Transport Accessibility for Disabled People Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateAlex Mayer
Main Page: Alex Mayer (Labour - Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard)Department Debates - View all Alex Mayer's debates with the Department for Transport
(1 day, 11 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)
I am always pleased to speak in debates about transport. I want to paint a picture for the Minister of Leighton Buzzard station—he is, of course, welcome to visit too. There are two lifts, which is fantastic, and I do not knock those lifts at all, because I know that many people want them. At the moment, a person can walk in from the ticket entrance side, get into one of the lifts, go up, go across and go down again, but then they hit a slight problem. They then have to walk all the way along the platform, passed the locked gate, whereupon there are a few steps to go up and a few steps to go down to get out of the station on to the other side, where many people want to go—it is a place called Linslade. As I said, there is a locked gate on that route. Were that gate to be opened, they would have entirely step-free access to get to the outside world.
I know that it is not that simple, because I have had a lot of conversations with people about it—there is some greenery in the way, some cables and there are issues with public rights of way—but it really does not seem impossible. My last discussions were with Network Rail and it said that it was talking to London Northwestern. Given that they are both now in public hands, it does not seem that there are many people to pass the buck between. Will the Minister suggest how we can make best progress on that local issue?
Moving on, I will talk briefly about a couple of points in the Transport Committee’s “Access denied” report. The first is the recommendation in paragraph 105 on a unified complaints system. I am in favour of unification and standardisation, and I think that Great British Railways offers a real chance to do that in many ways, not least on lost property, which I spoke about on Second Reading of the Railways Bill. I also think that as we establish more and more regional transport brands—the example of the Weaver brand has been discussed—that will be what customers think of as the portal gateway to many different types of transport. Indeed, that may well be the place where people ought to be pointed towards if they want to make a complaint—or, actually, if they are going to give somebody a compliment, because it is not always bad news.
I also highlight paragraph 25 of the report, which focuses on neurodiversity. It mentions various issues, including ambiguous signage, which nobody wants. I personally find the Thameslink boards at Blackfriars to be particularly confusing, and I never know which side the train is coming in on. Great British Railways offers us perhaps a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create familiarity and consistency right across the network. There are reports from Tokyo that on its metro, the Ginza line, colour-zoned boarding areas have been introduced and that has been cited as an example of neurodiverse-friendly design. It is also a design that has improved passenger circulation overall and meant far fewer last-minute dashes by everybody to the platform. Because this is, as the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) mentioned, the good thing about accessible design: improved signage can help tourists or commuters rushing to make a connection and banishing steps also helps anybody with a suitcase or a pram.
For society to thrive, we need to make use of the talents of everybody. If we do this right, we do not just remove barriers; we raise the standard of travel for everyone.