Blue Badge Reform Programme: A Consultation Document
Response from the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB)
July 2010
1. About us
As the largest organisation of blind and partially sighted people in the UK,
RNIB is pleased to have the opportunity to respond to this consultation.
We are a membership organisation with over 10,000 members who are
blind, partially sighted or the friends and family of people with sight loss.
80 per cent of our Trustees and Assembly Members are blind or partially
sighted. We encourage members to be involved in our work and regularly
consult with them on government policy and their ideas for change.
As a campaigning organisation of blind and partially sighted people, we
fight for the rights of people with sight loss in each of the UK’s countries.
During the next five years we want to tackle the isolation of sight loss by
focusing on three clear priorities:
1. Stopping people losing their sight unnecessarily;
2. Supporting blind and partially sighted people to live independent lives;
and
3. Creating a society that is inclusive of blind and partially sighted people.
We also provide expert knowledge to business and the public sector
through consultancy on improving the accessibility of the built
environment, technology, products and services.
2. Consultation response
Question 1: What would be the advantages and disadvantages of a
new power to cancel Badges that are reported as lost or stolen, or
have expired, or are withdrawn for misuse?
We support a new power to cancel badges that are reported lost or
stolen or are expired. The advantage would be that fewer invalid badges,
or badges which are not needed would be in circulation and potentially
open to abuse.
One potential disadvantage which needs to be avoided is of badges
being wrongly cancelled or withdrawn for perceived misuse when in fact
the badge was being used correctly. Mechanisms need to be put in
place, including disability awareness training of enforcement officers and
an effective and accessible appeals mechanism, to ensure incidences of
this are kept to a minimum.
Question 2: What would be the advantages and disadvantages of
giving local authorities a new power to confiscate Badges (a) that
have been cancelled and (b) that are being used by a third party for
their own benefit
We welcome the power for local authorities to confiscate badges that
have been cancelled, as this would remove invalid badges from
circulation. However, provisions would be made to ensure that the
information used to confiscate cancelled badges is accurate and up-todate.
The situation is more complex where it is believed that badges are being
used by a third party for their own benefit. Many people have hidden
disabilities which impact significantly on mobility which are often not well
understood, including people who are blind or partially sighted. There is
low public awareness of the impact of sight loss - whether partial or total on mobility. It is therefore a concern that individual enforcement officers
may confiscate badges rightly used by the drivers of people who are
blind or partially sighted, believing them to be used inappropriately. This
would cause significant distress as well as inconvenience for those
involved.
Enforcement officers should receive disability awareness training
covering a range of disabilities, particularly relating to the mobility
difficulties faced by people with hidden disabilities.
Question 3: What would be the most appropriate circumstances in
which such a power should be used?
We believe benefits of the Blue Badge should be available when the Blue
Badge holder is in the vehicle, or if they were in the vehicle when it was
parked in that place or close by and/or they will enter the vehicle to leave
from that place or close by. The Blue Badge holder will not be in the
vehicle at all times and it must be remembered that the Blue Badge
holder in many cases will not be the person driving the vehicle.
We support the removal of the Blue Badge and its return to the Badge
holder if it is clearly being used by a third party for their own benefit.
2
However, this should only be done if this is uncontested by the individual
and/or there is no possibility that the badge was being used
appropriately.
Question 4: What safeguards would be built into this new power?
A Badge should only be confiscated if the allegation of misuse is
uncontested by the individual and/or there is no possibility that the badge
was being used appropriately. Where an individual claims they are using
a Badge appropriately, and there is any possibility that this is correct, the
Badge should not be confiscated but the situation should be investigated
further.
We would like more information regarding how local authority officers will
assess if the wrong person is in possession of a Badge and what
measures that will be taken to protect individuals with hidden disabilities,
or those driving for them, from allegations of improper use of their Badge.
As stated previously, enforcement officers should receive disability
awareness training covering a range of disabilities, particularly relating to
the mobility difficulties faced by people with more hidden disabilities.
Question 5: What would be the most effective ways of removing
invalid Badges from circulation?
We would suggest that Badges could be issued every year and in
different colours in a similar way to tax discs. The application form for this
process will need to be accessible to people who are blind and partially
sighted. We support moves to make the distribution and supply of
badges more secure.
Question 6: Do you think that local authorities should be able to tow
vehicles that a) display cancelled or invalid badges or b) a third
party is misusing a badge for their own benefit
We would only support a power for local authorities to tow away vehicles
that are displaying Blue Badges that are cancelled if they are causing an
obstruction which is causing a danger to pedestrians or other road users.
We believe this power already exists. If a vehicle is parked in areas for
non-Blue Badge holders, or they are not causing an obstruction which is
causing a danger to pedestrians or other road users, they should not be
towed.
However, in general, if a Blue Badge is cancelled or invalid, a letter
should be sent to the Blue Badge holder (ensuring the letter is in a format
3
which is accessible to the Blue Badge holder) but the vehicle should not
be towed. Blind and partially sighted people are unlikely to be able to
read any expiry date on a Badge and so may realise it has expired and
often do not receive any letter (or one which is accessible to them)
saying that their Badge is due to expire or know that they have been sent
a new one. Towing their vehicle is likely to cause extreme distress if the
Badge holder has not intentionally used an invalid Badge. This is
particularly as blind and partially sighted people are often not the owners
of the vehicle themselves, and often rely on family and friends for
transport.
We assume that vehicles will only be towed if they are parked and there
is no-one present with the vehicle at the time. It is therefore unclear how
a local authority enforcement officer would establish whether a Blue
Badge is being misused by a third party. We do not think therefore that
cars should be towed in this situation.
Question 7: What would be the advantages and disadvantages of
removing the current three relevant convictions requirement from
the legislation?
We have no comment to make on this question.
Question 8: Should there be any additional grounds for withdrawing
a badge? If so what would you suggest and why?
We have no comment to make on this question.
Question 9: Should there be any additional grounds for withdrawing
a badge and why?
We have no comment to make on this question.
Question 10: What would be an appropriate route to deal with
disputes over whether badges should be withdrawn and
unsuccessful applications?
A clear and accessible method needs to be available for appeals, and
any information about this mechanism should be pro-actively provided to
everyone whose badge is withdrawn or whose application is
unsuccessful
The method for appeal needs to be accessible for blind and partially
sighted people. We would expect the channels for dispute to be available
4
both online and in paper format, and there should be a means to submit
an appeal by telephone is a person is unable to fill in a form themselves.
It should be ensured that information about the appeals procedure and
any forms to be completed are fully accessible to blind and partially
sighted people. It is not acceptable to expect a blind or partially sighted to
ask someone else to read their personal mail for them.
Website-based information and forms need to be accessible for use by
people using screen-reading software. Non web-based information
should be sent in a minimum of 14 point print, and should also be
available in Braille, large print, audio CD and as an accessible Word
document, or other format as notified by the individual. The preferred
reading format of individuals should be recorded and systems put in
place to ensure all information is sent to them in their preferred format, in
accordance with the Equality Act 2010.
Question 11: What are your views on the suggestion that there
should be more prescription from central Government on eligibility
assessment? What suggestions do you have on how this should be
implemented?
We support standardised criteria as different local rules causes
confusion. However, we do not want to see a reduction in overall
eligibility amongst blind and partially sighted people for this important
benefit.
For blind and partially sighted people, mobility and the ability to get
around safely and independently is one of the greatest difficulties faced.
Although generally people can "walk" in the physical sense, they often
have great difficulty in orientation and route finding, crossing roads
safely, and avoiding obstacles and dangers. This is particularly the case
in unfamiliar places. Many blind and partially sighted people simply do
not go to unfamiliar places or places where they find it difficult or
dangerous to navigate. A Blue Badge enables a blind or partially sighted
people to be driven to a place close to their destination so that they can
then get reach their destination with the least possible danger and
difficulty. This means they can attend appointments and activities and
increases their inclusion in society.
We would support receipt of higher rate mobility component of DLA as
one way of receiving automatic entitlement to a Blue Badge. However,
this should not be the only means of obtaining one.
From April 2011, people with the most severe sight loss will become
eligible for the higher rate mobility component of DLA if they meet the
5
relevant criteria. However, not all people who are registered as being
severely sight impaired will meet these very tight criteria. They
nevertheless have a great deal of difficulty in walking and being able to
reach a destination safely. Currently, people who are registered severely
sight impaired are also eligible for Blue Badges. We would argue strongly
that registration as severely sight impaired should also provide automatic
entitlement to a Blue Badge.
If medical assessments are to be introduced, we are very concerned that
the criteria suggested are worded as "an inability to walk or very
considerable difficulty walking". This could be interpreted as excluding
people such as people who are blind or partially sighted and also people
with severe autism or learning disabilities. Walking involves a great deal
more than the physical act of placing one foot in front of the other. It also
involves orientation and way-finding, perceiving danger and obstacles
and being able to take appropriate action. Any medical assessment must
therefore take full account of the person's ability to get from A to B safely,
in familiar as well as unfamiliar circumstances.
Question 12:
What do you think would be the advantages and disadvantages and
potential costs and benefits, of the Secretary of State taking a new
power to require local authorities to use any data-sharing system?
We have no comment to make on this issue.
Question 13: What suggestions do you have as to how we could
allow certain non-residents to apply for a Blue Badge?
We have no comment to make on this issue.
Question 14: What are your views on organisations badges? What
are your suggestions for how abuse might be prevented?
Blue Badges are essential for organisations that support people who
have mobility difficulties to help them take part in activities and get to
appointments. An example might be a local service for blind and partially
sighted people, some of whom may well have other disabilities, who want
to take a group of people to the local swimming pool or theatre. Being
able to stop and park nearby makes the trip much easier and safer. If
they are unable to stop and park close by, many more staff are likely to
be needed to escort people to the venue, which may mean the trip
cannot take place at all.
6
Organisational badges are very useful and should be retained. However,
it should be made clear to organisations that the badge is only to be used
when people with mobility difficulties are travelling or being picked up,
and that repeated misuse will be investigated which may lead to the
withdrawal of the Badge.
Question 15: Do you agree with the way in which we propose to
extend eligibility to children between the age of 2 and 3 with
specific medical conditions?
We have no comment to make on this issue.
Question 16: Do you have any comments on these proposed
transitional arrangements? Please provide information to support
your decision
We have no comment to make on this issue
Question 17: What are your views on this option? Please provide
advantages and disadvantages with this approach
We have no comment to make on this issue
Question 18: Do you think that funding should be distributed via
RSG or via ABG? Why do you have that preference?
We have no comment to make on this issue
Question 19:
We have no comment to make on this issue
Question 20:
We have no comment to make on this issue
Question 21:
We have no comment to make on this issue
Question 22:
We have no comment to make on this issue
7
Question 23
We have no comment to make on this issue
We would be pleased to provide any further information which would be
helpful to the consultation team.
Please contact:
Moira Fraser
Campaigns Manager, RNIB
[email protected], 020 7391 2197
8