|
||
| About DPTAC | Publications | Site Map | Links | Home
|
Minutes of the DPTAC Main Committee Meeting: 14 September 2005Chair: DPTAC Members: Observers: Invitees: In Attendance: Agenda item 1: Welcome, introductions and apologies1. DPTAC Chairman Neil Betteridge welcomed everyone to the third DPTAC Main Committee meeting of 2005. Neil welcomed Gregor Kerr from the Mobility and Inclusion Unit at the Department for Regional Development in Northern Ireland to his first meeting, and guests Paul McCourt and Wilma Jackson from the Department for Work and Pensions, and Ben Stafford and Elizabeth Hunter from the Department for Transport. 2. The meeting received apologies from DPTAC Members Sean Bolton, Jenny Meadows, Alan Norton, Carol Thomas and Richard West; and from observers Will Bee (Disability Rights Commission), Helen Cameron (Scottish Executive), David Petherick (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister), Mike Spearing (Welsh Assembly Government) and Ian Humes (Mobility and Inclusion Unit at the Department for Regional Development in Northern Ireland), as well as Sandra Duncan of the DPTAC Secretariat. Agenda item 2: Minutes of previous Main Committee meeting (15 June 2005)3. Members approved the minutes without amendment, and the Secretariat would place them on DPTAC's website. Action point 1: Secretariat to place the minutes of 15 June Main Committee meeting on the DPTAC website. Agenda item 3: Matters Arising4. Neil Betteridge noted that the Annual Report for 2004-05 was not quite ready for distribution to Members. However it was being prepared as Members requested, with a freepost comment form and greater use of pictures. There would be an easy to read summary for people with learning difficulties which Richard West had commented on. There were no other points raised under matters arising. Agenda item 4: Working Group membership and meeting arrangements 2006-075. Neil reminded Members that they had agreed that the frequency of Working Group meetings should be reduced from four to three each year. The paper set out the basis on which this would be done. It also suggested that Members should be invited to review their Working Group membership at the point when new members were appointed to DPTAC, and they also had to select Working Groups. The presumption would be that Members remain on the groups they were on at present, it was not change for the sake of it. However if a Member felt able to take on another working group then this would be the opportunity to do so. 6. Ann Frye of the Mobility and Inclusion Unit explained that the Minister had agreed to the suggested process by which the two vacancies could be filled from the shortlist of the previous application round. Letters had been sent to the two individuals and their replies were awaited. [Secretariat note - these have been received and Judith Jesky and Tomi Jones have been appointed.] 7. Members suggested that there might be the need for an Olympic Working Group and several volunteered to be on it if there was one. The Committee agreed to keep this under review. Action point 2: Secretariat to invite Members to review their Working Group membership once the new members had completed their induction. Agenda item 5: Endorsement of publications and events by DPTAC8. Neil observed that DPTAC had, from time to time, received requests to endorse publications and events. This was straightforward when DPTAC had been involved in developing these, but sometimes DPTAC had been asked late in the day to put its name to an initiative that it had enjoyed little role in developing. In addition, as the website had raised its profile, DPTAC had received very many requests for links. A clear policy would help the Secretariat to refuse endorsement where appropriate, and consult the Chairman or Chair of Working Groups where necessary. 9. Members felt that endorsements should not compromise other roles that DPTAC had. For example an endorsement related to a train operating company might appear to compromise DPTAC's role advising Ministers on requests for exemptions under the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations. Members also supported the suggestion that, for documents targeted at disabled people, making the document available in a full range of accessible formats should be a condition of DPTAC's support. 10. Neil noted that DPTAC had received a request from a local authority to use its website symbols, so this would be a good opportunity to consider copyright of DPTAC designs. Members considered a range of options including refusing all requests, allowing them free of charge or on payment, or requesting a contribution to a charity. Since any contribution to DPTAC, under government accounting rules, would go directly to the Treasury, and it would be difficult to choose one charity at the expense of others, Members agreed to allow this with acknowledgement but at no charge. Action point 3: Secretariat to incorporate the agreed policy into its working practices, with the addition that making the document available in a full range of accessible formats should be a condition of DPTAC's support for documents aimed at disabled people. Agenda item 6: DPTAC and the 2012 Olympic Games11. Energy and excitement, Neil Betteridge said, had characterised DPTAC Members' response to the London Olympics. There had been interest in and contributions to DPTAC's draft evidence to the House of Commons Transport Committee for its inquiry into transport aspects of the Olympics which exceeded those for any other issue since he had joined DPTAC. Another piece of good news was that on the day of the meeting, the Transport Committee had asked DPTAC to present oral evidence, probably on 19 October. Though this clashed with a Rail Working Group and a meeting of the Inclusive Design Group, it was too good an opportunity to miss. 12. Neil invited Ben Stafford and Elizabeth Hunter from the Department for Transport to make a presentation on preparations for Olympic transport. They explained that the principle of the Olympic bid was to make the best use if existing infrastructure, adding further provision where necessary. Some of this would be for the duration of the Olympic Games, some would be permanent. The Olympic Village would have 10 rail lines, with 240 trains per hour at peak times. The dedicated Olympic Javelin would run 10 times each hour from St Pancras. Infrastructure improvements would be made, such as to the accessibility of Stratford International, and West Ham's new pedestrian route. There would also be improvements to the accessibility of relevant London Underground stations. 13. The challenge would be moving half a million people each day to and from Olympic events, while keeping the rest of London moving, though it would be summer and there would be no other international events in London at the time. Tickets through London to the venue would be included in the price of event tickets themselves and details would be sent out with the tickets. 14. The London Olympics Bill before Parliament would create an Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA), of 7-11 members, including a Chairman, appointed by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. The ODA's functions would include providing, managing and controlling transport facilities for the Games. The ODA would have to develop an Olympic Transport Plan. This would set out the transport facilities needed to build in order to transport people to and from events. It could define an Olympic Route Network, and set road closures and restrictions. The ODA would have to consult the bodies named on the face of the Bill. 15. Members were pleased that there would be provision for Blue Badge holders to park near Olympic venues. However they were concerned that the distance from the parking area to the arena would exceed the 250 yard limit suggested for disabled people. If this was the case then transport would need to be provided, probably minibuses. 16. As far as the Olympic Village was concerned members felt that there would not be enough accessible routes from the south and the south west of London and the country. Members believed that the number of wheelchair spaces on buses and trains would not be enough, that demand responsive transport needed to be available, and that this should be costed in and provided for at an early stage. 17. Members felt that there had been too much emphasis on the Olympic Village and not enough on venues elsewhere in London or the country. Ben and Elizabeth explained that all venues would have a transport manager who would have responsibility for planning such matters. Members felt that the country's disabled people were an important resource in their own right, as they understood the needs of other disabled people. They were as much an asset as a problem to be solved. 18. Members wished DPTAC to explore the potential for DPTAC to be a member of the Olympic Delivery Authority, as well as to be a statutory consultee. Members strongly recommended that the ODA should be required to have internal advice on inclusion, and that it should employ an appropriately experienced access officer (or team of access officers) who would have an overview of the whole project as well as giving guidance on the fine detail of individual projects. 19. Although Members welcomed the opportunity to be involved and give strategic advice, they did not feel that DPTAC was resourced to give the level of support and advice necessary on a daily basis for a project of this size. On the Transport Committee inquiry, DPTAC should request interpretation to be provided at oral evidence sessions, as this had not been done for the inquiry into disabled people's transport in 2004. 20. Neil Betteridge thanked Ben and Elizabeth for attending, and thanked Members for their ideas. These would be fed into the brief for the Transport Committee evidence session. He asked Members to re-read the Memorandum to see if there were any other ideas to add or tricks that had been missed. He asked Members to consider volunteering to be DPTAC lead Member on Olympic issues. DPTAC would have to keep the possibility of a dedicated Working Group under review, but there were benefits in the lead official working with the existing Working Groups. Action point 4: Members to consider volunteering to be lead Olympic Member. Action point 5: Secretariat to ask the Transport Committee to provide British Sign Language interpretation for the oral evidence session at which DPTAC would be represented if BSL users were expected to be present. Agenda item 7: Consultation on Office for Disability Issues and National Forum for Organisations of Disabled People21. Neil reminded Members of the consultation earlier this year on the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit's report "Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People". The report recommended setting up an Office for Disability Issues and a National Forum for Organisations of Disabled People. The Government had decided to proceed with this, and the Department for Work and Pensions was consulting disabled people on how the two bodies should function. He invited Paul McCourt and Wilma Jackson of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to make a presentation. 22. Paul and Wilma explained that the consultation was being carried out on behalf of all the government departments that had contributed to the Life Chances paper. The plans for the two bodies might appear vague, but this was because this was a genuine consultation and the Government had not made up its mind what the detailed roles of the bodies ought to be. This was an important chance to influence delivery. DWP had advertised for members of an advisory group to develop the Forum, and was consulting for six weeks, with four regional events and six focus groups and leaflet and on-line consultation. 23. Members were concerned that the Life Chances report had been focussed on the needs of people of working age or younger. They were also concerned that the Forum might overlap with bodies such as DPTAC. Paul and Wilma said that the Office and Forum were intended to cover disabled people of all ages, and that the Forum was intended to add value rather than duplicate what was already there. It would also need to address other DPTAC Member concerns such as the position of disabled people from faith groups and ethnic communities. 24. Members were also concerned that children with disabilities should be represented: they were often ignored. The Chairman asked what the gaps were that the Forum was intended to address, and Paul and Wilma replied that the advisory group would need to help to identify and prioritise those gaps for itself, though government reports had done a lot of the groundwork. 25. Neil thanked Paul and Wilma for coming, and thanked Members for their ideas, which would be collated by the Secretariat into a response to the consultation. Action point 6: Secretariat to incorporate points made in writing and at the meeting into a DPTAC response to the consultation. Agenda item 8: Progress Report on 2005-06 Work Programme26. Neil Betteridge introduced the usual paper reporting on progress with the Work Programme and setting out priorities for the next quarter. He noted that all but one task was now fully under way. 27. Gary Kemp of the Secretariat reported on progress with audio visual announcements on buses (task 9). Transport for London planned to trial such a system from late 2006 and to have it working on all buses by 2008. This would give a kick-start to this important provision, showcase a practical system and should help to bring down the costs of the system in other parts of the country. Neil Betteridge noted that he was soon to have a meeting with Peter Hendy, Director of Surface Transport at Transport for London and would take the opportunity to raise the topic. [Secretariat note - Peter Hendy will also be attending Main Committee in December where the matter can be discussed further.]. 28. In answer to a question on Task 16 (development of disability equality strategies), Personal Mobility and Local Authority Working Group Chair Grahame Lawson replied that DPTAC had responded to the Disability Rights Commission's draft code on the duty to promote disability equality. Further action would have to wait until the DRC's final code was published. Agenda item 9: Reports from Working Group Chairs29. Neil introduced the usual reports from Working Group Chairs who he thanked for their work in preparing them. Katherine Phipps updated Members on the Inclusive Environment Group. This was the new name for the Built Environment group, which had passed from DPTAC to the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment along with DPTAC's built environment remit in March. On 2 August CABE had published a press notice announcing the change. The group's next meeting would be on 19 October at CABE's headquarters. New member of staff was in post to lead on the IEG's work and Katherine was due to meet her shortly. 30. Members discussed the request by Carol Thomas, Chair of the Education and Training Working Group, who could not be present at the meeting, to expand the remit of the group to cover cross cutting tasks on training service providers. Members welcomed this proposal. Action point 7: Education and Training Working Group to develop tasks for the 2006-07 Work Programme that include cross cutting work on training service providers. Agenda item 10: Mobility and Inclusion Unit Report31. In introducing her usual report of the work of the Mobility and Inclusion Unit, Ann Frye reported good progress with the European Commission proposal for a regulation concerning the rights of persons of reduced mobility when travelling by air. France and Germany favoured allowing carriers to opt out of provision that airport operators would have to make. In its chairing role the UK Government had to find an acceptable compromise. This would be to seek to strengthen the safeguards for airlines from their lack of control over the provision that the airport operators would make and charge them for. 32. The Mobility and Inclusion Unit was also carrying out its new rail responsibilities with the help of three contractors who had come over from the Strategic Rail Authority while permanent staff were recruited. 33. On road and pavement electric scooters research would be published shortly. Insurance and training were likely to be among the issues discussed, but these would not be taken forward without further consultation with DPTAC. Members noted the cost of insurance on those who would find it a burden, particularly parents of disabled children. 34. With the arrival of the 1 January deadline for new coaches to be wheelchair accessible, several designs had been developed. Ann noted that DPTAC Members had seen the low floor Wrightbus solution, and were to see the National Express "magic floor" option shortly. A third design using a more conventional platform lift at the front door was also in production and had gone into service with First Group in the West Country. 35. Neil Betteridge noted that the MIU was looking into the question of payment for DPTAC Members, that legal advice suggested that primary legislation would be required, and that the Minister had asked officials to provide her with more detail of the background and likely costs involved to help her consider the best way forward. He wondered if there was anything that DPTAC could do to provide this information. Ann Frye explained that it was necessary to establish some relevant baselines and that the payment to members of the Commission for Integrated Transport and other comparable bodies would be gathered. Agenda item 11: Scoping of Work Programme and research for 2006-0736. Neil noted that the realism of DPTAC Members in deciding how many tasks to attempt had helped determine progress with the Work Programme. He was keen for this to continue, in view of the reduced Secretariat resource. He introduced a paper setting out a process and timetable, and suggested an average of no more than three tasks per Working Group in the new Work Programme, including those taken forward from 2005-06. 37. Members noted the need to allow capacity for reactive work, and agreed to feed ideas into process through Working Group Chairs. Action point 8: Members to feed in ideas for research by 14 October and Work Programme tasks by 30 October to Working Group Chairs. Agenda item 12: Discussion of DPTAC Strategy Day38. Neil asked Members to consider the proposed aims and objectives for the Strategy Day which they had requested, and which had been fixed for 1 December at the City Inn. Members broadly welcomed the plans for the day. They asked that the Mobility and Inclusion Unit give an overview of their priorities for transport for disabled people over the 2007-20 period as input for the day. They also asked that the day consider what was more and less effective in DPTAC's recent work, and what would clearly fall outside DPTAC's remit and within those of other bodies such as the Rail Passenger Council. Action point 9: Mobility and Inclusion Unit to provide briefing note on their priorities for transport for disabled people over the 2007-20 period in time for distribution to Members before the Strategy Day. Action point 10: Chair and Secretariat to develop the Strategy Day in line with Member comments. Agenda item 13: Any Other Business39. Neil noted that the Secretary of State had agreed to meet him to discuss DPTAC matters on 1 November. He asked Members for their thoughts on what might be the most important topics to discuss in the limited time available. He noted that the last such meeting on 15 October 2003, had covered the Ten Year Plan, the relationship between accessibility and health & safety on the railways, the role of local authorities in enabling access by providing transport infrastructure and the need for continuity in support and funding community transport. 40. Members felt that all these topics were still as important as ever. They also raised issues of disability awareness training on the railways, the roll out of accessible buses across the country including access for wheelchairs and the provision of audio-visual announcements, and the Olympic Games. 41. The Chairman said that this was probably enough for the meeting with the Secretary of State, and thanked Members for their attendance and participation. Date of next meeting: 7 December 2005, Great Minster House also Strategy Day: 1 December 2005, City Inn, Westminster |
|
|