Minutes of Main Committee Meeting:
2 June 2004 (Ashdown House, Westminster)
Chair:
Neil Betteridge
DPTAC Members:
Pravinkant Amin
Ann Bates
Peter Barker
Josie Clairmont
Vidur Dindayal
Julie Giles
Roger Hewitt
Grahame Lawson
Jenny Meadows
Kate Smyth
Richard West
Observers:
Chris Angell - Department for Transport Mobility & Inclusion Unit
Will Bee - Disability Rights Commission
Melanie Chitty - Department for Transport Mobility & Inclusion Unit
Kyle Crutchley - Northern Ireland Department for Regional Development
Greg Dempster - Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland
Hilary Pugh - Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
Ann Frye - Department for Transport Mobility & Inclusion Unit
Ann Lyon - Scottish Executive
Heather Robertson - Department for Transport Mobility & Inclusion Unit
In Attendance:
Andy Kirby - Secretary
Sandra Duncan - Secretariat
Gary Kemp - Secretariat
Harriet Samuels - Secretariat
Verona Wiltshire - Secretariat
Paula Donovan - British Sign Language Interpreter
Mike Cook - British Sign Language Interpreter
Agenda item 1: Welcome, introductions and apologies of absence
1. Neil Betteridge welcomed DPTAC members and observers. He particularly welcomed first time participants Heather Robertson, who was on a work placement with Department for Transport's Mobility & Inclusion Unit, and Melanie Chitty who had just joined that Unit as the new Voluntary and Community Sector Co-ordinator.
2. Members noted apologies from Sian Baldwin, Jean Dunlop David Finnegan, Ffion Grant (Secretariat), Roy Hayter, Jenny Meadows, Tom Pey, David Pugh, Keith Richards, Laura Smales, Mike Spearing (Welsh Assembly) and Carol Thomas .
Agenda item 2: Minutes of the last meeting (7th April 2004) Paper MM-M2-04
3. Members agreed the minutes, without amendment.
Action Point 1: Secretariat to arrange for minutes of the April 2004 meeting to be placed on the DPTAC website.
Agenda item 3: Matters arising (Paper 01-M3-04)
4. Members discussed several items in the Matters Arising paper.
Secretariat to ask members for their views on dates and venues for e-DPTAC training.
5. Neil Betteridge reminded Members that e-DPTAC training had been deferred because of a delay in setting up the new software system that e-DPTAC would function on. The Secretariat had consulted Members on dates and venues and was collating the responses.
Action Point 2: Secretariat to advise Members of dates and venues for e-DPTAC training.
Secretariat to discuss mode specific and built environment sections of draft Annual Report with Working Group Chairs, and circulate the full draft to Members for comment.
6. Neil Betteridge reported that Members' and Working Group Chairs' comments were being incorporated into the text and he would approve the final text shortly. He assured Richard West that it was important for the text to be accessible to Members and other readers.
Action Point 3: Secretariat to proceed with publication of 2003-04 Annual Report once the Chair had agreed the final text.
Secretariat to ask Members if they wished to have a copy of the generic DPTAC presentation and would send it out on CD-ROM to those who did.
7. Neil Betteridge reported that this was being sent out to Members who had requested it.
Built Environment Group to consider how the new power to make regulations on secure buildings might be used.
8. The Office of the Deputy Prime Mister had supplied the text of the Sustainable and Secure Buildings Bill, and undertaken to provide the regulatory impact assessment and notes on clauses. This would enable the Built Environment Group to take a view on the use that it could recommend for the new powers to take forward accessible housing.
Action Point 4: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to provide the regulatory impact assessment and notes on clauses for the Sustainable and Secure Buildings Bill to the Secretariat.
Members to advise Secretariat of any suggestions on the text of the new Door-to Door website.
Secretariat to make arrangements for the launch of the Door-to-Door site at the England (17-19 June, Donnington) and Scotland (9-10 July, Edinburgh) Mobility Roadshows.
9. Neil Betteridge explained that Members' comments had been included in the draft, and that the site was being developed. The Secretariat would contact those members who had asked to be involved in the Mobility Roadshow stands for the website about training and when they would be needed. He explained that the events would take the form of user trials that would allow visitors to comment on how useful they found the site and how it could be improved. Members would also be given this opportunity through a demonstration site. Neil assured Members that their views on the site, including its accessibility to people with learning difficulties, would be an important contribution to the user trial process.
Action Point 5: Secretariat to proceed with developing the Door to Door website, and preparing for user trials at the Mobility Roadshows.
Members to advise Secretariat of any suggestions for amending the DPTAC Communication Strategy.
Members to advise Secretariat of any requests for articles, interviews or quotations.
Members to advise Secretariat of any ideas for a new BBC2 disability themed programme.
10. Neil Betteridge noted that Members had made few comments on these items. He reminded Members that responding to the Action Points from Main Committee meetings was an important way that Members could help maintain the momentum of DPTAC's work. Work carried out between meetings also kept agendas at Main Committee meetings to a manageable length.
Agenda item 4: Influencing schools' curriculum with regard to inclusive environments (Paper 02-M3-04)
11. Neil Betteridge introduced the paper from the Education and Training Working Group and gave Carol Thomas's apologies for not being able to introduce the item herself. DPTAC had agreed that influencing primary schools on inclusive environments should be a task for the 2004-05 Work Programme. The Working Group had now decided that, if resources permitted, DPTAC should try to work on both the primary and the secondary areas at the same time. Neil invited Members to comment on whether they thought DPTAC should extend the work in this way, either as well as or instead of the primary work.
12. Members noted that other countries recognised how important design education was. Members thought the additional work was certainly worthwhile. They felt that the ability of teachers to undertake the work was as important as the quality of the material itself. If DPTAC could influence teacher training, this would help ensure effective teaching of inclusive environments. DPTAC could learn lessons from road safety. They could bring access officers into schools, involve disabled people themselves, and draw on experiments with pupils conducting audits of local environments and assisting in the local warden processes.
13. Ann Frye of the Mobility and Inclusion Unit offered to provide contacts in the Department for Education and Skills, as it would be important to work in partnership with them. Will Bee of the Disability Rights Commission noted that the DRC's work with schools had only gone ahead in Wales once the Welsh Assembly had given a commitment to offer appropriate teacher training.
14. Neil noted that Members had expressed a commitment to rolling out this work to the secondary sector in the longer term. Mainstreaming disability issues in schools was important, and securing appropriate and committed partners would help DPTAC achieve this.
Action Point 6: Education and Training Working Group to continue developing primary education proposals and develop secondary school proposals for future Work Programmes.
Agenda item 5: Mobility and Inclusion Unit Report (Paper 03-M3-04)
Advice project
15. Ann Frye reported that this work was likely to take the form of a toolkit for highway engineers. This would help them to understand the human elements of their work, especially inclusive environments. A scorecard system would help engineers assess the balance of positive, neutral and negative impacts that a proposal would have on people. It would be CD-ROM based and incorporate video clips.
16. The next draft would be ready in September and the Mobility and Inclusion Unit would involve DPTAC in its development. The eventual guidance would be integrated with Local Transport Plan guidance. This would increase its profile and impact.
Disability Discrimination Act deadlines and the coach industry
17. Ann Frye reported concerns expressed by the coach industry about the January 2005 date by which new coaches operating scheduled services had to be wheelchair accessible. Some operators and commentators had confused this with the Government's proposal to lift the exemption from Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 in the Draft Disability Discrimination Bill. The industry had questioned the readiness of the technical solutions offered by manufacturers. There was a risk that some operators could either bring forward or further postpone orders for new coaches next year to avoid the deadline. This would mean that either old or new inaccessible vehicles would be able to remain in service until 2020 (the deadline by which all vehicles in service on local or scheduled routes must be accessible).
18. Members agreed that it would be useful for the Mobility and Inclusion Unit to provide a briefing, including news items in the specialist press and Department for Transport responses, for DPTAC and for other organisations such as the All Party Disability Group and the Disability Rights Commission. Ann Frye said she would certainly be able to do this in relation to the issues involving the coach industry; and would be happy to explore this becoming a regular form of communication as and when appropriate.
Action Point 7: Mobility and Inclusion Unit to put together a briefing pack on coach industry concerns about end-dates for wheelchair accessible coaches for use by organisations focussing on disability and transport, including DPTAC.
Audio-visual information on buses
19. Members were concerned at how long it was taking to provide audio-visual information on buses. The ANNOUNCE system had been thoroughly tested. Such systems would make buses accessible to many visually and hearing impaired people. The technical work had been done and the cost of such systems was falling.
20. Ann Frye explained that the Mobility and Inclusion Unit was continuing its work on the human aspect of audio-visual systems. This was because some bus drivers appeared reluctant to use audio-visual information systems. It was important to explore whether repositioning speakers, fitting induction loops, or some other technical solution could solve this, or whether there were deeper problems. Ann Frye agreed to report progress on the provision of audio and visual announcements on buses in each Mobility & Inclusion Unit report to Main Committee.
Action Point 7a: Ann Frye agreed to report progress on the provision of audio and visual announcements on buses in the MIU reports to Main Committee.
Fear of crime
21. Ann Frye noted that original research on public transport passengers' perceptions of their personal security had been undertaken seven years ago. The Mobility and Inclusion Unit had just published a follow-up review of people's levels of concern and what might influence them to use public transport more. The picture was mixed, with some sources of fear increasing and others deceasing. Men were becoming more fearful than they had been, and women no less fearful. Disabled people and people from ethnic minorities had reported particular concerns for their personal security, and their perspectives were included in special reports. The full report was on the Department for Transport website at: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/inclusion/se/.
22. Greg Dempster, Secretary of the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland, advised Members of a new transport project in Dundee. This involved closed-circuit television in all buses. Ann Bates noted that trains with no through corridors on some Kent lines were being considered as a possible safety problem.
Community transport
23. Josie Clairmont drew attention to the difficulty of longer term funding for community transport services. Neil Betteridge said that he had highlighted this at his meeting with the Secretary of State, and that DPTAC would raise the issue wherever appropriate. Ann Frye noted that DPTAC was helping the Mobility and Inclusion Unit with research on how community transport contributed to reducing social exclusion.
Charging for aviation ground handling
24. Ann Frye noted that the European Commission's position on charging for ground handling was likely to be that airports should be responsible. This would probably be resisted by them, and supported by the airlines. However the issue was unlikely to require active consideration until after the summer.
Blue Badge issues
25. Members were keen to become involved in two areas of research; the feasibility of a national database for Blue Badge holders, and the review of the exemption for four inner London boroughs. Ann Frye explained that the terms of reference for the London work were still under discussion.
Action Point 8: Mobility and Inclusion Unit to involve DPTAC in developing research on a national database for the Blue Badge Scheme and on the future of the exemption for four London boroughs.
Bus Industry training
26. The new video and training materials for the bus industry, that the Mobility and Inclusion Unit and DPTAC had developed, would be launched soon. The MIU would advise DPTAC of any launch event.
Agenda item 6. Oral Report on the Draft Disability Discrimination Bill
27. The Secretary noted that the Joint Scrutiny Committee on the Draft Disability Discrimination Bill had been published. The main recommendations most relevant to DPTAC's evidence had been as follows:
General
- The Bill should be introduced to Parliament as soon as possible and implemented as soon as possible after Royal Assent
- Government publications affecting disabled people should be available in alternative formats at the time of publication (DPTAC recommendation)
- Government should take a regulation making power to bring further conditions within the scope of the DDA (DPTAC recommendation)
- The DRC Codes should be made under affirmative rather than negative procedure (this means a vote would take place in the House of Commons)
Transport
- The Government should issue an indicative timetable for regulations setting out compliance dates for sectors (DPTAC recommendation)
- The DRC Code of Practice should be clear about what is reasonable for transport operators in each sector (including the 'book ahead' requirement) and in different circumstances
- Book ahead systems should be kept under review
- The DRC and disability organisations should work closely with the industry to help phase in widespread disability equality training
- The Government should consider easing the financial and practical burden on small operators
- The Government should make a commitment that, if evaluation shows that a voluntary approach is not working, it would consult without delay on the desirability of the statutory approach (DPTAC recommendation)
- The Government should consult immediately on the setting of the end date for all rail vehicles to comply with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998 (DPTAC recommendation)
- The end date for rail should be 2017, with a limited exemption system expiring in 2025 (DPTAC recommendation)
- Improvements in accessibility should be an integral part of refurbishment, including accessible audio-visual systems (DPTAC recommendation)
- The feasibility study on a national database for the Blue Badge Scheme should be completed quickly, and the full Bill used to cover language and reciprocity (DPTAC recommendation)
Discrimination by Public Authorities
- There should be an anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people (DPTAC recommendation)
Housing
- There should be a specific provision to prohibit a landlord from unreasonably withholding consent to making physical alterations in respect of a disabled person, including communal areas (DPTAC recommendation)
28. Neil Betteridge noted the considerable support that the Committee had shown for DPTAC's recommendations, including rail end dates and on the definition of disability. Ann Frye of the Mobility and Inclusion Unit said that the Government would take some time to consider its response to the report.
29. Will Bee of the Disability Rights Commission briefly explained the procedure for drafting and updating Codes of Practice for the Bill. He said that courts and tribunals had used the DRC's codes more than the codes of the other equality bodies. He explained that the codes on education and Part III of the Bill would need to be re-written, and that there would be new codes on transport and the public sector duty. The Scrutiny Committee had asked the DRC to include more reference to good practice in the new codes than had been done in the existing previous codes. DPTAC would be involved in drafting both of the new codes. The Secretariat had circulated a more detailed report to Members of a meeting that the DRC had recently convened on the subject.
30. The Chair noted that the much threatened backlash to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 had not occurred, and he was confident that it need not happen in relation to this Bill either. He paid tribute to the work of the DRC and the former National Disability Council in setting this work in hand and committed DPTAC to assisting in any way possible. Members agreed that the Chair should issue a press notice drawing attention to the support that the Committee had given in its report to DPTAC's recommendations, and that he should write to Lord Carter commending the report. The text of the press notice is at Annex A to these minutes, and the letter is at Annex B.
Action Point 9: Secretariat to issue press notice drawing attention to the support that the Committee had given in this report to DPTAC's recommendations, and Chair to write to Lord Carter commending the report.
Agenda item 7. Progress Report on the 2004-05 Work Programme (Paper 04-M3-04)
31. Members noted the progress report. Julie Giles advised Members that work was under way on Task 10 (Concessionary Fares) to identify additional areas where more research would be needed to inform the review. This work would not cover Scotland. Ann Lyon from the Scottish Executive noted that a Scottish Parliament consultation document on concessionary fares was about to be published. Neil Betteridge explained that, at his meeting with the Convenor of the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland earlier in the year, the common ground between the positions of MACS and DPTAC had been fully explored.
Agenda item 8. Review of DPTAC Main Committee Meetings 2004-05 and beyond (Paper 05-M3-04)
32. Neil Betteridge explained that the move from Working Groups to Knowledge Pools two years before had been coupled with an increase in the number of Main Committee meetings from four to six. This had ensured that adequate meetings took place to discuss Knowledge Pool proposals, and to ensure a reasonable level of face-to-face contact between members.
33. Neil had agreed that the restoration of Working Groups in 2003 would be sensible. However that had not been accompanied by a reduction in the number of Main Committee meetings. This had led to an unsustainable demand on Members' time. He therefore proposed a reduction in the number of Main Committee meetings.
34. The recreation of Working Groups in 2003 had not been accompanied by the restoration of meetings of Working Group Chairs before Main Committee meetings. Some Working Group Chairs had asked for these meetings to be restored. The issues for Members to consider were:
- The number of Main Committee meetings for 2005;
- Whether to cancel the August 2004 meeting;
- Whether to reinstate meetings of Working Group Chairs before Main Committees.
35. This item also provided the opportunity to advise Members of how arrangements for the October meeting in Manchester were developing.
Number of meetings per year
36. Members agreed that attendance at Working Groups meetings had been lower then they would have liked. However reducing the number of Main Committee meetings might not improve attendance at Working Group meetings. Members saw benefits in reductions to five or to four Main Committee meetings, and agreed to four.
Cancelling the August 2004 Main Committee meeting
37. Members felt that cancelling the August 2004 meeting could help, but would leave a long break. Members agreed to cancel the August Main Committee meeting.
Restoration of meetings of Working Group Chairs
38. Members agreed the principle of this. Some Members were concerned that these meetings might be seen as pre-empting the decisions taken at the following Main Committee meeting immediately following. Neil Betteridge assured Members that the terms of reference for these meetings would be sensitively written, and the purpose of meetings of Steering Group Chairs would be to discuss matters that were only of concern to those Chairs.
Action Point 10: Secretariat to plan on the basis of the August meetings being cancelled, to bring to Main Committee a timetable for four meetings for 2005-06, and to schedule meetings of Working Group Chairs immediately before Main Committee meetings.
Action Point 11: Chair and Secretariat to draft appropriate terms of reference for meetings of Working Group Chairs.
39. Neil also summarised the arrangements for the October Main Committee meeting in Manchester. Members would be asked to attend a meeting with local groups of disabled people on the previous evening at the hotel, to discuss issues of local concern. The Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland had considerable experience of this process. The Secretariat would draw on this. Members would be asked to volunteer for this task, but not all of them would be needed.
Agenda item 9. Scoping the DPTAC 2005-07 Strategy (Paper 06-M3-04)
40. Neil Betteridge explained that DPTAC's three-year strategy came to an end at the end of 2004. He would very much welcome the input of Members to what ought to replace it. The paper suggested a few longer-term factors. One was a possible European Union constitution that might change the balance between national and community competence in transport. Others were the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights (replacing the current equality bodies including the Disability Rights Commission), and the new Disability Discrimination Act.
41. Members raised a number of issues including:
- The need to put DPTAC's built environment work on a similar statutory footing to that of its transport work;
- The need to link future work more clearly to the Ten Year Transport Plan;
- Links to wider Government initiatives such as health, with links between obesity and walking;
- The extent to which DPTAC should concentrate on enforcement as well as policy development;
- Links with the Disability Rights Commission's own longer term planning;
- The needs of specific groups of disabled people such as the elderly, those from minority ethnic groups and women.
42. Neil thanked Members for their ideas, which would contribute to a paper for the October meeting.
Action Point 12: Chair and Secretariat to draft the DPTAC 2005-07 Strategy for approval at the October Main Committee meeting.
Agenda Item 11: Any Other Business
43. Neil Betteridge announced that new business cards for Members were available from the Secretariat. There being no other business, Neil thanked Members and observers for their contributions, and closed the meeting.
Date of next Main Committee meeting: 11.00 on 6 October 2004, Golden Tulip Hotel, Manchester.
Annex A: Press Notice 2 June 2004
Government's Adviser on Transport and Disability Welcome parliamentary Support for Disability Bill Changes
The Chair of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) today welcomed the support of the Joint Committee on the Draft Disability Discrimination Bill for DPTAC's recommendations on changes to this draft Government Bill. DPTAC is the Government's official adviser on disability in relation to transport and the built environment.
Speaking at a meeting of the full Committee, Neil Betteridge said:
"The Joint Committee has supported almost all of DPTAC's recommendations for further improving this important Bill. I particularly welcome its advice to the Government that it should adopt 2017 as the end-date by which rail vehicles should comply with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations, and that any system of exemptions should expire by 2025. The Committee has also recommended that improvements to accessibility, such as installing accessible audio-visual systems, should be integrated into the refurbishment process.
"DPTAC also welcomes the recommendation to prohibit landlords from unreasonably withholding consent for alterations to the home of a disabled person, including common areas. This could improve the quality of life for many disabled people."
He added, "The Joint Committee has done an outstanding job of considering 123 written and 23 oral statements to produce a clear, sensible and moderate report. DPTAC will do all it can to ensure the Committee's recommendations are reflected in the Government's Bill."
Notes to editors:
1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) was set up under the Transport Act of 1985 to advise Government on the transport needs of all disabled people. In 2000 its role was extended, on a non-statutory basis, to advising the Government on the built environment needs of disabled people.
2. For further information on DPTAC, contact the Secretary, Andy Kirby on 020 7944 8012 or email dptac@dft.gsi.gov.uk.
3. DPTAC's written evidence to the Joint Scrutiny Committee is at: www.dptac.gov.uk/consult/06.htm and http://www.dptac.gov.uk/consult/07.htm and its oral evidence is at: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200304/jtselect/jtdisab/82/8202.htm#evidence.
4. The all-party Committee of MP's and Peers published its report on 27 May. It welcomed the Government's draft Disability Discrimination Bill, and concluded that the Government could go further to provide better opportunities for the UK's estimated 10 million disabled adults. The report is available at: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200304/jtselect/jtdisab/82/8202.htm.
5. The Draft Disability Discrimination Bill was published in December 2003 and is available at: www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/index.htm. It is part of a process that began in 1997 with the appointment of the Disability Rights Task Force to review existing disability anti-discrimination legislation.
Annex B:
Lord Carter
Committee Office
House of Lords
London
SW1A 0PW
Dear Lord Carter,
Scrutiny Committee Report on Draft Disability Discrimination Bill
I write to let you know how pleased the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) is with the sense, clarity and scope of your Committee's recent report on the Draft Disability Discrimination Bill. DPTAC Members discussed it at their Main Committee meeting today and asked me to convey their thanks for all your work.
I attach a copy of a press notice that we have issued today, drawing attention to those of your Committee's recommendations most clearly linked to DPTAC's remit.
I was also particularly pleased to see your Committee's recommendation that the Government should consider talking an order making power for use in the event that the definition of disability needed to be updated. I believe that DPTAC was one of the few organisations, perhaps the only one, recommending this particular change. If adopted we believe that this would considerably increase the flexibility, and hence the durability, of any Act.
DPTAC will be energetic in encouraging the Government to accept your Committee's recommendations. We thank the members of your Committee again for their important work on behalf of all disabled people.
Yours sincerely,
Neil Betteridge
Chair
Top of page
|
