The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations

Chapter 5 Objectives:

Overall the chapter recommends what actions are required in order to move towards equality of opportunity in relation to travel. Specific objectives include:

• Identify structural barriers that have prevented fundamental changes in the past;
• Outline the specific range of initiatives and schemes required to move towards equality of travel opportunity;
• Provide recommendations as to how to facilitate the introduction of such initiatives and schemes.

Introduction

5.1 Previous chapters have clearly demonstrated that there are currently inequalities in the travel behaviour of disabled and non-disabled people. Additionally, Chapter 2 showed that generally, disabled people do wish to travel more than they currently do. This indicated that the different travel behaviour is largely caused by differences in equality of opportunity and ease of travel between disabled and non-disabled people (and between people with different disabilities). Earlier chapters have also demonstrated that many of the difficulties facing disabled people (and indeed some of the potential solutions to these difficulties) have been identified by previous research. However, despite this, the situation remains that there are decided differences in opportunity and hence travel behaviour. This suggests that there are some additional structural barriers which have prevented recognised changes from being introduced.

5.2 This chapter, therefore, seeks to address two key issues relating to addressing inequalities in travel opportunity. First, the chapter discusses some of the structural and administrative barriers which might, at least, be partial causes of why some of the barriers to equal opportunity of travel have not previously been addressed. Second, the chapter examines how to achieve the additional travel opportunities that disabled people want and who should take responsibility for bringing about the required changes. Specifically, an indication is made of what needs to be contained in the National Travel Strategy or addressed at a national level (including the potential need for new primary legislation) and what needs to be addressed at the local/regional level. The policy context of the Disability Discrimination Act and the Disability Equality Duty is also considered.

Lack of Strategic Context

5.3 There is evidence from this and previous studies that, if public transport provision for disabled people is to flourish, it needs to be placed in the context of a strategy. There are many examples of schemes that have been well-received by users and successful against other measures, but which have then folded because they were reliant on one or two enthusiastic people and/or short-term funding. If such schemes are to continue to provide benefits, they need the certainty of being part of an authority or operator's core functions. This has been demonstrated by the example in this research of Dial a Bus and Ring and Ride in the SPT area: this scheme has continued to expand, and is fully institutionalised within SPT's activities, because it can be seen to clearly assist in the organisation's strategic objectives, as set out in the Strathclyde Passenger Transport Strategy ( SPTS).

5.4 The case study evidence clearly shows that as well as an initiative or scheme needing to fit within an overall package of services or a planned strategy, a crucial element of the success of any scheme is funding. The Case Studies demonstrate the point that such schemes are rarely funded as part of an overall strategy and commitment - good schemes are all too often reliant on charitable donations or the energy and driving force of one individual. The English Case studies illustrate this very well, with Transport Matters due to end when the Lotteries Commission money runs out, in 18 months time, and the Kirklees Taxi Voucher Scheme having already been terminated. The problem, then, is that the scheme merely raises expectations, which are then ultimately not fulfilled. These two Case Studies can be seen as good examples of potentially useful schemes which could have been very successful given different approaches to long-term strategy and funding.

It is the research team's recommendation, therefore, that public transport for disabled people is set firmly within the context of wider transport policy. If a separate strategy is prepared, as has been proposed in previous studies, there are two possible problems: firstly, the strategy might never be prepared; and, secondly, there is a risk that a separate stand-alone Transport Strategy for Disabled People might be marginalized.

Structural Barriers

5.5 A real barrier to the development of a coherent strategy for disabled travellers (or more broadly, fundamental changes to transport provision as a whole) is the organisation of travel provision and transport legislation; up to now there has been a lack of strategic direction and there is a spread of responsibility at UK, Scotland, Regional, and Local levels, as well as the wide range of different travel providers.

5.6 The delivery of strategy to improve transport for disabled people is dependent on the interplay of many different actors and, as in other areas of transport, they are motivated by a range of different factors. Private bus operators must be profit-maximising (or at least optimising) and will introduce improvements where they perceive there to be a short or long term financial benefit and/or where they are required by legislation to do so. However, as evidenced by the DDA Regulations on the accessibility of public transport vehicles, such legislation is clearly negotiated. Local authorities are motivated primarily by a need to fulfil their statutory duties; by financial inducements from national government; and by local political priorities. They will also respond to exhortation/guidance from central government, but a consistent response to that from all authorities equally is unlikely to be forthcoming. Private rail operators will introduce those improvements that they are required to introduce according to the terms of their franchise; and Network Rail is ultimately answerable to its Board although, since the Railways Act 2004, Network Rail (Scotland) is, arguably, now much more responsive to national political imperatives. Thus a national strategy for improving transport for disabled people must consider ways in which these different players can best be induced or encouraged to realise those parts of the strategy in whose delivery they have a role to play.

Broader Social and Spatial Context

5.7 It must also be noted that not all the barriers faced by disabled people relate to transport policy. There are other key inequalities which contribute significantly to current inequalities in relation to differences in socio-economic status and levels of social inclusion. This is not the place for a broad discussion of inequalities in society but clearly, changes to transport policy need to be set within a broader context of changes to broader social policy in relation to access to education and employment for example. Achieving equality of opportunity to travel will not necessarily lead to equality of employment opportunity without broader and more fundamental changes.

5.8 It is also clear that there are some circumstances whereby it will not be possible, almost whatever a transport operator does, to enable some disabled users to use public transport. There may be situations where provision could be made which would enable small numbers of users to access some forms of public transport but that the cost involved in such provisions would be prohibitive. Evidence from the MATISSE²⁰ project also indicates that if the actual mobility levels of disabled people are to achieve parity with those of non-disabled people, then social and policy changes need to be effected beyond the sphere of transport. In order to take part in this process, therefore, those responsible for providing transport should engage with policy makers in other sectors, such as those responsible for employment, education and social services. Whilst taking such a holistic approach, the importance of accessible transport provision as an important enabler and potential catalyst for change should nevertheless be promoted. In other words, the solution does not always lie within the system of public transport and the responsibility for the provision of viable alternatives (or the funding of such) will rest with government.

5.9 There are recognised spatial differences in travel, for example people living in rural areas tend to make fewer trips, that are often multi-purpose, than do those in urban areas. Analysis of the SHS demonstrates differences in car use between urban and rural areas, which are linked to the lack of availability of alternative forms of public transport and distances travelled for amenities and employment. Addressing the needs of disabled people in rural areas will require different solutions to be developed from those that may be priorities in urban areas. At the same time it is necessary to address the lack of availability of public transport generally in rural areas; only then will some of the solutions discussed below become relevant.

Issues: Affordability, Fear and Staff Training

5.10 Before going on to discuss specific changes and priorities, we discuss some exceptions and assumptions that we have made in relation to the requirements

5.11 The affordability of transport emerges as an interesting and complex issue. It did not appear to be a priority for survey respondents - accessibility and ease of travel appeared much more important. However, we can surmise that for transport to be accessible it needs to be affordable, but that in the first instance, people consider accessibility to be the key. Cost of travel is almost an irrelevance if journeys are considered insurmountable for other reasons. It only becomes an issue where for example in the case of taxis in some areas at least, accessibility has been addressed. The discussion of the role of concessionary fares for disabled people to use conventional public transport in Chapter 3 demonstrates that such an initiative only brings about a partial improvement in travel opportunities, and should not be considered as a complete solution. Additionally, in Chapter 1 we noted the suggestion made in a previous research study that concessionary fares for older people may have led to more crowded buses which in turn may lead to lower use by some disabled people.

5.12 Another issue which emerges as important but is dealt with differently in this analysis is the issue of fear and intimidation while using public transport. There are two aspects to this. One is the fear of witnessing or becoming a victim of crime and antisocial behaviour while travelling. The other, is a lack of confidence in making the journey. Fear and intimidation is clearly a barrier to using transport for many disabled people (evidence from the SHS shows that it is a more common barrier among disabled than non-disabled people). While some of the solutions will specifically address the issue of confidence to travel, we do not directly address the issue of fear of crime in the current analysis. This is because it is an issue which is partly addressed by some of the other initiatives and solutions discussed below. Additionally, the issue is much broader than the focus of the current study and is the subject of other research being undertaken by the Scottish Executive in relation to addressing the problem as a whole rather than just for disabled people.

5.13 Almost all proposed initiatives require staff training and awareness raising. Either that, or the appointment of specialist staff and more staff on buses such as conductors to help address the fear of travel - both in relation to fear from crime or intimidation and uncertainty in relation to being confident of reaching the destination. The survey and audits have shown that many disabled people have had negative experiences with staff on public transport and that, even for those that have not, there is a fear of so doing, which puts them off travelling.

5.14 The Travel Dundee driver disability awareness training case study shows how one bus company has addressed this issue. However, unless required by statute, or via a contract (where services are contracted for by a public body, for example, as with bus services in London), it is not possible to ensure that all companies will act in this way, nor that all drivers will follow their training even where they have been trained. Some bus companies use mystery shoppers to assess driver behaviour (although Travel Dundee does not). However, even where mystery shoppers are used, it is the company's responsibility to define appropriate levels of customer service from its drivers - and these may or may not be sufficient to make a disabled traveller feel confident enough to use the company's services.

Changes and Priorities

5.15 As identified at the end of Chapter 4, there are a range of key changes identified as priorities for change by survey respondents. The different changes reflect differences in the needs and priorities of those in different socio-economic situations and with different disabilities. For example, access to a car is seen as more important by those of working age with children while the opportunity for accompaniment is seen as more important by older respondents. In summary, the key changes or requirements are:

• Door-to-door transport (either an on-call door to door bus or an on-call inexpensive, accessible taxi service)
• The opportunity for accompaniment during travel
• Adequate provision and enforcement of parking for disabled drivers and passengers
• Tailored journey planning/ in-trip information
• Improved physical accessibility of vehicles
• Improved accessibility of stops, stations and interchanges
• Improvement in the general physical environment including pavements, roads, signage and street furniture.
• Access to a suitable adapted car (either through grant/subsidy or shared car scheme)

The key changes or requirements are now discussed in relation to:

• What change or initiative is required?
• What would it overcome?
• What implementation options are there?
• What obstacles would still be left?

The chapter then moves on to examine:

• Who should be responsible?
• What are the key barriers to implementation?
• How could these be overcome?

Provision of door-to-door transport

5.16 This emerges as the most commonly required option for a significant proportion of disabled travellers and potential travellers and both the idea of an on-call door to door bus service and an on-call, affordable taxi service were popular among respondents to the survey. A key component of both options is the 'on-call' or 'on-demand' element. This feature does raise some important questions for consideration about cost and availability so that a fully on-demand service might not be possible. Despite this, it is important to note that this is perceived to be very important by disabled travellers. While noting the potential practical difficulties associated with the implementation of an on-demand service it is important to accept that as most non-disabled travellers can travel without pre-booking. In the spirit of aiming for equality of opportunity to travel, the enablement of spontaneity in travel for disabled people is crucial. This point also relates to the provision of accompaniment discussed below. However, it could also be argued that as among the general population most people who don't have access to a car all or some of the time cannot afford taxis instead, and so are limited by the bus timetable which by its very nature is not on-demand, nor is it door to door. Therefore, the argument might be that it is unrealistic to expect that disabled people should have such on-demand services which are not available to all members of society. The priority given to this needs to be considered by the Scottish Executive alongside other transport related polices aimed at closing the opportunity gap for people and places, which is an aspiration of the 2004 Transport White Paper ²¹.

5.17 Perhaps obviously, the provision of on-demand, door-to-door transport (whether bus- or taxi-based) would contribute to removing a range of obstacles and difficulties identified by disabled travellers (or potential travellers). First, there are some disabled people who are unable to make the journey from home to a public transport stop or interchange and from a destination stop or interchange to final destination. Second, it addresses the issue of lack of confidence to travel. This encompasses uncertainty about the reliability of different stages in the journey, (including availability of support when required, reliability of transport, ability to access and use vehicles safely, ability to access interchanges and negotiate obstacles en route,) as well as personal safety while travelling. Thirdly, this will decrease some disabled peoples' reliance on friends and relatives for travel; and reduce the cost of relying on taxis.

5.18 Options for introducing such a system generally relate to the types of vehicle used, the providers, and access/booking systems. The Ring and Ride/Dial a Bus system currently operated by SPT throughout its area provides one bus-based model which could be adopted as a base model. It does have some drawbacks, notably the need to book 12-24 hours ahead, and the (sometimes) quite geographically small service zones in which Dial a Bus operates. Additionally, any system of this nature will have a high unit cost. SPT's system costs £8 per passenger trip in subsidy (most users pay nothing); West Lothian carlink (again based on relatively small service zones) £10.60 per trip (net of a fare of between £1 and £1.60). Alternative options (perhaps to offer additional flexibility or in areas where demand is likely to be lower) relate to the use of taxis (for example like, once again, West Lothian carlink) or the use of a pool of specialist vehicles operated (or funded and enabled) by the local authority (again depending on demand).

5.19 Whatever delivery option was used, some key elements would be required in order for the service to be successful. First, the service needs to be as 'on-demand' as possible, meaning that if it is impossible for an on-demand service, booking should be as flexible and as last minute (combined with an option for block or repeat booking for regular trips such as to work or education for example) ²². Second, the drivers/operators need specific training in disability awareness and part of their duties needs to be the provision of help (if required/necessary) to access and exit the vehicle for example, and from the vehicle to final destination (e.g. SPT's Dial a Bus drivers carry shopping and push wheelchairs into homes from the street outside). Third, the cost to service users needs careful consideration. For example, as noted above, there is a gap developing between those who can use conventional public transport and who have a concessionary pass and those who can't currently use public transport, are therefore unable to utilise concessionary bus passes but are not eligible for concessions for taxis or other door-to-door alternatives. From an equity point of view, there are arguments for making such transport free for disabled people, so that they can enjoy the same benefits as older people who are not disabled do on conventional buses at present.

Accompaniment

5.20 Some disabled people consider it to be an absolute impossibility for them to travel without a travel companion while others can perhaps manage but find the journey difficult or challenging. A significant proportion of survey respondents felt that the opportunity for accompaniment from door-to door was the most important potential solution to travel difficulties. Again, a key requirement here would be for the service to be as on-demand as possible within the confines of making this practical. The issue is not to be reliant on availability of carers as this means individuals are tied to travelling at a time convenient to them. There is also the point that not all disabled people have, or need, carers.

5.21 There are some different delivery options for such a service. First, at a basic level, this might involve free travel for carers, to make it easier for those who already have a travel companion to travel. Another option would be the provision of a pool of trained people who can be booked to accompany disabled travellers (perhaps employed and operated by local authorities or properly funded voluntary organisations). For example, in Paris, the city's transport providers, SNCF and RATP, combine to offer a service known as "Les Compagnons du Voyage". Available since 1993, this scheme provides a trained escort for anyone who feels the need to be accompanied when making a journey by public transport. When it is a very young person being accompanied, then the service has an element of travel training and education. Importantly, the pool of escorts includes people trained to respond to a number of different needs, who are able to properly assist young children, older people and disabled people, and who are skilled in using sign language and in effectively guiding blind and partially sighted people.

5.22 A drawback to the Paris model is that it only operates within the Paris metropolitan area. A truly effective scheme would need to be designed in such a way that transport provider and geographical boundaries can be crossed with ease. Additionally, this should not be seen as a replacement for addressing some of the inadequacies of public transport in relation to information provision, physical accessibility and staffing. There is a significant sub-group of disabled travellers who do not need accompaniment to travel but do need to be able to rely on accessing information in a suitable format and deal with disabled aware staff. These are discussed in detail below.

Adequate provision and enforcement of disabled person's parking

5.23 This is an area where further research and analysis is required, particularly at the local level as, clearly demand and availability of parking for disabled drivers varies significantly across the country ²³. There are also key differences in relation to the private provision (off street parking spaces for disabled people such as supermarket car parks for example) and public provision (designated parking bays within controlled parking zones or parking concessions related to Blue Badges). It is also unclear to what extent the issue of misuse of parking for disabled people relates to use by those without Blue Badges or misuse by Blue Badge holders. In interviews, operators pointed out the irony of Blue Badge holders being able to park at bus stops (those without bus stop clearways), thus negating the benefits for disabled people of investment in low floor buses.

5.24 The first stage in relation to assessing the provision of adequate parking would be a local authority (or settlement) based study of current provision. However, the issue of enforcement is complex - first as there as there is no 'official' role in relation to the enforcement of parking for disabled people in private car parks. Second, as the status of the misuse of public parking or Blue Badges is often outwith the current powers of traffic wardens or parking attendants owing to its position as a fraud rather than a simple parking offence.

Tailored Journey Planning Service and Information Provision

5.25 This encompasses both on-board and pre-journey related information with the importance of each differing between those with different disabilities. The importance of on-board information such as when a bus or train is nearing a particular stop or is about to move off has been demonstrated particularly by the audits that were discussed in previous chapters. Additionally, the importance of the provision of real-time timetable information at bus stops and train stations in accessible formats including both visual and audible announcements (and displayed in readily accessible places) has been shown. Perhaps the most important element is the reliability of the information being available with some minimum guarantee of what will be displayed and available at a stop, station, interchange or on-board so travellers have some consistency to rely on.

5.26 A tailored journey planning service entails the provision of a much broader range of information in order for journeys to become as predictable and reliable as possible for disabled travellers. The ideal service should be able to provide full information across all modes of a complete journey - however long or complex. For example, a traveller wanting to travel from their home town of North Berwick to Inverness, using a combination of bus and train travel, should be able to obtain full journey information well in-advance of proposed travel date in relation to: timetables, on-board facilities (accessibility, toilets, staff, luggage facilities, on-board announcements) connections, journey within and between interchanges (stairs, lifts etc), length of wait, waiting facilities (and accessibility), availability of staff etc.

5.27 Clearly, there are some key challenges to address in order to be able to provide such detailed information spanning a range of modes of transports, transport providers and regions/local authority areas ²⁴. Not least, a full physical audit of all stations, interchanges and vehicles would be required. However, such information is crucial to some disabled travellers so such a service is a key element of any move towards equality of opportunity. Such a service would need to be introduced in a phased way with the prioritisation of different stages and incorporating existing systems and services. Start with audit and inclusion of major nodes and interchanges and build from there prioritising on the basis of potential demand. Also, some operators, for example Scotrail, currently are able (and do) supply such information about journeys made wholly on their services, including interchange information; this would need to be linked with information from other transport providers. Government provided services such as Transport Direct or Traveline could be used as vehicles to provide such a service, which would need to be accessible to all in a range of formats

5.28 The introduction of such a service would clearly require some kind of incentive or potential penalties for operators. Local Authorities (or Regional Transport Partnerships), where the relevant power was ceded to them by their constituent local authorities) could facilitate this by, for example, specifying what information should be available about timetables, accessibility of vehicles, driver training and on-board facilities as part of their Bus Information Strategy - should they choose to use the powers over bus information that they have under Part 2 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001. It is however possible to envisage a situation where, if operators perceived the requirements of a draft Bus Information Strategy to be too demanding, they might appeal against it, so there is no guarantee that all these things could be delivered in this way. Furthermore, the situation could arise where bus operators in one area accepted them, but operators in another area did not. For this reason, responsibility would need to be at the largest possible geographical level in order to ensure that services did not cease once a particular geographical boundary were hit.

Physical accessibility of vehicles

5.29 Arguably, this is perhaps the furthest developed element of a move towards improving accessibility of transport in general. However, so far, these targets for improvement have been agreed in negotiations between the industry, legislators and the groups lobbying on behalf of disabled people. The viewpoint of operators - which came out strongly in the feedback discussions - was that these targets could be brought forward and/or applied to existing vehicles, but that additional money would be needed from government to pay for this.

Physical accessibility of stations, stops and interchanges

5.30 Although, as discussed above, the accessibility of vehicles is being addressed (however slowly) similar targets are not in place in relation to public transport stops and stations. Clearly, an accessible train is only useful if the station itself is accessible so the physical environment of stations and stops are as important as the actual vehicles. Accordingly there should be a phased plan for the development of all stations and interchanges prioritised on the basis of flow-through and potential demand.

5.31 As all train stations in Scotland (with the exception of Edinburgh Waverley and Glasgow Central) are Scotrail operated, this could be relatively simple to plan. Accessibility improvement is already part of service and franchise agreements but a key barrier is that money provided is very limited. The only way of speeding up the phasing-in of accessible stations is to provide more money, as it is very costly to upgrade all stations.

5.32 The situation relating to bus stations and stops is more complex given the range of owners of bus stations (including local authorities and transport operators). This makes the mechanisms for setting targets to upgrade such interchanges more difficult. Again, this is perhaps best brought about by duties placed on operators and local authorities.

Removal of barriers in the general physical environment (including pavements, roads, signage and street furniture).

5.33 Local Authorities should be given a statutory duty to programme planned improvements to the pavements and roads in their area with the needs of disabled travellers in mind and giving priority to areas where it is known there are concentrations of disabled people.

5.34 Also there is a need to issue clear guidelines to other organisations in relation to signage and street furniture. Again, this needs policing/monitoring, and detailed training of contract supervisors, to ensure that issues such as sign placement, layout of tactile paving, layout of street furniture, and maximum tolerances for crossfalls, gradients and kerb upstands, are dealt with in such a way so as to deliver an increasingly "barrier-free" environment. Nonetheless, for such "micro-level" matters, a consistent approach will be difficult to deliver across the country, since so many different people are responsible for the design, construction and maintenance of the street environment.

Access/aid to access adapted, accessible car

5.35 One way of facilitating this would be an extension of the current system whereby the Higher Rate Component of the Disability Living Allowance can be spent on leasing a vehicle. There are four main ways in which Motability currently seeks to meet the needs of disabled people; the independent, not-for-profit organisation can provide,

• a new car on a three-year contract hire lease.
• a new or used car on hire purchase, over a term of two to five years.
• a new or used powered wheelchair or scooter on hire purchase, over a term of one to three years.
• a new or used powered wheelchair or scooter on contract hire lease for up to three years.

5.36 Most Motability customers choose the contract hire option, which involves a single, regular payment that includes comprehensive insurance, maintenance and breakdown cover.

5.37 Another option, rather than providing individuals with help to purchase or adapt a car (and an option which fits in with broader transport policy in relation to congestion reduction and reducing emissions), would be the adoption of a model similar to the Car Club scheme which currently operates in Edinburgh. An additional barrier (over and above general difficulties introducing Car Clubs in general) is the likely geographical dispersal of potential club members.

5.38 A similar scheme to the proposed is the ScootAbility mobility scooter loan service, run by the London Boroughs of Islington and Camden, aims to overcome barriers to travel for older and disabled people by delivering a fleet of mobility scooters to the homes of suitable users, leaving them for a period of several days at a time. The objective of this scheme is to address the problem of social exclusion, and increase quality of life, through mobility. An initial project, the "Access to Quality of Life" project, which was funded through the Older People's Health Improvement Programme ( HImP) by the Health Action Zone in Islington and Camden, undertaken in 2000/2001, showed that the provision of mobility scooters provided an effective alternative to accessing conventional public transport for people who had a limited ability to walk. The travel patterns of participants were recorded both before and after the commencement of the loan scheme and showed that users were able to reduce the number of car trips provided by friends and relatives. Feedback received at the end of the scheme was extremely positive and indicated that quality of life had been improved for the duration of the loan period.

Additional elements for consideration

5.39 Despite the broad range of initiatives discussed above, the introduction of the full range might still lead to some gaps potentially not being filled. Such gaps might need to be addressed by broader social policy but should be given consideration in any strategy.

5.40 The introduction of a door-to-door transport system (such as a dial a bus) - still leaves the problem of negotiating the end destination. If this is another transport related place it should be covered by another element of strategy. If not, this re-iterates the need for a holistic approach to equality of access and opportunity that is wider than merely transport related elements.

5.41 An issue which is mentioned at several points but is perhaps not clearly stated above is that some elements do not properly address longer journeys - for example going on holiday. Any strategy must consider ways of ensuring that crossing different geographical boundaries and using different forms of transport as far as possible does not adversely affect opportunity of travel.

Key Requirements for Implementation

5.42 As identified by previous research and clearly evidenced in the current research, some element of national planning and strategy is required for any real move towards equality of opportunity to be achieved. The previous lack of strategic context, enforcement (in the form of duty or penalty) and difficulties in introducing comprehensive changes within a piecemeal structure, have limited progress to date.

5.43 It is probable that the introduction of the Disability Discrimination Act ( DDA) 1995 and associated legislation and organisations will have a positive impact on future developments. Since 1995, the rights of disabled people have been safeguarded in law in the UK by the DDA. Since the 2 ^nd of December 1996, it has been unlawful to treat disabled people less favourably, for a reason related to their disability; since the 1 ^st of October 1999, service providers have had to make "reasonable adjustments" to enable disabled people to use their service. More recently - since the 1 ^st of October 2004 - service providers have had to make "reasonable adjustments" in relation to physical features of their premises in order to overcome physical barriers to access.

5.44 The DDA aims to eliminate discrimination against disabled people, and is divided into several parts. The parts of the Act that have a particular relevance to transport are Part 3, which deals with access to services, and Part 5, which sets access standards for certain types of vehicle. Other parts of the Act are Part 1 (The Meaning of Disability), Part 2 (Employment and Occupation) and Part 4 (Education).

5.45 Any service consisting of the use of a means of transport was exempted from Part 3 of the 1995 version of the Act, although services associated with transport infrastructure were not covered by this exemption. This meant that services at stations and interchanges, as well as information services, were subject to Part 3 of the Act. This exemption for transport was lifted when the 1995 Act was amended by the Disability Discrimination Act 2005.

5.46 The 2005 Act also places a duty on all public sector authorities to promote disability equality, and thus impacts significantly on how public services are run. This Disability Equality Duty for the Public Sector means that public sector bodies have a duty to promote disability equality in all aspects of their work and in this way is similar to the Race Relations Amendment Act. This duty provides a framework for public authorities to tackle discrimination and its causes in a proactive way, and encourages them to "mainstream" disability equality into all activities. Authorities are required to both have "due regard" to disability equality when making decisions that will affect the future, and take action to rectify the consequences of past decisions that have compromised disability equality. The implications for this in Scotland are set out in the Disability Rights Commission's Code of Practice on the Disability Equality Duty (Scotland). This Code of Practice was laid before Parliament on the 24 ^th of November 2005, came into force on the 1 ^st of February 2006.

5.47 Section 3 of the 2005 Act imposes duties on public authorities to promote equality of opportunity for disabled people. The Scottish Parliament confirmed, on the 24 ^th of February 2005, that it was content for Parliament to legislate for Scotland in this devolved area. The proposed new duty for the public sector to proactively promote disability equality ( DED) is likely to have a key role in the improvement of accessibility for disabled people.

5.48 However, it will still be necessary for a range of primary legislation to be introduced in order to provide a coherent structure for the development of appropriate transport strategies at different levels and, in particular to enable the effective monitoring and policing of such strategies and initiatives.

It is the research team's recommendation, therefore, that public transport for disabled people is set firmly within the context of wider transport policy. A clear strategy should be developed and should firmly state that as well as adhering to the spirit of the DDA, the range of initiatives and schemes identified as necessary in this research must be supplied where need is identified. The auditing of the need for particular schemes in local areas should be a duty of local authorities and the Disability Equality Duty should be a useful tool in facilitating this.

5.49 As discussed above, the delivery of strategy to improve transport for disabled people is dependent on the interplay of many different actors and, as in other areas of transport, they are motivated by a range of different factors. Thus a national strategy for improving transport for disabled people must consider ways in which these different players can best be induced or encouraged to realise those parts of the strategy in the delivery of which they have a role to play.

National Transport Strategy

The Scottish Executive is currently developing the National Transport Strategy ( NTS). It is this team's recommendation that the NTS is used as an opportunity to identify and to state that disabled people have significant problems in travelling, that they travel much less than people who are not disabled, and that there are significant transport challenges for national, regional and local strategies if this situation is to be improved to allow disabled people to take a fuller part in society. The authors of the NTS may also wish to consider whether there is a need to set an aspirational target (at least) for the level of mobility of disabled people, towards which Scotland should work.

5.50 This research has identified and measured the scale of the transport problems that disabled people in Scotland face. It should therefore allow the NTS to include objective(s), to be achieved through a combination of national, regional and local actions that will bring about a reduction in these problems. The inclusion of these problems and objectives in the NTS could enhance how seriously they are viewed by those at the regional and local levels.

It is the research team's understanding that the NTS will not include a detailed list of projects and measures to be pursued at the national level, but it is to be followed by a National Strategic Projects Review ( NSPR). Some of the measures that this research identifies that could bring significant improvements for disabled people's travel are dependent largely on some level of national action and it is recommended that these measures are therefore appraised alongside other projects in the NSPR.

5.51 These might include for example a systematic prioritised set of enhancement to the accessibility of the busier rail and bus stations in Scotland; and enhancements to Traveline Scotland to provide the level of pre-journey information that disabled people require. These are projects that would need to be taken forward at a national level.

Introduction of duties and penalties

5.52 As noted above, there is no method currently in Scotland to ensure that local authorities all work together towards common transport objectives, one of which may be to improve transport for disabled people. Without inducements to do so, or the threat of withdrawal of funding if they do not, then, as argued above, they are likely to pursue local political priorities. This tension between local autonomy on the one hand, and providing a consistent level of service across Scotland on the other, is one that has been recognised in other studies and is an issue that goes much wider than transport. However, with specific regard to transport for disabled people, without some national and local targets, monitoring of those, and incentives and disincentives for local (and now regional) authorities to achieve them, then the research team is of the opinion that there is a greater risk that transport for disabled people will not improve on a consistent basis across the country.

There is a need to allocate responsibilities for different elements of transport for disabled people according to the spatial level at which activities are best addressed and whether they are best public or private sector led. A further need is outcome, as opposed to output, based monitoring of strategies. For example, one simple outcome might be the narrowing of the gap in trips made between disabled and non-disabled people, as measured by the SHS. There is also a requirement to have incentive based contracts for transport providers that specifically include targets for provision for disabled people that are properly monitored. Clearly allocating responsibilities and obligations will require additional funding to meet these new requirements.

Regional Strategies

5.53 New statutory regional transport partnerships ( RTPs), which will be formally constituted on 1 ^st April 2006, must adopt a statutory regional transport strategy ( RTS) by April 2007. The RTS must, by law, show how transport in the region will "promote social inclusion" and "encourage equal opportunities and, in particular, the observance of the equal opportunities requirements" (Section 5, Transport (Scotland) Act 2005). This is encouraging from the point of view of transport for disabled people. However, the draft guidance on RTSs (November 2005) does not give a great deal of further advice as to how such objectives might actually be operationalised, nor an indication of any desirable minimum levels of provision of transport (e.g. taxicards, Dial a Bus, quality of street environment) for disabled people.

Without a clear lead from the Executive, there is a risk therefore that different RTSs will deal with the issue of transport for disabled people in very different ways and give it very different levels of priority, even though this research has identified broadly similar needs amongst disabled people right across the country. It is recognised that there is a need to allow local and regional variations to be reflected in RTSs, but in the case of transport for disabled people there may also be a need for stronger central prescription.

Local Strategies

5.54 Local Authorities are now developing their second round Local Transport Strategies. These are non-statutory documents that give an indication of (some of) the planned transport activities of local councils. Guidance from the Scottish Executive has indicated in broad terms what the content of an LTS should be, although (unlike in England) there is no link between the content of the document and the amount of transport capital funding that an authority receives. The guidance is clear that LTSs should explain how well the transport system currently meets the needs of disabled people. However, it is not prescriptive in stating that authorities should then set out policies and measures to improve this situation (with the exception of the accessibility of taxis). In contrast, it does state that there is an expectation that LTSs will seek to improve local bus services, improvements in local rail infrastructure, and improvements in road safety - amongst other things. A more consistent approach to meeting the transport needs of disabled people across Scotland might have been achieved had the Guidance on LTSs asked for each one to contain:

• Consideration of improvements to existing public transport provision for disabled people (Dial a Bus, Handicabs, CT schemes).
• A costed and prioritised programme of footway, crossing and dropped kerb enhancements to benefit disabled people's mobility.
• An analysis of the use, cost and demand for existing Taxicard schemes, and evaluations of possibilities for their enhancement.

5.55 However, even if such requirements had been included, there is no direct means for the Executive, or an RTP, to monitor the implementation of such improvements. In contrast, the English LTP system ²⁵, were it to be adopted in Scotland, would provide a mechanism of monitoring and evaluation against the plan's objectives, targets and programmes, and thus an ability for a higher authority to ensure that plans were actually implemented.

Local authorities should have a duty to audit need and arrange supply on the basis that most journeys made by most people are local. It is necessary for a means for monitoring to be created. Without this approach there is a greater risk that Scottish local authorities' approaches to demand responsive transport schemes, Taxicard and footway maintenance and enhancement will remain inconsistent and piecemeal across the country.

Summary of recommendations

5.56 A coherent and comprehensive strategy for achieving equality of mobility must be an integral part of a National, Regional and Local Transport Strategies rather than being separate or 'add-on'. Evidence from previous research, the feedback exercise undertaken for this study and case study evidence indicates that unless the strategy is integrated, only piecemeal rather than comprehensive developments will occur.

5.57 The sheer scale of some of the current problems needs to be recognised (for example the challenge of adapting all rail and bus stations or creating a comprehensive pre-journey information service) and realistic phased targets should be set in consultation with transport operators. Schemes aimed at information provision should be set within the broader context of 'knowledge expansion' as indicated in the feedback exercise. Information provision should be combined with initiatives to ensure that the services are reliable and operate as expected.

5.58 Linked to this, the inevitable cost of implementing some of the necessary changes and initiatives needs to be recognised by government. Setting duties and responsibilities for other agencies and transport operators without the provision of additional funding will not achieve the required outcomes. As indicated in the feedback from operators, funding is already in crisis and the current climate is more likely to see cutbacks rather than expansions in non-statutory services.

5.59 Duties for transport authorities and providers need to be enshrined in law and policed through the setting of targets that are in some way enforceable and are properly monitored. Such targets need to relate to measurable outcomes of transport initiatives rather than the provision of services. Contracts with transport operators should include specific relevant performance measures.

5.60 Such duties should specifically relate to the provision of the schemes and initiatives outlined above (and identified in previous research). Local authorities must have a duty to audit need for each and arrange for supply accordingly. This is likely to be aided by the Disability Equality Duty which should be utilised as a useful tool in enforcing and monitoring developments.

5.61 To be at all effective, monitoring needs to be focused on measuring outcomes rather than monitoring the existence of schemes and initiatives. This should be facilitated by a set of benchmarks against which to measure success. The development of a national framework should be developed to guide local activity and direct outcome monitoring.

5.62 Schemes which require co-ordination across different transport operators and geographies must be overseen by regional or national authorities in order to ensure that the chain of accessibility is maintained.

5.63 In addition to the provision of schemes and initiatives discussed above, minimum national standards should be introduced in relation to staff training and awareness which again should be carefully monitored.

5.64 Concessionary fares policy should be reviewed in terms of priority in relation to the other substantial funding requirements highlighted above and to ensure the concessions are meeting the needs of disabled people. Additionally, there needs to be a requirement to measure the outcome and cost-effectiveness of concessionary fares in keeping with other transport initiatives. Policies and practice related to parking for disabled people should also be reviewed.

« Previous | Contents | Next »