English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill

Lord Shinkwin Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 13th April 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Grey-Thompson (CB)]

My Lords, I have attached my name to both amendments. I cannot say that I have quite as long a history in accessible transport as the noble Lord, Lord Borwick, does, but in the mid-1990s, I sat on the National Disability Council with the noble Lord, Lord Shinkwin, which oversaw the implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act. Back in the 1990s, the promises that were made on accessible transport felt like they were a very long way away. To be honest, in my 20s, I did not think I was going to live that long.

Considering the challenges that we face in accessible transport, the small gains that have been made have been slow and quite hard-fought. When I look at the provision of taxis, there is very much a difference between what is available in a city and what is available elsewhere. Where I live, in the north-east of England, it is almost impossible to get an accessible taxi. A friend of mine, an electric wheelchair user, came to visit last year. It took many hours over several days to even find provision for her to be able to use.

The challenges that we face are wider than just accessibility. There have been many cases of overcharging disabled people. There is wider access for people with other impairments in terms of discrimination, but the reality is that we have far from equal access. The noble Lord, Lord Borwick, talks about the number of wheelchair users who are in the UK. It is hard to find the numbers, but what we do know is that changes and improvements to mobility aids mean that more people are probably using mobility aids to be able to travel than they have ever done before.

We have to think about how we can make travelling much easier for disabled people than it currently is, and how we join this up with other modes of transport. If I look at things such as rail replacement services, most of the buses are not accessible and disabled people have been stranded at railway stations because it has not been possible to get an accessible taxi. As yet, we do not know the impact that changes in Motability will have on quite a significant number of disabled people. Just for clarity, I am a recipient of PIP, but I do not have a Motability car; but I imagine that those changes that are coming and the significant decrease in the mileage allowance are going to make accessible transport and accessible taxis even more important for quite a large number of disabled people.

I think the answer is not just in taxis. We have to take a really long, hard look at transport for disabled people. So far, there is still a significant amount of discrimination. As I was adding my name to these amendments, a number of scooter users got in touch with me to raise issues that they have with using accessible taxis. Where they are available—quite often around school hours—they are used for accessible taxi trips to and from school, and even where they are available, there are large chunks of the day where disabled people are not able to access them. I look forward to the Minister’s response, because accessible taxis are a really important part of equal access for disabled people.

[Lord Shinkwin (Con)]

My Lords, I rise to speak in support of my noble friend’s Amendments 268 and 287. In doing so, I should say that, although I welcome them, the fact that we are considering them this evening makes me sad, because they should not be necessary. The fact that they are exposes how little progress has been made, as the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, has said, in the 31 years since she and I served on the National Disability Council, advising the then Government on the implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act. The case of continued taxi inaccessibility, which these amendments modestly seek to remedy, provides just one example of the lack of enforcement of a law and subsequent laws that promised equality and, crucially, sustained attitudinal change.

Therefore, it should surprise no one that the failure to enforce these laws is having the opposite effect to what was intended by the authors of the Disability Discrimination Act. Instead of positive attitudinal change and greater inclusion, a lack of enforcement of the law, together with a licence to vent the vile prejudice that is, sadly, the hallmark of social media, have together spawned a culture of renewed discrimination and impunity. Attitudinally, as we heard in the debate on government Amendment 334 to the Crime and Policing Bill—which, incidentally, I supported—we are going backwards as far as disabled people are concerned.