DPTAC response to the Department for Transport's consultation on the European Commission Proposal for a Regulation concerning the Rights of Persons with Reduced Mobility when travelling by air

• This document has also been made available in MS Word for downloading (114kb)

Introduction

1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) welcomes this opportunity to comment on the European Commission (EC) Proposal for a regulation concerning the Rights of Persons with Reduced Mobility when travelling by air.

2. DPTAC was established under the Transport Act 1985 to advise the Government on the transport needs of disabled people. Our aim is to ensure that disabled people can go where everyone goes and that they can do so easily and without extra cost.

3. We base our advice on four underlying principles, which are that:

• accessibility for disabled people is a condition of any investment;
• accessibility for disabled people must be a mainstream activity;
• users should be involved in determining accessibility;
• achieving accessibility for disabled people is the responsibility of the provider.

4. These principles are the basis of our response. Some general comments on accessibility for disabled people are also set out in Annex A.

Context of DPTACs Recommendations

5. As the Statutory Advisors to the UK Government on issues relating to transport and disabled people, DPTAC has been concerned for some time that the rights of disabled people have not protected when travelling by air.

6. Within the EU member states, the UK is in the rare position of considering this proposed Regulation alongside well-established existing domestic Legislation for all providers of goods and services. There is also a well-established body of voluntary guidance and service level standards which accompany the legal obligations.

7. Since 1995 disabled people in the UK have had protection and redress under the Disability Discrimination Act, however this domestic legislation specifically excludes air transport. The UK Government recognised that, in common with shipping, aviation is a mainly international transport mode and would therefore be more appropriately dealt with through European and International forums and legislation. This would ensure consistency of provision, facilities and service at both departure and destination airports. In addition it would provide clarity and a 'level playing field' for the European Aviation industry.

8. In 2001 the European aviation community adopted the Airline and Airport Passenger Service Commitments, which both contain specific sections on meeting the needs of people with reduced mobility. However these are only voluntary guidelines and can not be legally enforced.

9. DPTAC therefore wholeheartedly welcomes and supports the introduction of proposed Regulation as an example of European legislation, to ensure service levels and give disabled people redress when they experience discrimination or poor service.

10. The UK also has an established Code of Practice on Access to Air Travel for Disabled People which was developed by the Department for Transport in association with DPTAC, UK airports and airlines as well as other organisations for and of disabled people.

11. The DfT Code of Practice sets out a number of preferred benchmarks of good practice for all involved in the aviation industry, from travel agents and tour operators to airlines, airports, ground handlers and designers. It sets out minimum standards that the aviation industry should provide but encourages them to provide higher levels of service and facilities.

12. DPTAC would urge the European Commission to adopt this comprehensive and informative document at a European level and use it as the basis of any supporting material to this Regulation, as outlined below.

13. In parallel to the DfT Code of Practice DPTAC has produced a document entitled Access to Air Travel: Guidance for Disabled and Less Mobile Passengers, which sets out practical advice to disabled people travelling by air.

14. One of the main messages of this guide is to be prepared, let people know if you might need assistance and make arrangements in advance. This helps airlines and airports provide a better service.

15. DPTAC is aware that large number of disabled people already enjoy a high standard of service from airlines everyday, and that a number of airlines have invested a great deal of resources and commitment to build up a high level of expertise, knowledge and experience.

16. However we are also aware of airlines that are using the lack of any enforceable regulations to continue discriminatory practices. Unfortunately this has resulted in many disabled people experiencing discomfort, humiliation, loss of dignity, inconvenience, limited mobility and social interaction as well as in some cases serious injury when trying to travel by air.

17. We do not wish to see this Regulation penalise the responsible airlines, but rather to protect the rights and safety of disabled passengers from the unscrupulous ones.

18. DPTAC would urge the European Commission take into account the existing knowledge expertise and experience, ensuring that current good practice is disseminated and built on rather than lost.

19. We also urge the Commission to ensure that the transition is planned and implemented with care and consideration so as to limit any negative impact on disabled passengers.

Question 1: Does this proposal appear to you to provide for a suitable package of measures to assist PRMs at Community airports?

Is there anything else which you would wish to see included in the eventual regulation?

20. DPTAC welcomes this initiative to clearly define the responsibilities for provision of service to disabled passengers at airports, as it is often at this point with the uncertainty and blurring of airline and airport responsibilities when disabled people are most likely to encounter problems and receive bad or inappropriate service.

21. As it is currently set out the package goes a long way towards ensuring that the risk of discrimination in the use of airport services will be removed or minimised.

22. It should help to ensure that all airport operators and airlines have to work to the same standards, as well as helping disabled and less mobile passengers know what services and facilities they can expect, wherever they were travelling in Europe.

23. DPTAC supports the broad aims of the proposed Regulation so far as it aims to ensure the following:

• No direct charging of disabled passengers
• No refusal of reservation or boarding simply because of their disability
• Seamless assistance through all stages of the journey
• Clear service that airports must make available to disabled people
• Mobility equipment to be carried on board at no cost to the disabled person
• Member States to bring in sanctions for non-compliance and ensure enforcement mechanisms are in place

24. However, DPTAC would like to see several amendments to the Regulation which would strengthen and extend its scope.

25. In addition, DPTAC supports the recommended amendments proposed by the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism within their Draft Report of 25 July 2005.

Renaming the Regulation

26. DPTAC recommends that the Regulation should be renamed "Regulation concerning the Rights of Disabled Passengers and Passengers with Reduced Mobility when travelling by air".

27. Although DPTAC welcomes the recognition that it is not only disabled people who may experience difficulty in accessing services and facilities within the airport and aircraft setting, we do not feel that the term Persons with Reduced Mobility (PRM) is accurate, appropriate or inclusive enough to be used in European Legislation.

28. As well as reflecting a more inclusive description of the range of people that this Regulation applies to, this amendment would provide clarification and ease of understanding to many people who are covered by the Regulation, but who would not perceive or recognise themselves as PRMs, for example, people with hearing impairments or learning disabilities.

29. In addition, DPTAC recommends the substitution of the phrase 'persons with reduced mobility' with the more inclusive and accurate 'disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility' throughout the document.

30. DPTAC also recommends that the definition of PRM should be standardised across EC Regulations and documents relating to all modes of transport.

Training

31. DPTAC recommends that the importance of staff training should be emphasised within the Regulation.

32. Experience has shown that that ignorance and misconceptions about disability are often the greatest barriers to disabled peoples independence, freedom of choice and mobility.

33. DPTAC is concerned that the staff members who will be making the final decisions on the rights and suitability of disabled passengers are full trained and are able to ensure that the assistance provided is appropriate to the specific requirements of the individual passenger. In order to ensure this, they should also understand the need to work with the passenger or an appropriate companion to agree the necessary assistance.

34. DPTAC recommend the inclusion of a specific requirement within the Regulation for standardised Disability Equality Training.

35. DPTAC believe that this training should not be restricted to front line staff, but should also be undertaken by all staff at all levels from the Boardroom down to ensure the appropriate allocation of resources and that access for disabled passengers is given appropriate consideration in the developing and implementation of all company practices, policies and procedures.

Guidance on Service Standards

36. DPTAC recommends that more emphasis should be placed on the details of the service provided to disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility within the Regulation.

37. DPTAC recommends that Annex I and II which set out the respective responsibilities for assistance by the managing bodies of airports and air carriers should be expanded to give more detailed guidance on the specific detail of facilities, equipment and services necessary and how they should be provided.

38. DPTAC recommends that the Department for Transport Code of Practice is used as a basis for this Guidance.

39. Consideration should also be given and mention made of ECAC Doc 30, Section J Code of Good Conduct in Ground Handling for Persons with Reduced Mobility.

Design of Infrastructure

40. DPTAC fully support the recommendation of the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism to include a new Recital stating that:

Airports and air carriers have a clear duty to ensure that airports and aircraft are planned, designed, built and refurbished in consultation with organisations representing disabled people and people with reduced mobility and in a way which respects their access needs.

41. DPTAC would expect more detailed guidance on these issues to be clearly set out in the Guidance on Service Standards as detailed above.

Provision of Information

42. DPTAC fully support the recommendation of the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism to include a new Recital stating that:

All information provided to air passengers should be provided in alternative formats accessible to disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility.

43. DPTAC would expect more detailed guidance on these issues to be clearly set out in the Guidance on Service Standards as detailed above.

Emergency Situations

44. DPTAC recommends that, as a minimum, the Regulation should include reference to the provision of information and assistance to disabled passengers and persons with reduced mobility in the event of an emergency.

Compensation

45. DPTAC does not feel that the reference in Annex 1 which lists one of the duties on managing bodies of airports as to provide 'temporary replacement of damaged or lost mobility equipment' is sufficient.

46. DPTAC recommends that the Regulation is strengthened to reflect the vital importance of mobility equipment such as wheelchairs to disabled people. The Regulation should emphasise the very distinct purpose and difference between such items and other luggage.

47. As a minimum DPTAC recommends that sections be added setting out:

• The mechanism for dealing immediately with damaged or lost equipment and the provision of appropriate temporary replacements.
• The mechanism for awarding appropriate compensation.

Question 2: Is the definition of passengers with reduced mobility acceptable? (Article 2)

48. DPTAC supports the recommendation of the European Parliament Draft Report to amend the wording in Recital 1 from:

'Consequently persons suffering the disadvantage of reduced mobility, whether caused by disability, age or another factor, should have opportunities for air travel comparable to those of other citizens'

to:<./p>

'Consequently disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility, whether caused by disability, age or another factor, should have opportunities for air travel comparable to those of other citizens'

49. Not only will this remove language which some people find offensive, it will also reflect a more inclusive description of the range of people that this Regulation applies to.

50. As set out earlier, DPTAC would recommend the substitution of the phrase 'persons with reduced mobility' with the more inclusive and accurate 'disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility' throughout the document.

51. The DfT Code of Practice and DPTAC Guidance documents both list the IATA Categories of Incapacitation as set out in Resolution 700.

52. DPTAC recommend that as these categories are already internationally recognised, that their use should continue and be reflected within this Regulation.

53. DPTAC also recommend that this opportunity should be used to formally recognise the additional category in use by some airlines of WCHP - Passenger with a disability of the lower limbs who is unable to take care of him/herself. Passenger requires assistance to embark or disembark and who can move about in an aircraft cabin only with the help of an onboard wheelchair.

Question 3: Are the conditions for preventing air carriers and others refusing to carry a PRM in your view effective and proportionate? (Articles 3 & 4)

Are the timings proposed in Articles 3 & 5 workable?

54. For continuity with earlier amendments, DPTAC recommends that the text of Article 3.1 should be amended from:

An air carrier or its agent or a tour operator shall not refuse, on the grounds of reduced mobility,

to:

An air carrier or its agent or a tour operator shall not refuse, on the grounds of disability or reduced mobility,

55. In the same way Article 3.2 should be amended from:

An air carrier or its agent or a tour operator shall not refuse to embark a person with reduced mobility,

to:

An air carrier or its agent or a tour operator shall not refuse to embark a disabled person or persons with reduced mobility,

56. The text within Article 4.1 is ambiguous in its reference to 'safety requirements duly established by law', as there is no indication of which law.

57. DPTAC is concerned that differences between National Laws could lead to confusion and complications, for example a disabled person could be carried under one set of national laws and yet be considered a safety risk under another.

58. This is especially relevant in the area of group travel, as demonstrated recently by several high profile cases where disabled people have been refused carriage due to airline staff misinterpreting safety regulations.

59. DPTAC therefore recommends the clarifying and harmonisation of rules relating to safety requirements at a European or International level, and for this to be reflected in the wording of the Regulation.

60. DPTAC is however aware that safeguards are necessary to ensure the health and safety of staff and other passengers, for example in the instance of communicable diseases etc.

61. DPTAC recommends that a form of words should be agreed by all stakeholders which would provide airlines with the protection necessary in such circumstances, whilst ensuring that this can not be used as grounds to discriminate against disabled passengers.

62. DPTAC understands and accepts the need for passengers to be self-sufficient and that an airline is entitled to require that a passenger travels with a companion if they are not self-sufficient.

63. DPTAC support the definition of self sufficiency set out in the Department for Transport Code of Practice, that:

To travel alone a passenger must be capable of:

1. breathing - the passenger should not be reliant on supplementary oxygen.
2. feeding - the passenger should be capable of feeding themselves (although cabin crew will open packaging or describe layouts to blind passengers).
3. lifting - the passenger should be capable of moving from a passenger seat to an on-board wheelchair, as cabin crew are not permitted for Health and Safety reasons to lift passengers in and out of seats.
4. communicating - the passenger should be able to communicate with cabin crew and understand their advice and instructions.
5. toileting - the passenger should be capable of using the toilet facilities unaided as food-handling regulations do not allow cabin crew to assist with toileting arrangements, however they can assist in pushing an on-board wheelchair, where one is available.
6. medicating - the passenger should be capable of administering their own medicines and medical procedures.

64. DPTAC recommend that for clarity and information this definition be adopted into the Regulation.

65. DPTAC also recommends that the Regulation should reflect the UK Code of Practice recommendation that if an airline requires a disabled person to travel with a companion or assistant, then that persons should be carried at no or reduced cost.

66. DPTAC recommends that Article 4.3 is amended to reflect that any safety rules and restrictions related to the carriage of persons with reduced mobility should be widely and publicly available rather than just on request, for example on company websites and in brochures.

67. If this information were available prior to the booking process disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility would be able to make informed choices and decisions. In many cases this would reduce the instances of refused boarding, thus saving the disabled persons (as well as any companions and the service provider) a great deal of time money, embarrassment, disappointment and inconvenience.

68. As outlined earlier in this response, this information should also be available in alternative formats.

69. DPTAC does have some concerns regarding the manner and level at which such decisions may be made. We reiterate the importance of good quality appropriate staff training to ensure that disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility are given the necessary information and that decisions are made on a factual informed individual basis and not from preconceived misconceptions and generalisations.

70. DPTAC notes that the regulation does not include any provision for reimbursement or re-booking or flights for a person who has been refused boarding.

71. DPTAC supports the recommendation of the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism that the following text should be added to Article 4.2:

The person in question must be offered full reimbursement of costs or the opportunity to rebook on another flight at no additional cost, where all safety requirements can be met.

72. When considering the timings set out within this article 5, DPTAC noted that although a compulsory notification period could be considered discriminatory, in some cases it may be necessary to ensure that the appropriate equipment and staff are available at a particular location at a specified time. This is especially relevant on long haul flights or when engineers are needed to install specialist equipment.

73. In light of this, both the DfT Code of Practice and the DPTAC Guidance document recommend a 48 hour notice period.

74. However DPTAC would expect that the enforcement of the notice period should reflect the level of assistance required.

75. DPTAC supports the duty in Article 5.2 that if notice is not given that:

'the managing body shall make all reasonable efforts to provide assistance'

76. This reflects the DfT Code which states that:

However, where flights are changed at short notice by the airline, or disabled people make bookings at short notice, (e.g. by using "last minute deals"), there may not be sufficient time for the disabled person to meet any requirement for advance notice. In such cases the airline should do all that it reasonably can to accommodate requests. [4.13]

77. DPTAC would also expect that following the introduction of the Regulation, the suggested improvements within the booking systems should mean that the majority of access and assistance requirements would be included in the original booking.

78. DPTAC is concerned that the requirement of 'not later than sixty minutes before the published departure time' may not be realistic to complete all standard airport procedures and security checks. This seems especially unlikely in the current security climate.

Question 4: Are the obligations on airport managing bodies to assist PRMs reasonable? (Article 5)

79. DPTAC again recommends that more emphasis should be placed on the details of the service provided to disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility within the Regulation in an expanded Guidance on Service Standards, as outlined in earlier in this response.

80. DPTAC guidance to disabled air passengers is to check if they need a particular service before booking as services provided can vary between operators. The services which airlines and airports should provide on request include:

• assistance to reach check-in
• assistance with registration at check-in
• assistance to reach the gate
• assistance boarding and disembarking the plane
• assistance to the general public area or to a representative of another operator
• assistance to passengers in transit
• assistance to point of onward travel

81. DPTAC supports the recommendation of the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism that the following text should be added to Article 5.1:

This notification shall also cover the return flight

82. Except in specific cases of injury, in most circumstances a disabled person or person with reduced mobility will have no variation in requirements between their outward and return flights. It is therefore reasonable for arrangements to be put in place for the both journeys at the same time.

83. In addition, the knowledge that appropriate arrangements have been put in place will help to alleviate any concerns and worries that a disabled person may experience regarding arrangements for their return flight, thereby increasing the quality of the whole experience. This is especially relevant when travelling abroad as it may be considerably more difficult to confirm arrangements due to a language barrier.

84. DPTAC recommend that the text of Article 5.4 should be amended from:

'When a person with reduced mobility transits through an airport ... The managing body shall make all reasonable effort to provide assistance'

to:

When a person with reduced mobility transits through an airport ... The managing body shall provide assistance

Question 5: Do you agree that the airport managing body should organise the necessary assistance to PRMs?

If so, should the airport managing body be able to recover all the costs from the airlines? And should it merely be able to recover costs, or be obliged by law to do so?

Are the proposals adequate in respect of cost-effectiveness of provision? (Article 6)

85. DPTAC welcomes the Regulation' s commitment that "in the interests of social inclusion, the persons concerned should receive this assistance free of charge".

86. DPTAC agrees that the airport managing body should recover costs from the airlines, in as much as they are providing assistance through the airport.

87. However DPTAC would not expect the airport operator to pass any on costs for which they would be liable as a service provider in their own right, e.g. accessible toilets, appropriate information and signage systems.

88. DPTAC recommend that a clear and transparent cost and charging systems should be agreed by all relevant stakeholders and put in place before the Regulation is enacted.

89. Airport operators should not be allowed to use the monopoly service provision created by this Regulation to profit.

90. Therefore DPTAC recommends that the text of Article 6.2 is amended as follows:

The managing body of an airport ... may levy an agreed charge on the air carriers

91. DPTAC recommends that the text of Article 6.3 is amended from:

The charge ... shall be cost related, transparent and established after consultation of the Airport Users Committee

to:

The charge ... shall be cost related, transparent and established in agreement with all relevant stakeholders

Question 6: Could the assistance be organised in any other way? For example, should individual airlines be allowed to self-handle?

Does the provision that the airport managing body may subcontract the assistance, for example at an entire terminal, affect this?

92. DPTAC considers that as long as the Regulation is clear and unambiguous about the service levels that need to be achieved in order to provide a seamless, effective journey for the customer, it would not be unreasonable for alternative options to be explored.

93. As referred to earlier, DPTAC are aware that many airlines are already providing a very high standard of service to disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility and have made considerable investments in staff, equipment and training.

94. The Regulation will set out minimum standards which must be achieved, but there must be an opportunity for airlines to go beyond this standard without it being prohibitively expensive.

95. DPTAC is concerned that if these additional costs are significantly higher than current airline costs, they may act as a deterrent or disincentive for airlines to continue to provide the current high standard.

Question 7: Do you agree that the charge to airlines should be proportionate to the total number of passengers they carry at the airport, i.e. not specifically the number of PRMs?

96. DPTAC supports this recommendation. This is the only way to equitably share the cost of customer service provision across all airlines in a way which does not allow any individual airlines to penalise disabled passengers.

97. To emphasise this point DPTAC recommends that the text of Article 6.4 is amended from:

It shall be shared among the air carriers using an airport in proportion to the number of passengers that each carries to and from that airport.

to:

It shall be shared among the air carriers using an airport in proportion to the total number of all passengers that each carries to and from that airport.

Question 8: Are the proposals on quality standards appropriate?

Do you agree with the cut-off of two million passengers per annum for the setting of quality standards? (Article 7 & Annex I)

98. DPTAC firmly believe that this Regulation should be expanded to include clear and binding Guidance on Service Standards. These should clearly set out what services, facilities and equipment should be provided.

99. In addition, DPTAC recommends that clear, transparent and enforceable Service Level Agreements should be made at European level as to how these facilities and services should be provided and funded by the airports and air carriers.

100. This agreement at European level would give the necessary clarity and harmonisation required.

101. DPTAC is aware of airline operators concerns that Regulation will create an enforced monopoly of service provision by airport operators.

102. DPTAC believe that it is reasonable for air carriers to have a degree of control over the provision of these services for which they are paying. In addition they should have recourse to clear and enforceable sanction mechanisms in the event of poor performance.

103. DPTAC recommend binding service level agreements between airports, service providers and airlines should be jointly agreed by all stakeholders, and include commitments on quality standards, charging principles and penalties. These agreements should be clear transparent and enforceable.

104. DPTAC believes that account should be made of the current high standards of provision and practices operated by some airlines. We would seek assurances that these high standards would not be compromised. DPTAC would not wish to see the implementation of this regulation lead to a decrease in current standards.

105. Through out the agreement process DPTAC would expect the emphasis to stay on the provision of service to disabled passengers, rather than territorial and financial squabbled between operators.

106. DPTAC believe that there is no reason why airports with less than two million passengers should be excluded from the proposed quality standards.

107. In reality these are the very airports where we would argue that an effective service infrastructure is absolutely essential. For example, many of the no-frills carriers operate out of these airports in the UK and across Europe. If the aim of this Regulation is to prevent airlines from making it difficult or un-attractive for disabled passengers to book with them (because they charge extra or do not have published quality standards in place) then disabled passengers will inevitably choose airlines operating out of airports where these standards are in place and which are covered by the regulations. The result of this would be to create an un-level playing field where the real costs of service provision for disabled passengers is borne by customers using airlines out of larger airports only with no cost sharing for those airlines operating out of smaller airports.

108. This would also effectively limit the choice of departure and destination airport for many disabled people, denying them access to possibility of cheaper or more convenient flights and destinations.

Question 9: Are the provisions covering the assistance to be provided by air carriers appropriate (Article 8 & Annex II)

109. DPTAC welcome the commitment contained within article 8 that air carriers should provide assistance free of charge.

110. DPTAC recommend that the Regulation should be expanded to include more detailed guidance on these issues to be clearly set out in the Guidance on Service Standards as set out earlier in this response.

111. DPTAC believe it is important that the Regulation covers the essential elements of assistance on board including:

1. assistance with stowing and retrieving baggage on the plane
2. providing an on-board wheelchair
3. assistance moving to and from the plane toilet
4. assistance transferring between a mobility aid and passenger seat
5. providing limited assistance with meals
6. briefing disabled passengers and any escort or companion on emergency procedures and the layout of the cabin
7. carriage of properly certified assistance dogs in the cabin

112. DPTAC has recently participated in the development of the "Policy for the Carriage of Guide Dogs and Other Assistance Dogs by UK Airlines". This document published by Guide Dogs and Assistance Dogs UK in association with British airlines has created an agreed protocol for carrying assistance dogs in the cabin of the aircraft.

113. DPTAC recommend that the Regulation reflects the findings of this report that:

'guide dogs and assistance dogs can travel on a flight of up to 10 hours duration ... It may, at the airline's discretion, be permissible to carry a guide dog or assistance dog in the cabin of the aircraft for flights in excess of this length of time with assurance from the owner that the dog's health and welfare will not suffer.'

114. DPTAC believe that it is unacceptable to impose a limit of one piece of mobility equipment per passenger. Disabled passengers may have complex needs requiring a variety of equipment. For example a wheelchair user may also need a portable dialysis machine, pressure cushions, dressing packs for pressure sores or incontinence supplies - this is especially relevant as some airlines still require wheelchair users to use catheters when flying, a practice DPTAC condemn.

115. DPTAC recognise that space is limited in the cabin environment and accept that it is reasonable to limit equipment and supplies carried within the cabin to items essential during the flight only. However this should be agreed on an individual basis rather than a blanket numerical allowance. Additional equipment and supplies should be safely and carefully stowed in the hold in such a way that they are quickly and easily returned to the passenger on landing.

Question 10: Are the provisions on notification appropriate and workable (Article 9)

116. DPTAC seek assurances that the communication systems within the potential additional layers of bureaucracy involved in arranging assistance will be robust enough to ensure that requests for assistance are dealt with effectively and efficiently. Disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility need to have confidence that when they make a booking with an airline that this information will be passed to the ground handling staff on both outward and return flights.

117. DPTAC recommend that Article 9.1 is strengthened to reflect the necessity for all booking options to enable disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility to book assistance.

118. As the Regulation includes a requirement for people to give advance notice of assistance, it should also If disabled people pre-notification is required then provision must be made for disabled people to communication their assistance needs what ever their booking preference. This will ensure that disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility are able to have equal access to special offers and internet discounts.

119. This system should be robust user friendly and reliable.

120. DPTAC support the recommendation of the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism that the following text should be added to Article 9.1:

Air carriers and affiliated tour operators shall ensure fully accessible internet booking sites i.e. compliance with Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guidelines,

121. In addition DPTAC recommend that reference should be made to the following additional guidance:

• World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) - Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)
• UK Government Guidelines can be found at: www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/government_it/web_guidelines.aspx

122. DPTAC also support the recommendation of the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism that the following new article should be added at 9.2a:

A system should be devised to ensure tracking of notification for assistance and giving a confirmation code to provide prima facie evidence of notification of the need for assistance.

Question 11: Do you have any views on the appropriate bodies to oversee and enforce the provisions of this regulation? (Article 11)

123. DPTAC agree with the DfT Initial Regulatory Impact Assessment attached to the consultation document, that the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and Air Transport Users Council (AUC) should be designated respectively as the UK's enforcement and complaints body.

124. However, DPTAC would seek assurances that these bodies would be adequately staffed, resourced and trained to deal with these additional responsibilities.

Annex A: General comments on accessibility for disabled people

The population

1. Disabled people account for a significant proportion of the population. The number of disabled people varies according to the definition used. There are an estimated 8.6 million adult disabled people in Great Britain and 11.7 million people are covered by the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

2. Disabled people are not a homogenous group with identical needs. The needs of people with mental health problems or learning disabilities are distinct from those of wheelchair users for example. Even within disabilities needs vary, for example a profoundly deaf person will not benefit from a hearing aid.

3. Of disabled people overall, in broad terms:

1. 70% have difficulty walking and/or climbing steps;
2. 41% have a hearing loss;
3. 24% have a vision loss.

4. Disabled people live throughout the whole community. One in four households are reported to have a disabled resident. The need for access for disabled people is not limited to specific areas or buildings but present throughout transport and the built environment.

5. In broad terms, over the next 30 years:

1. The proportion of the population over 65 will increase by 40%;
2. The number of people aged over 65 will double;
3. The proportion over 80 will increase by 100% and the number will treble.

6. Over the same period that will bring about these changes in the population profile, the overall population will increase by less than 7%.

7. There is a correlation between the age and disability. Over half the population aged over 75 has some kind of disability and two thirds of disabled people are over pension age. Many have more than one disability that affects their mobility.

8. The growing disabled and older populations will have social as well as economic implications if those responsible for transport systems and built environments do not recognise and address the need for more inclusive environments. Mobility and transport are vital to achieving and sustaining self-sufficiency and independence into old age.

Accessibility for disabled people

9. 'Accessibility' is a term that is interpreted differently by different audiences. By accessibility for disabled people we are seeking inclusive transport systems and built environments which are easy to reach, use and understand in safety and comfort.

10. DPTAC's believe disabled people should have access to the transport choices and opportunities available to non-disabled people. By doing so everyone would have the opportunity for independent mobility.

11. To maximise the full potential market, people need to be able to use a service. Otherwise many people will be excluded - and along with them their friends and families. Those people will be forced to look at alternatives. It is estimated that accessibility issues are relevant for 30-40% of the travelling population at any one time. Disabled people alone spend over £40bn annually in the UK.

12. Accessibility for disabled people benefits everyone, including older people, those with temporary disabilities or those temporarily encumbered with heavy luggage or pushing a pram. It also helps people for whom English is not their first language or people in an unfamiliar place by making it easier to use and understand.

A strategic approach

13. There is enormous scope and opportunity to improve accessibility for disabled people but it will require a strong commitment at all levels.

14. DPTAC believes that the need for - and benefit from - an inclusive transport system and built environment should be given a high profile.

15. The Government's ten-year plan for transport, Transport 2010, stated:

"6.5 The Government is committed to public transport that is accessible to disabled people. The rate and level of new investment in this Plan will ensure that improvements in the accessibility of public transport are brought forward more quickly. Building in accessibility for all disabled people in all new investment is a condition of public money being spent. Local authorities and transport operators should ensure that the transport needs of disabled people are factored into their plans and that the full benefits of improved public transport are accessible to all."

16. Providing access for disabled people is often only considered in terms in terms of detailed design. DPTAC believes this is no longer sufficient and that strategic decisions, investment and policies must address access for disabled people.

17. We welcome the Government's commitment to accessibility being a condition of public money being spent. However, it is the experience of disabled people which will measure whether it is having an impact.

18. To be effective all investors in the transport and built environment, public and private, at all levels, need to understand how to provide access effectively and require evidence access is improving as a result of their investment.

19. The Disability Rights Taskforce (DRTF) report 'From Exclusion to Inclusion' contains a summary of the problems faced by disabled people with access to travel and the built environment. The Government's response, 'Towards Inclusion', published in April 2000, provides details of action that is being taken to address these issues. Further references are given on DPTAC's web site at www.dptac.gov.uk.

Skills and competencies in accessibility for disabled people

20. Investment in people is also necessary. All staff, including those who plan, provide, manage and operate services or deliver policies will benefit from disability equality training to a high standard.

21. Training is relevant to everyone involved from the boardroom to the front line of service provision and policy implementation. There is a need for all staff, not just those dealing with the public, to understand the relevance of their work to access for disabled people.

22. To be effective, training itself must be relevant to the job, of high quality and on-going. Education and on-going training for staff should be a key element in delivering access.

23. It will be essential to incorporate accessibility for disabled people in training and retraining of those responsible for planning, designing, operating, maintaining and management transport services, infrastructure and built environments, including the public realm.

24. There is support, guidance and advice available to help deliver inclusive environments. Those responsible need to understand and apply this to their work and not see access as a separate burden.

25. There are also specific regulations and requirements that set out the minimum standards for accessibility for disabled people, for example on bus and rolling stock design. These minimum requirements must be met in full. As the understanding of peoples access needs evolves improvements can be made.

26. Early consideration and involvement of disabled people is advised to ensure accessibility considerations and local problems are taken into account.

• Responses to consultations

Top of page