Government’s access advisers face criticism for ‘meaningless’ response on rail reform

The government’s advisers on accessible transport have been fiercely criticised for a half-hearted and “meaningless” response to the government’s planned rail reforms.

In response to a call for evidence on the draft rail reform bill, the government’s independent  advisers on accessible transport, the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC), produced a response of just 543 words.

The call for evidence came from the Commons transport select committee, following the publication in February of the government’s 30-page draft bill, alongside 29 pages of explanatory notes, a 123-page impact assessment, and a 26-page memorandum.

The draft bill lays out plans to transfer powers to Great British Railways, the new over-arching body that will – eventually – run the rail system.

The government said last year that its plans “will ensure that accessibility on the railway is improved and the experience for disabled passengers is enhanced”, although the draft bill has no chance of becoming law before the next general election.

DPTAC had previously told the government – two years ago – that it did not believe its proposals for reforming the rail system would be “sufficient to deliver cultural change or an accessible railway”.

But last year the government appointed a new DPTAC chair, Matthew Campbell-Hill, and in an interview with Disability News Service shortly after his appointment, he questioned whether it was right to release DPTAC research that exposed the discrimination faced by disabled passengers.

Campbell-Hill, a technology and media consultant and retired international wheelchair fencer, has said little else publicly about accessible transport since his appointment, despite the months of anger and activism from disabled people over plans to close nearly 1,000 ticket offices across England, which were later abandoned (see separate story).

Transport secretary Mark Harper eventually reversed the government’s previous position supporting the closures, announcing in late October that ministers had “asked train operators to withdraw their proposals”.

The response to the transport committee suggests that DPTAC has eased its criticism of the government’s rail reforms.

In its response, DPTAC says it is committed to working with the Department for Transport (DfT), calls for a “comprehensive understanding” of its own new role under the reforms, and says there needs to be “further exploration” of its proposed expanded role.

It also calls for “explicit clarification” of measures on accessibility, and praises the government’s “thorough and insightful impact assessments”, while highlighting the need for “comprehensive staff training”.

Accessible transport campaigner Doug Paulley, who has taken many influential legal actions against the transport industry for its repeated failures on accessible transport, said DPTAC’s response “simply doesn’t even begin to respond to the call for evidence, let alone advance disabled people’s enforceable and enforced rights”.

He told Disability News Service (DNS): “It is lacking in any content or meaning, there is no recognition of the discriminatory service failures we currently experience, and it doesn’t give the firm commitment to disabled people’s rights we need and deserve from our representatives.”

Tony Jennings, co-chair of a rail accessibility panel and co-founder of the Campaign for Level Boarding, also said he was disappointed by the DPTAC response, which he said “could have been written by a non-disabled person who doesn’t actually use trains regularly”.

He said DPTAC failed to note the importance of imposing deadlines for the legislation to be introduced and the need for significantly increased investment for accessible stations, as well as the need to introduce level boarding from the train to platform “or else the same barriers will exist in 100 years”.

He pointed to a 2022 report by DPTAC, which concluded: “At current annual rates of investment spend on station accessibility, it will take around 100 years to make the entirety of the station estate step-free to new-build standards.”

He told DNS: “There is no mention of discrimination or challenging the status quo and the importance of enforceable rights.”

After two years campaigning, Jennings has finally succeeded in persuading ScotRail to change its discriminatory mobility scooter policy.

He added: “DPTAC needs to be truly independent and subject to scrutiny and more transparent, as it was ominously silent over ticket office closures when disabled people needed them most.”

The disabled-led campaigning organisation Transport for All (TfA) also raised concerns about the DPTAC response.

Ezra Johnson, TfA’s campaigns and communications officer, said: “This is a major piece of legislation that will affect how the rail network is managed for many years to come.

“If it’s done right, Great British Railways could address some crucial barriers disabled people face to travelling by train: standardised infrastructure, simpler complaints processes, meaningful accountability.

“But at this stage, this is all hypothetical; the bill in its current form does not live up to such a promise and our fear is that, if disabled people are not built into the new rail network from the very beginning, then we could be built out of it for good.

“We’re concerned that DPTAC have missed an opportunity to influence the bill given the brevity of their response, and urge them to go further to exercise the full extent of their influence on this issue, holding the government’s feet to the fire to ensure that accessibility obligations are clear and enforceable from the outset.”

Campbell-Hill told DNS: “In our response to the consultation, we emphasized our intention to engage with the Department for Transport as the rail reform bill evolves, to ensure that accessibility and the voice of disabled people are central to the legislation’s development.

“Regarding public statements, our advisory role often involves confidential discussions with the department, allowing us to provide candid advice that supports effective decision-making.

“This confidentiality is essential to our work but can sometimes result in fewer public communications.”

He said DPTAC had taken “significant steps to increase transparency” and had published or contributed to “at least 34 public documents, indicating a considerable increase in transparency and communication compared to previous years”.

This includes publication of three guidance and regulation responses; three news and communication pieces; one research and statistics response; one programme of work summary; one register of members’ interests; one report on gifts and hospitality received by members; three annual reports covering 2018 to 2023; 15 sets of main committee meeting minutes, including previously unreleased minutes dating back to 2020; and six working group reports summarizing the past year’s activities.

He said these publications were “part of our ongoing commitment to transparency and accountability” and “provide evidence of our active engagement in addressing critical issues affecting transport accessibility”.

He added: “We remain dedicated to advising and supporting the Department for Transport to create a more accessible and inclusive transport network.”

Picture: Doug Paulley (left) and Matthew Campbell-Hill

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…