various disabilities to access the public transport network and increase their life choices. Learning to use the network is a rite of passage undertaken by young people. However people with learning disabilities cannot always take this route, and need additional support to access public transport. One-to-one travel support of this nature needs to be acknowledged in government policy so that it is mainstreamed and properly resourced. In addition, the inability to fund such revenue-based initiatives locally through transport capital funds from the Department for Transport is a long-standing problem, which can result in training programmes and related initiatives being reliant on short-term or bid funds, making them, “stop-start” in nature.

4. What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 4.1 On the lessons learnt from the Olympics/Paralympics, then it is considered that the success lay in the fact that the Olympics were planned with accessible, sustainable transport as an integral component, aided by the identiﬁcation of budgets, from the outset. 4.2 This highlights the importance of integrating land use planning, service planning and transport provision, so that accessibility is planned from the inception of a project or service, not as an add-on. This will ultimately result in better, more attractive, more useable developments that are accessible to all. Ev 130 Transport Committee: Evidence

4.3 The Olympics/Paralympics was also an example of a site and destination designed with sustainable transport as its primary mode, rather than being designed solely with access by car in mind. It is often the case that developments built solely around the needs of the car exclude people travelling by other modes, including public transport. This can have a disproportionate effect on people with disabilities and who do not have access to a car or private transport. Such problems then lead to the need to retroﬁt costly access solutions to rectify a situation (eg supported bus services), which is usually more expensive than making accessibility a core requirement from the outset.

4.4 A further lesson from the Olympics/Paralympics was the integration of travel and venue ticketing and information, coupled with the dedicated bus and rail services that supplemented the conventional services. Equally, the availability of ﬂeets of motorised buggies and people movers within the Olympic Park catered for the needs of people who were disabled, elderly or inﬁrm.

4.5 The role of the “games makers” was signiﬁcant in supporting access by people with disabilities (and equally without), by making information, travel advice and directions easily available at interchanges and arrival points. The “games makers” principle could equally be applied to other major events eg the Commonwealth Games in 2014 and on regular basis across the transport and tourism industries as a mainstream model of delivery. This needs to be addressed as one of the legacies from the Games and as one of the great successes of the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics in London. There is considered to be a role for “games maker”-style support at travel facilities (eg bus, coach and rail facilities) to support passengers with information and support, and provide a friendly welcoming, and reassuring presence.

4.6 Finally, the facilities that were designed and made freely available at the Olympic venues, such as toilets, seats, rest areas and water stations, need to be recognised as major successes and lessons that can be carried into the future. Such facilities are critical determinants for many disabled people and can make the difference between having the conﬁdence to make a journey or not. January 2013

Written evidence from Transport for London (TfL) (DAT 67)

Introduction

1.1 Transport for London (TfL) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Committee’s inquiry into the effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people.

1.2 Accessible transport is a key enabler for independent living and opens up opportunities for disabled people to access education, employment and health and other essential services.

1.3 The UK Government, through the Equality Act 2010, and the related Public Sector Equality Duties, as well as in previous legislation such as the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Disability Equality Duty (DED) 2005, has responded to the needs expressed by disabled people and their organisations to gain equal access to goods and services. It is fair to say that the existence of this legislation has accelerated the improvements to accessibility in the UK, and in London, which can now claim to be one of the most accessible large cities in the world.

1.4 TfL, as the transport authority for London, is accountable for the accessibility of a comprehensive and complex transport network and has worked closely with the Department for Transport (DfT) and others to ensure that regulations such as the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) 1998 are developed to take into account the speciﬁc nature of its services. Further opportunities to look at how the regulations could be even better adapted to metro services would be welcome

1.5 TfL has led the way in working with the bus industry to develop a bus ﬂeet that is wheelchair accessible, and since 2005, all of London’s buses have been low-ﬂoor and wheelchair accessible. Since 2008, all of London’s buses are also equipped with audio visual information.

1.6 The DED also placed the requirement to involve disabled people in the development of services. In response to this, TfL set up its own Independent Disability Advisory Group (IDAG), which has worked with TfL on changes to the physical accessibility of the network, including rolling stock, vehicles and the street environment, staff training and employment policies, engaging with disabled customers and service users and improvements to information.

1.7 Whilst it could be argued that improvements to accessibility may have happened without legislation, it is also fair to say in response, that the rate of change may have been considerably slower, and to this extent at least, the legislation can be said to have been effective.

1.8 TfL also believes that the involvement of disabled people, (as required under the DED), early on in the design and development of services has proven to be beneﬁcial in terms of focusing resources where they would make the most difference. This becomes ever more important when there is a need to bring costs down. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 131

1.9 The involvement of disabled people also builds conﬁdence in the services being provided and the outcome of the investment can then be seen in more disabled people living independent lives and being able to play a full role in society, which has been a key driver in current and previous legislation.

The effectiveness of legislation—is it working? 2.1 Since its foundation in 2000, TfL has been obliged, first under section 404 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and now by virtue of the Equality Act 2010, to promote equality of opportunity. This has meant that from the outset, improvements to accessibility of the transport system have been a priority and needed to be demonstrated both in terms of capital investment and improvements to information and customer service standards. 2.2 The introduction of the DED added the requirement on public bodies, including TfL, to not only pay due regard, but also to demonstrate how they involve disabled people in the development of their services. TfL responded to this requirement by setting up its own IDAG to advise it on strategic accessibility issues. 2.3 TfL also developed its engagement with disabled people’s organisations such as the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB), Action on Hearing Loss, Guide Dogs and Whizz-Kidz and has worked closely with other bodies such as Transport for All and London TravelWatch. TfL continues to develop and refine its engagement with disabled people to ensure that it is asking the right questions of the right groups at the right time. An example of this can be seen in how TfL involved disabled people in the development of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) and its statutory Accessibility Implementation Plan (AIP). 2.4 TfL’s IDAG provided a strategic direction in how the draft AIP should be put together, focusing on the whole journey approach, improving the journey experience across all modes and reducing the journey time difference between step-free and non step-free journeys. 2.5 TfL then convened a “Citizens’ Jury” in 2011 to assess and respond to its approach to improving accessibility in the medium to long term. The Citizens’ Jury was recruited independently and was made up of disabled people from across London who were provided with detailed briefings on what was proposed in the AIP. The Jury members then made contact with senior managers from across TfL to discuss aspects of the draft AIP on which they wanted more information or to question assumptions made in the draft. The Jury then made certain recommendations which TfL incorporated into the AIP. 2.6 This inclusive approach means that discussions with disabled customers and service users can take place in a way where they feel that they have sufficient information available to them in order to make appropriate comment and suggestions for improvement. All of this takes place in the context of both parties being aware of the legislative requirements, which was useful for both parties. 2.7 The executive summary of the AIP is attached to this submission (Appendix 1).

Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) 3.1 The RVAR are an extremely effective tool for improving the accessibility of rolling stock on light rail networks. They offer clear guidance on all aspects of design, which leave transport providers such as London Underground with no doubt as to what they need to do to comply with the law. 3.2 This legal framework and the fact that the ORR can ultimately prevent a transport provider from running rolling stock which is non-compliant, provide a huge incentive to comply with the RVAR’s requirements. It ensures that money and resources are prioritised for accessibility. However; the very prescriptive nature of the regulations does sometimes restrict an operator’s scope to be flexible in how to deliver access on trains; sometimes directing resources in order to “meet the law” rather than to provide suitable access. 3.3 Within the strict confines of RVAR, there is some room for pragmatism and common sense. Support and advice from DfT is always at hand, however the processes for enacting pragmatism can be over complicated, bureaucratic and burdensome. Only the Secretary of State is able to grant exemptions from specific requirements. 3.4 For example when the rolling stock on the Victoria Line was upgraded, there was a requirement to provide level access to all platforms served by these new trains. However at Pimlico station, there are no existing or planned step-free routes or interchanges and trains do not terminate or reverse there. Therefore there is no benefit in providing level access and the DfT granted an exemption accordingly. However, although this “Pimlico Principle” has become the agreed standard approach between DfT and London Underground with regard to level access provision; London Underground will still have to seek an exemption (via the Secretary of State) for each station we wish to apply the principle to. 3.5 This pragmatic approach aims to ensure that resources can be focussed specifically where they provide benefit and enhances the effectiveness of the legislation. However, sometimes scarce resources are wasted in either “demonstrating” London Underground has complied with RVAR or in enacting the exemption process. 3.6 The RVAR provide a good and acceptable standard of accessibility, however, one possible drawback of this is that it does not encourage the development of creative ideas which could ultimately speed the evolution Ev 132 Transport Committee: Evidence

(and perhaps even revolution) of accessible train design. Any deviation from the standard requirements would again require an exemption and this may discourage train designers from trying something new. 3.7 The RVAR continue to evolve. London Underground were able to work with DfT to inﬂuence some changes in the 2010 regulations which we felt better met the needs of our customers and we would welcome the opportunity to be closely involved in their future development; especially to ensure that good use of public money continues to be made in this area, particularly with respect to conversion of old assets such as rolling stock prior to replacement.

How effectively is the legislation enforced? 4.1 TfL believes that the enforcement of legislation relating to accessibility of transport has been at an appropriate level, taking into account the time required to change operating practices, renew vehicles and rolling stock and increase step-free provision at London Underground and London Overground stations. 4.2 Disabled people and their organisations, like other groups within the community, continue to lobby for further improvements and, as TfL has shown, these discussions have led to it focusing on the things that are important to them. The Mayor of London and TfL are committed to continuing these improvements and furthering the involvement of disabled people in the development of its services and to keep disabled people up to date on the progress being made.

5. Accessibility of Information 5.1 Investment in the accessibility of infrastructure, rolling stock and new vehicles needs to go hand in hand with improvements to the accessibility of information. Disabled people have told us that they need to know what services are available and how they will be informed if disruption to services occurs. TfL provides a range of accessible information both on-line, over the telephone and in a variety of printed formats. 5.2 TfL also ensures that it meets with disabled people across London on a regular basis to let them know about the services it provides, so that disabled people can make informed choices about how they travel. In December 2012, TfL published “Your Accessible Transport Network”39. This document outlines what is already in place and what improvements disabled people can expect to see during this Mayoral term. The document sets out four key principles, the first of which is: “To provide clearer, simpler and more personal accessible transport advice so you can make informed travel choices more easily”. 5.3 The key improvements outlined for accessibility of information are: By summer 2013: — Conducting an end-to-end review of signage and wayfinding throughout the Tube network to make it easier for people to navigate through stations across the whole system. We will also review complex step-free interchanges such as Green Park and London Bridge to make it simpler for passengers needing these routes, with new signs being introduced from summer 2013. — Replacing the highly effective accessibility signage that was introduced for the London 2012 Games with distinctive permanent signs which highlight step-free routes and accessible boarding points. — Reviewing all the information we produce about accessibility, including improving the way that step- free advice is displayed on the standard Tube map, in consultation with disabled people. This will make it clearer which stations have level access throughout and which are step-free in the station but have a gap between the platform and the train. — Working with Network Rail and the Association of Train Operating Companies to produce a step- free rail map for London, including the rail services we don’t operate. This will give an overview of step-free access across all rail services in the Capital for the first time. — Redeveloping the transport accessibility section of our website so that the information it gives about our services is simpler, clearer and more consistent across all types of transport. — Making available real-time travel apps for smartphones in accessible formats. We will work with developers to produce apps that make our real-time information for the bus and Tube networks accessible, particularly for people with sight loss, and motor and learning disabilities. — Making the step-free Tube guide available in smartphone apps. For the first time we will publish Tube accessibility data electronically so that developers can incorporate detailed information about access into their apps. This will include the information contained in the step-free Tube guide, locations of level access areas on platforms and information about toilet provision. — Introducing a new accessibility Twitter feed so we can communicate directly with you to raise awareness of new schemes and services that improve accessibility. 39 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/gettingaround/transportaccessibility/1167.aspx Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 133

In 2014 we will have: — Completely redeveloped our website with clearer, easier to read content, designed to work across a range of different devices. You will start to see improvements next year, as we introduce single accounts so you’ll only ever need to log in once with one password to access all our online services. We will also introduce a new online customer service and complaints system. With all our online developments we will maintain high levels of accessibility, meeting and exceeding statutory standards. — Upgraded our Journey Planner to include further information on the accessibility of the network. This will include providing accessible routes that plan in real-time around service disruptions and the availability of lifts and escalators. When planning journeys, you will be able to specify your accessibility requirements in relation to step-free access, escalator provision, walking distances within stations and use of stairs. You will also be able to save journey preferences, including access requirements, for future searches.

6. The Provision of Assistance by Public Transport Staff and Staff Awareness of the Needs of People with Different Disabilities 6.1 For some disabled people, accessibility to the network relies on assistance from members of staff. TfL operational staff and staff employed by third party providers, such as London bus drivers, London Overground staff and DLR Passenger Service Agents, are given comprehensive disability awareness training. 6.2 TfL is committed to improving customer experience for all of its service users and is working with disabled and older people’s organisations to ensure that the training we provide meets their needs. In particular, London Underground is planning the following enhancements to its training regime: — Up-skill training staff in LU’s Network Operational Learning department, to give them a deeper and more rounded understanding of the issues faced by disabled people using public transport. — Create centres of excellence at five key stations across the LU network, with extensive training delivered in partnership with a disabled persons’ organisation. — Provide additional disability awareness training to staff being promoted to station management roles, enabling them to teach and model their new skills to other station staff. 6.3 Furthermore, TfL will continue to work with bus operators to ensure that drivers are equipped to deliver accessible services. 6.4 London’s 24,000 bus drivers receive extensive training above and beyond that normally given to bus drivers throughout the UK, in the form of a bespoke BTEC vocational award. This includes customer service and disability awareness training. 6.5 TfL also publishes the “Big Red Book”, a handbook issued to bus drivers which gives clear guidance on the level of service expected from them. It contains a comprehensive section on how to meet the needs of disabled customers including: — Guidance on pulling in close to the kerb at bus stops; — Kneeling the bus to assist passengers who need help boarding; — Allowing older and disabled passengers time to hold on or get to a seat before driving off; and — How to offer assistance to anyone who might need additional information or support to use the bus. 6.6 The latest edition, published in August 2012, contains updated guidance on access to buses for mobility scooters—making it simple to recognise which are safe to use on buses. 6.7 We will continue to review and update the Big Red Book. The next edition will reflect the new initiatives that are identified as part of a bus driver training review. 6.8 London has seen a significant rise in the bus ridership in recent years and some wheelchair users have found it difficult to board buses due to the wheelchair space being occupied by a child’s buggy. In November 2012, following extensive engagement with disabled people, parents, drivers and bus supervisors, TfL launched a new information campaign which clarifies how the space is to be used. New posters have been put on 5,000 London buses, and on-board, i-bus announcements have been revised. TfL will refresh the campaign in February and will evaluate its impact later in the year. 6.9 Staff responsible for the design of services and the development of strategies also need to be aware of accessibility issues and TfL provides training on assessing the impact of services and disability awareness.

What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its success? 7.1 In preparation for the London 2012 Games, TfL carried out extensive analysis of how best to ensure that the network was accessible to visitors to the Games and disabled Londoners who needed to carry out their own day to day activities. The Games provided TfL with an opportunity to showcase all that it had achieved as well as using it as a spring board for further improvements. Ev 134 Transport Committee: Evidence

7.2 It was clear that information provision was a key factor in the success in ensuring TfL met the needs of disabled people. The “Get Ahead of the Games” message and information about how to plan journeys and avoid “hot spots” was particularly welcomed by disabled people. 7.3 Other innovative accessibility solutions, such as providing manual boarding ramps at key London Underground stations, opened up sections of the network to wheelchair users, without causing delays to boarding and thus affecting service frequency. TfL will maintain mobile boarding ramps at the stations where they were used during the Games and it is looking at rolling them out at other step free stations where practical to do so. 7.4 The Games provided TfL with the opportunity to test the “whole journey approach” to accessibility. TfL monitored disabled people’s journey experience during the Games, both via social media and through other customer research methods including individual video logs undertaken by disabled people throughout Games time. On the whole, the data from this research demonstrates that TfL’s accessibility performance improved during Games time and was even better than many disabled people expected it to be. 7.5 A key success of the Games was the volunteers who supported their front-line colleagues, providing assistance to customers (Games Makers and Travel Ambassadors). All of the volunteers were provided with training and information on how to provide assistance to disabled people. The content of this training was developed with the input of disabled people and their organisations. 7.6 Dedicated Accessibility Assistants were deployed at key stations where demand for lift usage was high. In preparation for the Games a detailed analysis of lift capacity was carried out across the London Underground and Rail networks. This enabled mitigations to be put in place to minimise potential breakdowns and also brought alternative lifts into service at Westminster and North Greenwich, which meant that wheelchair users and others were able to exit the station quickly and safely. 7.7 TfL is looking at ways in which Travel Ambassadors can be used in the future, particularly during major events. The use of social media such as “Twitter” and “Facebook” as ways in which information can be provided in real time proved to be useful and TfL will continue to develop the information it provides via these platforms.

8. Conclusions 8.1 TfL believes that legislation has played a crucial part in improvements to accessibility in transport. It has enabled it to engage with service users and third parties such as bus operators and address the issues within a mutually understood context. 8.2 The legislation and the Public Sector Duties have provided TfL with a platform for service improvement, without being prescriptive or cumbersome and thus stiﬂing innovation. 8.3 TfL would welcome the opportunity to be involved in any further development of legislation, regulations or codes of practice designed to improve the accessibility of transport for disabled people. January 2013

APPENDIX 1 TAKING FORWARD THE MAYOR’S TRANSPORT STRATEGY ACCESSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1. Foreword London’s transport network has become significantly more accessible over the past 10 years. Improvements include the entire fleet of 8,500 buses becoming low-floor and wheelchair accessible (with the exception of Heritage Routemasters) and the introduction of the iBus and Countdown systems which have transformed bus service information. In addition, the proportion of the Capital’s 19,000 bus stops which meet accessibility specifications has increased from around 30% to more than 60% since 2008. Accessibility of streets has been improved through Better Streets and other public realm initiatives, two fully step-free extensions have opened on the Docklands Light Railway (DLR), and service on the London Overground has been enhanced beyond recognition, and includes six new accessible stations. The proportion of all stations and stops across London’s rail-based public transport system with step-free routes between street and platform is approaching 40% and will rise to 45% by 2015. It is expected to reach 50% before the end of the decade. The Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) sets out funded and unfunded improvements to 2031 in an Accessibility Implementation Plan. This report provides greater detail on when, where and how the improvements in the AIP will be carried out and what the outcomes will be. The Capital’s transport system is undergoing a colossal investment programme, the majority of which is detailed in the Transport for London (TfL) Business Plan. It includes schemes such as Crossrail, the Tube upgrades and Access for All step-free station projects. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 135

The 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games are not only acting as a catalyst for accessibility improvements but offer a great opportunity to showcase the improvements made in recent years and tackle perceptual and attitudinal barriers that may exist.

Disabled people have told us that they value the reassurance and assistance provided by well trained staff particularly highly. TfL and disabled groups work closely together to develop and deliver staff training programmes and monitor the standard of service. TfL has demonstrated through the London Overground how improved staff service contributes to higher levels of customer satisfaction and are seeking to replicate this across the Capital’s suburban rail network.

Information technology has a part to play too. Technological advances are already bringing us better journey planning, navigation and communication, with the potential for further improvements in areas such as reliability and targeted travel information.

As a result of all these improvements, disabled people now have more choice in how they get around London and can do so with greater independence than ever before. But TfL knows that there is still much more to be done.

Disabled people have told us through their comments in a public consultation held on a draft version of this report that the time it takes to make a journey is an important accessibility element.

TfL has developed proposals to reduce the journey time difference between step-free and non step-free journeys and it has done this by looking at the journeys disabled people make. Like all customers, disabled people want a safe reliable and comfortable network that they can afford to use.

All of these issues are addressed in this report, having been developed with the input and insight of disabled customers and service users as well as with the advice and support of TfL’s Independent Disability Advisory Group (IDAG).

TfL also held a Citizens’ Jury to scrutinise the public consultation draft of this report and make recommendations for improvement. The jury was comprised of disabled people from across London. TfL is grateful for their contribution to the development of this report.

The committed investment in London’s transport system, together with the principles and priorities for further investment will transform the journey experience for disabled people. TfL will continue to work with disabled people and other service users to achieve the best outcomes for them. Sir Peter Hendy CBE Commissioner, Transport for London

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

This report details the approach that will be taken to improve the accessibility of London’s transport system beyond committed investment programmes, and within the 2031 time horizon considered by the MTS. To establish the context for further enhancements, the current accessibility of the transport system and the improvements that will be achieved through the programme of committed investment are also described.

The MTS is London’s statutory transport strategy and was published in May 2010 following consultation with the public and the London Assembly. It sets out policies and proposals to manage and further develop the Capital’s transport system. It includes an Accessibility Implementation Plan that focuses on improving transport access.

This report provides further detail to the content of the MTS Accessibility Implementation Plan. However, it does not change any elements of the MTS and therefore the MTS will not be reviewed or altered as a result of this report.

The development of this report follows a request made by the London Assembly Transport Committee in their November 2010 scrutiny of the accessibility of London’s transport system. A public consultation on a draft version took place between June and October 2011 and informed the creation of this report. The public consultation drew responses from a wide range of stakeholders. A large number of positive responses were received, which demonstrates the consensus and common understanding that has been achieved through development of this report and established ongoing engagement.

A consultation report is published alongside this document to provide further detail on the consultation process, the input received and how it is reﬂected in this revised report.

This executive summary is only intended to provide an overview of the content of the report. Please refer to relevant sections of this report for a comprehensive view of plans for that area. Ev 136 Transport Committee: Evidence

2. Context Improving the accessibility of London’s transport system benefits not only disabled people, but it also makes the transport system easier and more comfortable to use for everyone. Much of London’s transport infrastructure was built at a time without legislation defining accessibility standards. As a result, some of the city’s transport system, especially the railways, is inaccessible to some people and not as convenient for others to use as it could be. Schemes to retrofit modern standards of accessibility are often expensive, disruptive and technically challenging. Therefore, it is a long-term project that will extend beyond the MTS timescales of 2031. London’s population is growing and ageing. More people living in the Capital are set to benefit from improved access to transport, however the proportion of people with mobility difficulties is expected to increase. A number of factors must work together to enable as many Londoners as possible the freedom to travel independently, including by public transport. London’s transport infrastructure (ranging from pavements and road crossings to stations, trains and buses) must be as accessible as possible. The manner in which public transport services are delivered must be accessible, from staff assistance to information provision. People must have the knowledge to use the public transport system and the accessibility equipment associated with it, such as bus ramps or station lifts. Furthermore, people must have the confidence to travel independently and the reassurance that they will not be stranded should something go wrong. Committed and proposed improvements to make London’s transport system as accessible as possible will enable independent travel for more people. However, dedicated door-to-door transport provision will remain an important element of future services.

3. Recent improvements, committed investment and MTS identified further indicative schemes London’s transport system has become more accessible in recent years. Since 2005 the Capital’s entire bus fleet has been low-floor wheelchair accessible (with the exception of “Heritage” routes); the proportion of accessible bus stops has more than doubled since early 2008 to more than 60%; and nearly 40% of all stops and stations across London’s rail-based network have step-free routes between street and platform. This is expected to exceed 50% by 2020. In addition, a record 1.4 million Dial-a-Ride trips were made in 2010–11—around 200,000 more than in 2007–08—and 1.9 million Taxicard journeys were undertaken in 2010–11—500,000 more than in 2007–08. Additionally, new and refurbished trains, public realm and pedestrian road crossing improvements, innovative journey planning and real-time travel information tools, plus a popular travel mentoring scheme, have significantly contributed to improving accessibility of the transport system. Furthermore, TfL has established strong links with representative disabled groups. Well-established forums of engagement have guided the design of transport schemes and had a strong influence over staff training and the operation of the transport system. The benefits achieved by recent improvements are reflected in the 2011 All London Survey where more than half of respondents with a disability or long-term illness cited transport as one of the best things about living in the Capital, compared to 46% of other people. Further significant improvements will be achieved through the committed programme of investment. For example, Crossrail, the Tube line upgrades and Thameslink will transform accessibility to and within central London by rail-based public transport. Furthermore, the continuing programme of urban realm schemes, the New Bus for London, improvements in information provision and further step-free stations and accessible bus stops will ensure continuing improvements across the Capital. The committed programme of investment generally covers the period to 2015, with the exception of major infrastructure schemes such as Crossrail where the commitment extends to completion of the project. Beyond the committed programme, further investment in the transport system will be required to cater for London’s population and employment growth, despite the very constrained financial situation. The MTS identifies a number of major infrastructure projects, such as the Northern line extension to Battersea and Crossrail 2, that form the basis of assumptions for major infrastructure schemes made in this report. Major schemes will transform access to some public transport corridors. However, to achieve an equal spatial distribution of accessible transport local accessibility initiatives will continue to play a vital role. These include public realm, accessible bus stop and individual step-free station schemes.

4. Summary of improvements The following sections provide a high-level overview of the approach to further improve accessibility beyond committed investment. Please refer to relevant sections of the main report for further details. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 137

(a) Journey planning Developments in technology will create opportunities to improve accuracy of information (especially real time) and tailor it to the individual. Furthermore, with an increasing number of formats and channels, the challenges will be to ensure consistency, that interfaces are as accessible as possible and do not exclude people without internet access. Improvements currently being made include the provision of real-time information on public transport services, such as whether lifts are in service. Videos are now also provided to show how to use various features of the transport system such as bus boarding ramps. Travel mentoring will continue to be developed and be vital in equipping people with the skills and conﬁdence required to travel independently.

(b) Streets The extensive programme of public realm improvements, such as Better Streets, will continue to enhance the accessibility of streets in key London locations. Maintenance of road surfaces and enforcement against potential obstructions and illegal parking will ensure the beneﬁts of urban realm improvements are sustained over the long term. All signalised road crossings will meet the latest standards and the Pedestrian Countdown system will be expanded. Wayﬁnding will be improved through expansion of the Legible London scheme and there will be further investigation into the potential of Talking Tags.

(c) Buses The proportion of bus stops across London that meet accessibility standards will continue to rise. The introduction of the New Bus for London will further improve the accessibility of bus vehicles. New Countdown screens will be installed at many bus stops and awareness of the recently introduced internet and text message real-time service information will continue to increase. Review of the bus network will continue to include wide-ranging stakeholder engagement, including disabled user groups and take into account new developments, transport changes and access to health services.

(d) Tube and rail service standards The continuing programme of Underground station upgrades will increase accessibility across a wide range of features at a number of stations. The introduction of wide-aisle gates at all Tube stations where it is feasible will also enhance accessibility. A vast improvement could be realised through the introduction of London Overground service standards across the Capital’s suburban rail network. This could be achieved through devolution of franchise speciﬁcation powers for these services from national Government to the Mayor.

(e) Interchanges Interchange improvement works will be integral to improving public transport. Schemes will be designed according to TfL’s Interchange Best Practice Guidelines. The coordinated Interchange Management Programme will be expanded to ensure staff are well informed and able to provide assistance across an entire interchange.

(f) Step-free station access (from street to platform) The committed improvements will signiﬁcantly increase the number of step-free stations in the Capital and transform accessibility to and within central London. Beyond the commitments, major schemes such as new lines, extensions and station capacity upgrade projects will increase the coverage of step-free stations. In addition, a number of individual step-free station access schemes will be required to ensure a more equal spatial coverage of step-free access to the rail network across London. More than 50 stations have committed funding for the provision of step-free access between street and platform, the majority by 2015. Beyond the committed programme, within the period to 2031, it is anticipated that around 80 further stations could offer step-free access between street and platform. These would be either as an integral part of major infrastructure schemes or individual station works.

(g) Platform-to-train accessibility Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (RVAR) platform-to-train interface standards will be met on the Tube network with the introduction of new or refurbished rolling stock (where there is either step-free access between street and platform, step-free interchange or trains regularly terminate and the platform curvature does not prevent it). The challenge to meet RVAR platform-to-train standards on the National Rail network is generally greater because of the different rolling stock types that use the same platforms. Boarding ramps will continue to be used where necessary to enable access to trains on the National Rail network.

(h) Tube and National Rail trains All new and refurbished rolling stock ﬂeets will meet RVAR speciﬁcations, and include features such as wheelchair spaces, separate areas for luggage and baby buggies, audible and visual information, improved lighting and colour-contrasted handrails. Ev 138 Transport Committee: Evidence

(i) Staff availability, training and customer attitudes

Disabled user groups will continue to be closely involved in the design and, where feasible, delivery of staff training programmes. The Mayor and TfL will seek to ensure a greater consistency of staff availability and training across London’s rail-based public transport through lobbying for devolution of franchise speciﬁcation for the Capital’s suburban rail network. Mystery traveller surveys to monitor customer service will continue, including the disabled mystery traveller survey. The 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games provide a once in a generation opportunity to positively inﬂuence public attitude towards disabled people.

(j) Door-to-door transport

The provision of dedicated door-to-door transport and subsidised taxis will continue for those who are unable, or ﬁnd it very difﬁcult, to travel independently. The potential for improved customer service through closer coordination of service provision among operators will be examined further.

(k) Car driving and parking

The Blue Badge reform process and range of privileges and exemptions available to Blue Badge holders will continue to be supported. The 2011 London Plan provides clear guidance for the provision of disabled parking spaces at new developments. Where feasible the Mayor and TfL will take action to ensure car parks, petrol stations and new vehicle technologies are as accessible as possible for disabled people.

(l) Other areas

New licensed taxi (black cab) vehicles will continue to be wheelchair accessible and drivers will not charge for providing assistance to disabled people. The riverboat ﬂeet will continue to become more accessible through refurbishment and replacement and the Emirates Air Line will create a new accessible river crossing. The 2012 Games will provide an opportunity to raise awareness of the travel needs of disabled people and promote considerate behaviour among others. The London Plan contains a number of policies to ensure that new building development in the Capital contributes to creating an ever more accessible city.

5. Outcomes

The initiatives outlined in this report to improve transport accessibility will have a broad range of positive impacts across all the goals and outcomes identified in the MTS. The spatial coverage of stations with step- free access between street and platform will expand significantly, with the number of people living within 480 metres of a step-free station expected to approximately double by 2031. As a result, the average difference in public transport journey time between using the entire network and using only buses and stations with step- free access is anticipated to roughly halve by 2031. The accessibility of public transport to and within central London and its town centres will improve significantly, thereby enhancing access to the wide-ranging opportunities at these locations.

6. Cost, funding and delivery

Delivery of the enormous programme of committed investment in London’s transport system will continue. The cost of schemes to improve accessibility is often very substantial and securing funding for further investment beyond the committed programme is key to making further improvements

This report will inform further development of London’s ﬁve sub-regional transport strategies, borough Local Implementation Plans, preparation for TfL’s next business planning period (2015–2020) and TfL’s recommendations for investment by other stakeholders, for example, DfT’s Access for All programme.

Engagement with disabled people will be crucial in the deﬁnition of detailed delivery plans to ensure investment realises as many beneﬁts as possible.

7. Monitoring and reporting

Monitoring through regular customer satisfaction surveys and the annual Travel in London (TiL) report will continue. TfL’s Single Equality Scheme will be launched in 2012. It will incorporate actions from the MTS Accessibility Implementation Plan for the next three years and an annual progress report will be published. Feedback received through regular forums held with disabled groups and emerging best practices will be important in guiding both delivery works and further policy development. January 2013 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 139

Supplementary written evidence from Transport for London (TfL) (DAT 67A) During Stephen Golden’s oral evidence in connection with the above inquiry, Sarah Champion MP asked (Q111) about the reliability of Transport for London (TfL) services. In response, Stephen undertook to write to the Committee with further information on how this had improved. Our fifth Travel in London report provides the following overview of the performance trends of our services: Public transport in London has, over recent years, benefited from the longest run of sustained high operational performance and service provision ever recorded. All key indicators of service provision have shown a marked trend of improvement over the last decade, and this improved still further in the latest year: — A total of 72 million train kilometres were operated on the Underground in 2011–12, up from 69 million in 2010–11 and above the previous high of 71 million in 2008–09. Levels of service reliability reached new highs in 2011–12 and excess waiting times were 5.8 minutes, down from 6.5 minutes in 2010–11. — A record high of 490 million kilometres were operated on the bus network in 2011–12, up 1% from 486 million in 2010–11. Levels of service provision reached new levels in 2011–12 and excess waiting times match the “best ever” minimum of 1.0 minute first achieved in 2010–11. — Reliability continued to increase on the DLR, with the percentage of scheduled services operated increasing from 97.5% in 2010–11 to 97.7% in 2011–12. Further capacity has been created on the DLR with the introduction of three-car trains throughout the network. — Tramlink returned a reliability value of 98.9% of scheduled services operated—slightly down from the previous two years. — The overall performance of National Rail services in London improved in 2011–12, with the public performance measure for all but two train operating companies (TOCs) improving. — London Overground achieved a public performance measure of 97%, increasing to its highest ever level. — Journey time reliability on London’s road network has remained fairly constant, averaging between 89 and 90% for the past three years, although it is not yet possible to discern a clear directional trend for this indicator. Average vehicle delay in the central London morning peak increased slightly in 2011, up from 1.3 minutes per kilometre in both 2009 and 2010 to 1.4 minutes per kilometre. More data on service provision and performance trends can be found in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. The report can be accessed here: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/travel-in-london-report-5.pdf More recently, the reliability of London Underground specifically, measured by the amount of delays to passengers, has reached new levels having fallen by 20% over the past year. This improvement is reflected in independent customer satisfaction surveys which have recorded a new high of 84 out of 100. These figures come at the same time as passenger numbers continue to reach new levels with 1.229 billion journeys made last year. Please follow the link below for more information: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/27843.aspx May 2013

Written evidence from Community Transport Association (DAT 65) The CTA would like to submit the following as evidence to the Transport Committee’s Inquiry into the effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people. The effectiveness of legislation in this area and whether it is comprehensive, working or effectively enforced raise the following specific issues: — Concessionary travel regulations need to be extended and strengthened to include mandatory reimbursement of accessible community transport services (such as dial-a-ride run under Section19 Permits) so that disabled passengers can benefit from the same travel concessions as those that are able to use mainstream public transport. The reimbursement level should be at 100%—no generation factor should apply. — Section 22 Community Bus services need a fairer mechanism of concessionary travel reimbursement which recognises that they do not have the capacity to generate additional passenger trips. This is important in order to ensure that socially necessary (but economically marginal) local services can be operated in sustainable way. This will require a new methodology to establish a reasonable trip generation factor to ensure that such services are “no worse off” as a consequence of concessionary fares reimbursement levels. — Many community transport organisations take the time and trouble to ensure staff are trained in disability awareness, equality and other appropriate areas. Knowledge of disability issues and their effect on travelling passengers is much lower in the wider public transport network. Training standards (eg drivers CPC) should be required to include sufficient disability equality training. Ev 140 Transport Committee: Evidence

— European vehicle “type approval” rules have resulted in new minibuses being constructed to meet EU requirements. This has required an increased space for wheelchair users (which should improve passenger comfort and safety) but at the same time has reduced the numbers of wheelchair passengers that can be accommodated at any one time. If existing accessible minibuses are replaced with the same number of new type approved minibuses, then there will be a drop in wheelchair carrying capacity across the transport fleet. To maintain capacity would require, larger, heavier and more expensive minibuses that would be too heavy to be driven on a car driving licence gained since Jan 1st 1997. Some form of concession on driver licensing minibus weight limits would be beneficial. — All public transport operators should contribute towards and assist in the development of travel training in order to better improve services to disabled people and increase patronage. — The “separate fares” requirement on the Section 19 Permit operation of small wheelchair accessible vehicles appears to prevent community organisations from delivering socially necessary local authority contracts. Improved guidance/interpretation to ensure that such transport can take place would be very beneficial. — Many wheelchair users are being transported in non-crash tested wheelchairs, using passenger restraints without cant rail mountings (ie without any whiplash protection). Regulations should be considered which would require cant rail restraint belt points and head rests to improve safety standards for travelling wheelchair users. January 2013

Written evidence from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (DAT 26)

Introduction

1. The CAA welcomes the Transport Committee’s Inquiry as an opportunity to inform the Committee members of the effectiveness of legislation protecting the rights of disabled air passengers and to give an insight into the experiences of the UK’s disabled air passengers in general.

Regulation EC 1107/2006

2. In 2008, European legislation—Regulation (EC) 1107/2006 (PRM Regulation)—came into force in full, providing legal rights for disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility (PRMs) to access air travel. The Regulation covers all EU airports and ﬂights on all airlines from these airports. It also covers ﬂights from a third country to an EU airport if the carrier is registered in an EU country.

3. The Regulation represented a considerable change in the provision of assistance for PRMs. It made it an offence to deny someone access to a ﬂight on the grounds of a disability or impairment, except where there are speciﬁc safety restrictions. It also obliged industry to provide appropriate assistance throughout the journey at no additional cost to the passenger.

4. The Regulation is wide ranging, covering the passenger journey from a designated arrival point to a designated departure point at the airport (car park, train station etc.). It specifically requires: 5. Non-discrimination—the Regulation imposes obligations on airlines, travel agents and tour operators not to refuse a reservation or boarding on the grounds of disability, except where carriage is unsafe or where carriage is physically impossible (ie the size of the aircraft or its doors, makes the embarkation or carriage of the PRM physically impossible). 6. Sharing passenger information (pre-notification)—PRMs should request assistance at least 48 hours before travel either with the airline directly or through a travel agent. This request is then passed to the airline and airport. Even if the request from the passenger is made within 48 hours of travel or if no request is made the airline and airport must still do all they reasonably can to provide assistance. 7. Assistance provided by airports—airports must provide assistance for PRMs, at no extra cost, to ensure they are able to take their flight. If required, the assistance must be available throughout their entire airport experience, from arrival at a designated point at the airport (car park, train station etc) to the gate (generally via a wheelchair or electric buggy), boarding the aircraft, stowing hand luggage, to disembarking from the aircraft and being transported to the designated point at their destination airport. 8. Service quality standards—airports must set service quality standards in consultation with airport users and organisations representing PRMs. Airports used by more than150,000 passengers a year must publish their service standards. 9. Assistance provided by airlines—airlines must provide assistance without any additional charge. This includes the carriage of assistance dogs, medical equipment and up to two pieces of mobility equipment, as well as assistance in getting to the toilet and reasonable adjustments for seating. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 141

Industry guidance and best practice 10. The Department for Transport’s Code of Practice on access to air travel for disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility was ﬁrst issued in March 2003. It is aimed at all those involved in air travel including travel agents, tour operators, UK airlines, UK airports, ground handling companies and retailers. The Code is guidance material and is not legally binding. It sets out the requirements of the PRM Regulation and Equality Act, in addition to recommend best practice. 11. There is also international guidance and best practice in the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s Manual on access to air transport by persons with disabilities and the European Civil Aviation Conference’s Document 30 section 5 Facilitation of the transport of persons with reduced mobility. These documents are designed to achieve consistency in policy and in the application of measures among international and European countries. The European Commission has also produced Interpretative Guidelines on the PRM Regulation.

CAA’s role 12. In the UK, the CAA is the National Enforcement Body for the PRM Regulation. The Regulation is enforced in the UK under the Civil Aviation (Access to Air Travel for Disabled Persons and Persons with Reduced Mobility) Regulations. Under the Statutory Instrument, the CAA is limited to criminal powers for enforcement of the Regulation. However, further action is currently being considered by the DfT in regards to providing us with civil sanction enforcement powers. This would enable us to secure changes in companies’ policies and procedures rather than just impose penalties for past offences. We believe that criminal powers do not give us sufficient flexibility to enforce the Regulation because they are generally not proportionate to the type of offences we see committed. We therefore currently rely to a large extent on informal action and persuasion to ensure compliance with the Regulation and to bring about changes to industry practices that benefit PRM passengers in general. 13. We are also the designated complaints handler for the PRM Regulation for England, Wales and Scotland, having taken over the role from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) in October 2012. The General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland handles complaints from passengers in Northern Ireland. We offer advice through our telephone helpline and through information on the CAA website. We also take up complaints with airlines and airports on behalf of PRMs who are not able to gain a satisfactory resolution themselves. Under a Europe wide agreement, the CAA handles complaints from PRMs departing from all UK airports and from those arriving at UK airports (if the flight is from a country outside the EU and the carrier is EU registered). 14. In addition, we also offer advice and take up complaints on all other issues relating to disabled air passengers. This can include in relation to the Equality Act (the UK Equality Act does not apply on board aircraft but does apply to air travel in relation to the use of booking services and airport facilities.

Effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufficiently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? 15. In 2010 the consultants Steer, Davis, Gleave carried out an Evaluation of the PRM Regulation40 across all EU Member States for the European Commission. This wide ranging review of the effectiveness of the Regulation concluded that most airports and airlines had implemented the requirements of the Regulation. However, the report stated that there was a significant variation in the quality of service provided by airports to PRMs and in the policies of airlines and airports. 16. The CAA’s experience of the Regulation is similar to those of the authors of the report. We recognise the significant steps the industry has made to bring itself into compliance but also that there remain inconsistencies in the quality of service provided by different businesses. We also note that there remains a degree of non-compliance from industry. These include: — Low pre-notification levels with some airlines (often caused by systems and processes which make it difficult for PRM to pre-notify). — Airlines’ seat allocation processes which leave PRMs seated in inappropriate seats. — Inconsistent service quality coverage at airports on all parts of the passengers’ journey (eg arrival points to check-in on departure, and on arrival from baggage reclaim to car park). — Inconsistency in application of airline policies on the circumstances in which airlines might refuse carriage for a PRM on safety grounds (CAA Document FODCOM 49/08 sets out guidance on this). — Restrictions on carriage of mobility equipment. 17. In carrying out our consumer policy remit, we must balance this with the CAA’s obligations as a safety regulator. Much of our consumer policy work in relation to PRMs involves significant interaction between our consumer and safety policy. One area is in relation to the carriage of electric mobility aids. The power circuits of electric mobility aids must be inhibited prior to loading and the devices must be protected from damage on board the aircraft, as such equipment poses a potential fire risk during flight. Complying with these safety requirements might restrict the numbers of PRMs that can be carried and ultimately restrict access to PRMs. 40 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/facts-fundings/evaluations/doc/2010_reg_1107_2006.pdf Ev 142 Transport Committee: Evidence

In addition, under the PRM Regulation, airports within the EU are responsible for providing assistance to ensure that any electric mobility aid belonging to a PRM is made safe for carriage, whilst outside of the EU, the airline is typically responsible for this. Involving the airport in the preparation of electric mobility aids for carriage makes the process more complex as airlines have to establish separate processes for within the EU and everywhere else. We also understand from UK airlines that very few airports in mainland Europe have identified to them what organisation they have assigned the task of making electric mobility aids safe for carriage. 18. Nevertheless, the CAA is currently undertaking a significant amount of work to improve industry compliance and iron out the inconsistencies in the assistance provided by different airports and airlines. It has already had some notable successes. The work includes: — work on improving pre-notification levels: — in conjunction with ABTA, we have published guidance for industry on pre-notification; — we have encouraged UK airports to produce wallet-sized cards setting out the importance of pre-notification to be handed out to PRM passengers at special assistance desks; and — we have asked airport operators to provide us with regular data on pre-notification levels by airline, allowing us to target under performers. — We have carried out work, in co-operation with Animal Health and DEFRA, to ensure all UK airports and airlines flying to and from the UK accept assistance dogs. — In relation to the seating policies of carriers for PRMs, we are currently working with a number of carriers to ensure that their policies do not restrict access to PRMs and that PRMs do not pay extra for seats appropriate for their needs. — We have set up a “Disability Working Group” to share complaints data with disability groups and disabled individuals. The first meeting of the Group is expected to take place in the first half of this year. In addition, we attend a number of groups seeking to improve access to tourism for disabled people and we have strong links with charities, groups representing the disabled and disabled individuals. — The bringing together of complaints handling and enforcement has provided us with an opportunity to integrate further our complaint handling with the CAA’s enforcement of legislation that protects disabled passengers, so as to make the best use in our policy and enforcement work of the valuable information generated by complaints casework. — We are enhancing the general information and advice to PRMs available on our website. — We are devising and implementing a more structured approach to audits and inspection of airports and airlines. We are drawing up a compliance questionnaire on the PRM Regulation to be completed by major airlines flying to the UK and all UK airports. The questionnaire will be supplemented by targeted onsite inspections of services. — We are working with industry to put in processes to ensure that passengers’ are not denied boarding because of lack of space to carry mobility equipment and that the equipment is transported safely and securely. — We are about to undertake a project surveying the published quality standards at UK airports, in order to determine if all airports produce them; whether they are accessible to the public; and whether they are drawn up in co-operation with disability groups.

Case studies 19. A number of wheelchair users had complained to us that they had been refused travel by one particular airline despite travelling with the airline on many occasions previously. They had been refused because they were not accompanied by an able bodied passenger and staff did not believe they would be able to evacuate in any emergency. Following our intervention, the airline agreed that the passengers should not have been denied boarding. We worked with the airline to redraft their advice to crew members (the “Notice to Crew”) in relation to PRMs so as to give their staff better information on when to, and when not to, deny boarding to wheelchair users. 20. We received a number of reports from passengers and from the airport operator itself that large numbers of wheelchairs at Heathrow were not being returned to their owners at the aircraft door by airline ground staff as they disembarked the aircraft on arrival and were instead being sent to the baggage reclaim. We asked Heathrow Airport Limited to monitor performance of repeat offenders and write to these airlines, reminding them of their obligations to repatriate passengers’ own wheelchairs at the aircraft door on arrival wherever possible. Recent data shows that repatriation levels across a number of airlines at Heathrow have improved signiﬁcantly in the last six months. 21. We also undertake work on PRM issues additional to our remit as enforcer of the PRM Regulation. For example, in relation to our safety remit, we have; — helped in the development of the introduction and approval of the MERU TravelChair, a specialist seat for children that ﬁts into a normal aircraft seat; Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 143

— carried out trials with Guide Dogs for the Blind to ascertain space needed for a guide/assistance dog on board the aircraft and the best method of evacuation for a passenger travelling with a guide/ assistance dog; — worked with airlines and implemented an Exemption to ensure comfortable, but safe carriage of disabled children with regard to supplementary means of safety restraint for PRMs when the aircraft seatbelt alone is insufﬁcient or inadequate restraint; and — published Safety Notice 2012/003 which explains the ﬂight safety responsibilities of airports and airlines concerning the preparation and loading of electric mobility aids, together with a video that runs through each step of the process.

The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares 22. The PRM Regulation obliges airlines and airports to communicate in accessible formats all essential information to take a ﬂight. It also obliges airports to make arrangements necessary to enable PRMs to communicate their arrival at an airport and request assistance. Further, the DfT Code of Practice sets out obligations under the PRM Regulation and the Equality Act, in addition to recommended best practice. 23. The EHRC and the CAA have received some complaints about accessibility to information, but not in high numbers, suggesting it is not a particular problem for PRMs. We have also carried out a survey of the information for PRMs provided on a number of airline and airport websites and found that in general information was comprehensive and was easily accessible from the home pages. 24. However there is still scope to improve the consistency of quality of information on PRM services on websites and signage at airports. We are therefore working closely with airlines and airports on helping them to better signpost their services and the assistance that is available to PRMs and also increase the information they provide advising PRMs of their rights under EU law. We are also working with airlines to help make booking and check-in systems more accessible and easier to use for PRMs, particularly in relation to passing information to the airline on the type of assistance required. 25. We expect the CAA PRMs compliance questionnaire to provide us with better information in the future on the accessibility of airline and airport websites. It will include a number of questions on accessibility of information during the booking process and when requesting assistance. It will also include questions on accessibility of general information on the services onboard aircraft and at airports, and on the distances between the different areas of a terminal building and the quality of overall service provision. We are also considering publishing information for comparative purposes on the facilities and services available to PRM passengers under our new Information powers that have been granted to the CAA as part of the Civil Aviation Act 2012.

The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 26. The PRM Regulation includes provisions on training of staff. It obliges airlines and airports to ensure that staff are trained in how to meet the needs of the disabled and have general disability awareness training. The PRM Regulation refers to the European Civil Aviation Conference Document 30 which provides detailed guidance for industry on staff training for handling PRMs. 27. The EHRC and the CAA have received some reports from individuals and disabled groups of inappropriate and insensitive handling of disabled passengers, particularly in relation to security searches at airports; but not in signiﬁcant numbers, which suggests that there are not systemic problems in this area. Nevertheless we have sought assurances from airport operators and airlines that they are meeting their training obligations. On the occasions we have taken up issues we have had a positive response from the service provider.

What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 28. In practical terms, the CAA’s view is that the industry can learn much from, and build upon, the numerous examples of good practice at UK airports over the Games period. We observed firsthand how co-operation between airport operators, airlines and PRM service providers ensured a high quality service to the Games family. Examples of good practice include: — high numbers of wheelchairs being spread evenly over short haul flights operating with smaller aircraft, greatly reducing any potential for delays; — aircraft carrying Paralympic athletes were routinely allocated to the most suitable gates at Heathrow—generally those close to the accreditation area and with lifts to carry wheelchairs; and — the significant amount of time and effort dedicated by Omniserv, the PRM handlers at Heathrow, to training its staff to deal with the arrival and departure of unusually high numbers of disabled passengers and wheelchairs on flights. Ev 144 Transport Committee: Evidence

29. In relation to the experience of PRMs, we shall continue our engagement with airlines and airports to ensure that these best practices are put into practice when appropriate and that airlines and airports continue to work together to provide a seamless and superior service to PRMs. January 2013

Supplementary written evidence from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (DAT 26A) At the oral evidence session for the Committee’s Inquiry into Access to travel for people with disabilities, I said I would send to you details of the numbers of Persons with reduced mobility (PRMs) passengers that depart from UK airports, as a proportion of total passenger numbers. I apologise for the delay in providing this data. The reason for this is that we had hoped to be able to provide you with extensive up to date data, compiled through a questionnaire we have recently distributed to all UK airports on the assistance they provide to PRMs. Unfortunately we have so far received responses only from Heathrow, Stansted, Birmingham and Liverpool. However these airports together account for about half of the total departing passengers from UK airports and there is no reason to believe that the data from those airports yet to respond will be signiﬁcantly different. Therefore we estimate that PRM passenger numbers in 2012 accounted for approximately 1.2% of total passenger numbers. This compares to 0.8% in 2008 (based on a survey the CAA carried out of all UK airports at the time). The CAA plans to issue its questionnaire annually so we will continue to gather data on PRM passengers numbers. I hope this information is sufﬁcient for the purposes of the Inquiry. June 2013

Written evidence from RMT (DAT 63) 1. Introduction 1.1 The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to the Transport Committee’s inquiry into the effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people. RMT represents 80,000 members in all sectors of the transport industry.

2. Executive Summary — Whilst noting that infrastructure and technological improvements are taking place, the fact remains that accessibility is highly dependent on the levels of staffing. — The Government’s own code of practice’s recognise the importance of adequate staffing to assist disabled passengers yet both the Government and Transport for London are pursuing polices that will radically reduce staff which will have a direct and negative impact on the current levels of accessibility. — If any lesson was learnt from the Olympics and Paralympics it was that extra staff meant that people with disabilities felt they were able to travel with the expectation that they could be assisted and were in a supported environment. — Even if the public transport system became fully physically accessible, it would still need its current level of staffing, or preferably a higher level, to ensure that people with disabilities could access the system. — The Government and Transport for London should cancel its drive to cut staff numbers and at the very least both the Government’s and TFL’s proposals to reduce staff numbers should be independently audited to assess the impact on disabled passengers. — The Equality Act should be reviewed with a view to the requirement for adequate staffing to assist disable passengers being enshrined in legislation.

3. Background 3.1 The RMT actively supports all moves to increase accessibility for people with disabilities to transport. It must be noted that the term “disability” covers a huge range of impairments and affects each person with a disability differently in regards to their personal experience of access to transport. 3.2 For the avoidance of repetition regarding access to transport for people with disabilities, the RMT refers to the Department of Transport’s publication in December 2012 “Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all”.

4. Effectiveness of Legislation 4.1 Whilst it is noted that different modes of transport are increasing their physical accessibility due to legislative directions, the whole of the Department of Transport’s Action Plan referred to above, speciﬁcally Chapter 2, “Improving accessibility” completely ignores the key point of access which is about staff and stafﬁng Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 145

levels. A train with wide doors is of no use to a wheelchair user if there is no staff member to assist with getting on and off the train. 4.2 The legislation is therefore “effective” in regards to the areas it covers such as vehicular accessibility, but fails to protect service provision through adequate stafﬁng levels. The greatest threat to accessibility is through stafﬁng cuts.

5. Accessibility of Information 5.1 Although this has improved, there is still a long way to go. Information needs to be provided in formats accessible to people with hearing, visual and reading impairments. It also, crucially, needs the availability of public transport staff to assist with the information provision. 5.3 Whilst it is to be welcomed that innovations in modern technology can increase access to information about transport, ultimately an accessible station for a person with a disability is a station with staff. There are simply no “cheap”, staff-free alternatives which protect accessibility. Stations must keep their ticket offices open to facilitate information provision. 5.4 The above was confirmed in a the “Ticket Vending Machine (TVM) Usability report by Passenger focus in 2010 which stated that: “Unsurprisingly, passengers with disabilities can find TVMs difficult and frustrating to use and reported various barriers during the interviews” 5.5 The report went on to give the following examples of the difficulties being experienced by disabled people when using TVM’s: Dyslexia “I prefer to speak to people, I don’t like machines. I get in a panic, that’s probably the dyslexia … I tend to rush ahead of things and press buttons that I haven’t thought about and get myself in a pickle, and it ends up taking much longer than it would to queue and speak to somebody”. Visually impaired “Using TVMs can present a significant challenge for vision-impaired passengers as the nature of their disability can vary significantly (one respondent was partially sighted in both eyes and the other had tunnel vision). There was some recognition from these passengers therefore that it would be difficult for the TOCs to ensure that TVMs met all of the diverse needs of passengers with vision impairments. “Vision impairments are all different; some people can see better in less light, some can see better in more light, so it’s difficult”. Wheelchair users “The overriding issue for wheelchair users is the lack of accessibility of TVMs,as demonstrated by this research. Even DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) compliant machines can be difficult for some wheelchair users, particularly those who are elderly or lack the upper body strength or mobility to reach the touch screen. Neither of the wheelchair users was able to position themselves close enough to the TVM to use the touch screen in the same way as other respondents. One attempted a side-on approach which got her closer, but she found the twisting motion required to touch the screen awkward and uncomfortable and she still experienced problems with the reach distance. I’m not very comfortable for a start, I’m twisted and I’ve got to spell out Hastings and it’s hard for me to reach the screen.” 5.6 Despite this evidence the Government is continuing with a policy of replacing Ticket Office staff with Ticket Vending Machines. In September 2012 the Government approved proposals to shut 4 ticket offices on London Midland and radically reduce hours at 86 other tickets offices including 20 stations which would shut ticket offices completely for at least one day a week. 5.7 The closures went ahead despite the objections from disability groups and the Passenger Transport Authority Centro who attacked the impact the decision would have on disabled passengers. 5.8 The closures at London Midland would have been even worse if it had not been for the Ticket and Settlement Agreement which specifies the opening hours of ticket offices at stations across the country and stipulates that any changes that Train Operating Companies wish to make must be subject to consultation with passengers. According to a report in the Times In December 2012 Michael Roberts, Chief Executive of the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) used his speech at a Future of Rail conference to urge the government to scrap these regulations that prevent train companies from launching a programme of wholesale ticket office closures. Roberts said: “We are looking to the Government to allow us to change our booking office opening hours as the cost of this retail point of sale is twice as much as all the channels put together.” Ev 146 Transport Committee: Evidence

6. Provision of Assistance by Staff and Staff Awareness

6.1 As stated by Unions in previous submissions to the Committee’s Rail 2020 inquiry the Department for Transport’s Code of Practice on accessible train stations, drafted in co-operation with ATOC and Network Rail states that “one of the most effective ways of making services more attractive to disabled passengers is to provide properly trained staff” and continues that “all railway passengers like to know, in advance of their journey, where to go when they reach the station and how to ﬁnd the appropriate train service. This is especially true of disabled passengers, who may have particular concerns about ... help available from staff.”

6.2 The Code of Practice recommends that “At the very least, staffed booking ofﬁces and information points as well as appropriate remote help points should be able to provide this information.

6.3 The Department for Transport accessibility strategy Railways for All states that “staff are seen by many passengers, and by disabled passengers in particular, as important at times of disruption, especially unplanned engineering works or delayed trains and in improving personal security, all of which increase conﬁdence to travel by rail.”

6.4 Yet policies pursued by the Government on rail and Transport for London in respect of the London Underground are designed to dramatically reduce the staff presence that is so vital for disabled passengers.

6.4. On Rail the McNulty report advocates the widespread closure of ticket offices with the loss of 2000 ticket office staff and 5000 station staff including: — the closure of all ticket offices in 27% of stations on the network, or 51% of those stations with ticket offices. — reducing the opening hours at medium staffed stations. — increasing the availability of ticket vending machines (TVMs) at larger stations, enabling a reduction in the number of ticket office windows. — requesting train operating companies review stations staffing as a “matter of priority”. McNulty claims that only 20% of trains are dispatched by station staff and that this is not always necessary. — In attacking station staff, McNulty focuses solely on the dispatch of trains ignoring the role that station staff play, and the stated purpose of their jobs, in providing quality customer service at stations, ensuring passengers are kept well informed, maintaining health and safety standards, arranging alternative travel for passengers when required.

6.5 RMT members employed in ticket offices are already reporting that due to pressures for ticket sales on our members (not meeting targets results in losing jobs) and also reducing staff to the bare minimum, then in instances of lone-working they are forced to remain in a ticket office while they can see that there is a person with a disability who would benefit from assistance.

6.6 The McNulty report also recommends the further introduction of Driver Only Trains (DOO) with the prospect of the loss of 6000 Guards who are currently able to assist disabled passengers on and off trains. McNulty sates, “the ﬁnancial imperatives facing the industry, the need to change radically the cost structure of the industry, and the availability of new communications technology has led the Study to recommend that the default position for all services on the GB rail network should be DOO (Driver Only Operation)”.

6.7 Transport for London has also made clear they wish to embark on programme of de-stafﬁng. On top of the 800 ticket ofﬁce staff lost on 2010 London Underground has issued a number of internal discussion documents proposing the complete automation of the tube with the removal of station staff the introduction of driverless trains.

6.8 Whilst public and political pressure has forced London Underground to step back from these proposal they have not been ruled out altogether and the pressure on stafﬁng remains. RMT drivers are reporting incidents of visually impaired people who have disembarked and were clearly stuck on a platform due to a shortage of station staff. This has led to them having to shut the train down and wait until station staff arrived before feeling able to carry on.

6.7 It should be noted that a staffed station is a beneﬁt to all customers, making everyone safer. Distance monitoring by CCTV is a poor substitute for both perceived and real levels of accessibility and safety.

7. Paralympic Lessons

7.1 The programme of investment announced by TfL and the London Mayor on 20 December 2012 to improve transport accessibility while containing a number of important initiatives made no mention of protecting staff numbers when it is clear that an increase in stafﬁng during that time contributed to the games success. Similarly the government and rail industry while acknowledging the important role staff played have not given any indication that they will change direction in pursuing staff cuts. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 147

8. Recommendations 8.1 RMT would like to see the importance of staffing levels acknowledged in legislation. Without such protection, the discussion of improving accessibility of transport for people with disabilities is without foundation. Maintaining and increasing staffing levels where appropriate is the essential part of securing and improving accessibility. Trade union representatives should also have a protected role in advising the minimum level of staffing required to ensure that transport is truly accessible. January 2013

Supplementary written evidence from the RMT (DAT 63A) The RMT also wishes to note our concern over reported hate crime aimed specifically at people with disabilities. British Transport Police figures show the number of recorded disability hate crimes increased by 22% in 2011/2012 to the previous year (Freedom of Information request 1008–12). A staff presence is both important in deterring hate crimes and providing re-assurance to disabled people and thereby improving access to the railway. Although research is not specifically available on the assurance provided to disabled people in particular it is available for passengers in general as demonstrated below. It can be seen a number of reports support the view that there are direct associations between staffing levels and personal security for passengers which, according to RMT members working in the rail industry would be amplified in the case of disabled passengers: 1. Anthony Smith, Chief Executive of Passenger Focus has stated that “all our research indicates passengers really like the re-assurance only the presence of staff can bring. Taking staff away from stations would represent a very short-term, short-sighted saving.” 2. Passenger Focus’s National Passenger Survey41 shows that “personal security” and “availability of staff” are two of the worst three areas of passenger satisfaction at stations. Personal security scored more highly on trains but less than half of all rail passengers were satisfied with the availability of a guard on their train. 3. Passenger Focus Wales published its report ‘The Passenger Experience at Unstaffed Stations’ in February 2011. Among its main findings were: “with 54% of passengers rating their personal security as good, 9% lower than the ATW average, personal security at unstaffed stations is a concern for many passengers.” 4. An Independent Social Research report from April 2009 ‘Passengers’ Perceptions of Personal Security on Public Transport’ stated that: “the presence of uniformed staff provided a sense of order and authority, and gave passengers confidence that anti-social behaviour would be challenged.” February 2013

Written evidence from the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) (DAT 35) 1. Introduction 1.1 TSSA welcomes the opportunity to submit comments to the Transport Committee’s inquiry into this important issue. 1.2 TSSA is an independent trade union with approximately 22,700 members throughout the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland most of whom are employed in the railway industry and various other public transport organisations, Transport for London/London Underground being the most signiﬁcant. Our members are employed in a wide variety of jobs including front-line duties advising and helping disabled passengers.

2. The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufﬁciently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? 2.1 Limited feedback we have received from TSSA union workplace representatives suggest progress has been made in recent years on the rail network both in terms of attitudes towards disabled people and by improvements made through initiatives like the Department for Transport’s Minor Works Fund and Access for ALL Fund. Feedback from our workplace representatives also indicated that improved knowledge of the difﬁculties faced by disabled passengers and access to funding has contributed to a change in attitude and resulted in: — Better employee training on disability awareness. — Equipment being based at stations. — Automatic doors being installed. — The introduction of new toilets designed for the disabled. 41 National Passenger Survey, Passenger Focus, Autumn 2011. Ev 148 Transport Committee: Evidence

— Improved information systems and signage. — The Advanced Passenger Reservation System. — Dropped kerbs being introduced outside stations. — Anti-slip stair edges being introduced on bridges. — Adjustable height ticket window being introduced into sales points. — Disabled friendly help points on platforms. — The introduction of new hearing loops. — Leaflets/literature available at stations. — Disability being discussed at all levels of decision making. 2.2 While it is likely the sorts of improvements referred to above have come about as a result legislative requirements, rather than acts of pure philanthropy, it is clear much more needs to be done. Regular reports in the media indicate clearly disabled passengers continue to experience difficulties using public transport. The full extent of this is probably not known, but instinctively we feel the level of under-reporting is likely to be substantial. It is probable that only the worst cases are covered in the media and it is likely that many more disabled passengers suffer lesser but nonetheless significant problems. 2.3 In October 2012, as part of its on-going work to support improved accessibility on rail, and to ensure the views of passengers with disabilities are driving change, Passenger Focus published a report: “Experiences of disabled passengers” (http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/research/publications/experiences-of-disabled-rail- passengers). This report is an analysis of the views of 6,730 passengers with a range of disabilities who have travelled by rail over the past three years. Passenger Focus says that, as well as highlighting some interesting insights, the report provides opportunities to target improvements. Passenger Focus also says it will use the report for planning future work, and is making it available to the rail industry to help operators target their work, making improvements that would deliver real benefits to passengers with disabilities. Passenger Focus’s report can obviously help identify and tackle problems experienced by disabled passengers. However, the fact that it is based only on the views of passengers who have travelled by rail means it does nothing to shed light on potential disabled passengers who for whatever reason have chosen not, or been unable, to travel by rail. 2.4 In terms of customer satisfaction, Passenger Focus found disabled passengers give similar scores to other passengers apart from: — Lower ratings for security at the station and on the train—as three quarters are travelling alone and half of disabled passengers have lower mobility , this seems to emphasise concerns about security. — Much lower ratings for ease of getting on and off the train—again with many disabled passengers travelling alone, this is possibly one driver for their concern about access to the train. — Higher value for money ratings—as double the number of disabled passengers use a railcard, this is a key driver for the higher scores, coupled with the fact that fewer disabled passengers travel for commuting purposes and at peak times, when fares tend to be higher. Disabled commuters and peak travellers rate value for money similarly to commuters and peak travellers with no disability. 2.5 We do not feel current requirements are sufficiently comprehensive with, for example, compliance timetables for operators being on the whole generous in their favour. We find them lacking both in terms of ambition and urgency. The law needs to be strengthened to ensure a fully-integrated public transport network that, for example, delivers a step free railway environment making life easier for everyone, not just those with disabilities. Resources must be prioritised to enable this and needs to be seen as an investment. Amongst other things, it will help give disabled people, who are already significantly more likely to be unemployed, a better chance of getting a job and becoming economically active. Indeed, a more accessible transport network would also enhance the employment opportunities of disabled people in the transport industry itself. 2.6 Regarding the effectiveness of enforcement, there appears to be little hard information to go on. The apparent absence/low level of legal action could be for a number of reasons including: — service providers are doing a good job and enforcement is not needed; — compliance standards have been set too low and are easily complied with; and — standards are not being met by service providers, but disabled people for whatever reason(s) are not seeking to establish their legal entitlements. 2.7 At national level, our members have not made us aware of specific non-compliance issues in relation to the companies they work for. However, the experience of disabled people indicates there remains a big problem that needs to be dealt with. We are, for example, aware of the work of the A2B campaign (launched January 2012) that aims to fight the discrimination towards disabled passengers “that is endemic across public transport”. It says discrimination comes in all forms, from verbal abuse to simply denying access. With increasing pressure on the travel network is it is happening more and more. A2B aims to bring this to the attention of the Government, so that measures can be put in place to improve the public transport system for Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 149

disabled passengers, as well as for all other users. The campaign is supported by Baroness Tanni Grey- Thompson, Transport for All, Disability Alliance and Unity Law—legal experts on disability discrimination. Amongst other things, A2B is asking for a Regulator, funded by the industry, to: — ensure ongoing training is given to all customer-facing public transport staff; — regulate a minimum standard of compulsory training, including refreshers; and — maintain a centralised register of complaints as an essential part of the process of awarding, regulating and renewing franchises. These changes will improve the quality of service for all who use public transport. 2.8 According to Unity Law (http://www.unity-law.co.uk/disability-discrimination/public-transport/) from their experience, transport companies very often only take complaints from disabled passengers seriously when legal action is taken. According to its website they are helping a group of disabled bus passengers (“The Darlington 16”) taking their local bus company, Arriva, to court in the first case of its kind. They allege they are being discriminated against because ramps on the buses are often faulty, people in wheelchairs are often left waiting at bus stops and they say drivers aren’t trained properly. In addition, Arriva operate a “First come, first serve” policy—ie if luggage or a buggy is occupying the disabled space on a bus then they won’t move it or make alternative arrangements for disabled bus users so they can get on the bus. Effectively they turn them away. The lead client in the case is Antony Wilson, who says: “Arriva Buses are getting worse and worse… I go to college in Durham and I have to leave an hour and a half early to get there on time… I’m fuming because I want my independence, I want to be able to go out and find work but I can’t find a job because I have to travel so I have to look for jobs close to home and they’re just not there.” 2.9 The Channel 4 website (3 December 2012: http://www.channel4.com/news/arriva-faces-court-action- over-disability) reported the court hearing in this case commenced at the beginning of December 2012. Lawyers for the claimants gave examples of best practice, including: — Transport for London’s policy, if a passenger refuses to move from the wheelchair area, is to use the public address system to make clear they must. The bus driver can also refuse to drive on until the wheelchair space is freed up. — Lothian Buses expect passengers to vacate the space, and exclude unfoldable prams from its buses. — Oxford Buses have created spaces for both buggies and wheelchairs. 2.10 Arriva North East has told the court it acts in line with the law, training its drivers appropriately, and that it is not under a legal obligation to let a wheelchair user on the bus if the space is full. Its drivers cannot compel people with pushchairs or shopping to move. 2.11 The case will continue into February 2013. The claimants are demanding £18,000 in compensation from Arriva North East. They also hope the judge will make recommendations to which transport companies will have to listen. If made in time, the judgment in this case, subject to subsequent appeals by either party, should help the Committee’s deliberations on some of the questions under consideration.

3. The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares 3.1 The list in 2.1 above included a number of improvements that fall under this heading, but again there is scope for further improvement and much more needs to be done. Furthermore, for them to be fully effective requires staff at the point of use to provide help and guidance. We feel pressure on the rail industry to cut frontline staff at stations and on trains will jeopardise any progress made. Ev 150 Transport Committee: Evidence

3.2 The Passenger Focus report (Experiences of disabled rail passengers, October 2012) showed passenger experience by different types of disability. Table 1 and Table 2 (see below) contain some of the criteria contained in the Passenger Focus report in terms of the “at station” and “on trains” levels of satisfaction recorded in their survey. Particularly when compared with rail-industry punctuality standards, for examples, none of these compare especially well and there is scope for improvement in all areas. Most of the criteria show varying degrees of difference in satisfaction levels experienced by passengers with different types of disabilities. This suggests the needs of people with some sorts of disabilities are being better catered for than others. Further work needs to be done to understand the reasons for this and what needs to be done to improve matters for different disabilities and overall.

Table 1 PASSENGER EXPERIENCE AT STATIONS: % SATISFIED BY DIFFERENT TYPES OF DISABILITY Wheel chair Hearing Eyesight Speech Learning Mobility user impairment impairment impairment difﬁculties Other Ticket buying 74 75 76 73 82 70 69 facilities Provision of 79 84 80 75 83 75 75 information about train times/ platforms Attitudes and 73 76 75 72 71 70 70 helpfulness of staff Connections with 74 79 74 67 67 69 74 other forms of public transport Availability of 61 61 60 60 63 57 57 staff How request to 84 80 88 86 79 80 79 station staff was handled

Table 2 PASSENGER EXPERIENCE ON TRAINS: % SATISFIED BY DIFFERENT TYPES OF DISABILITY Wheel chair Hearing Eyesight Speech Learning Mobility user impairment impairment impairment difﬁculties Other Connections 75 82 77 74 70 65 75 with other rail services Provision of 73 76 70 68 58 64 68 information during the journey Helpfulness 67 72 65 62 54 67 62 and attitude of staff on train Availability of 52 58 48 47 50 49 44 staff How well 46 37 41 36 46 41 40 train company dealt with delays

3.3 We are particularly concerned about the low level of satisfaction with availability of staff both at stations and on trains. In contrast passenger “at station” experience (Table 1) shows much higher levels of satisfaction (79% to 88%) with how requests to station staff were handled. This suggests that where staff are available and approached by passengers they add signiﬁcant value in terms of passenger satisfaction. Staff availability at the point of use is vital to making information more accessible, including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares. 3.4 We would, therefore, call for urgent action to address low levels of satisfaction with staff availability, and would call for a moratorium on cuts to staff at stations and on trains. Indeed there is a strong case for Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 151

increasing staff numbers to address this problem and in line with recent record usage and future projected growth.

4. The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 4.1 Amongst other things, the list in 2.1 above acknowledged recent improvements in terms of better employee training on disability awareness. At national level TSSA is not aware of employers we deal with failing to provide training to relevant staff in this area of their work. However, there is no room for complacency and as in most areas of dealing with the needs of disabled people there is scope for improvement. We do not know how effective training is and, for example, if this is reflected in the staff related satisfaction criteria in Table 1 and Table 2 above. 4.2 We are seriously concerned that cutting staff numbers, including ticket office closures and extending the use of driver only operated trains will render such training pointless if there are no or not enough staff to provide assistance to disabled passengers. One of TSSA’s workplace representatives who works for a train operating company and takes a special interest in disability issues confirms our fears that progress on this important issue will be jeopardised if frontline staff are cut. He says: “Sadly, all these improvements could be lost if, as proposed under the McNulty Report and subsequent Command Paper, station staff are reduced. It is these staff who: — Meet you at an agreed point when you get to the station. — Help you to buy a ticket and plan the best route. — Show you where to go at the station. — Help you to get on the train and to find a seat. — Help you with the stairs and ramps. — Help you to change trains during the journey. — Carry light luggage. — Tell you where to find your nearest station without steps or advise which one has a lift. — Arrange another kind of transport for you if you can’t use steps. — Advise other stations that you are travelling so that someone can help you. The loss of these staff can only lead to a reduction in the customer service currently provided.” 4.3 We would ask the Department for Transport to arrange for a comprehensive assessment of industry staff training programmes to be undertaken to, amongst other things, identify and share best practice. This should involve disabled people’s organisations and representatives of those who work in the industry.

5. What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its success? 5.1 TSSA agrees with the broad consensus of opinion that the Paralympics were a success and the transport system and significantly higher staffing levels available during the Games were crucial to the success. In our view basically there are three main lessons: (a) the importance of planning ahead; (b) investment in the transport infrastructure in order to get people to and from the various venues, and (c) the numbers of people required to deliver a good service during the Games. 5.2 Transport for London (TfL) board paper (20 September 2012: London 2012 Games Transport— Performance, Funding and Legacy: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Part-1-Item06-TfL- Games-performance-Final-corrected.pdf) contains a section “Accessibility of the Transport Network”. It reports: — TfL has invested hundreds of million of pounds and implemented various measures over the past few years and during the period of the Olympic and Paralympic Games, which together have helped to make London 2012 the most accessible Games ever. This will have a lasting legacy for Londoners and visitors alike. — Investment meant that 66 Tube stations were step free by the Games, lifts across the fully- accessible DLR network were refurbished and the London Overground upgrade included replacing ageing rolling stock with new, fully-accessible trains. — Level access provision was more extensive than originally planned, with more permanent humps, a number of “semi-permanent humps” and manual boarding ramps used at 16 step- free stations. — TfL also provided better accessibility information with products like the step-free Tube guide and extra staff at key lifts to provide help and support. Fire service lifts were brought into operation in Westminster and North Greenwich stations to boost step-free capacity. Ev 152 Transport Committee: Evidence

— 90% of platforms served by London Underground services had tactile paving (or platform edge doors) to warn of the platform edge—above the 65% planned within the London 2012 Accessible Transport Strategy. — Almost 40,000 disabled spectators attended ticketed events over the course of the Games, and over 2,000 on the busiest days, many of whom used public transport, demonstrating the importance of this investment and planning. While TfL does not require disabled people to book assistance in advance, on London Overground, where data is available, there were 75 customer assistance requests on the busiest day of the Olympic Games and 162 on the busiest day of the Paralympic Games—significantly higher than usual. 5.3 In spite of all this the London Underground remains far from fully accessible to disabled passengers. Obviously much more needs to be done. Better disabled access to public transport should be for life, not just for the Games. What is needed is much more of the same sorts of investment and initiatives that were seen before and during the Games. While the comments here refer specifically to TfL/London Underground, the same general principle applies to the national rail network also. 5.4 Again we must emphasise the importance of staffing levels as part of an integral strategy that complements more investment in the infrastructure and other technological initiatives that will also make using public transport easier for disabled passengers.

6. Impact of government cuts 6.1 We would like to take this opportunity to comment on the impact of government public expenditure cuts that we think is relevant. Often the debate on this issue concentrates largely on the physical barriers to using various modes of transport. However, disabled people do not exist in a vacuum and because they are more likely to be adversely affected by government cuts face an increased risk of further—economic—barriers being put in their way. In the case of rail travel regardless of whether any future benefits are capped by 1% or increased in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rail fares are set to rise by the higher Retail Prices Index-(RPI)-plus for the foreseeable future. 6.2 A posting on Disability Rights UK’s website (3 January 2013: http://disabilityrightsuk.blogspot.co.uk/ 2013/01/government-in-denial-over-impact-of_3.html) strongly refuted the Prime Minister’s claim that disability organisations support the Government’s welfare reform agenda—and the DWP Minister for Disabled People’s suggestion that disabled people are protected from cuts. It says these two myths need debunking: “Firstly, many disability organisations do support welfare reform which delivers improvements in the way benefits are delivered or which cut the bureaucracy involved. Some aspects of current reforms deserve support—for example the taper in Universal Credit which allows people to keep more of their earned income when starting work. But there is no disability organisation supporting the total package of Government reform because the combined effect is catastrophic. Just a quick recap on some headline figures: — 100,000 disabled children to lose under Universal Credit; — 600,000 disabled people 16Ð64 years of age to lose Disability Living Allowance (DLA); and — 300,000 disabled people to be cut off from all out of work support after just 365 days despite 75% receiving regular NHS treatment. So it’s no surprise that the most representative group—the Disability Benefits Consortium (almost 60 national disability, advice and welfare focused organisations)—doesn’t support the Government agenda……….. Secondly, Esther McVey suggests disabled people are protected from the cuts. Saying this may make the Minister feel better about making drastic reductions in support but it is somewhat undermined by the statistics above. Usually, Ministers suggest disabled people ‘with the highest needs’ are protected but here’s two points showing how even this divisive technique (of suggesting some disabled people are somehow ‘more deserving’ than others) is inaccurate: — The Government has confirmed that the Independent Living Fund (ILF) will close in 2015—the ILF supports 19,000 disabled people with the highest care needs to live independently; and — Under the abolition of DLA and introduction of the restrictive Personal Independence Payment, 430,000 disabled people with the highest mobility support needs lose out. This will lead to thousands of disabled people losing Motability vehicles and will mean many disabled people in work are made unable to retain employment. Sadly, we believe the UK is about to witness a vast rise in poverty and social exclusion for disabled people and, with the NHS and councils also facing a significant squeeze, the ability of the state to proffer alternative assistance is reduced. With charities also facing a tough financial climate and unable to fill the gap, the future’s far from bright—despite the powerful and positive Paralympics in 2012. Our request for a better understanding of the impact of the Government’s plans has been ignored to date. The Government appears to be in denial. It should come clean about the lack of support for its welfare cuts and the severity of its agenda.” Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 153

7. Conclusion 7.1 We would like to thank the Committee for giving us the opportunity to comment on this important issue. We would again emphasise the vital part staff have to play in delivering a good quality service and improvements needed to make public transport more accessible to disabled passengers would make life easier for passengers generally. We consider any organisation involved in delivering public transport services proposing to cut staff, close ticket offices etc. should be obliged to carry out a full disability impact assessment in line with the equality duty requirements of the Equality Act 2010. We would also support a comprehensive assessment of industry staff training programmes to, amongst other things, identify and share best practice. This should involve disabled people’s organisations and representatives of those who work in the industry. 7.2 Specifically with regard to the railway industry TSSA considers the existing structure of the industry that puts company profits ahead of the public interest means resources that could and should be used for dealing with these sorts of problems are not available. 7.3 A substantial report (June 2012) “Rebuilding Rail” (http://www.transportforqualityoflife.com/u/files/ 120630_Rebuilding_Rail_Final_Report_print_version.pdf) highlights the massively wasteful nature of the industry’s structure. The research undertaken by Transport for Quality of Life confirmed that since privatisation the cost to the public of running the railways has risen by a factor of between two and three times. The most cautious view is that the public money going into the railways has increased from around £2.4 billion per year before privatisation (in the period 1990–91 to 1994–95), approximately £5.4 billion per year in the period 2005–06 to 2009–10 (all at 2009–10 prices). Over the same period, the money going into the railways from passenger fares has also increased in real terms. 7.4 According to “Rebuilding Rail” much of the increase in cost may be attributed to the fundamental problems with the complex privatised railway structure created by the Conservative Government in 1994. It says the key reasons for the increase in cost include: — higher interest payments in order to keep Network Rail’s debts off the government balance sheet; — debt write-offs; — costs arising as a result of fragmentation of the rail system into many organisations; — profit margins of complex tiers of contractors and sub-contractors, and — dividends to private investors. 7.5 Taken together, these represent a cumulative cost since privatisation of more than £11 billion of public funds, or around £1.2 billion per year. This should be considered a minimum figure, as it includes only those costs that may be most easily readily quantified. To put these figures in context, “Rebuilding Rail” says if all unnecessary costs were eliminated and the resultant saving used entirely to reduce fares, this would equate to an across-the-board cut in fares of 18% (or a substantially larger cut in fares that are price-regulated because of their social importance). Savings of this order might alternatively, in TSSA’s view, be used entirely or partly to improve disabled access on the network. January 2013

Supplementary written evidence from Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) (DAT 35A) When I gave evidence to the Committee earlier in the month on 3rd June, it was agreed that I provide some further information—some speciﬁc examples of the challenges TSSA members working in “frontline” jobs on the rail network face- that the Committee might ﬁnd helpful. This is information is attached. Also included is a selection of comments from rail passengers who returned post cards, as part of the Together for Transport campaign, mainly during Spring/Summer 2012.

Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) Additional Information to the House of Commons Transport Committee Inquiry Into Effectiveness Of Legislation Relating To Transport For Disabled People 1. Set out below are a number of testimonies/experiences/comments from TSSA members and staff representatives mostly working in frontline jobs. While not all of them refer specifically or directly to passengers with disabilities, we consider them worthwhile including because the sorts of issues mentioned apply equally, if not more so, to disabled passengers. It is hoped that the accounts also demonstrate how rail staff work as part of a community and deal with broader societal issues such as people with serious mental health issues who may, as illustrated in one of the accounts below, see the railway as a way to commit suicide. Rail staff also play an important part in maintaining high health and safety standards and contribute as exemplified below to avoiding injury (and resultant disability) and death. Member A: “McNulty’s realising the potential of Great Britain’s rail report was commissioned back in 2011 far from realises any potential. The plans drawn up to find savings of £3.5 billion are intact on the industry and will see the loss of 20,000 jobs across the entire network. Over 14,000 of those jobs will be front line positions. Ev 154 Transport Committee: Evidence

Divided up, this will be 7,000 guards or on train staff, 5,000 station and platform staff and over 2,000 ticket office clerks. Should these proposals go ahead we could see over half the staff ticket offices close, and the removal of staff and conductors across the whole industry across these services. These cuts will have catastrophic impact on all passengers but will affect disabled and elderly rail travellers even more so. Current DfT legislation for assisting and protecting disabled passengers is pretty bad and lacks substance. Rail operators have to provide a DPP, a disabled passengers plan which basically equates to ensuring that staff are trained in disability awareness. But does not actually address mobility or access issues for disabled and elderly passengers. Where I work, we have already faced major staffing reductions and struggle as a result of this. I have been displaced twice and we have seen our peak staffing level drop from five to three in the last few years. We have seen a substantial increase in disabled and elderly passengers since the introduction of lifts at our stations. As most of the stations within our vicinity are still pretty inaccessible. The installation of lifts was an excellent step in the right direction but many problems still arise. As we only have one platform staff member per shift available to assist passengers with poor mobility, with access to the station wheelchair ramps, unfortunately this staff member has to divide their time between two, sometimes three other stations and is often not available to assist. To alleviate this issue, there is a booking system but this regularly fails as communications break down. Some stations have poor internet and phone coverage. The platform guys, the guys in help you on and off the trains have a BlackBerry mobile phone, they get emails, etc., telephone calls, telling them where to be at certain times for certain trains. So, yeah, there is a breakdown in communication. Some stations have poor internet and phone coverage and many passengers requiring assistance do not use the booking system and to be honest, why should they anyway? I do not have to, why can’t wheelchair users have the same luxury and spontaneity enjoyed by their fellow rail travellers? Mobility is not the only issue faced by disabled or vulnerable and elderly passengers as mentioned before I have been displaced. The first time I found myself surplus to requirement I was replaced by a self-service ticket vending machine. Self-service machines are daunting and frustrating for elderly and those with learning difficulties and basically useless for blind people. We do not have the facilities to credit oyster cards at the ticket office but the option is available from the self-service ticket machine. I regularly witness passengers struggling to operate the machines and they report to my ticket window. I am not physically able or allowed to leave the office to leave the office. We have similar regulations to banking staff. It is also a threat my own security, I have colleagues that have been attacked when leaving their offices so basically, I am left to try and explain how they top up or credit their oyster card or how they should buy their ticket from at my window, which is not very easy as you can imagine. Staff are vital in providing safety and security for those travelling alone and at night. A recent incident took place at X station....., where a disabled passenger fell from their wheelchair to the track. There was a member of staff able to be help immediately, you have got your own imaginations, I will conclude with a few quotes from disabled people against cuts and survey respondents. — As a person with a learning difficulties, when I travel on my own, I sometimes get anxious and have panic attacks. I get confused sometimes so I need staff around to ask because members of the public are not always friendly. — I would be very worried travelling without staff around. — Another one, unmanned stations are an absolute barrier to travel. You cannot always plan a day or a journey 100% in advance, especially if you are juggling work and family pressures. I do not have a car and I am completely reliant on public transport to get to where I need to be. — Lastly, very poignant comment, if you cut rail staff, it will mean rail travel won’t be a difficult option for disabled people, it will not be an option at all.” Member B: “I work on a daily basis on a busy railway station a busy interchange and since the introduction of the new timetable back in May we have seen a slight increase in staff levels. I’ve stood there on several occasions where I’ve witnessed staff stopping people from committing suicide in front of trains I’ve done it myself and if staff are not there on the platforms to stop that if they take away them staff then that’s putting people at risk and it’s going to cause problems for not just the TOCs but the public who will incur several delays and problems due to these situations. If they do actually start removing station staff then there’s not going to be anyone there to stop that and you’ll see an increase in timid people standing on platforms not wanting to be there and they are going to stop travelling which is going to impact the railways in the long-term.” Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 155

Member C: “My job is actually working on trains with guards so of course my first point of contact is with the passengers on trains and there’s been many a time where there has been service disruptions when I’ve had to deal with passengers on platforms and they are quite happy they can talk to somebody rather than not speak to anyone and speak to a machine on the wall. And when you see somebody face to face it makes it more easy and if anything has gone wrong you can step in, intervene and help and any face is better than no face at all.” Member D: “I’m a travel advisor I’ve been on the railway now for 21 years and I’ve seen a great deal of change in them 21 years especially through privatisation I have a lot of interactive things with deaf customers.... because I’m the only person at the station that can do sign language so when I’m there and they’re around some do wait for me, sometimes the staff actually come and fetch me because they know I can sign so it makes it easier for them and I have a letter of praise from a deaf customer for doing it which I thought was really nice and really good it just proves that if McNulty does come into force they’re going to lose people like me who are there to help people and there will be nobody there to help anybody like that when we have gone.” Member E: “.....I’m a resource manager in the control room...been in (x TOC) for over 29 years been in the control room for near enough to 18. Recent stories I would say is that during the festivities of Christmas and New Year there I had a conductor phoning me from a train saying that they had a drunk passenger and he was putting her off at a station that was unmanned. Well, a drunk passenger, drunk female at that not a good sign you know so I switched on the TV cameras for the station we can do this from the office I advised Network Rail about this very drunk female and put a caution on the line just to be seen where she was at the station. We observed her coming down the stairs on the platform and she stumbled and fell on the track knocked herself out. Now if it wasn’t for the team work and the conductor phoning myself then...... getting the tv cameras switched back on and.... the ambulance.... called the trains were halted the passengers at the station were told not to go near her on the track leave her until the ambulance arrived the person was fit and well and eventually she got up and in an ambulance and got taken to In (x TOC’s) control, we all work as a team. So much so that we bond together, we all go out together and we all help each other you find people, there’s a lot of work going on their desk they do go and ask can I help you can I do some work for you just to— work later, you know and so much so that you find that people know each other’s jobs as well as they know their and they know your limitations and you know theirs and all in all it’s a good..... to work with a good group of people and they work well together.” Member F: “Another key thing we need to note is sometimes we’ve got the fast ticket machines and nine times out of ten a lot of people who use the fast ticket machines end up back to us anyway because they’ve made an error they are so complicated and one of the best things of the job is the customer service we give to the customers you know it is first class and you know we try everything we can to save the customer lots of money and that’s the beauty of our job you know, over 30 years on the railway I still love the job and the customers are the best people in the world.” Member G: “ ..../work as a customer service assistant. X TOC pride themselves as one of the leaders in customer service and think of us quite highly. At X Station we have a large number of electronic machines a large number of people using them. I’m afraid there’s a real age gap a lot of the younger people they tend to prefer to go to the machines we deal a lot with older people a lot of old people come into X station and they definitely prefer to talk to a human being rather than into a machine the machines aren’t perfect by far, lots of mistakes are made on them and we spend a lot of our time putting that right that will be the situation for the foreseeable future.....”. Member H: “....I work for X TOC I’m classed as a GPR which means I can work at most stations and on the platforms so I have a big link with customers who go on our trains. I sell them tickets I also dispatch their trains or work on the gate line and deal with their ticket problems. I think that in the future with the McNulty report we are going to find that staff are going to be reduced from platforms and the customers will have to talk to a machine and they won’t get any level of service from a machine they will just be issued a ticket and they’ll have to find their own way on the platforms and onto the trains. I was at X station last week and we have what’s called assisted passenger system, where people that need assistance onto a train contact our customer centre and they arrange for a member of staff to be there to help passengers go on the train and also arrange for them to be collected where they are going to arrive. Because of staff shortages the customer that wanted assistance there was no staff in the afternoon so that I don’t know what happened in the end but they had to probably get a member of the family to assist them onto the train and have a word with the guard who would have to make the appropriate arrangements but with staff being reduced in the future there will be no staff that will be able to help the disabled people onto the train to advise whereabouts on the train they are and to contact the next station to help them off.” Member I: “more investment we have better stations more stations are becoming access friendly for all people and this is a great incentive with the Olympics coming up and the Paralympics and it’s been proven that our passengers have increased nearly twofold since beginning of the concession and we have brand new stock of trains top of the range stations and going forward staff are very happy. Working on X TOC, you come across a lot of passengers sometimes you need to help them and help them on their way and then on other occasions things happen that cause you to go into an automatic pilot situation ie a “one under” where you have to act pretty quickly clear the station and Ev 156 Transport Committee: Evidence

then report everything to all the relevant services and if you’re lucky enough a BTP is present and that makes your situation better. Working for X TOC one of the most pleasing things is when you assist a passenger and you’re making their journey more pleasant by giving them the correct direction and the fact they say thank you to you always makes your job more worthwhile.” Member J: “Passengers get a perception of safety if they see someone in uniform, British Transport Police or station staff. A visible presence of a person in authority is always reassuring. The BTP police work with station staff as a compliment to their hard work—not to replace them. Staff on stations are primarily the BTP’s first point of contact, usually they see an issue and are the first to liaise with the BTP. Station staff see an issue they know is going to escalate before anyone else is aware of it.” 2. The accounts from our members set out above appear to be borne out by members of the public who responded to a survey undertaken in conjunction with the Together for Transport campaign (mainly in Spring/ Summer 2012). The survey asked various questions including what they thought about government plans to cut station staff whilst raising fares at the same time. About 150 responses to this question made reference to people with disabilities. For obvious reasons some grouped disabled and elderly people together. In many respects both groups have the same issues, indeed many elderly people are disabled. The Railway Safety Et Standards Board (RSSB) Annual Safety Performance Report 2011/12, amongst other things, said that older passengers have the highest risk per journey and that “The ageing population and consequent issues related to reduced mobility present a challenge to the railway”. It also said: — Passengers aged over 70 have a rate of harm per journey that is more than five times higher than average. — The majority of harm to this age group (66%) came from slips, trips and falls. Elderly travellers are involved in a disproportionate number of escalator accidents; four people over 70 have died after falls on escalators in the past five years. — Passengers over 70 are also over represented in boarding and alighting accidents. TSSA agrees with the RSSB that this is a challenge for the industry. We consider that staff have a vital role to play in helping address the problem. Instinctively we feel reducing station and on board staff is almost certain to make things worse. Rail workers deal promptly with passengers who have accidents. Many rail staff are trained “first aiders” and, where appropriate, are able to administer first aid to injured passengers. Rail staff also contribute to making trains and stations as hazard free as possible by reporting and isolating potential dangers for repair. Selection of responses to passenger survey: (i) Abergavenny: “I have a child in a wheelchair and there is no way of accessing at least one platform at most stations on the route where I live. We have to book assistance to get him off/on the train, which if no platform staff means the guard has to do, which then delays the train by 5 minutes. So until the millions have been spent to access the platforms and the train companies come up with accessible trains, PLATFORM STAFF are imperative.” (ii) Alnmouth: “Staff are so helpful with my husband who is disabled. This help us over the track which we have to cross as well as keeping with chair, luggage. Please think of the safety.” (iii) Bethnal Green: “Cutting station staff will make using public transport more difficult and dangerous for everyone, especially older people, disabled people and women. This is a really important campaign.” (iv) Bexhill: “Being disabled both visually and mobility I constantly have great difficulties boarding and alighting from trains. Several times lately “I’ve tripped getting on because step is to high breaking my glasses and nose. Also those horrid couched seats with no arm rests make it impossible to get up/down as there is nothing to hold to. Too few disabled seating and nothing to stop us falling— seat belts maybe.” (v) Bridgwater: “They have no thought for the elderly, disabled or people with learning disabilities who do not have the ability to plan, work out the best deals etc. and they need a staffed station to help them. Not everyone has access to the internet or can operate the machines.” (vi) Bristol Temple Meads: “How can they charge more for receiving less? Have they even given the disabled a thought? How are they expected to achieve what would be impossible alone? If train fares rise, and staff are cut I will be definitely using alternative transport. That is a fact.” (vii) Brixton: “It’s disabled people who will be hurt most by these plans. Already, disabled people are more likely than the general population to live below the poverty line; and, since many of us do not drive or have access to a car, we are more dependent than most on public transport. Yet we are being asked to pay more to use stations which are frequently understaffed. Many disabled people depend on staff for assistance. Wheelchair users cannot board or disembark from a train without a staff member to assist with a ramp. Many blind and visually impaired people need a member of staff to guide them to the right platform and help them off the train safely. More and more frequently, disabled people are getting stranded at stations when staff do not meet them. Hate crime continues to be a real problem for disabled people on public transport—many of us have been laughed at, Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 157

sworn at or even physically assaulted because of a disability. A uniformed staff presence deters crime and harassment and makes disabled people feel safe, and confident to travel independently.” (viii) Cardiff Central: “I am a partially blind and find the staff really helpful and courteous and could not on a train without them.” (ix) Coventry: “As a disabled person if booking offices closed you cannot get railcard discount from ticket vending machines. You cannot also get railcard discount from conductors as far as I know as some persons and know a lot of the permit to travel machines at unmanned stations don’t work for visually handicapped and don’t like using ticket machines.” (x) Dalmuir: “Unstaffed stations will become havens for drinking dens and undesirables. I personally feel unsafe travelling in the evening from unstaffed station. Some unstaffed stations already make it hard for wheelchairs and pram users to board trains.” (xi) Downham Market: “I cannot see ticket machines as I am registered practically blind (also the local machine faces south, when in full sunshine, people with good eye sight cannot see the screen), so therefore a ticket office is a must!” (xii) Downham Market: “My disabled son cannot use ticket machines so would no longer be able to travel on own.” (xiii) Enfield Lock: “Terrible! With the number of delays/reroutes people need a person to ask for help. Especially if they are disabled, elderly etc.” (xiv) Ham Street: “This would be a bad mistake. Travellers like to speak to a person direct not on a phone line. Not everyone has a computer or internet access. Station staff also help with disabled passengers and luggage for the elderly who otherwise would not be able to travel.” (xv) Moreton (Merseyside): “It is most important that staff are there to help disabled and old people who are nervous at night-time. Safety is most important for all who use and work at all stations.” (xvi) Nuneaton: “I think that this is a very poor plan. As it adversely affects the general public’s access interface with the Rail Network. It will more so with those sections of the public who most need help at station, like blind, the elderly and others with disabilities.” (xvii) Preston Park: “As a disabled person requiring assistance to board/disembark a train and leave a station, cutting station staff effectively excludes me from travelling. I didn’t realise the government thought that disabled people should be under curfew at home. As my disabilities prevent me from driving and mean that bus travel is problematic, that’s the effect that cutting station staff will have on me. As we have a government “of the motorist, for the motorist, by the motorist”, the repeated and above-inflation fare increases are not unexpected but not any less abhorrent. More exclusion— this time by economic means—with complete disregard for safety, sustainability and other long term goals the government claims to adhere to.” (xviii) Salisbury: “It’s a disgrace!! Staff at our railway stations are essential for safety, security and helping people with disabilities not just physical but learning too. How can someone suffering from acute dyslexia cope with only a self-service machine given the complexity of the ticketing?? The elderly and the young may be nervous of travelling and a staff presence is always reassuring. One of the reasons I travel from the above stations is because they have staff in the ticket offices and on the platforms that are always helpful. The train company who run those stations have a strap line which is “We will give customers the best service they have ever had” how would this be true if they cut staff numbers??” (xx) Sittingbourne: “I have never used a ticket machine and will continue not to do so. I prefer to speak to someone to get the best advice regarding the train tickets I buy. As a young woman it makes me feel safe knowing there are station staff around me, especially as my route home from work can be late and sometimes it can be a little scary when other passengers are drunk or a little disorderly, having station staff means situations do not escalate, something which will most definitely happen if they are removed. Only the other day I travelled to London and witnessed train staff helping a blind woman on and off the train, how would she be able to travel without their assistance? It is absurd to remove valuable members of the rail community when they do so much to help. Every time a signal failure has occurred and other means of transport have been required, these are the people that organise things such as this and keep the public informed. I would be outraged to find that staff were being fired and fares increased, I would much rather my fares increase slightly to continue this valuable service, as I’m sure other train users would agree.” (xxi) Stoke Newington: “Bad idea would pay some more to keep. Staff are missing after 12 noon most days, poor. I am recently stroke disabled and steep wide steps at this.....station are difficult.” (xxii) Swindon (Wilts): “Not good to reduce station staff as it increases the inconvenience and dangers. Suggest an increase in station staff is what is required. A planned train journey does not always go to plan. Faults in automatic equipment and delayed or cancelled trains occur so often that alternative routes and arrangements is a regular consideration while travelling. Small unmanned stations are the worst place to have travel plans disrupted with not only lack of public/fellow travellers to ask advice but often a lack of other facilities in the area such as food and accommodation. Vulnerable travellers such as disabled are put at risk by lack of staff to give assistance when unanticipated events occur. Ev 158 Transport Committee: Evidence

I have witnessed a traveller faint and rail staff provide much needed assistance protecting her person and belongings until she could proceed on her own.” (xxiii) West Norwood: “At West Norwood staff are needed to open the side gate to let wheelchair & pushchair users in. If staff are cut I believe we would have to wait much longer to access the platforms. We cannot use the tube due to escalators so trains & buses are how we get around. Machines cannot answer questions but the staff at West Norwood station are extremely helpful. Don’t axe staff & reduce customer service whilst raising fares.” June 2013

Written evidence from Unite (DAT 41)

1. Introduction

1.1 This response is submitted by Unite the Union, the UK’s largest trade union with 1.5 million members across the private and public sectors. The union’s members work in a range of industries including manufacturing, ﬁnancial services, print, media, construction, energy generation, chemicals, transport, local government, education, health and not for proﬁt sectors. In the arena of transport Unite represents over a quarter of a million members in all transport modes, making it the largest transport union in the UK.

1.2 Of importance to this submission, Unite’s membership includes members who are involved in all aspects of public transport, from bus and tram drivers to aviation staff, train drivers and crew and taxi drivers, in addition to several thousand members who live and work with disabilities every day.

2. Areas of the Inquiry

1. The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: Is it working? Is it sufﬁciently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced?

2.1 Unite believes that whilst the legislation relating to disabled access is working, more could be done on improving training so that it becomes sufﬁciently comprehensive. Unite feels that criminal punishment, with penalties and prosecution is not an appropriate way of improving assistance for disabled passengers. Unite believes that a better way of tackling this is through education and training. Legislation does not cover the key issues of ensuring access to public transport only enforcing rules on adaptation.

2.2 Unite further believes that there is enough enforcement to ensure that vehicles are adapted for the use of passengers with special transport requirements but not enough to ensure that there is sufﬁcient staff to assist passengers when needed. The problem also lies with the facilities provided at bus and train stations and with respect to route availability.

2. The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares.

2.3 Cuts to rail subsidy on the scale proposed by McNulty and indicated by the Secretary of State for Transport and the rail command paper indicate a signiﬁcant reduction in access to information on train services and fares. Unite believes that the cuts that will follow will lead to the closure of a large number of ticket ofﬁces, or reduced opening times, resulting in passengers being forced to buy often the most expensive tickets from machines at stations.

2.4 Whilst it is true to say that such travel information is available on-line from a variety of sources, not every disabled passenger is able to use the internet. Bus services can often be delayed or cancelled at the last minute, especially less frequently served routes, leaving passengers waiting at stops for services that never arrive. Digital applications can help but this often needs either assistance to highlight the existence of these services or at least some basic training for those capable of using such services. As with all issues related to disability, there is no such thing as a one size ﬁts all solution.

2.5 For blind and partially sighted passengers the is a need to ensure a standard layout of seating and buttons. Often train carriages have buttons with brail lettering, but these may be found at different positions around doors. Equally, announcements only made over public address systems on platforms and on trains are of little use to deaf passengers, who may end up on the wrong train or frustrated due to the lack of information about delays or last minute alterations to the service.

2.6 Reliability is key in trying to secure employment, be that for a disabled person or more generally. If a disabled passenger cannot rely on properly trained staff or equipment being there to assist them with their journey, how can they hope to end the isolation and reliance on the public purse? Equally, where there is limited access to public transport, how are those with short term conditions able to guarantee that they can attend medical appointments etc? Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 159

3. The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities. 2.7 Unite is gravely concerned that the Government’s proposals to cut stafﬁng will reduce access to rail and bus services and the provision of assistance, leaving many disabled people stranded in their homes. Staff awareness of the needs of different disabilities has improved greatly over the years but there are gaps in training. Many deaf people are left frustrated by the absence of individuals trained in British sign language, for example. 2.8 Awareness and training into ways to assist customers’ requirements can only be useful when there are enough staff who have time to spend assisting disabled passengers. Unite is concerned that due to cuts staff members may have to attend to other jobs or may be replaced by ticket machines, remotely staffed help points or CCTV. 2.9 An increase in the number of unstaffed rail stations will preclude disabled passengers and those with assistance needs from train travel and will leave them with little option than to use either a taxi or private vehicle. 2.10 An increase in the number of such stations also increases the risk of crime on station premises, and whilst the provision of close circuit monitors may help in apprehending the perpetrators it does not act a deterrent to criminal activity. Given the increased risk levels or the perception of increased risk, it will deter a number of passengers groups from using these stations, not just those with disabilities. Disabled passengers are frequently the victims of hate crime, and without some physical presence, there is little to deter crime or assist should such instances occur.

4. What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 2.11 During the Paralympics additional stafﬁng was on hand to assist passengers with their transport needs. Access was augmented with the provision of temporary ramp access at several stations. This highlighted that with the correct level of stafﬁng available and the right equipment no disabled person should have to experience the current obstacle course of barriers preventing them from utilising public transport. 2.12 Whilst buses have been adapted to provide for disabled people in wheelchairs, few will utilise this provision in London, for example, due to the issue of overcrowding. In the regions and on rural services experience has shown that the issue is more about the provision of a service and reliability. Unite has had reports back from members who suggest that when there is a choice between providing a service to an area with a higher than average elderly or disabled population or one which services a supermarket, it is the supermarket service that gets priority due to the commercial decision to supply the service to fare paying customers over those who can travel for free.

3. General points 3.1 When access to bus or rail services is lacking the next standby is often the use of a taxi service. If the prospective passenger is deaf then they are often left frustrated by taxi firms who refuse to accept SMS42 bookings. The cost of alternatives to public transport are often far more expensive and in some cases prohibitively expensive, if the passenger is surviving on benefits or only able to obtain low paid work. 3.2 Taxi drivers have long argued that there should not be such a focus on a one size fits all provision for disabled passengers with the focus on wheelchair access. How about the majority of other disabled people with different disabilities, will the taxi be suitable for them? There is no one definition of a disabled person. The needs of wheelchair using passengers are different from those of someone who cannot bend forward, or who can’t get up the step that is usually required for the ramp to get a wheelchair user on. So clearly the one size fits all taxi vehicle or standard is not a realistic deliverable option. 3.3 Unite’s attempts to gain free entry and open access to airports, railway and bus stations, retail parks and supermarkets for Hackney Carriage Licensed Taxis would clearly help improve access for the public. The Government would have to step in to make private companies allow Hackney Carriage Licensed Taxis access in these areas. This might not be that easy to achieve because it is highly likely private companies would want some compensation. 3.4 The deregulation of taxi services leads to a reduction in the quality of drivers and less stringent background checks. Whilst this would appear to be a way of increasing competition and availability of taxis, it also drives down the safety of journeys as drivers stay out longer to make the money they need to survive or face the reality of going out of business. 3.5 The Coalition Government tasked the Law Commission with a wholesale review of the taxi and private hire trades and the proposals they have come up with will obliterate the industry. National private hire licensing with no cross border controls will see chaos across the country as minicabs crisscross the UK picking up fares, relying on satellite navigation as opposed to local knowledge to determine the best routes. 42 Short Message Service—text messages often sent and received between mobile phones. Ev 160 Transport Committee: Evidence

3.6 Law Commission proposals may introduce peak time licences which could result in an uncontrolled flood of taxis as well as private hire on the streets at busy times. That is set alongside the threat of “no limits on taxi and private hire numbers”. Without such limits taxi ranks over flow creating traffic disruption for other road users.

4. Summary 4.1 The provision of public transport to disabled passengers is often a lifeline enabling them to take an active part in the communities they live in and provide for their families. Placing barriers in disabled people’s way only serves to reduce their lives to one where they are either forced to rely on others, removing their independence and increasing the use of private transport provisions, or they are left to stare at four walls, isolated and unable to participate in society. January 2013

Written evidence from Disabled Person’s Transport Advisory Committee (DAT 30) Context Before turning to the questions posed by the Committee we felt it would be helpful to set some context for the Committee’s enquiry. 1. Disabled people are facing important changes in their lives as they are increasingly expected to find work and cope with the challenges of commuting. The replacement of Disability Living Allowance by Personal Independent Payment will see significant numbers (perhaps 300,000) losing all or part of a benefit which helps with their transport costs. 2. Consequently, disabled people who have developed coping strategies to avoid using a public transport system which many believe remains inaccessible to them will need to consider using it for at least some of the journeys they make. 3. This is why DPTAC consider that it is essential to ensure that legislation which drives the development of accessible public transport is effective. It is vital that there is sufficient understanding in Government of the developing needs of disabled people. It is equally vital that there is sufficient resource in the public service to lead and deliver creative, pragmatic solutions to remove barriers and open up opportunities.

Q1. The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufficiently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? 4. Legislation designed to create physically accessible transport vehicles is working reasonably well—these are essential parts of the picture, but not the whole of it: — The requirements covering new buses and trains meet the needs of the majority of disabled people but some problems are emerging. Currently the framework does not work well in terms of encouraging and allowing for further innovation—what were “good” standards at the point of regulation become out-dated but they are locked into the design of subsequent vehicles: — Mobility scooters—greater availability enables many disabled and older people to get out and about but there are many concerns about the safety and use of scooters on public transport vehicles. The legislative framework requires updating. — Demand for the wheelchair space—problems arise when two or more wheelchair users wish to travel on the same vehicle. The framework could better encourage innovation in the design of vehicles. — Guidedogs—on some buses there are problems with the positioning of heating for guidedog users sitting in the priority seats. — The major omission is absence of a requirement to fit audio visual announcement systems on buses. This affects people with a visual impairment, some people with learning difficulties or other cognitive impairments, and wheelchair users who have to travel facing backwards. — Even on trains, where the regulations require audio visual announcement systems the equipment is either not used or is unreliable. Announcements which use terms such “alight” or “terminate” can mean very little to people with learning difficulties. — Provision for disabled people is greatly improved in London and other major conurbations but often remains poor in the suburbs and in rural areas. It is understandable that funds for improvements must focus on where they will achieve the greatest benefits. However, through proper discussion with disabled people there are opportunities to better meet the needs of all disabled people. — While individual modes of transport have improved the barriers between them, steps, lack of drop curbs, street furniture etc, make moving between them unnecessarily difficult. Two steps can make it impossible for someone to make a journey that is well served by an accessible bus and train. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 161

5. We are now drawing close to the end dates when all vehicles must comply; which raises the following concerns — Provision is in place for regulations to be partially applied to train rolling stock which has a lifespan beyond the end date for compliance of 2020. The pragmatic compromises this will entail require a mechanism that allows disabled people to consider and to endorse decisions. Without that we risk making avoidable mistakes and outcry from some disabled people who will have difficulties using partially compliant vehicles. This is a role currently supported by DPTAC. — Current order rates for new buses indicate that it is highly unlikely that new purchases will be sufficient to replace the 39% of the UK bus fleet which needs to be replaced by the 2015–17 deadlines for compliance. There will need to be a new mechanism of validation developed for low floor buses which pre-date the PSVAR so that they can be modified to meet the requirements of the regulations. — DPTAC have seen no convincing information about the degree of compliance in the long distance bus fleet which needs to be fully compliant by 2020. — The introduction of PSVAR compliant buses is of limited use where there is no raised pavement by the bus stop, particularly in some rural settings where there sometimes isn’t even a pavement. This limits who can enter the bus and means continued isolation for many disabled and older people. There should be an obligation on local authorities to match improved accessibility of buses with investment in highway infrastructure. 6. Taxis are a life line for many disabled people—the greatest and most glaring problem undermining an integrated provision of accessible public transport is in the taxi fleet. DPTAC accepts that for the foreseeable future a universally accessible vehicle will not be available. What are commonly described as accessible taxis are more accurately described as Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (WAVs). 7. When not carrying a wheelchair a WAV is able to operate as a normal taxi or PHV. A non-disabled person has no difficulty in using a WAV. However some people with physical impairments find that some of the features of the design which enables a WAV to accommodate a wheelchair make it difficult or impossible for them to use the vehicle. Most commonly this is because the vehicle has to have a high floor to provide a level surface for the wheelchair. The steep step which results is an obstacle for some people, particularly if they also have to stoop to get through the doorway. In addition in some WAVs the seat is set back some way from door requiring the passenger to stand and turn in the vehicle before being able to take their seat. 8. DPTAC believes that it is vital that the Law Commission Review of legislation covering and Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles should lead to the introduction of a regime which enable licensing authorities to ensure that there is an adequate mix of vehicles available in their area to meet the needs of all disabled people. 9. Despite the major improvement in the provision of accessible public transport vehicles disabled people are still reporting considerable problems using accessible transport services: — Conflict is arising over use of the wheelchair space (particularly but not exclusively on buses) between wheelchair users, parents with children in buggies, people with wheeled walking aids which cannot be easily stowed and passengers with luggage. — Recent research by Passenger Focus showed that there are still high failure rates for assistance services on trains — There are many anecdotal reports of bus drivers refusing to lower ramps for wheelchair users and failing to ensure they get close enough to the kerb for people with mobility impairments who cannot climb up into the bus from the road. It is difficult to quantify the extent of this problem, but the very regularity of such reports serves to discourage potential users. — The EHRC report “Hidden in Plain Sight” highlighted the problems with the behaviour of other passengers. The report identified public transport as a hot spot for hate crime incidents noting that problems are particularly associated with staff being ill equipped to deal with the issue, poor reporting of information and lack of effort to deal with known issues locally—such as working with Police and local schools. — Travel training and buddying schemes to help disabled people learn how to use public transport have been very successful but are not being rolled out consistently and are often hampered by silo funding by local authorities limiting beneficiaries of such schemes to particular impairment groups or age groups. 10. Although the Equality Act, and before that the Disability Discrimination Act, made it unlawful for transport operators to fail to make reasonable adjustments to meet the needs of disabled passengers there has been very little successful litigation in this area. It seems questionable whether individual litigation will provide a suitable way for disabled people to ensure the quality and consistency of service that they require to make public transport accessible to them. It may be that some other enforcement mechanism may be required to ensure that transport operators give the issues sufficient attention. 11. Improvements in the design of vehicles, driven by legislation have greatly increased the opportunities for people with physical and sensory impairments to travel by public transport. However, the needs of people Ev 162 Transport Committee: Evidence

with mental health difﬁculties are often overlooked in terms of provision of concessions and staff training and passenger awareness. As a result, many people with mental health difﬁculties who may experience extreme anxiety and concern about travelling are effectively trapped in their homes. Getting out, getting work, meeting with others are essential aspects of maintaining a healthy mental state.

Q2. The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares 12. The provision of information for disabled passengers is improving, and the Olympic Journey planner began to help people plan journeys with confidence, but with a very limited range of destinations, almost all in London, where it was able to build on the existing TfL website. 13. This aspect of the Olympic legacy would seem to be easier to build on than some of the other provision such as dedicated shuttle buses. However there is a long way to go, particularly outside major cities where the provision of detailed digital information is limited. 14. DPTAC wishes to place on record two matters of concern in rolling out journey planning websites: — It is important to be sure that all websites are accessible to all impairments and that the information base is interchangeable. — It cannot be assumed that everyone has a smart phone or will have one in the near future. The technology is expensive and inaccessible to some impairments—depending on impairment type many people will not be able to see a screen or be able to use a touch screen. 15. Audio visual announcement systems can also help disabled people to travel with greater confidence. However, vague announcements such as “this bus is on diversion” can be frightening for a disabled person and act as a deterrent to using public transport. 16. Technology has the potential to do much more to make transport accessible to disabled passengers. For example on line systems to track rail passengers who need assistance which can send reminders to station staff as the train approaches (including the seat and carriage where the disabled person is travelling). Similar systems could allow a disabled person to book assistance and alter the time of train on which they will travel if their engagement finishes early or late. 17. One of the concerns of disabled people making longer journeys is the need for consistency of provision in all parts of the Country. The regulations governing vehicles are intended to reduce this problem but only apply to technical matters. Variations in the conditions applicable to concessionary passes, differing levels of provision of wheelchair accessible taxis, and currently big variations in the quality of bus services all mean that disabled people have to undertaken a great deal of research before embarking on their journey. 18. The localism agenda is enabling those areas which want to invest in accessible public transport to do so, but is threatening to leave behind those authorities which do not see it as a priority. Inconsistent provision of public transport threatens to become a new barrier to disabled people using public transport.

Q3. The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 19. The failure to provide reliable assistance for disabled passengers is in many ways the biggest barrier to disabled people using public transport (at least in cities where there is a good quality service and widespread provision of compliant vehicles). As noted in paragraph 9 above bus drivers who fail to “kneel” their bus or don’t attempt to get passengers to vacate the wheelchair space make an accessible bus inaccessible to many people with physical impairments. Similarly the lack of confidence in the assistance service on railways deters many disabled people from using this mode of transport. 20. Staff who are helpful and proactive can build the confidence of disabled people, but one uncooperative staff member can destroy confidence and convince disabled people (and others they talk to) that public transport remains off limits. 21. There are significant benefits to be gained for all passengers and operators if staff are aware of how to meet different needs. In particular, DPTAC are aware that the needs of people with mental health conditions— which are extremely common—are poorly understood by staff and other passengers. This greatly discourages many disabled people from travelling by public transport and, as suggested by the EHRC’s report, can lead to bullying and hate crime.

Q4. What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 22. The success of the Olympics seems to have been built to a large extent on a commitment to ﬂood the network with staff who were trained to be helpful, informative, and empowered to solve problems (eg by getting on to crowded trains to instruct passengers to move up to let on wheelchair users). Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 163

23. Staff who are positive, informed and empowered to be helpful will go a long way to give disabled people the confidence to use public transport. Conversely, staff who hide in offices when there are problems (perhaps because they are not supported by senior management) make problems worse. 24. Because of the importance of staff assistance in making public transport accessible to disabled passengers DPTAC considers proposals (such as those in the McNulty Review) which aim to reduce staffing to be of great concern. However, freeing up staff from a ticket office so that they can provide advice and information to all passengers and practical assistance to disabled people is helpful.

Conclusions and Observations 25. Much has been done to solve the engineering problems which meant that public transport was inaccessible to many people with physical and sensory impairments. Nevertheless many years of continued investment into the infrastructure of the rail and tube networks will be required before the majority of public transport is accessible. Much still needs to be done to support people with mental health problems. 26. It is crucial that focus is not lost as we approach the deadline for all buses trains and coaches to be accessible. Concerted effort is required to support the transport industry to make the necessary investment to ensure that we achieve 100% compliance for buses and trains. 27. The increasing availability of accessible vehicles is highlighting that accessibility is much more than an engineering problem. Good quality information, trained staff who are ready and willing to provide assistance, and work to improve the behaviour of some other passengers are all required to create an accessible public transport system. 28. DPTAC is disappointed therefore that the Department for Transport’s recently published Disability Action Plan “Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all” does not set any targets for increasing the number of journeys made disabled passengers. This would provide evidence that the investment made in access improvements to vehicles was successful, or conversely highlight that some of the behavioural issues we describe are still preventing disabled people from using public transport. 29. DPTAC is also concerned that in addition to its own long planned abolition, the Department for Transport is further cutting the number of staff dedicated to transport and disability issues. This seems to indicate that the Department plans to give the issue a lower priority at this crucial time. It is clear that the small, dedicated team is already very overstretched. Given that transport is so key to the quality of life of disabled people and to their opportunities to contribute to economic growth it seems perverse that DfT, rather than actively pursuing innovative, cost effective solutions, is cutting its dedicated resource to just two relatively junior members of staff. 30. DPTAC believes that to relax now in the belief that the job is largely complete would be a fatal error which risks wasting much of the investment of the past 10 years at a time when an accessible public transport system is needed more than ever. January 2013

Written evidence from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (DAT 14) Introduction 1. On 12 September, the Equality and Human Rights Commission published the findings of its formal inquiry into disabled related harassment. Our extensive evidence indicates that for many disabled people, harassment— including verbal and physical abuse, theft and fraud, sexual harassment and bullying—is a commonplace experience. Many disabled people have come to accept it as inevitable because public authorities have not put adequate structures in place to prevent and address it. 2. Disabled people often do not report harassment for a number of reasons: it may be unclear who to report it to; they may fear the consequences of reporting; or they may fear that the police or other authorities will not believe them. A culture of disbelief exists around this issue. For this reason, we describe it as a problem which is “hidden in plain sight”. 3. There is a systemic failure by public authorities to recognise the extent and impact of harassment and abuse of disabled people, take action to prevent it happening in the first place and intervene effectively when it does. These organisational failings need to be addressed as a matter of urgency and the main report makes a number of recommendations aimed at helping agencies to do so. Public transport has been identified as a “hotspot” for harassment. This briefing sets out the key issues for public transport providers: — Key areas for improvement for Public Transport. — Increase reporting of harassment. — Investigate, recognise and record harassment as disability related. — Reduce potential for conflict over shared space. — Work with schools and police to reduce harassment by young people. Ev 164 Transport Committee: Evidence

— Provide better support for disabled victims. — Intervene effectively to prevent escalation. — Improve communication with other agencies.

Harassment on Public Transport 4. Harassment of disabled people takes place in many different settings but public transport has been identiﬁed as a particular hotspot.43 On and around public transport, including stations, stops, ticket ofﬁces and waiting areas were settings for harassment incidents cited in almost every focus group and interview conducted for the inquiry. These affected respondents’ lives not only because of the intrinsic features of the incidents themselves but also because many disabled people rely on public transport.44 5. Respondents mentioned being stared or laughed at, avoided and commented on by other passengers. They also talked about other passengers showing impatience or annoyance, for example if they were slow or took up a lot of space with aids such as assistance dogs, sticks, frames and wheelchairs.45 6. One visually impaired person recalled an example of such resentment, although it did happen some years ago. On a crowded tube train she had pulled her assistance dog onto her lap and when someone else put a case on top of the dog she pushed it slightly away. The other passenger slapped her, saying, “Who do you think you are?”46

7. “Use of public transport can be in itself isolating on two counts. Firstly, a person who is waiting for public transport is there for a reason and should bullying take place at this point, the individual would not have the same opportunity to vacate this environment in the same way that they would, for example, leave a shop if they felt threatened. Secondly, once on the public transport, the journey itself can be quite isolating as once underway, the individual may not have the opportunity to simply get up and exit the transport for a range of reasons.” (Submission to the inquiry by Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE))

8. Being harassed made people feel generally less safe, and often very fearful. Many respondents had curtailed their lives to avoid situations where they felt they were likely to be harassed; for example, avoiding public transport at certain times of day or not going out at night.

9. Respondents also complained about bus companies that did not maintain their wheelchair ramps in working order and about individual bus drivers who were inconsiderate or ignorant of their needs. One respondent with a mobility impairment said she often could not board buses because the drivers did not pull in close enough or refused to lower the step. Bus drivers were often seen to be overly concerned with their timetables, to the detriment of disabled passengers’ convenience and safety. Respondents said that drivers in a hurry sometimes didn’t stop for them or moved off from the bus stop before they were safely seated or—when getting off—before they were safely on the pavement.47

Conﬂict Over Shared Space 10. Seating reserved for disabled people and wheelchair spaces on public transport were reported to be a major cause of harassment, especially where designed to be shared with groups such as pregnant women or people with young children. The main cause of the problem was perceived by respondents to be the “competition” for the relatively small number of places.48 A blind person stopped using public transport and was living a much more restricted life because the driver on her route had on more than one occasion made her give up her seat for a woman with a child in a pram. Disoriented and offered no help by any of the other passengers, she found it difﬁcult to balance on the moving bus and she was unable to see where to hold on. She was too traumatised by these incidents to keep on using the bus.49

11. One person with a mobility impairment gets stiff, is often in a lot of pain and needs to use a stick when walking. Recently, on a bus, there were children in the disabled seats, with their mother. It was crowded. She desperately needed to sit down. She stood near to them but no-one got up. She asked if they were disabled. 43 Sin et al. for Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2009, Disabled people’s experiences of targeted violence and hostility. Available from: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_ﬁles/research/disabled_people_s_experiences_of_targeted_ violence_and_hostility.pdf 44 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission, p18. 45 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission. 46 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission. 47 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission. 48 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission. 49 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 165

The woman/mother was talking on her phone and said in a very loud voice: “She is asking children to get up so she can sit on the seat.” Eventually one of the children stood for her in spite of the mother’s attitude.50

12. “A lot of conﬂict between disabled people and other service users can be traced back to the infrastructure and how transport systems are designed. If... spaces that may be allocated for wheelchair users or people who have other mobility impairments [are] not well signed... then conﬂict between people who may be standing or sitting in these places and a disabled person who needs them is almost inevitable.”

Stephen Golden, Head of Equality and Inclusion at Transport for London

13. Some academics told us that the “bottleneck” effect of many people generally in a hurry to get to wherever they are going and the potential for someone who needs to do something a little differently, or slower, is evidenced as triggering anger or resentment or impatience. Public authorities and transport operators have a duty to proactively consider how they are going to effectively reduce this tension in their preventative work, for example, by designing out tension hot spots such as shared spaces that cause conﬂict, but we received little evidence of where this is being addressed.

14. One common theme that was reported by people who experienced harassment on public transport was that the operators’ employees, especially bus drivers, did little to prevent the harassment from occurring, or were even the perpetrators of it. Disabled people stopped using public transport as a result, which left them more isolated and socially excluded.

Harassment by School Children

15. Some disabled people and their organisations raised concerns about the harassment of disabled people by schoolchildren on public transport. Transport providers and schools should work together to resolve these problems.

16. “Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) identiﬁed that harassment of disabled people on public transport is a problem. They commissioned research which indicated that schoolchildren are often the main instigators for harassing disabled people, especially people with learning disabilities, particularly on buses and trains and when waiting at bus stops. In response to this, GMPTE have undertaken various projects to enhance the travel opportunities of people with learning disabilities and improve access, enabling them to make better use of mainstream public transport services and increase conﬁdence when using public transport.” (Submission to the inquiry by Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE))

17. “Andrew was on his way home from college using the bus. A group of schoolchildren in uniform spoke to him as they were all getting on the bus. The schoolchildren sat at the back of the bus while Andrew sat at the front. When the schoolchildren got off the bus, one of them smacked Andrew over the back of his head. When Andrew got home, he reported it to his support workers. After discussing it with his support workers Andrew didn’t want to report the incident to the police. Andrew often asked “Why me?” Andrew continues to travel independently on public transport and has community members he often sees when travelling which bring him security. Now Andrew is wary of groups of young adults/children when he is out in the community and goes out of his way to avoid them.” (Submission to the inquiry by United Response)

18. “Dave has learning disabilities and is partially sighted so when out in the community he has a white stick to support him with his bearings. Dave got on a bus and school children in uniform started sniggering at him and calling him names such as “Blind *******”. Dave decided it was best not to say anything to the children or the bus driver but was determined to stay on the bus until he reached his destination.” (Submission to the inquiry by United Response)

Reporting Levels

19. There is a substantial gap between the amount of harassment that disabled people experience, the amount that they report and the amount that is recorded as disability motivated. Despite anecdotal evidence that disability-related harassment is a major problem on public transport, reporting levels appear low. The British Transport Police recorded a total of only 60 disability-related crimes in the three years 2007–09. The Association of Transport Operating Companies were aware of only 19 recorded incidents which were classiﬁed as hate crimes against disabled people on the entire rail network in the previous year, out of a total of 61,000 incidents.

20. The low reporting levels may be because disabled people think that behaviours are non-criminal so no- one will be interested in them. They may also be unclear who to complain to. For example if someone is harassed on a train and then gets off at a station, they may not encounter anyone from the company running the train service. 50 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report. Equality and Human Rights Commission. Ev 166 Transport Committee: Evidence

21. Respondents also said they had found transport providers difﬁcult to communicate with or to access in the past, and overly rigid or process bound in their dealings with disabled people.51

Understanding the Problem 22. The evidence we gathered suggested some differences in opinion and understanding on the extent and nature of the problem between different public transport organisations and providers. For example, Transport for London had a good understanding that harassment takes place and what needs to be done. Other organisations had less of an understanding and tended to perceive the relatively low numbers of complaints as indicative that this is not a major problem. 23. “Most of our members don’t actually have a harassment categorisation in their complaints systems, so even if harassment is going on it’s not generally resulting in complaints by disabled people to bus operators.” (Stephen Salmon, Director of Policy Development from the Confederation of Passenger Transport) 24. Many operators still see physical access in relation to disabled people as their main issue. They did not always understand the links between access and disabled provision with incidents of harassment. Transport operators need help in understanding the scale of the problem. 25. Some transport operators talked about their responsibilities under the Disability Discrimination Act in terms of ensuring discrimination does not occur in the delivery of services and focus wholly on access issues. They had less of a sense of their responsibility in terms of preventing disability-related harassment. For many, this is understandable, given that as private sector organisations they were not subject to the DED (now replaced by the PSED). Notwithstanding that there is no legal obligation to prevent harassment, we do feel that there is a moral and corporate social responsibility obligation to. And of course it makes good business sense, attracting more customers.

Good Practice 26. Most public transport is provided by the private sector. In providing services, private companies must comply with relevant equalities legislation—the Disability Discrimination Act until October 2010, the Equality Act 2010 since then. They must not discriminate themselves and if a crime occurs on public transport they must take action to stop it, such as stopping the bus and calling the police. Some public transport operators are public authorities and have responsibilities for eliminating harassment under the public sector equality duty (PSED), both within services they deliver and those that they procure from other providers. 27. We found several examples of good practice in the public transport sector. For example: 995 rail stations on the network have achieved “Safer Stations” Status, which means CCTV has been installed along with improvements in security.

28. For bus services in London, the bus companies are contractors to Transport for London. As part of the contract, there is an obligation on the bus operators to record and report all incidents that happen on buses to Transport for London. Incidents of harassment would come under that obligation. But this obligation is not something that is widely used across the country. In fact, Stephen Salmon, director of policy development from the Confederation of Passenger Transport, described it as “extremely rare” and “virtually unknown” outside London. Transport for London has its own travel mentoring programme helping people make their journeys. It runs a quarterly meeting with young people with learning disabilities around what they can do to make themselves safer when they are travelling on the network.

Working with Other Agencies 29. The Inquiry identiﬁed examples of both good and ineffective inter-agency working. Agencies’ working together before an issue becomes “critical” is seen as important. We wish to see greater progress made by public authorities to foster good relations. Examples of this work could include public authorities in the same locality working together to tackle the prejudice and hostility that disabled people can experience when using public transport.

Recommendations 30. Our full report sets out measures which our evidence suggests could help prevent disability related harassment and improve responses to it. Over the next six months we will consult widely with stakeholders on whether these are the right steps, how they might work and whether there are any other measures which might be more effective. We are keen to engage with all parties to ﬁnd out how the improvement can be achieved for the most reasonable cost. Most importantly, we recognise that we will only succeed in effecting change when others take responsibility and ownership for these recommendations. 51 Sykes, W., Groom, C. and Desai, P., 2011, Disability-related harassment: the role of public bodies. A qualitative research report, p33. Equality and Human Rights Commission. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 167

Seven Core Recommendations

31. At this stage, it is clear that there are seven areas where improvements will show to us that society is achieving real progress in tackling harassment: — There is real ownership of the issue in organisations critical to dealing with harassment. Leaders show strong personal commitment and determination to deliver change. — Deﬁnitive data is available which spells out the scale, severity and nature of disability harassment and enables better monitoring of the performance of those responsible for dealing with it. — The Criminal Justice System is more accessible and responsive to victims and disabled people and provides effective support to them. — We have a better understanding of the motivations and circumstances of perpetrators and are able to more effectively design interventions. — The wider community has a more positive attitude towards disabled people and better understands the nature of the problem. — Promising approaches to preventing and responding to harassment and support systems for those who require them have been evaluated and disseminated. — All frontline staff who may be required to recognise and respond to issues of disability-related harassment have received effective guidance and training.

32. A number of more detailed recommendations lie beneath these seven core areas including: — Removing all barriers to reporting for disabled people and putting in place processes to encourage reporting. — Improving data collection and recording. — Using the public sector equality duty as a framework for helping promote positive images of disabled people and redressing disproportionate representation of disabled people across all areas of public life. — Encouraging all individuals and organisations to recognise, report and respond to any incidences of disability related harassment they may encounter.

Specific Recommendations for Public Transport

33. In addition to the core recommendations, there are recommendations targeted at different sectors, including public transport: — Transport providers should identify ways to design out potential for conflict in new fleet and transport infrastructure design. For example, they should review their vehicles and waiting areas to ensure that conflicts between disabled passengers and those with pushchairs are minimised. They should also ensure that disabled access provisions are clearly identified and enforced and promptly resolve any disputes regarding these. — Public transport operators should develop reciprocal reporting arrangements between providers so that people can report harassment experienced at stops, stations and on transport to whichever operator they encounter. They should also develop systems to allow repeat perpetrators to be refused entry to each other’s vehicles (similar to those already used by licensed premises). — Regular disability equality training should be provided for frontline staff on handling disability- related harassment and clear guidance to staff on routes to take when reporting an incident. This should be included as part of core training, before transport staff work with the public. — Disabled people should be involved in public transport policy development and transport providers should work in partnership with criminal justice agencies to reduce risk on and around transport provision. — Data on high risk areas and subsequent actions to reduce risk should be collated. Based on this data they should provide adequate protection where known high risks exist, in the same way as other provision is made, for example, around football matches.

34. The Commission will seek to progress and ﬁnalise the recommendations in partnership with the various groups and agencies in the coming months. But everyone should be aware that disability-related harassment is predominantly a social problem and one that, in the ﬁnal analysis, also requires an individual response and commitment to change. Ev 168 Transport Committee: Evidence

Written evidence from the Department for Transport (DAT 59) Introduction 1. The Government welcomes the Committee’s timely inquiry into transport for disabled people and, in particular, the effectiveness of the legislation aimed at improving accessibility. 2. The Government acknowledges that problems with transport provision can prevent people (not just disabled people) from accessing key services such as education and health care, as well as activities such as employment, shopping or leisure, and visiting family and friends. 3. These problems take many guises: the availability and physical accessibility of transport; the cost of transport; perceptions of safety and security; and staff attitudes. The Government wants everybody to have the opportunity to play their full part in society, so the Department for Transport aims to work to overcome those barriers which impede or prevent access to the transport network or reduce mobility. In seeking improvements for disabled people, it is recognised that there will be beneﬁts for all travellers. 4. The Department for Transport’s accessibility action plan ‘Transport for Everyone: an action plan to improve accessibility for all’, published on 13 December 2012, sets out the Department’s policies and actions over the period of the next Spending Review and beyond.

The effectiveness of legislation relating to transport for disabled people: is it working? Is it sufﬁciently comprehensive? How effectively is it enforced? 5. The Government acknowledges the important role of the original Disability Discrimination Acts of 1995 and 2005 in leading to improvements in accessibility for disabled people. Following the introduction of the Equality Act 2010 and ratiﬁcation of the UN Convention on the rights of people with disabilities, the legal obligation to provide access to transport services is now embedded in Government policy.

Buses 6. Provisions in Part 12 of the Equality Act 2010 relating to public service vehicles replicate those originally contained in Part 5 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. These provisions enable us to introduce regulations making all new buses accessible to the widest possible range of disabled people.

Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 2000 (PSVAR) 7. The Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000 (PSVAR) require facilities such as low ﬂoor boarding devices, visual contrast on step edges, handholds and handrails, priority seats and provision for passengers in wheelchairs. 8. All buses designed to carry 22 passenger or more and used on local or scheduled services will be required to be fully PSVAR compliant by 2015, 2016 or 2017 (depending on the bus type). Further details are at Annex A. 9. Latest statistics (November 2012) show that, for 2011/12, 71% of buses in England now meet PSVAR accessibility requirements, while 89% of buses operate with a low ﬂoor facility. The Government will continue to monitor progress towards full compliance with PSVAR. We will liaise with bus companies to ensure investment in accessible buses remains on track.

The Public Service Vehicles (Conduct of Drivers, Inspectors, Conductors and Passengers) Regulations 1990 (amended 2002) 10. The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for a bus operator to discriminate against a disabled person simply because they are disabled, treat disabled people less favourably or fail to make a reasonable adjustment to the way they provide their services. 11. The Public Service Vehicles (Conduct of Drivers, Inspectors, Conductors and Passengers) Regulations (Amendment) 2002 place an obligation on drivers of regulated buses (those which must comply with PSVAR) to help disabled people to board or alight from their vehicle. Further details are at Annex A. 12. Also, from 1 October 2002, the Regulations were updated to require all buses to allow disabled passengers to board with their assistance dogs. There is no limit on the number of assistance dogs allowed to travel on a bus at one time.

EU Bus and Coach Passenger Rights Regulation (EU Reg 181/2011) 13. The EU Regulation on bus and coach passenger rights will apply in all Member States from 1 March 2013, primarily to long-distance regular services 250km or longer. 14. The Regulation lays out the responsibilities of operators and terminal owners in the case of delays, cancellations, accidents and other issues affecting passengers, including disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 169

15. A limited number of mandatory provisions of the EU Regulation to help disabled passengers will also apply to all regular bus and coach services. These are set out in Annex A. 16. In order to enforce these new requirements from March 2013, the Government will designate a national enforcement body and outline enforcement arrangements in domestic legislation.

Concessionary Travel 17. The statutory national travel concession allows eligible older and disabled people to travel for free anywhere in England on local buses at off-peak times. There are around 11 million older and disabled people eligible for the concession. In 2011/12 there were 9.8 million passes with active validity periods, making, on average 109 journeys per pass. 18. The Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007 (the CBT Act) amended existing primary legislation in the Transport Act 2000 (the 2000 Act) and the Greater London Authority Act 1999 (the 1999 Act) to give free England-wide off-peak bus travel to those who are eligible. Both the 2000 Act and the 1999 Act list categories of disability which define eligibility for concessionary travel. 19. Government funding for the statutory concession is provided through the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Formula Grant. 20. Any local enhancements, such as peak-time bus travel, concessions on other modes, or to other groups of people not defined in legislation, are discretionary. Local authorities fund such enhancements based on their assessment of local needs and their overall financial priorities. 21. There are no plans either to withdraw the statutory entitlement to concessionary bus travel or to introduce means testing to assess eligibility for the concession. Primary legislation would be required to change the entitlement to the concession, for example to change the categories of people who are eligible. 22. The CBT Act has powers to simplify the administrative arrangements for concessionary travel eg by moving responsibility from district councils to county councils. This was done in April 2011. The move to upper tier authorities should bring about savings through economies of scale. 23. The Department for Transport has issued guidance to Travel Concession Authorities (TCAs) to assist them with interpretation of the legislation regarding those who are eligible for concessionary travel, as TCAs are responsible for assessing applicants resident in their area. With the forthcoming changes to introduce Personal Independence Payments (PIP) in place of Disability Living Allowance (DLA), the Department’s guidance is under review. DfT is working with the Department for Work and Pensions to update the guidance. 24. Further details about the national travel concession are provided at Annex A. In addition, the Disabled Persons’ Railcard run by the Association of Train Operating Companies, offers a third off most National Rail tickets. The Blue Badge scheme (see below) is also an important concession.

Rail 25. Improving access to rail travel for disabled passengers is a Government commitment. The steady increase in purchases of the Disabled Persons and Senior Citizens Rail Cards, as well as requests for assistance, is welcome evidence that more disabled people are travelling by rail, more frequently. 26. Provisions in Part 12 of the Equality Act 2010 relating to rail vehicles replicate those originally contained in Part 5 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. These provisions enable the Government to introduce regulations making all new rail vehicles accessible.

The Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998 (RVAR) 27. New rail vehicles have been subject to mandatory accessibility standards since the introduction of RVAR in 1998. 45% of rail vehicles meet those standards—and we have recently passed the point where 50% of the “heavy rail” train fleet is fully accessible. These figures include a growing number (over 500) of older vehicles that have been fully refurbished to the standards. Plans to make many more older fleets fully accessible are already underway, years ahead of the 2020 deadline. 28. Most older, unmodified fleets can still be used by most disabled people—for example, they might have wheelchair spaces or priority seating but not, as yet, the full range of accessibility enhancements.

Railways (Interoperability) Regulations 2006 (PRM-TSI)/Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Non-Interoperable Rail System) Regulations 2010 29. The pan-European standards that replaced domestic requirements for trains in 2008 closely mirrored the UK’s previous requirements—evidence that suggests our original regulations were sufficiently comprehensive. However, the Government took the opportunity in 2010 to refine our domestic requirements, to take on board lessons learned and to better reflect their scope (to “non-heavy” rail, ie trams, Underground, metros and heritage/tourist lines). Ev 170 Transport Committee: Evidence

30. Responsibility for enforcement of rail vehicle accessibility rests with the Ofﬁce of Rail Regulation (ORR). Passengers who experience a problem on a train—such as the failure to switch on the audio-visual passenger information system when this is present—are encouraged to report this to the ORR.

Rail infrastructure 31. The Government’s policy to improve access to rail stations fulfils obligations under its Passenger and Station Licences; the DfT’s “Accessible Train Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice” 2010; the DfT’s Guidance: “How to write your Disabled People’s Protection Policy” (2009); and the requirements of legislation such as the Disability Discrimination Act 1995/Equality Act 2010, and the Human Rights Act 1998. 32. All licensed train or station operators, including Network Rail and London Underground, must have in place a Disabled People’s Protection Policy (DPPP) which sets out the standards of service and facilities that disabled customers can expect. It explains how they will make reasonable adjustments to allow disabled passenger access to their service, for example by providing an accessible taxi at no additional charge, to passengers who cannot use a particular station. 33. The Department for Transport approves DPPPs before a licence is granted by the ORR, and then reviews them annually to ensure that they are kept up to date. 34. The DPPP also explains how passengers with reduced mobility can book assistance in advance of travel and commits the operator to participating in the “Passenger Assist” system that allows passengers to pre-book assistance (see below). 35. The Equality Act 2010 does not necessarily require changes to infrastructure when making reasonable adjustments to allow access to services. In addition to staff assistance, all operators will provide a free accessible taxi to anyone unable to use a particular station. However, where infrastructure changes are made at stations they need to comply with “Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People: A Code of Practice” which the Department for Transport last updated in November 2011. 36. The Code of Practice applies to new, renewed or replacement infrastructure and sets out European standards for station design taken from the “Technical Specification of Interoperability: Persons with Reduced Mobility” (2008), domestic standards (drawn largely from BS8300) and good practice. It covers all aspects of station design. If operators cannot comply with the standards in the Code of Practice, they can apply for a dispensation from the Department for Transport (if the stations is on the Trans-European Network then a derogation from the TSI would be required). This will take into account information provided by the applicant and mitigating actions proposed to help disabled passengers, as well as the views of Passenger Focus and the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC). 37. DPPPs require operators to comply with the Code of Practice and enforcement is carried out by the ORR. 38. Evidence that more disabled people are using the rail network as a result of improvements at stations is further supported by a study carried out by Steer Davies Gleave Ltd, who undertook a study in 2009 and early 2010 to assess the impact and benefits of the Department for Transport’s £370 million Access for All programme that will provide an accessible route at more than 150 stations by 2015. The study concentrated on a sample group of Access for All stations, compared to a control group of similar but inaccessible stations, and final results showed that 13% of all passengers, rising to 69% of mobility impaired and 92% of wheelchair users, reported having increased their use of Access for All stations following the improvements.

Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles (Minicabs) 39. The Government has commenced a number of the taxi sections in the Equality Act 2010, principally those which simply transferred existing obligations from the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. For example, taxi drivers cannot refuse to take a guide dog. The relevant sections are listed in Annex A. 40. The Government is still considering its commencement strategy for section 165 of the Equality Act (placing duties on taxi drivers to assist passengers in wheelchairs). 41. The Government has asked the Law Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of taxi and private hire vehicle (PHV) legislation. The Commission consulted from May to September 2012, and the ﬁnal report and a draft Bill is due in December 2013. 42. The Commission’s consultation document asked for views about how to make most appropriate provision for disabled people. The Government will be publishing its response to the consultation in due course.

Personal Mobility Blue Badge Legislation 43. Blue Badge legislation encompasses the following: Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970; Disabled Persons (Badges for Motor Vehicles) (England) Regulations 2000; Local Authorities Trafﬁc Orders (Exemptions for disabled persons) (England) Regulations 2000. The combined effect of this legislation is that local authorities shall issue eligible disabled people with a parking badge and provide parking concessions to Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 171

enable them to park without charge or time limit in otherwise restricted on-street environments (eg on-street parking meters, pay-and-display) and to park on yellow lines in Great Britain for up to three hours. 44. The primary purpose of the scheme is to help those individuals with the most severe mobility problems to park close to the places they need to access. The scheme has existed since 1971 and effectively facilitates access for over 2.5 million disabled people. The Government believes it is sufﬁciently comprehensive. If it was broadened further the scheme could become unsustainable and the value of the badge to a disabled person with mobility problems would be negated. 45. Administration and enforcement is for local authorities. However, the Government has recently reformed the scheme to tackle fraud and abuse, and to ensure that badges are issued more fairly and consistently across the country. The measures being taken are set out in Annex A. 46. The Department for Transport issues comprehensive guidance to assist local authorities in administering the scheme and the Government is supporting a Private Members Bill that will provide local authorities with improved powers of enforcement. This includes allowing local authority enforcement ofﬁcers to recover, on- street, badges that are being misused, building on a recommendation of the Transport Select Committee in 2008. 47. The Department has contracted with the private sector to operate a dedicated Initial Inquiry Service to provide information to potential applicants before they interact with local authorities. When a badge is issued, every badge holder is issued with a booklet explaining their rights and responsibilities. Comprehensive information is also available on Gov.UK along with the means to make online badge applications. The online application form is accredited by the Shaw Trust (a national charity assisting those who face barriers due to disability).

Use of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988 48. “Invalid Carriage” is the legal term for a manual wheelchair, a powered wheelchair and a mobility scooter. In March 2010, the Department for Transport launched a consultation into the proposed changes to the laws governing powered mobility scooters and powered wheelchairs (DfT 2010–10): http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/closed/2010–10/ Also in March 2010, the Transport Select Committee held an inquiry into Mobility Scooters (Ninth Report of Session 2009–10): http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmtran/414/41402.htm The Department for Transport published its response to the Committee’s inquiry in July 2010: http://www.ofﬁcialdocuments.gov.uk/document/cm78/7887/7887.pdf 49. The Transport Committee included in their conclusions and recommendations that the Department for Transport should consider further the issue of the carriage of mobility scooters on buses and trains and to seek the views of both operators and users when considering further regulation. 50. On 1 March 2012, the Department published a Written Ministerial Statement which set out which issues were to be taken forward following its consultation: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/mobility-scooters-and-powered-wheelchairs These included replacing the term “invalid carriage” with a more suitable term, increasing the maximum unladen weight of Class 2 powered wheelchairs, further consideration of insurance and specialist training providers, and of how current legislation aimed at reducing accidents could be better enforced. From 2013, the police will be able to record whether a mobility vehicle has been involved in an accident on the public highway. 51. There would be no changes to permitted speed limits, the minimum age for using a Class 3 vehicle, and the law relating to the use of a mobility scooter by only one person. 52. The Statement also included a commitment to develop a kite marking scheme to indentify those mobility scooter models that were suitable to be carried on public transport. It also reiterated the Department’s support for the Confederation of Passenger Transport’s “Code of Practice regarding the use and acceptance of mobility scooters on low ﬂoor buses”. Further details are at Annex A.

Aviation 53. There is a wide range of aviation legislation that covers passenger rights, including disabled air travellers (see Annex A). The Government considers this legislation to be comprehensive and that it generally works well. 54. Legislation for disabled air travellers includes protection for disabled air travellers at airports and on board planes and, in cases of denied boarding, cancellation or long delays, disabled passengers and anyone accompanying them are required to be dealt with as a priority. In addition, the Equality Act 2010 applies to air travel in relation to the use of booking services and airport facilities services. Ev 172 Transport Committee: Evidence

55. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) enforces the legislation and has a designated Passenger Advice and Complaints Team with considerable expertise in handling complaints. It is actively engaged with airlines and airports in seeking to improve service levels. 56. The Government continues to monitor the effectiveness of the legislation and the associated enforcement regime. Further action is currently being considered in regard to providing the CAA with wider civil sanctions to supplement its existing criminal penalty powers.

Maritime 57. The Government has yet to commence section 30 of the Equality Act 2010 which provides the power to apply Part 3 of the Act to ships and hovercraft, so the previous anti-discrimination legislation with regard to transporting people by, or a service provided on, a ship or hovercraft continues to apply. Nevertheless, disability discrimination in relation to being transported on a ship or hovercraft is not reported as being a major problem. 58. The Government is continuing to consider its commencement strategy for section 30 in light of the implementation of EU Regulation 1177/2010 on maritime passenger rights, which will apply to most cruise and ferry services operating within the EU. The EU Regulation will enhance existing legislation by providing passengers with the right to assistance in cases of cancelled or delayed departures. It also aims to provide disabled persons and those with reduced mobility the same rights and accessibility assistance when travelling by water as they have in other transport sectors. The EU Regulation entered into force across the EU on 18 December 2012, and our domestic legislation to facilitate implementation is expected to be in place by early February 2013. 59. For the purposes of implementing the EU Regulation, the Passenger Shipping Association has agreed to act as the voluntary complaint handling body for England and Wales, with London TravelWatch retaining responsibility for services operated and licensed by Transport for London. The Consumer Council for Northern Ireland and the Scottish Government have also agreed to take up similar roles in their respective areas. The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) will act as the national enforcement body.

DPTAC 60. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) is a statutory body established by the Transport Act 1985. Its primary function is to provide independent advice to Government, by presenting a pan- disability view on matters relating to disabled travellers in the development of transport policy and any associated legislation, regulation and guidance. The Department for Transport will be considering how best this advice should be provided in future, should the decision be taken to replace DPTAC in light of the review of Non-Departmental Public Bodies.

The accessibility of information: including the provision of information about routes, connections, timetables, delays and service alterations, and fares 61. The Government recognises the crucial role that the provision of information on accessibility of the transport network, and the availability of such information in accessible formats, plays in enabling disabled people to undertake their door to door journeys. The absence of such information can act as a signiﬁcant barrier and, as such, does not meet with the legal obligation to provide access to transport services.

Transport Direct 62. DfT’s Transport Direct Portal provided for some accessibility requirements prior to the Olympics and Paralympics. Research carried out in this area did not identify the existence of any consistent national data about accessible transport that could be used within an internet-based journey planner. Transport Direct therefore included contextual links within its journey results and other outputs, to provide more information and guidance for people with reduced mobility. In addition, the Transport Direct website conforms to Level AA of the Web Accessibility Guidelines (WAI). 63. For the Olympics and Paralympics, Transport Direct worked with the Olympics Delivery Authority (ODA) on the development of a Spectator Journey Planner (SJP). This included the capability to plan an accessible journey to the Games. If a user requested an accessible journey, they would be provided with a journey result that only included services and stops that operators had agreed were accessible. 64. Transport Direct and the ODA worked with operators to agree a “Games Network of Accessible Transport”. This consisted of a network of accessible stations (rail, tram and Underground), as well as a network of accessible rail, bus, coach, river, tram and Underground services that were used to enable Olympics and Paralympics ticket holders to plan an accessible journey. This information was collated by the ODA and Transport Direct into data ﬁles that could be used within the SJP to provide users with details of an accessible journey. 65. Simple selection options were used, so users could ask for a wheelchair accessible journey, a journey with staff assistance, or a wheelchair accessible journey with staff assistance available. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 173

66. The results gave details of potential journeys that met the users’ selection criteria, and included clear information about the modes of transport, the departure and arrival times of the services, interchange times, and additional information where available, such as links to detailed information about a station and any requirements for advanced booking. 67. Although there was limited scope within the SJP for the provision of real time information relating speciﬁcally to accessible journeys (such as a lift being out of order), it is hoped that this level of information, if made available in data, could be provided in the future. 68. The accessible journey planning element of the Spectator Journey Planner proved that it was possible to provide this capability. Transport Direct is therefore working to upgrade its software and data to enable accessible journeys to be planned on the Transport Direct website, as a legacy of the Olympics and Paralympics.

Rail 69. Information provision is very important for all rail passengers, but particularly those with a disability. 70. New rail vehicles have been required to provide audio-visual passenger information since 1998. In addition to the 45% of rail vehicles that are fully accessible, many thousands more carriages that are not yet accessible in other ways also have these systems ﬁtted already. By 2020 all rail vehicles will have this equipment, which must give destination and next stop information, as well as updates on diversions, delays of over 10 minutes and emergency information. 71. Standards for signage and customer information systems (CIS) are set out in the Code of Practice referred to above. The Department for Transport has funded a large number of CIS through the Access for All Small Schemes programme, and several operators have installed systems as a franchise commitment. Around 80% of mainline stations now have it installed. 72. The DfT has also supported the Association of Train Operating Companies’ (ATOC’s) “Stations Made Easy” project which supports the new “Passenger Assist” system. For the ﬁrst time, comprehensive and consistent access audits have been carried out at every station in the country. The information is available online and includes photographs of all the facilities available at stations. This allows disabled passengers to judge whether they can use a particular station, either with or without pre-booked assistance.

Aviation 73. There is a wide range of information available for disabled air travellers and the aviation industry. This includes: a DfT Code of Practice for the industry; a passenger guidance leaflet produced by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (and endorsed by the DfT); and joint CAA/Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) guidelines on pre-notification for the industry. 74. The CAA has also published a table showing the optional charges which apply when booking with the major airlines operating in the UK. This is a valuable tool which will assist disabled and other passengers to make informed decisions when booking flights.

The provision of assistance by public transport staff and staff awareness of the needs of people with different disabilities 75. Physical accessibility is not the only potential barrier passengers face. The Government recognises the important role that the provision of assistance by staff, as well as their awareness of and attitudes towards passenger’s needs, can have on the passengers’ ability and willingness to travel and, in particular, to make use of public transport. Research indicates that negative attitudes by staff act as a serious deterrent and barrier to undertaking journeys. The Olympic and Paralympic Games demonstrated what can be achieved when a good customer service is provided (see below). The Government is therefore seeking to ensure that transport staff have the appropriate disability awareness training to help people, and that passengers can travel in a safe environment.

Buses 76. The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for bus operators to disregard the needs of disabled people, including wheelchair users. Also, since September 2008, all professional bus and coach drivers have been required to hold a Certificate of Professional Competence as a requirement of the EU Directive 2003/59. In order to keep their Driver Certificate of Professional Competence, drivers are required to carry out 35 hours of periodic training every five years. 77. Disability Awareness Training is available as part of the periodic Certificate of Professional Competence training syllabus and the training materials can be obtained free of charge from the Go Skills website. 78. These training materials have been developed to reflect the content and best practice set out in the Disability Equality and Awareness Training Framework for Transport Staff developed by the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee. Ev 174 Transport Committee: Evidence

79. We recommend that transport operators involve disabled people themselves in the training, and that both front line and management staff are trained and their skills regularly updated. 80. The Confederation of Passenger Transport have estimated that across the whole bus and coach industry, approximately 75% of drivers have already completed some form of disability awareness training through the Driver Certificate of Professional Competence and this figure continues to rise each year. 81. We are taking this further by working with the transport industry to ensure greater disability awareness amongst staff, following on from the positive example set out during the Olympics and Paralympic Games. 82. The Department for Transport will seek to ensure that existing disability awareness training provided by transport operators includes modules on disability-related harassment, and involving stakeholders. As mentioned in the Department’s recently published Accessibility Action Plan, we will explore with the Traffic Commissioner the scope for developing a Code of Practice for bus operators aimed at reducing harassment on the bus network.

Rail 83. “Passenger Assist” is operated by ATOC. It was introduced in 2011 in response to a report by Passenger Focus that the previous system (Assisted Passenger Reservation System) was not working. The Department for Transport has allocated around £500,000 from the Access for All Small Schemes programme to ATOC to help develop the new system, and a further £370,000 to help develop the associated “Stations Made Easy” tool on the National Rail Enquiries website, which helps disabled passengers decide if they can use a particular station. 84. Customers booking assistance are requested to give 24 hours’ notice. This helps operators to plan their resources, ensuring staff are in the right place at the right time. Where passengers have not pre-booked, then railway staff will make all reasonable endeavour to provide assistance on the day, but it is more likely that some delay or inconvenience to the passenger could result, particularly when travel is planned from an unstaffed station. We understand from ATOC that the level of service has improved signiﬁcantly. 85. DPPPs also require that all front line rail managers and staff are required to undertake disability awareness training.

Taxis 86. As mentioned earlier, the Government is still considering its commencement strategy for section 165 of the Equality Act (placing duties on taxi drivers to assist passengers in wheelchairs). The position at present is that local licensing authorities can require taxi and private hire vehicle drivers to undertake disability awareness training. Otherwise drivers themselves can opt to undertake training for their own beneﬁt. The Department for Transport will continue to work with operators and authorities on encouraging training, eg by formal training or voluntary measures such as guidance or video.

Aviation 87. European Regulation 1007/2006 requires that all staff providing direct assistance to disabled passengers should have the knowledge of how to meet the needs of various disabilities and mobility impairments. Airports and airlines must also provide suitable disability/equality awareness training and refresher training, when available.

What can be learnt from transport provision during the Paralympics and how can we build on its successes? 88. The Olympic and Paralympic Games saw record breaking demand for public transport, and ratings for spectator travel experience, relating to the ease and efficiency of public transport during the Games, were very high. These satisfaction levels were closely linked to the enhanced customer service that was provided. 89. For example, Transport for London (TfL) set out to re-deploy over 3,000 non-operational staff across the transport network in customer facing roles. Following a concerted recruitment process, around 3500 Travel Ambassadors were secured and trained, and distributed across the TfL network to provide enhanced customer service and information over the course of the Games. Hundreds of extra staff from train companies and Network Rail worked at the busiest stations across London and serving other Games venues across the country. 90. While TfL did not separate out and record the number of disabled users on the bus, Tube or DLR, anecdotal evidence indicated that numbers of disabled users were much higher during Games time, which was also borne out by the fact that lift usage was significantly higher than usual, and by the numbers for overall wheelchair ticket sales and pre-booked journeys. 91. The infrastructure and facilities improvements undertaken as part of the main programme of works have left a lasting legacy: — Changes needed for the 2012 Games, such as the improvements to Stratford station, DLR, the Jubilee line and London Overground, as well as to highways schemes and cycling and walking routes, will make a significant long-term difference to Londoners and visitors. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 175

— London Underground is carrying out trials on the continued use of manual boarding ramps, which were a great success during the Olympics/Paralympics. This will mean wheelchair users can use many more stations where investment on step-free access has been made (but where the step/gap between the platform and train has continued to be a barrier). — Extended coverage of the spectator journey planner, which was developed for the Games, will allow accessible journeys to be planned.

92. The CAA monitored operational movements at airports during the Games period, and the overall performance was generally very good. Heathrow Airport invested in additional facilities, equipment and training to assist passengers with reduced mobility across the airport, much of which will remain as a legacy beneﬁt.

93. Many of the accessibility improvements were made by the delivery partners as part of their own programmes, while others were made with the support of the Olympic Delivery Authority. The Government recognises the importance of working with all delivery partners to build on the success of the Games. The key will be in ensuring that accessibility is integrated throughout all levels of planning, that continued progress is made in improving physical access to the network, and that the importance of enhanced levels of customer service is recognised.

94. The Government recognises the importance of building on the legacy successes to-date of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The legacy portfolio is broad and varied and the Government is committed to those elements that will require long-term delivery.

Annex A

Buses

PSVAR 2000 progress — The transition will take place over time and transport operators will inevitably use a mixed ﬂeet of accessible and non-accessible vehicles. — Since 31 December 2000, new full size single deck buses over 7.5 tonnes and double deck buses have been required to be fully accessible to disabled people, including wheelchair users. — All full size single deck buses over 7.5 tonnes will be fully accessible from 1 January 2016, and all double deck buses from 1 January 2017. — All buses weighing up to 7.5 tonnes will be fully accessible from 1 January 2015 and coaches by 1 January 2020. — Also since 31 December 2000, new buses weighing up to 7.5 tonnes and coaches have had improved access for ambulant and sensory impaired passengers and, from 1 January 2005, new buses weighing up to 7.5 tonnes have to be wheelchair accessible.

Requirements of the Conduct Regulations — Safely deploy the lift or ramp when a wheelchair user wants to board or alight from a vehicle. — Operate a kneeling system or folding or retractable step so as to minimise the height of the ﬁrst step from the ground if a disabled person is clearly about to board or alight from the vehicle if the driver is requested to do so. — Allow a wheelchair user to board the bus when the wheelchair space is unoccupied. The only exception is if the wheelchair is too large or unsuitable to board the bus. — Where other passengers are occupying the wheelchair space the driver should ask them to move to allow the wheelchair user to board.

Provisions in the EU Bus and Passenger Rights Regulation — Non-discrimination against passengers on the grounds of nationality, disability or reduced mobility. — Compulsory disability awareness training for personnel of carriers and terminal managing bodies (except drivers) who deal directly with the travelling public. — Compensation in respect of damage caused to wheelchairs and other mobility equipment. — Right to travel information throughout a journey and information on passenger rights at designated terminals. — All carriers to have a complaints handling mechanism and passengers able to make complaints. Ev 176 Transport Committee: Evidence

National Travel Concession Scope of the concession — The statutory concession is not a “scheme” but a national minimum standard that Travel Concession Authorities (TCAs) can enhance if they choose to do so. TCAs in England manage the travel concession schemes in their areas. The schemes have to offer at least the statutory minimum, and TCAs negotiate reimbursement for carrying concessionary passengers with the local bus operators in their area. — Concessionary travel is a devolved policy area so the arrangements differ in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The CBT Act contains a power to allow, via future regulations, for necessary changes in English and Welsh legislation to introduce mutual recognition of concessionary bus passes across the UK. However, there are no plans to do this at present and it could only be done with the co-operation of the Devolved Administrations. — Local authorities which are TCAs retain the flexibility to offer more than the statutory concession. If they choose to do so, TCAs can include demand responsive or community transport services as a local concessionary travel scheme enhancement, based on local needs and circumstances. — There would be a significant cost in extending the mandatory concession to other services, but cost is not the only concern. There would need to be fair and robust definitions of eligibility, consideration of demand, and in the case of community transport, which is largely a voluntary sector, whether the service would be able to cope with demand. — Some community buses are already services eligible for concessionary travel as long as they are sufficiently accessible to the public as local bus services.

Travelling companions — Travelling companions or carers are not included in the statutory concession. There are issues around deﬁning who might be eligible as a companion or carer, which would require fair and sensitive assessment of eligibility, as well as measures to mitigate fraud. — The Department for Transport’s survey of TCAs in 2012 showed that 55 of the 89 TCAs outside London offered concessionary bus travel to companions of disabled people. TCAs which offer this enhancement issue bus passes with a “C” or “+1” symbol showing that the pass holder may be accompanied when travelling.

Statutory times — The statutory times available for the mandatory concession are from 9.30am to 11pm Monday to Friday and at all times at weekends and on bank holidays. — The Department’s survey of TCAs in 2012 showed that 66 of the 89 TCAs outside London offered enhancements to their travel concession schemes which gave extensions to the times available for concessionary bus travel. — In London, concessions provided by the Freedom Pass through the 1999 Act are more generous than the England statutory minimum. Travel on other modes (the entire Local London Network) is a statutory minimum entitlement for London residents and the extension to the times beyond those required by the statutory concession are enhancements funded by the London boroughs.

Blue Badge Reform Measures — Amended regulations so that a badge can be withdrawn for misuse following one (as opposed to three) convictions. — A new badge design that is harder to copy, forge and alter, with secure, centralised printing and distribution to prevent fraud from happening in the ﬁrst place. — A new shared, nationwide database of all Blue Badge holders and their key details, preventing multiple and fraudulent applications. The system, called the Blue Badge Improvement Service, enables more effective monitoring of cancelled, lost and stolen badges and allows local authorities in England, Scotland and Wales to make quick and easy validity checks of badge details. — The introduction of independent mobility assessments by professionals qualiﬁed to assess walking ability, to enable local authorities to make fair and objective decisions about applicants’ eligibility (this was supported by the 2008 Transport Select Committee).

Mobility Vehicles—Background Regarding Carriage on Public Transport — Wheelchairs that conform to the dimensions of a “reference wheelchair” may be carried on both buses and trains that are designed or adapted to carry wheelchairs. However, the ﬁnal decision on whether to carry a mobility scooter rests with individual operators as they are best placed to take into account the vehicles they use and local conditions when making their decision. Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 177

— The Department for Transport is undertaking a review to identify a coherent national strategy for carrying scooters on public transport vehicles. This includes working with the Confederation of Passenger Transport on the dissemination of their Code of Practice for bus operators regarding the use and acceptance of mobility scooters on low ﬂoor buses. The Code was published in September 2011. — In 2012, the Department let a research contract to look at bus and train operators’ current policies and guidelines for the carriage of scooters. It will look at what consumer guidance, training and permit schemes are in operation; identify which mobility scooters meet the guidelines in terms of allowable dimensions that would enable them to be carried on public transport; identify the similarities and differences between schemes run by bus and train operators, and investigate the feasibility of a more integrated approach.

Aviation—Background on Legislation European Regulation (EC 1107/2006) — Protection for disabled air travellers and persons with reduced mobility (PRMs) is given by European Regulation (EC 1107/2006) the rights to assistance at airports and on board planes. This Regulation is fully supported by the UK Government and it has applicability in UK law under Statutory Instrument SI 2007/1895. — The Department for Transport published a Code of Practice which sets out the legal framework and gives advice and information on good practice. This has helped the UK air transport industry to comply with its obligations under the Regulation. The DfT and CAA have also been involved in the development of guidance which was issued in June 2012.

EC Regulation (261/2004) — EU Regulation 261/2004 established common rules on compensation and assistance to air passengers in the event of denied boarding, cancellation or long delay of flights. — The Regulation makes clear that, in cases of denied boarding, cancellation or long delays, disabled passengers, PRMs, and anyone accompanying them, should be dealt with as a priority and receive the right to care specified in the Regulation as soon as possible. — The CAA is also working with carriers who operate from the airports concerned to ensure that the liability of the passenger to pay the charge is indicated, along with other unavoidable taxes fees and charges, as part of the booking process. — The levels continue to vary significantly across airlines and on specific flight routes. There are also problems with the accuracy of the information that is collected and transferred and this impacts on the airports’ ability to plan resources accordingly. — The CAA has helped in the introduction of the MERU Travel Chair, a specialist seat for disabled children that fits into a normal aircraft seat. It has helped in discussing the introduction of a BSI standard for air travel for wheelchair users.

Equality Act — As a service provider, aviation is covered by UK equality law. It is unlawful for service providers to discriminate against, harass or victimise a person because of a protected characteristic when providing services. This protects someone when they are requesting a service and when they are being provided with a service.

Provision of Information — The “Access to air travel for Disabled Persons and Persons with Reduced Mobility” code of practice aims to improve the accessibility of air travel to disabled people and persons with reduced mobility. It covers the whole journey experience, from accessing information at the booking stage through to arriving at the final destination. This best practice guidance helps the aviation industry comply with European Regulation 1007/2006. — The Department and Equality and Human Rights Commission has published a passenger guidance leaflet “Your rights to Fly—what you need to know”. — The CAA and Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) published new guidelines (Pre- Notification Guidance for Supporting Passengers with Reduced Mobility) for the travel industry, to help deliver a smooth airport experience for people with reduced mobility. Ev 178 Transport Committee: Evidence

TAXIS—STATUS OF PROVISIONS IN THE EQUALITY ACT 2010 Section Description Status 160, 162–164 Provisions to require all taxis to meet No immediate plans to commence certain accessibility standards 165, 167 Imposition of duties on taxi and private Considering the case for commencing hire vehicle drivers to assist passengers in wheelchairs 161 Qualifying local authorities’ power to Considering the case for commencing limit taxi numbers 166 Allows exemption from the duties to In force from October 2010 assist 168–171 Duty to carry assistance dogs In force from October 2010 172, 173 Appeals and interpretation In force from October 2010

January 2013

Supplementary written evidence from the Department for Transport (DAT 59A)

At the Transport Select Committee on 11 March 2013, oral evidence was given on two questions relating to Transport Direct. Having reviewed the responses given, it is possible that some of the respondents may have been referring to websites other than Transport Direct. The relevant transcript of the contributions is as follows: Q55 Chair: Is the new Transport Direct journey planner website useful? Richard Leaman: For blind people, no; it is inaccessible. I have to say that that is not an uncommon experience. If you go to some of the transport websites that show you the timetables, they are in pdf format, which cannot be read by blind people. Q56 Chair: Does anyone think it is useful? Paul Breckell: As I have already stressed, planning is not as much of an issue as real-time updates. While there are some real-time updates in relation to the site, the options there are not as full as some of the other proprietary sites like National Rail Enquiries and so on. In that sense it is not particularly adding anything. Also, there is not any British Sign Language content on the site. For a proportion of people who are profoundly deaf, which is approximately 10%, it is not accessible from that perspective.

The Transport Direct response is as follows: Transport Direct conforms to Level AA of the Web Accessibility Guidelines (WAI) produced by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) and to XHTML standards. A comprehensive independent audit of the accessibility of the site has been carried out by experts in this area, using both automated and manual checks as well as testing by users with varying degrees of disability. We asked testers to perform typical tasks on the portal with the objective of ﬁnding out if they experienced any difﬁculties. We also asked them to consider the navigation of the site, our use of appropriate icons, and the potential use by people with a range of disabilities.

The ﬁndings from these tests were used to make design enhancements to the portal. For example: — We have designed the pages on the site so that as far as possible they do not require horizontal scrollbars when viewed at a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels. — All images have an alternative text description so that they can be understood by users of screen readers. — Our journey itineraries can be presented in tables as well as using a graphical time line (note that we do not use PDFs within our journey planning offering).

In addition, a past member of the core Transport Direct team was blind, and carried out extensive system testing, providing us with signiﬁcant input into the practical usability of the website.

Transport Direct welcomes feedback, particularly from users with any disabilities, about any particular problems encountered in using the portal. This enables both data and software to be reﬁned to provide the best journey results. June 2013 Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 179

Supplementary written evidence from the Department for Transport (DAT 59B) Thank you for your letter of 12 June, about the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC). I was, of course, delighted to be able to announce that we have been able to retain the services of DPTAC, but there is a great deal of work still to be done to ensure that it is an efﬁcient and effective body. I would be happy to share with the Committee our ideas, and respond to the questions in your letter. I am due to meet with the Chair of DPTAC shortly to discuss plans for restructuring, and propose that I report back to you as soon as possible after that. I would be happy to meet to discuss the report and its proposals once you have had an opportunity to consider it. I trust that this will meet with the timetable for preparing your report. June 2013

Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Ofﬁce Limited 09/2013 030099 19585