1.  The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) is grateful for the invitation to submit evidence to the inquiry by the House of Commons Transport Committee into personal mobility scooters (PMS).

  2.  As you know, DPTAC was established under the Transport Act 1985 to advise the Government on the transport needs of disabled people. DPTAC has identified four overarching principles on which we base our advice to Government, other organisations and disabled people. These are that:

— Accessibility for disabled people is a condition of any investment.

— Accessibility for disabled people must be a mainstream activity.

— Users should be involved in determining accessibility.

— Achieving accessibility for disabled people is the responsibility of the provider.

  3.  These principles are also the basis on which we offer the following comments.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

  4.  Individual mobility and expectations of improved access to facilities, including the wider public realm have increased over the last 25 years, partly due to successive government and local authority intervention. Mobility scooters have enabled a historically mobile generation to continue to enjoy that mobility and we cannot expect people to readily accept it being reduced.

  5.  DPTAC consider this inquiry is timely and are pleased that the Department for Transport is actively involving us in the development of this area of policy, but consider that the scope for consideration should be as wide as possible—we would seek full research in this area now, to ensure future actions are soundly evidence based.

  6.  DPTAC consider the research on the use of PMS should be wider than limiting it to their use on the pavement. We would seek that research and evidence gathering should cover the full usage of PMS:

— on public transport;

— on the road;

— within buildings; and

— where possible conflicts with pedestrians and other road users could take place.

  7.  DPTAC also consider that a clear outcome of the research should be the production of a sound evidence base, flexible enough to support future technological developments covering: increase in traffic; improvement in size and effectiveness of PMS themselves; changes in proposed street scape (shared space); developments from the EU; and any other technical developments in personal transport.

  8.  Turning to your four specific questions:

— Is the current legal position clear with regard to mobility scooters and pedestrian use of space?

  The current legislation has not kept pace with developments in personal mobility. Therefore the current legal framework is unclear. DPTAC would seek the production of research to produce a firm evidence base, to provide clarity, and which could be used to develop a framework for the future that would ensure the safe use for all users of the road, pavement and public transport.

— Does the current situation protect both pedestrians and other road users?

  The lack of evidence means that pedestrians may well not be sufficiently protected, or for that matter other road users and users of mobility scooters. This lack of clarity creates uncertainty and leaves all users vulnerable and could lead to conflict.

  DPTAC would wish to see research and evidence gathering to investigate, as a minimum: type and value of training; understanding of the Highway Code; considering the benefits of wearing high visibility vests/clothing; and the value of compulsory insurance.

— Does an increase in mobility scooter use and a greater variety of similar non-standard vehicles mean that new legislation and guidance is needed?

  The range and type of mobility scooters and electric vehicles has grown considerably in recent years, but there is currently a lack of sound evidence on which to base the development of legislation. DPTAC consider that this situation needs to be rectified.

— What evidence is there about the safety of pedestrians and mobility scooters and similar non-standard vehicles sharing space?

  DPTAC is aware of a range of anecdotal evidence and some factual evidence, albeit not statistically significant. What DPTAC do not have is clear information of the scale of the "problem". This lack of clear information can lead to a misunderstanding of the real situation. Some of what is said about PMS can also be said about small children using their bikes on the pavement.

CONCLUDING COMMENTS

  9.  The principal concern of DPTAC is to ensure continued and increased accessibility for disabled people. We believe that PMS already are making a significant contribution towards these aims and they have the potential to contribute even more in the future.

  10.  DPTAC consider that detailed research in this area by the Department for Transport is essential. The production of a sound evidence base, flexible enough to take account of technical developments and changes in personal expectation, will in the long run save time and money in the drafting of effective legislation in the future.

February 2010