Written evidence submitted by the Rail Delivery Group (RDG) (ATL0016)

 

Introduction

 

  1. The Rail Delivery Group (RDG) welcome the Transport Select Committee’s interest and desire to improve the accessibility of the UK’s Transport Sector and are grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this call for evidence.

 

  1. This document has been prepared on behalf of and with input from Train Operating Companies (TOCs) and represents a collective view of the Transport Select Committee’s Call for Evidence.

 

  1. The rail industry recognises that disabled people may not have the same breadth of choices as non-disabled people. The importance of removing barriers to public transport for disabled people, those who may not identify as disabled or people with intersectional characteristics cannot be understated.

 

  1. The rail industry understands the role it needs to take in creating an accessible and inclusive society. We are aware that there are many areas that we can improve so that we can deliver on our ambition on making the railway inclusive, easy to use and accessible to all. We would never presume that we are in a position where we would not look to make further accessibility improvements to our services.

 

  1. Clarity of obligations and transparent open relationships between transport operators and enforcement bodies are also vitally important in managing compliance and achieving accessible transport for all. It is better for all parties to work together to avoid breaches of obligations rather than reaching the stage of enforcement. This needs to be done openly and transparently to build customer trust.

 

  1. TOCs continue to welcome any changes that lead to improvements in customer outcomes, building customer confidence, trust, and satisfaction. We trust that the input provided in this document is helpful and RDG would be happy to expand on specific points or supply further details should this be needed.

 

 

Q1. How effective is the current legislation aimed at ensuring accessible transport for all?

 

  1. There is a range of statutory instruments regulating accessibility, with a range of enforcement bodies with each piece of regulation effective in supporting accessibility within their specified remit.

 

  1. The overarching legislation, the Equality Act 2010, outlines the nine protected characteristic (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation) and the duty of Train Operating Companies (TOCs), to make reasonable adjustments to prevent discrimination and ensure the provision of services as close as reasonably possible to the standard offered to all others travelling on the rail network.

 

  1. Further statutory and regulatory requirements for TOCs are set out in the Department for Transport Code of Practice, Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 2000 and PRM-TSI, which are enforceable by the Department for Transport (DfT) and RSSB Rail Safety Standards Board (RSSB).

 

  1. There are also specific regulations, such as Regulation (EC) No 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail passengers' rights and obligations which is retained EU law and implemented through the Rail Passengers’ Rights and Obligations Regulations 2010 which appoints the Office of Rail & Road (ORR) as the enforcement body for all obligations within this regulation.

 

  1. Additionally, all TOCs are obliged to have an Accessible Travel Policy that is updated annually to reflect changing guidance and current best practice. These then set out the commitments to disabled and older customers to comply with the ORR’s Accessible Travel Policy Guidance. The ORR are also responsible for monitoring and enforcement of the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 2010.

 

  1. However, the current volume of obligations and regulations is not easy for transport operators to navigate, and interpretations may vary between what the legislation states and how this is interpreted and delivered leading to an inconsistent customer experience.

 

  1. Improved guidance and clarity over how responsibility is addressed within a complex framework where operators and asset/infrastructure owners overlap would also be beneficial so that expectations are clear to TOCs and customers.

 

  1. Further, during times of disruption or engineering work, TOCs may need to rely on road transport to ensure our customers can continue to travel safely to their destinations. However, the availability of replacement buses or accessible taxis may not be available or offer the right facilities, a focus on improving this area as well as consistent enforcement would then be possible across the industry as a whole and would aid in achieving the objective of making public transport inclusive, easy to use and accessible to all.

 

Q2: How can existing legislation be better enforced to make accessible transport a reality? 

 

  1. Within the rail industry there is a range of data and insight provided to enforcement and regulatory bodies to monitor compliance with statutory obligations. There is also a range of options available to these bodies in relation to enforcement as and when necessary, and legally the legislation is seen as strong with high financial penalties for breaches.

 

  1. Clarity of obligations and transparent open relationships between transport operators and enforcement bodies is also vitally important. TOCs believe the enforcement bodies work well and engage Operators on a regular basis to manage compliance and all parties work together to avoid breaches of obligations rather than reaching the stage of enforcement.

 

  1. However, there are multiple strategies and visions published including by the government. It is recommended that understanding how existing and planned regulation underpins delivery to these is clarified so that they are interpreted correctly and consistently applied across the rail network.

 

  1. Additionally, there is an opportunity in the context of rail replacement vehicles to clarify and align standards so there is consistency of legislation between different modes of transport and to ensure that rail and rail replacement standards for vehicles do not overlap.

 

  1. Further, some members have suggested that a single independent enforcement body would allow for further improvements to be made and to provide customer confidence that concerns are taken seriously.

 

Q3: Are operators and local licensing authorities fulfilling their legal obligations to disabled travellers and travellers with other accessibility needs? If not, why not? 

 

  1. TOCs recognise the importance of removing barriers to public transport for disabled people and others who request assistance and understand the role this plays in creating an accessible and inclusive society.

 

  1. We are also aware, as an industry governed by a wide range of legislation and numerous legal obligations and the wide scope of different disabilities and other accessibility needs, there is no single way of fulfilling everyone’s needs.

 

  1. Systems and processes that support accessibility must remain agile and follow an approach that implements a continuous improvement loop to provide accessible and inclusive transport to all. It is also critical that accessibility is a central consideration in everything we do, and disabled people are genuinely consulted to gain the benefits of their lived experience.

 

  1. For example, from a customer experience perspective, rolling stock designs may be seen by some as not meeting their requirements and impact on their ability to travel confidently, especially if they use a mobility aid other than a wheelchair, travel with a pram or wish to bring a bicycle on their journey.

 

  1. While rolling stock may be considered compliant, to ensure customers can travel confidently and their needs met, regulation should be based on the views of those with lived experience to set minimum standards that can be taken onboard to make decisions in the best interest of the customer

 

  1. Further, rolling stock procurement needs to take into consideration the need for a new baseline when it comes to PRM standards. Newly procured rolling stock should have accessible toilets on board, where applicable, and be compatible with step free access solutions such as lower floors or extension ramps.

 

  1. Funding is also a clear challenge for the industry with many physical improvements to better the experience for customers coming with significant cost.

 

  1. The Inclusive Transport Strategy focus on improved training, awareness and information provision has driven improvements of which we are extremely proud. These include such things as improved refresher training for staff every 2 years, personal notifications if a customer’s train has been changed or cancelled, a reduction in booking assistance from 24 hours to 2 hours and the development of a national assistance dog card scheme as well as many more to ensure customer confidence when travelling. To be able to achieve this same level of achievement with infrastructure improvements, more investment is needed.

 

  1. Additionally, many stations are listed as English heritage sites which often prevent TOCs from making important accessibility improvements. As well, much of the rail infrastructure regardless of whether it is listed or not, was built some time ago and therefore retrofitting can be complex. Guidance on how we can balance the needs of protecting heritage and retrofitting complex older infrastructure while looking to improve accessibility would be beneficial.

 

  1. We are also looking at changes designed to move staff closer to customers in stations with the intention to increase the help available to all customers, including those who are disabled or those that may need some additional support when travelling by rail.

 

  1. With just 12% of customer transactions now taking place at station ticket offices, there is a clear opportunity to free up staff to work in other areas of the station where they are closer to customers and better placed to help with a wider range of issues.

 

  1. The creation of a new multi-skilled role would better equip staff to take on a wider range of responsibilities. This would include help buying tickets on platforms and supporting disabled people who may need assistance to board trains which cannot be done effectively from the confines of a ticket office.

 

  1. There are a number of safeguards in place designed to protect customers and no changes can be made to station retailing until after a full statutory consultation process for each station change.

 

  1. These consultations will be run by industry watchdogs Transport Focus and LondonTravelWatch and will include Diversity Impact Assessments of each proposal.

 

Q4: How well do complaints and compensation processes work when things go wrong? 

 

  1. There is a well-defined complaint handling policy and accessible travel policy set out and monitored by industry bodies, created following a public consultation with input from disability organisations, individual customers, and industry representatives.

 

  1. Full details of these processes and how customers can make complaints are provided in a variety of accessible formats such as websites, posters at stations and onboard trains along with hard copies of TOC Accessible Travel Policies available for customers who wish to access them.

 

  1. Rail customers also have an independent ombudsman they can approach if they are not satisfied with the way the relevant TOC has managed or responded to their complaint.

 

  1. Customer insight shows mixed views of the process depending on personal experience. Yet the feedback overall is positive with the process considered easy to access with minimal effort required and solid escalation processes in place to ensure complaints are investigated thoroughly.

 

  1. Nevertheless, there are challenges with ensuring a prompt response to all complaints and a feeling of inconsistency in complaint handling processes throughout the transport industry, even including between rail companies despite the ORR guidance.

 

  1. For example, automated processes in place to ensure a prompt response for customers can be hindered by the need for manual intervention when extraordinary events take place such as the recent industrial action, prolonged disruption or edge cases that need further evaluation to ensure the correct outcome for the customer.

 

  1. The need for additional information from the customer, as well as the need for manual intervention, can increase the time it takes to investigate a complaint leading to the customer not having a resolution for a longer period than we would prefer.

 

  1. To address this, TOCs need to continue to attract talent into our Contact Centres taking into consideration the highly skilled nature of this work and empathy as well as the triage understanding needed.

 

Q5:  Are there specific transport modes or kinds of journeys where compliance with legal obligations is especially patchy?

 

  1. While TOCs feel that current legislation has driven significant improvements in our industry, insight from customers highlight two modes of transport that are in need of improvement: accessible taxis and buses (including replacement buses used as alternative transport during disruption or engineering works).

 

  1. As noted by TOC suppliers and in the practical application of sourcing accessible vehicles during both planned and unplanned disruption, the lack of national regulation or legislation affects the supply of accessible vehicles available, both in an absolute sense and in respect to timely provision. This is the case in both urban as well as rural areas and is a widespread problem effecting the overall UK rail network.

 

  1. This issue applies to booked and un-booked assistance journeys and often customers and TOCs are let down at the last minute with long wait times and even cancellation of such vehicles due to the limited number available and the demand for them. As TOCs are reliant on third party providers of coaches and taxis, for whom the majority of their work often does not require PSVAR compliant vehicles, an improvement in the provision of these vehicles would be beneficial to enhancing the overall customer journey experience in times of disruption or during periods of engineering work.

 

  1. One of the principal areas for improvement is the availability of accessible taxis. This is often a key reason for customer complaints and an area where both customers and TOCs believe greater consideration and action is needed to increase the number of accessible vehicles, such as some form of incentive to taxi providers to choose an accessible vehicle over a standard vehicle.

 

  1. Short-term investment would lead to the much-needed increase in accessible vehicles available, improve the customer experience for disabled travellers and reduce the time and resource needed by rail operators in sourcing a suitable vehicle.

 

  1. Bus accessibility is also variable with poor access, limited spaces for wheelchair users and often no toilet facilities for lengthy journeys effectively ruling out this mode of transport for many disabled customers.

 

  1. Legislation is important in driving correct behaviours. While TOCs have reasonable adjustments in place to enable all customers to make their journey as easy as possible, this process is often let down by the lack of provision of accessible vehicles which has been exasperated due to the pandemic significantly reducing demand for accessible vehicles and consequently, suppliers moving away from ownership of these vehicles, further reducing supply. We cannot materially impact the long-term provision of alternative accessible transport without legislation.

 

Q6:  Are there differences according to where in the country you are travelling?

 

  1. Customer insight indicates that views on this vary depending on individual experience and the modes of transport used. However, TOCS are aligned to achieve the same goal of providing a great service to the customer and providing easy rail travel.

 

  1. Nevertheless, TOCs do have to consider that processes and technology differ between train operators and can often impact the customer experience as we essentially ask the customer to change their expectations depending on which TOC they are travelling with.

 

  1. This further supports the idea that improved collaboration and sharing of best practice between TOCs across the industry will lead to a better journey experience for disabled customers across the country.

 

Q7: What difficulties does this cause for travellers with access needs? 

 

  1. Any lack of cohesion or reduction in standards of accessibility and service reflect negatively on the UK transport industry and highlight where there has been a lack of consideration of accessibility.

 

  1. This can lead to a different customer experience when taking a multi-TOC journey and makes planning a journey seamlessly and without considerable stress difficult which may lead to travel anxiety or, in some cases, may prevent the customer from traveling at all increasing the risk of social exclusion.

 

  1. Delivery of an accessible journey planning tool along with further enhancements to Passenger Assist should aid in delivery of a more joined-up travel experience and improve customer confidence when traveling.

 

Q8:  How effective are the relevant regulators at enforcing accessibility in transport? These include the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the Office of Rail and Road and Local Licensing Authorities?

 

  1. There are several regulatory bodies responsible for enforcing a range of legal requirements and obligations within the rail industry. This creates a complicated framework which can seem inconsistent when working across different regulators and can lead to different expectations on TOCS. When you consider the whole transport sector, the range of regulators and framework in which operators work increases even further.

 

  1. However, the legislation in place does have effective enforcement powers within the areas of their remits, but the transport industry and its customers could benefit from a clearer and more cohesive framework of regulation as well as greater transparency of any action being taken.

 

  1. Ease of access for customers to take matters to relevant regulators has also been questioned with customers stating that they did not know that as a member of the public they could take an issue to the Equality and Human Rights Commission or any of the other regulatory bodies creating an impression the system that does not support the interests of those they are meant to protect.

 

Q09: Do current legal obligations or guidance need to be strengthened?  

 

  1. Current legal obligations have adequate protection against discrimination and aid in making public transport more accessible. However, improved clarity from enforcement bodies to prevent ambiguous interpretation would aid TOC effectiveness in delivering continuous improvements to the customer experience so that all customers feel confident when choosing to travel by rail.

 

  1. Some TOCs have also suggested that the DfT Design Guide for stations could be strengthened and the National Technical Specifications Notices (NTSN) for rolling stock updated. Further, legal obligations and guidance overall should be reviewed to ensure they align with the changes taking place in the industry and are fit for purpose to reflect current societal views and are future proofed so we can ensure we are meeting customer expectations now and in the longer term.

 

  1. Further, guidance notes should be reviewed on an agreed timescale. This would ensure critical points of decision-making, such as when TOCs are looking to procure new rolling stock or complete station re-design, are supplied a minimum and maximum standard keeping guidance and legal obligations current and fit for purpose.

 

Q10:  What best practices should transport operators be following to improve their performance on access and inclusion for users? 

 

  1. With regard best practice, TOCs believe that involving those with lived experience is absolutely key to decision-making and creates the best possible customer experience for everyone.

 

  1. Consulting and engaging with panels of customers who are disabled with lived experience should be the starting point for every conversation, project, investment, or improvement. Diversity impact assessments should also be embedded into the process for all customer facing activities that are put forward for implementation. After all, if we meet the accessible needs of our customers, we will create a more inclusive rail network for all.

 

  1. Further, accessibility is an area that would benefit from a joined-up approach to investment and adoption of innovative technology to help break down barriers to equal access to public transport for all.

 

  1. Consistency in the application and access to digital and non-digital solutions to improve rail travel for disabled customers across the industry is also key. Rather than working in isolation on localised solutions, TOCs need to share best practice and use the benefits of scale to work together to ensure the right outcomes are achieved to continuously improve the customer experience across the UK rail network.

 

  1. Industry collaboration on the Passenger Assist programme is a good example of the industry coming together to create a single platform that when fully adopted will enable consistency of experience

 

  1. Additionally, a central system of sharing best practice and innovation would be of huge benefit to improving accessibility in public transport. Often operators within the same area of the industry may not be aware of improvements being made or what is working well for customers at different operators within the country, let alone between diverse types of transport operators. This would open up a route for better cross-modal collaboration to support seamless accessible journeys between various public transport operators.

 

  1. Insight shows that disabled customers often use more than one type of public transport during their journeys. Improved working relationships between different areas of the transport industry would be a huge benefit for customers, such as better connections and journey information, which would improve independence and support accessible journeys from start to finish

 

Q11: How effective is the Government’s Inclusive Transport Strategy, and how well does it influence decision-making across transport policy?

 

  1. In speaking to customer panel members, the feedback to TOCs is that there is a lack of awareness of this scheme even among those that are regular users of the rail network.

 

  1. Members have also commented they are unsure how the strategy affects the culture around accessibility and inclusion and provides the gravitas to truly imbed this into their organisations. Culture needs to be of greater focus to truly be embedded ensuring we achieve more than just pockets of excellence.

 

  1. However, TOCs do recognize that the Inclusive Transport Leaders accreditation programme is a good scheme. Although it is viewed as inconsistent as it has not reopened for applications for a longer than expected period of time.

 

  1. Additionally, some TOCs have suggested that the easier to accomplish commitments within the Inclusive Transport Strategy have been achieved but significant funding is needed to accomplish the required infrastructure improvements that will deliver the step-change required to create a fully inclusive and accessible rail network for all customers.

 

Q12: How could the Government’s Inclusive Transport Strategy be improved? 

 

  1. Insight from customers suggests that there needs to be greater involvement of disabled people in the formation of this strategy, and promotion and awareness activity needs to be improved and conducted on a more regular basis to keep momentum.

 

  1. Ongoing updates and better transparency of any improvements made or being made as a result of this strategy and showing how customer experience has improved will provide better transparency and give disabled people more confidence that the government is being more active and sincere with its commitment to improving accessibility within public transport.

 

  1. It would also be beneficial to understand how this strategy impacts and addresses the culture and provision of accessibility and inclusion for TOCS. Ensuring that culture is identified as a crucial driver is important to ensure customer satisfaction and confidence. GBRTT’s work and development of a joined up, industry-wide culture programme will, be beneficial toward ensuring that all rail staff have a focus on accessibility and inclusion and delivering improvements to the overall customer experience.

 

  1. Additionally, by supplying more clarity on how the outcomes of the strategy attribute to the purpose and goals of the strategy, and how these outcomes are measured and evidenced through lived experiences across the rail network would allow for greater transparency.

 

  1. Another area related to this raised was the role of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) with a suggestion that the membership be revised to reflect greater representation of those with lived experience of disability which could include those who care for disabled people as well as more members of younger demographics to provide a wider view of the disabled community.

 

  1. It also important that this group is truly independent and is seen as having an influence over government policy in accessibility, particularly in the rail industry which is undergoing a period of transition.

 

 

March 2023