moved Amendment No. 64:
64: After Clause 47, insert the following new Clause—
““Wheelchair accessible taxis and private hire vehicles providing a local service
The duties imposed by section 36 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 shall apply from 1st August 2008 for all licensed taxis and licensed hire cars which—
(a) provide a local service as defined by section 2 of the TA 1985, and
(b) are deemed or registered by the relevant local licensing authority to be a wheelchair accessible taxi.””
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment was tabled by my noble friend Lady Chapman who unfortunately has had to leave the House for a hospital appointment. I am moving the amendment at her request and with her permission. It gives me great pleasure to do so, because it seeks to bring into force Section 36 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Those of your Lordships who can count will appreciate that disabled people have not seen the benefit of this provision for the past 13 years. Section 37, which is comparable, gives a similar protection to disabled people who are guide dog users. It seems quite inequitable that Section 37 can be brought into force without the comparable protection for wheelchair users that Section 36 would provide.
I strongly support this amendment, which is why I have no difficulty in moving it on the behalf of my noble friend. She wanted me to thank noble Lords on all sides of the House for their warm expressions of support for her amendment. She also asked me particularly to thank the Minister for the time and courtesy he has extended to her in the discussions they have had about the implementation of Section 36 of the Disability Discrimination Act.
The Minister will recall that my noble friend asked a question on 18 December about when this provision was to be brought into force. The Minister indicated that the Government planned to bring it into force at a reasonably early date. However, my noble friend has tabled the amendment to concentrate minds and ensure that at least we make a start.
I hope that the Minister will appreciate that the scope of this amendment is very limited—it has to be to bring it within the scope of the Bill. It would, from August 2008, place the duties imposed by the, as yet unactivated, Section 36 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 on any taxi that is deemed or registered by the relevant local licensing authority to be a wheelchair-accessible taxi and where it is providing a local service as defined by Section 2 of the Transport Act 1985. We very much welcome the provisions in the Bill which permit the use of taxis to provide local transport services. However, this means that the scope of the amendment has to be limited to taxis that are providing a local transport service. It would not apply to a wheelchair-accessible taxi that could be hailed; for example, on a street corner.
My noble friend has been assured by the National Association of Licensing and Enforcement Officers—NALEO—which represents local government officers who enforce and oversee Britain’s taxi licensing regime, that her amendment is practical and workable. It issued a statement on 14 January which said that the, "““amendment is, in our view, a proportionate and logical step in the improvement of local services. NALEO has no doubt that every licensing authority in England and Wales can identify all wheelchair accessible vehicles licensed by their authorities either instantly or at very short notice. Therefore the existing local authority licensing and enforcement framework would be capable of supporting this amendment at little or negligible cost””."
This statement additionally says that NALEO also believes that while the Government’s proposed amendment on Report to impose a duty on local transport authorities to have regard to the transport needs of disabled persons is to be welcomed, my noble friend’s amendment is necessary to reinforce that with requirements on taxi drivers not to discriminate against wheelchair users when they are driving a taxi that is providing a local service. This amendment seeks to achieve this through the unambiguous and enforceable duties on taxi drivers contained in Section 36 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
An estimated 1.2 million wheelchair users in England alone could benefit from the incremental advance this amendment seeks. They have already waited 13 years for Section 36 of the 1995 Act to be brought into force. It is time at least to make a start. In the summer of 2007 the Public Carriage Office of Transport for London was unable to pursue a court case against the driver of a wheelchair-accessible taxi who had refused to take my noble friend’s fare because it discovered that Section 36 was not in force. This amendment, if accepted, would mean that such a prosecution would in future at least be able to be brought where a taxi was providing a local service. Up until now successive Transport Ministers have considered that rural and other areas are not ready to comply with the protections that the section would afford to wheelchair users using taxis. In urban areas far more taxis are wheelchair-accessible; for example, in London every taxi has to be wheelchair-accessible to obtain a licence. But, as I have said, my noble friend has been assured by the National Association of Licensing and Enforcement Officers that her amendment would be practicable and workable in rural areas no less than in urban areas.
If the scope of the Bill were wider, my noble friend Lady Chapman would have amended it to bring the section into more general force, where local authorities have certified a taxi to be wheelchair accessible, so that unlike this amendment, it would apply to taxis being hailed on a street corner, not just those providing a local service. That will have to wait for another day.
Looking around Britain’s high streets, it is hard to believe that—as estimated by the NHS—there are over 1 million wheelchair users in the country. More wheelchair users might get about and participate more in the economic life of this country if the Government were to accept this amendment and the door it will open for progressing wider implementation of Section 36.
With the numbers of potential beneficiaries from this amendment and the considerable numbers of wheelchair-accessible taxis now available in Britain, we believe that passing this amendment would be bound to have more than a symbolic significance. If the Government can give an assurance on this matter or offer to meet the purpose of the amendment in some way—for example, on the commencement date—then we would be prepared to consider withdrawing it. My noble friend Lady Chapman wanted me to remind your Lordships that 1 million of our fellow citizens are weary of being left out in the rain by successive governments as well as by many wheelchair-accessible taxis. I beg to move.
Local Transport Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Low of Dalston
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 16 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Local Transport Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
697 c1342-4 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:06:37 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_435097
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_435097
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_435097