Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee 26 June 2019

26 Jun 2019 · S5 · Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee

Item of business

Transport (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Matheson, Michael SNP Falkirk West Watch on SPTV

Amendment 257, in the name of Jeremy Balfour, seeks to impose a duty on traffic authorities to ensure that new traffic lights that are erected in their area are accessible for persons with disabilities. It would also require authorities to provide annual reports to the Scottish ministers setting out what they have done to comply with that duty, and what steps they have taken to make existing crossings accessible. The Scottish ministers would be obliged to lay a summary of those reports before the Scottish Parliament each year. Although I completely agree with the principle of having pedestrian crossings that are accessible and straightforward for everyone to use, I do not consider that amendment 257 is necessary or appropriate. Traffic authorities are given powers to provide pedestrian crossings on roads for which they are responsible by provisions in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The 1984 act also provides that the traffic signs that are used to indicate a pedestrian crossing must comply with the specifications that are set out in regulations that are made under that act. The current regulations are the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016. In making a decision on the location and type of crossing to be created, traffic authorities are guided by design manuals such as “Local Transport Note 2/95: The Design of Pedestrian Crossings”. That document is currently being reviewed by the Department for Transport, with input from the Scottish ministers and local traffic authorities, and is expected to include updated guidance on accessibility issues, including the rotating cones to which Mr Balfour made reference. Additional guidance for traffic authorities is provided in “Roads for All: Good Practice Guide for Roads”, which was produced by Transport Scotland. That document also includes advice on the accessibility of pedestrian crossings. Transport Scotland is currently reviewing and updating that guidance document in consultation with relevant stakeholders. In addition, Transport Scotland chairs the roads for all forum, which meets quarterly and includes representatives from the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland, the Guide Dogs For The Blind Association, RNIB, Living Streets, Alzheimer Scotland, the Scottish Accessible Transport Alliance, the Society of Chief Officers of Transportation Scotland, Disability Equality Scotland and other organisations that represent people with disabilities. The main function of the forum is to advise Transport Scotland on the interests of disabled people in connection with development of standards for design, construction and maintenance of roads, and for layout and accessibility of public transport infrastructure, including pedestrian crossings. That ensures that the Scottish ministers are well informed on accessibility issues and can update regulations, design manuals and best-practice guides on the matter. I can confirm that members of the forum are involved in the update of the “Roads for All: Good Practice Guide for Roads”, which I mentioned a moment ago. It should also be noted that, in exercising their functions in connection with pedestrian crossings, traffic authorities are already subject to the duty to make reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities, and to the general public sector equality duty, as set out in the Equality Act 2010. Those duties can be measured and enforced using the machinery that is provided for in the 2010 act. For all those reasons, I consider that amendment 257 is not necessary. It should also be noted that the reports that would be required by subsection (3) of amendment 257 would place an additional administrative and financial burden on traffic authorities. There has been no consultation of them or other stakeholders about the duties that would be imposed by the amendment. My view is that the existing arrangements can be made to work effectively; therefore, I ask Jeremy Balfour not to press amendment 257. If he does so, I ask the committee to reject it.

Search Hansard contributions

Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee 26 June 2019

In the same item of business