DPTAC response to Department for Transport consultation on Local Transport Planning - The Next Step

This Document has also been made available in Adobe Acrobat and MS Word formats for downloading.
The Adobe® Acrobat Reader® can be freely downloaded.
Viewers with visual difficulties may find it useful to investigate services provided to improve the accessibility of Acrobat documents - www.adobe.com/accessibility/index.html

Adobe Acrobat version: DPTAC response (104k)
MS Word version: DPTAC response (89k)

Our Comments

1: What are your comments, concerns and other views about the proposed guidance, including whether it is sufficient and appropriate?

Fully allocating the integrated transport block should bring stability to local authority transport planning and that should in turn help local authorities to meet their statutory obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act. To that extent we welcome the proposals. However, we are concerned that while there is reference to dialogue between local authorities and regional government offices and public transport operators and to providing information to stakeholders and customers (which we assume would include groups representing disabled people), there is no reference to the reverse process whereby stakeholders and customers have the opportunity to influence delivery - as is required under the Disability Equality Duty of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, as amended.

Also, while we appreciate the desire to allow local transport authorities flexibility in reporting on progress, we would also expect to see certain minimum requirements. These would include the use of performance indicators to demonstrate progress in promoting the interests of disabled people and proof of their satisfaction with that progress.

The fact that the 2008 progress reports will not be assessed or classified by the Department would seem to us to be an abrogation of responsibility by the Department in terms of its duties under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 and contrary to its commitment to disabled people in its published Disability Equality Scheme. We would expect the Department to be able to demonstrate that it was taking a keen interest in the promotion of the interests of disabled people - including keeping a close watch on the actions of what are the key partners of the Department in implementing national transport policies.

Finally there is reference to the proposed new Local Area Agreements and the finalisation of guidance for the 2008 progress reports following current discussion. We would expect DPTAC to be given the opportunity to participate in the development of this guidance before it is published.

Appendix One of the consultative document refers to the progress reports which are an essential complement to the Local Transport Plan process. We note that it is not envisaged that there will be a need for a report in 2009. This means that it is all the more important that the 2008 report is complete. We note also that road safety and local air quality have been identified as particular issues that must be addressed in the progress reports. As you will be aware, the current Full Guidance on Local Transport Plans: Second Edition was published in December 2004. This date was well before the passing of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 and the introduction of the Disability Discrimination Duty in 2006. However, the nature of the duty is that those public authorities that are affected by the Act are required to review their existing policies and actions. We believe that both the Department and local transport authorities need specifically to recognise this in the policies, programmes and progress reports relating to the local transport plan process.

We are aware that there are references to "delivering accessibility" and that there is a mandatory performance indicator LTP1 that expects local authorities to set an accessibility target. However, we note that the Departments definition of "accessibility" appears to centre on measurement of time to access work, health services, education and major shopping centres by public transport. This is very different from what we understand as accessibility from the point of view of a disabled person. In fact many disabled people would be happy to be able to access any of these opportunities by public transport almost irrespective of the time it took! Physical access and accessible vehicles are key for disabled users. This, for example, means having guaranteed availability of low floor accessible vehicles with audio/visual announcements complemented by accessible bus/tram/rail stops and accessible footway infrastructure. We have consistently drawn attention to this in our advice to Ministers and the Department and are disappointed that there still appears to be no change in Departmental attitudes and published advice.

We believe it is vital that the 2008 Progress Report identifies how local authorities are meeting their obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 with evidence of the involvement of local disabled people and a measure of their satisfaction with what is being achieved.

2: Do you think changes should be made to the formula funding allocations in line with the working group's recommendations?

This block of questions (2-5) relates to the allocation of maintenance capital funding. The standard of maintenance of footway infrastructure is of particular relevance to the interests of disabled people. The current formulaic approach to distribution of funding by the Department is arcane and as mentioned in our introductory remarks, we would expect to see the Department demonstrate its obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act by ensuring that an element of the distribution was dependent on measured customer satisfaction.

3: What do think of the changes to the damping mechanism? Do you agree with the changes or do you think there should be a wider or lower variation?

See comments on 2 above.

4: Do you agree that the quartiles differential should be lowered or do you consider it should remain at its existing level?

See comments on 2 above.

5: Do you agree that given the variability of quality of condition data on unclassified roads allocations for unclassified roads should be based on road length only?

See comments on 2 above.

6: Would it be helpful, in joint plan areas, for allocations to individual authorities to be made on the advice of the area as a whole?

We have no difficulty with this provided the need to promote the interests of disabled people is recognised appropriately in the financial allocations.

7: Do you have any further comments to make?

No further comment.

8: Do you agree that there be more flexibility in future about the form of the local transport plan?

As indicated previously, we have no difficulty in principle with local authorities having flexibility in the form of the local transport plans that they prepare. We would, however, now expect local authorities to be demonstrating that they recognise their responsibilities under the Disability Discrimination Act in their policies and spending programmes and in their reporting of progress.

9: Do you agree the proposals for amending legislation described above?

We would support, in principle, the proposals to amend the legislation. The association of policies and an action plan for implementation is a feature of the Disability Equality Duty and it would seem logical that this should also apply to local transport plans. We note too that the Secretary of State would intend taking powers to intervene where a local authority did not keep its local transport plan up to date. We would expect these powers to extend to situations where the local authority was not adequately meeting its duties under associated legislation such as the Disability Discrimination Act 2005.

10: Have you any other views on the way in which local transport planning might develop from 2011?

In terms of the way that local transport planning might develop post 2011, we would expect the Department to recognise that the Government has a statutory adviser on transport matters as they relate to the interests of disabled people. We would ask the Department to ensure that DTAC is fully involved in the future development of the local transport planning system.

Any other general comment that you would like to make concerning this consultation

This consultation on the future of the Local Transport Planning system relates to a key element of the way that local authorities implement their policies on transport matters and is part of a statutory obligation on them. We note that while organisations with an interest in disability matters are listed as formal consultees, DPTAC is not one of them! As the Government's statutory adviser on transport matters as they relate to the interests of disabled people, we are extremely disappointed that we were not recognised in the list of consultees. We would ask that the Department ensures that it recognises the role of DPTAC by ensuring that we are involved in the development of further guidance relating to the local transport plan process.

We do, however, recognise that the proposals should introduce a degree of stability to the LTP system which ought to allow local authorities to take a longer term view to transport planning. The encouragement of joint working between local authorities also has the potential to make a difference for disabled people in the areas in question.

We note that the consultation has been informed by the following report prepared for the Department by Atkins - Delivering Better Local Transport, Key Achievements and Good Practice from the First Round of Local Transport Plans. This reports some welcome facts and figures such as the scale of introduction of low floor bus services; major increases in the percentage of crossings with facilities for disabled users; and the implementation of dropped kerbs at crossings and raised kerbs at bus stops. However, there is a distinct lack of reporting of actual take-up by disabled people of these facilities and how satisfied they are with the new facilities. Only in the case of Manchester and Hertfordshire do we read of the involvement of disabled people in the transport planning process - yet this is a fundamental requirement under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005. We would also draw attention to the fact that the Disability Equality Duty that was introduced under the Act applies to both the local authorities and to the Department for Transport. We would therefore expect to see this reflected in all studies commissioned by the Department and in any consultation or policy guidance publications emanating from the Department.

The lack of any acknowledgment of the significance of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 in this consultation is a matter of concern to us as is the more hands-off approach by the Department to the local transport planning process. In our advice to Ministers and the Department, we have consistently stressed that we expect:

• accessibility for disabled people to be a condition of any investment;
• accessibility for disabled people should be a mainstream activity;
• disabled people should be involved in determining accessibility;
• accessibility for disabled people to be the responsibility of the service provider.

With passing of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, these tenets are in effect a statutory obligation. In this respect we would also draw attention to "Planning, buildings, streets and disability equality", the guide to the Disability Equality Duty published by the Disability Rights Commission to assist local authority planning and highways departments in delivering their responsibilities under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005.

Finally, we would draw attention to the undertakings by the Department in its own Disability Equality Scheme published in December 2006 regarding recognising and promoting the interests of disabled people in all that the Department does.

• Responses to consultations

• Top of page