MOBILITY MATTERS
SOUTH GLOUCESTERSHIRE WAV TAXIS RULE DELAYED DUE TO PANDEMIC AND UKRAINE WAR
A new rule on making taxis in South Gloucestershire accessible to people in wheelchairs has been delayed because of “recent global events”.
The rule was scheduled to come into force in April, but has been paused due to the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. In a bid to make travelling easier for disabled people, South Gloucestershire Council decided in 2017 to encourage hackney carriages to switch to wheelchair- accessible vehicles. A hard deadline for all hackney carriages to
be wheelchair-
accessible was set for April 1 this year. But taxi drivers have urged the council to delay the rollout of the new rule. The council is also considering a separate rule forcing all taxis to be electric by 2030, and electric wheelchair-accessible taxis are currently “prohibitively expensive”. Drivers also said the pandemic meant a huge drop in trade, and the war in Ukraine had disrupted global supply chains, delaying the manufacturing and supply of new vehicles. The council’s regulatory com- mittee voted to delay the launch of the new rule on Thursday, March 23. A report to the committee said: “This is not an attempt by hackney carriage vehicle licence holders and drivers to avoid the policy, and they
understand why it is
happening. “The drivers are seeking a greater degree of sympathy from the committee, to
give them the
chance to adjust to the change given the wider circumstances.”
PHTM APRIL 2023
The policy has already made some progress in increasing the numbers of taxis in South Gloucestershire which passengers in wheelchairs can use. “According to the report, in 2016 there were
31 wheelchair-
accessible taxis, now there are 37. But drivers have to wait a year or 18 months to be able to buy a new WAV taxi, according to councillors, who warned that enforcing the policy from next month could mean drivers would be “out of work” — despite the trade having six years of notice about the new policy. Conservative Councillor Keith Burchell, representing Severn Vale,
said: “This has been going on for a long time but unfortunately due to the events of the last three or four years, we have to do something now just to alleviate the situation, because the situation has changed since this was first recommended. “If the events of the past three or four years hadn’t happened, there would be no way I would be recommending this [delay] today. But the vehicles aren’t available for the trade to get. “They’ll have to wait a year or 18 months to get a vehicle. That means a taxi driver, if we implement this, could be out of work for a year or 18 months as they haven’t got a vehicle.”
BLIND OXFORD STUDENT STRANDED AFTER CABBIE REFUSES GUIDE DOG
A blind student says a taxi driver refused to stop to pick up his guide dog, leaving them both stranded by the side of the road. Kelsey Trevett, 21, said it left a feeling of being “vulnerable” and “powerless” and was one of several incidents in a year. Politics and philosophy student at Oxford University booked the cab from a friend’s house back home one Saturday night. But when it arrived, the driver refused to stop. Kelsey said: “I hate to say that I almost expect to be refused access when I order a taxi. It happens regularly enough that it affects me. It’s something that stays with you after it happens.” Kelsey said: “It was cold, it was dark, I was vulnerable, yet I was left on the kerb.” Kelsey called for
another cab which let the dog travel, albeit reluctantly. Kelsey says reluctant cabbies usually say they are “scared of” or “allergic to” dogs. Three-quarters of assistance dog owners surveyed by Guide Dogs charity say they refused access to
are regularly restaurants,
shops, or public transport. Under the Equality Act, guide dog owners have the right to enter the majority of services, premises and vehicles with their dog. A Guide Dogs spokesman said: “The law is clear, and yet guide dog owners continue to experience access refusals.” Kelsey added: “We need to ensure all workers are trained in dealing with service dog users and are aware of the Act.”
21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90
