My Lords, the last speech was interesting. I agreed with some of it in that we have all had to wait far too long to pass something that might improve the situation. These vehicles are nowhere near as disabled-unfriendly or far below the standards we have set as their predecessor. So I support the noble Lord, Lord Snape, in saying that we have waited for far too long to get a better back-up in place. However, I am afraid that he downplayed the fact that these are minimum standards that we have set and the Government are required to give us a reason why they are not imposing those minimums on the rolling stock that is being used.
Even if we are talking about comparatively small changes in the scheme, in percentage terms, it may happen that your arms are not quite strong enough to use the door at this level, or not to use it consistently. On a comparatively short journey, it may not happen, but if you have to use the doors three or four times and you have very little strength in your muscles due to various conditions, you are then stranded within a loo. That is not a good situation and it will be inconvenient to everyone else. Can the Minister agree that we should ensure that the standard is enforced and that those who do not come up to it should have to jump through a few hoops to get there? Having said that, if they are prepared to jump, let us make sure that they do it quickly. I think that that is probably a fair compromise.
There has been a history between myself and the Minister in trying to get these regulations in place. I initially complained about the same line, quite a while ago, when we set this hare running—which ended up with greater responsibilities on Parliament for the amount of reporting in place, as a result of the upgrading of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. I thank the Minister for the work that he did on that. I hope the Minister will confirm that the Government take exemptions from standards seriously. It is not something that should become almost automatic; before we raised this, there was a grave danger that it would. Will the Government make sure that we always address this seriously in future?
So, returning to the fact of the matter, this is a comparatively small change, but every change here which potentially imposes on the dignity and, indeed, the practicality of a disabled person travelling should be taken seriously and scrutinised by Parliament. It should be done as quickly as possible to ensure that we can raise standards overall, even if in smaller steps than I would like. Having said that, I have no major objection to this legislation.
Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Gatwick Express Class 458 Vehicles) Exemption Order 2006
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Addington
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 March 2006.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Rail Vehicle Accessibility (Gatwick Express Class 458 Vehicles) Exemption Order 2006.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c428 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:58:41 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_304590
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_304590
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_304590