|
||
| About DPTAC | Publications | Site Map | Links | Home
|
DPTAC response to Scottish Executive proposals for a Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland
Introduction1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Scottish Executive's proposal for a Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland. This response incorporates contributions to discussions made in the presence of Scottish Executive observers at two meetings of the Mobility and Access Committee (MACS) (where DPTAC has observer status) and DPTAC's Main Committee, held between February and March 2006. 2. The Government set up DPTAC under the Transport Act 1985 to advise it on the transport needs of disabled people. Our aim is to ensure that disabled people can go where everyone else goes and that they can do so easily and without extra cost. We would like to see this happen by 2020. Our statutory remit covers non-delegated matters in Great Britain (England, Wales and Scotland). The Scotland Act 1998 (Cross-Border Public Authorities) (Specifications) Order 1999 (1999 No. 1319) specifies DPTAC as a cross-border public authority for the purposes of the Scotland Act 1998. 3. DPTAC has identified four overarching principles on which to base its advice to Government, other organisations and disabled people. Those principles are that:
4. These principles are the basis of DPTAC's response to consultations. In this response, we set out some general issues before making comments specific to this consultation. General commentDisabled People in the Population5. DPTAC's principal concern is to ensure accessibility for disabled people. By this, we mean inclusive transport systems that are easy to reach, use and understand by all, in safety and comfort. 6. About 1 million people in Scotland, or one fifth of the population, are covered by the Disability Discrimination Act. Of these some 729,000 experience hearing loss; about 180,000 have serious sight impairments; over 18,000 adults are known to local authorities in Scotland to have learning disabilities; and one and a quarter million will experience a mental health problem at some point in their lives. 7. Disabled people are not an 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 among people with similar impairments, needs vary; for example, profoundly deaf people will not benefit from induction loops, and many blind people do not read Braille. 8. Disabled people live throughout the community. One in three households in Scotland has a disabled resident or one with a long-term illness. The need for access for disabled people is not limited to specific areas, but is present throughout the wider transport system. Population Trends in Disability9. We have seen that older people are more likely to be disabled. In broad terms:
10. Over the same period that will bring about these changes in the population profile, the overall population of Scotland will increase by far less. 11. While higher numbers of children are being born and living with impairments than ever before, prevalence of disability does increase with age: 8% of those in the United Kingdom aged 16-17 years have a current long-term impairment, compared with 33% of those aged 50 to 65. This proportion of the working population will increase, as more young people study full time, and retirement ages rise. The number of people over the current pensionable age is projected to increase from nearly 11.4 million in 2006 to 12.2 million in 2011, rising to nearly 13.9 million by 2026 and exceeding 15.2 million by the year 2031. The impact will be much greater in some parts of Scotland than in others. Dumfries and Galloway for example has a projected fall of over 40 % in the 30 to 44 age group between 2002 and 2017. 12. The Department for Work and Pensions estimated in 2006 that disabled people in the United Kingdom have a spending power of around £80 billion each year. Planning strategically to design transport facilities that meet the needs of disabled people is likely to further increase this amount, as more disabled people become creators of the national wealth, rather than consumers of its state benefits. 13. It is therefore an economic imperative as well as an ethical one to meet the transport needs of disabled people by providing inclusive transport systems that are accessible by all sectors of society. It both allows disabled people to exert their spending power and enables them to become or remain part of the country's work force. 14. The mobility of disabled people is also a precondition for the achievement of a wide range of government objectives such as independent living; full participation in civil society; and the maintenance of good physical and mental health through access to recreational and cultural facilities. Some of these links were brought out in the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit's report "Improving the Life chances of Disabled People", and in our response to it. A strategic approach to designing inclusively15. There is enormous scope and opportunity to improve accessibility for disabled people but this requires a strong and continuing commitment at all levels by Government, local government, service providers and developers. 16. Accessibility for disabled people is often only considered at the detailed design stage, and DPTAC believes this is no longer sufficient. The consideration of accessibility for disabled people must underpin strategic decisions, investment and policies, with evidence of how diversity was considered in making decisions. We also seek evidence of joined up action by all parties involved in transport service provision. This may require education, training and continuing professional development in disability issues for those involved in the planning, design and management of transport systems, as well as at the front line. 17. It is not only disabled people who benefit from this approach. There are currently a further 18 million people in the United Kingdom who would directly or indirectly benefit. These include older people, families with small children under the age of five, carers, friends and relatives who accompany people with disabilities, and tourists and others whose first language may not be English, Indeed it is fair to say that all members of society benefit to some degree from what we can call "inclusive design". 18. An inclusive approach to design creates transport that can be used by everyone, regardless of age, gender, sexuality, faith, ethnicity or disability. This makes facilities truly functional, efficient and sustainable. Inclusive design recognises and accommodates differences in the way people use transport and provides solutions that enable all to take part in mainstream activities equally, independently, and with choice and dignity. 19. Inclusive transport planning does not attempt to meet every single need, but considers people's diversity and breaks down unnecessary barriers and exclusions in a manner that benefits us all. This is significant because although society and individuals have invested heavily in enabling people to manage their personal circumstances effectively (e.g. by providing aids and adaptations for disabled people), many people remain unnecessarily 'disabled' by ill-conceived facilities and services. 20. DPTAC welcomes the commitment that the UK Government has made to accessibility being a condition of public money being spent in England in support of its Ten Year Plan Transport 2010, and its similar commitment in respect of the Wales Transport Framework. 21. Private and public investors of any transport or built environment project need to know whether investment plans meet the need of disabled people. They will also need evidence that people at all levels of responsibility understand how to provide accessibility for disabled people effectively to prevent a waste of resources. Key issues in the consultationThe case for a wider representative body for passengers22. DPTAC recognises the case that led Scottish Ministers' to consider establishing a general representative body for passenger transport in Scotland. Such a body could holistically consider the transport needs of passengers across a range of transport modes more effectively than is the case at present. The existing position23. The maturity of the present arrangements for passenger representation varies widely across transport modes. At present some representative structures, such as those for aviation passengers and for rail passengers, are already well established. In other sectors such as shipping and buses, existing arrangements have been subject to recent changes that are still bedding in. In still other sectors such as shipping, the new Shipping Service Advisory Committees have been proposed but not yet established. 24. Interestingly the pattern of representative bodies shows a similarly mixed pattern in mirroring transport responsibilities. Representative bodies within Scotland either exist or are planned for shipping services (reserved) and buses (devolved) while UK wide bodies exist for rail (increasingly devolved) and for aviation (reserved). Option 1 - Single integrated committee with mode-specific sub-committees25. The Scottish Executive's preferred arrangement for the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland is for a new integrated high level committee, with mode specific sub-committees and a sub-committee carrying forward the work of the current Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland (MACS). We understand that this option will not require primary legislation in order to dissolve the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland in its current form, though the Minister would have to revoke the regulations that established MACS through secondary legislation. 26. This preferred option would not create a body with a thoroughgoing representational role in respect of aviation and rail passengers, as the Air Transport Users' Council and the recently reconstituted Rail Passengers Council (under the trading name "Passsengerfocus") retain reserved roles for the whole of the United Kingdom for their respective transport modes. The Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland would therefore have to work with these bodies in their current form. The remit issue27. DPTAC is very concerned at the way in which the Scottish Executive proposes to incorporate the functions of the present Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland into the new Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland. This is because we understand that the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland was established under Section 72 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 to consider "such matters resulting to the needs of disabled people in connection with transport as the committee think appropriate". 28. This remit is much broader than the consideration of public transport related issues, or indeed wider passenger concerns. For this remit to be carried out effectively, inclusively, and comprehensively; the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland has found it necessary to consider the transport needs within Scotland of disabled people who are pedestrians, car, motor and pedal cycle drivers and passengers, as well as those who do to use transport at all. It has also needed to consider such as issues as the pedestrian environment, the Blue Badge Parking Scheme, Shopmobility, vehicle recovery, car hire, tolls, road user charges, and Ring and Ride and other demand responsive transport services. 29. None of these appear to fall within the statutory remit of the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland. This is potentially very significant, because emerging research commissioned by the Scottish Executive appears likely to suggest that public transport as conventionally understood is unlikely to provide a complete solution to the provision of accessible transport for disabled people in Scotland. 30. Furthermore, like DPTAC itself, the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland has been keen to point out the need to link decisions on transport policy to those made on wider agenda, such as education, health and social inclusion. 31. It is true that Section 42 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2005 states "the [Public Transport Users'] Committee shall consider and make recommendations about any other matter if asked to do so by the Scottish Ministers". However if this power were to be exercised in respect of all the issues that we have outlined above, then the Public Transport Users' Committee would be responsible for more transport issues outside its core remit of the needs of "public transport users" than within it. Its name and formal function would risk losing meaningfulness and credibility. We understand that Scottish Ministers cannot change this name without further primary legislation, but we do not consider this an insuperable obstacle to such a very necessary change. 32. Moreover, the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland has a role in respect of the consideration of aviation and rail services, for which there will continue to exist representative bodies (the Air Transport Users' Council and the Rail Passengers Council respectively) outside the proposed Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland. If the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland needs to liaise with these bodies then we see no reason for MACS not to be able to do so. 33. We therefore cannot see with any clarity how "the functions of MACS could be incorporated into the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland and be carried out by a sub-committee which would build on the excellent work of MACS and set its functions in a wider context" as suggested in the consultation document. 34. The Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland itself has noted that it is not primarily a representative body in the sense that the new Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland is intended to be. Instead it is an expert advisory non departmental public body, essentially concerned with identifying the barriers that prevent people from using transport; and bringing these to the attention of Scottish Ministers and transport operators, with the intention of trying to improve the mobility of disabled people. We do consider that it would be possible in principle to combine the strategic advice function of a body such as MACS with the consumer representative function of the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland, but we do not think that this issue has been fully thought through by the Scottish Executive. 35. In addition, the adoption of mode-specific sub-committees appears to us to be a rather linear approach which may not do justice to the concept of travel and mobility needs as an integrated whole. It does not sit well with the cross-cutting remit of a sub-Committee taking on the work of the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland, which would presumably need to become involved in the work of each of these sub-committees. The Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland in relation to DPTAC36. DPTAC is concerned that the support that the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland has been able to offer to DPTAC might not be maintained in the event that Option 1 is adopted. It is not clear what relationship there will be between the remit, resources, reliability and reputation of MACS and the post-MACS sub-committee that is proposed to be a part of the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland. Unless there is a high level of continuity with the current MACS membership and secretariat, then the expertise and experience of the existing MACS could be lost. This would add to the work of DPTAC at an important time, with the disability equality duty coming into force for public bodies in Scotland, a subject to which we shall return. 37. When Ministers set up the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland, DPTAC remained the statutory advisory body for the transport needs of disabled people in Scotland in respect of matters that were reserved to the UK Government. In carrying out this work we have received valuable assistance from MACS. We have together published a Concordat setting out how we work effectively together. This is annexed to our consultation response. 38. We have found it useful to liaise with MACS, for example, in:
39. All of these activities had implications for disabled transport users in Scotland. If MACS was to be replaced by a sub-Committee of the proposed Public Transport Users' Committee, DPTAC would seek assurances from the Scottish Executive of the continuation of this supporting role for our work. 40. For these reasons, the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee cannot recommend Option 1 in its current form. Option 2 - Umbrella body superimposed on existing bodies41. The proposal that the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland is an umbrella body superimposed on existing bodies, suffers from the same key flaw as Option 1. This is that the remit of the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland is so much broader than that of the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland that large areas of its work would be, to develop the consultation document's umbrella metaphor, left out in the rain. Presumably MACS would continue to report directly to Ministers in respect of those non-passenger functions. It is hard to see what clarity, transparency, or efficiency would be achieved by creating such a situation of dual reporting and accountability in respect of MACS' work. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee is therefore not able to recommend Option 2 as drafted. 42. For both these options the consultation document clearly states that those who put themselves forward to be members of the Public Transport Users' Committee for Scotland will be required to go through the public appointments systems. It also suggests that bodies that have been already set up could be involved and incorporated. This will only be possible if there is a 'protected appointments' provision. 43. We understand that the Scottish Executive may be prepared to entertain this possibility; but there has been no public statement to that effect during the consultation period. This is just one example of the distinct absence of detail with which the options have been set out, and which severely limits DPTAC's ability to respond with any specificity. Others include resourcing and timetables for creating the new body. The Disability Equality Duty44. We have noted the new disability equality duty that will come into force for public bodies in Scotland in December 2006. It is explained in Disability Rights Commission's publication The Duty to Promote Disability Equality Statutory Code of Practice Scotland. 45. This sets out new duties for local authorities in Scotland that will have an impact on their transport functions, for Passenger Transport Executives, and for Scottish Ministers, who will be required to publish reports giving an overview of progress towards equality of opportunity for disabled persons. The first report (which will need to cover transport) will have to be published no later than 1st December 2008, and subsequently every three years thereafter. 46. This has the potential to be an important addition to the current work that the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland exists to advise Scottish Ministers about, though it will be for MACS to determine its priority and significance in its programme of work. For any such advice to be timely, actionable and comprehensive, either MACS in its current form will continue to be needed for some years, or a new body must be created that has the expertise, energy and resources to carry forward its remit without delay or diminution. A new option47. The Scottish Executive has suggested in paragraph 44 that the needs of cyclists and walkers could be added to the remit of the Public Transport Users' Committee. While this addition of some of the non passenger transport issues that we have identified at paragraph 27 above is not acceptable in this abbreviated form, it does contain the kernel of a third alternative. 48. DPTAC suggests that the Scottish Executive should consider the case for the creation of an overarching Transport Users Committee for Scotland to monitor the delivery of all aspects of transport in Scotland from a user perspective, including those who would like to use public or private transport but who, for a range of reasons, do not do so at present. 49. This would be particularly timely given the recent formal launch of the long-term strategy of the new Transport Scotland Agency which was created by the Scottish Ministers to promote an integrated approach to the delivery of the direct transport interests of the Scottish Executive. The Agency's scope includes all trunk roads, motorways and railways in Scotland, as well as concessionary fares. However the Transport Users Committee for Scotland could also take on those matters retained by the Scottish Executive Transport Group which remains responsible for:
50. It has been suggested that the National Transport Forum created in 1997 was just such a body. In fact this was not the case. The Forum, abolished with the creation of the Scottish Parliament, was planned as a Scottish partner to the Commission for Integrated Transport. Bringing together representatives from central and local government, transport operators, pressure groups and transport user groups, the Forum was to encourage co-ordination between different transport modes. This is quite different from the multi-modal user group that DPTAC now proposes. 51. It could be argued that this option might delay matters since it would require primary legislation. This may be the case, but DPTAC considers that it would be preferable to take longer to set in hand the most appropriate arrangements than to establish a less useful body to a shorter timescale. 52. If the Transport Users Committee for Scotland were to be established; and to then demonstrate a good track record of reliable and effective performance; then DPTAC considers that there could be a case, at a later date, for incorporating into it the functions of the present Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland. 53. DPTAC would wish to consider that case further at the point when the Scottish Executive came forward with such a proposal. We would be prepared to work with MACS and the Executive in developing the idea further, particularly in dealing with the challenge of developing a body which combines representational and advisory functions. Conclusion54. The Scottish Executive should not miss the opportunity to create a body that comprehensively represents users of public and private transport, covering the functions of both the Scottish Executive Transport Group and the Transport Scotland Agency. If this is achieved then there could be a case for incorporating into it, at a later date, the remit, resources and membership of the current Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland. Until such time, the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland will need to remain in existence in order to advise Scottish Ministers and other on these functions and on the new disability equality duty in relation to transport. Neil Betteridge Date: 22 March 2006 |
|
|