Hampshire County Council Cabinet 31 March 2008 Blue Badge Scheme Report of the Director of Environment

Item 7

Contact: Alison Quant, ext 5099 email: alison.quant@hants.gov.uk

1. Summary

1.1 This report details the County Council's response to the Department for Transport's (DfT) consultation on reforms to the Blue Badge Scheme.

1.2 The Scheme will enable those with severe mobility problems to have access to on-street parking, with the primary purpose of enabling such people to park as close as possible to their destination.

2. Recommendation

That approval be given to the County Council's response, as set out in the report, to the Department for Transport's consultation document on a Comprehensive Blue Badge (Disabled Parking) Reform Strategy.

3. Introduction

3.1 The Blue Badge Scheme allows badge holders to park in designated on-street parking spaces free of charge and on yellow lines provided it is safe to do so. District Councils usually reserve spaces for the disabled in their off-street car parks. Although this is not regulated by law, they often specify in the relevant regulations that only Blue Badge holders may park in these spaces. Supermarkets and other retailers also reserve spaces for disabled customers. However, these are not subject to formal regulations.

3.2 In February 2007 the DfT announced a strategic review of the Blue Badge Scheme. An independent consultant was commissioned to undertake the review which examined the Scheme's eligibility, concessions, administration and enforcement provisions in light of the many social, political, environmental and technological changes that have occurred since the Scheme was first introduced in 1971.

3.3 The DfT has now published its preliminary proposals for modernising the Blue Badge Scheme and is undertaking a structured consultation with a wide range of stakeholders during the period 24 January to 18 April 2008, including the County Council.

4. Department for Transport Response to the Independent Strategic Review

4.1 An independent consultant was commissioned to conduct the review and the outcome was reported to Ministers in September 2007. The following matters were addressed:

(i) Eligibility;

(ii) Concessions;

(iii) Better Administration; and

(iv) Choice and Alternatives to the Scheme.

4.2 The Reform Strategy outlines plans for modernising the Scheme in line with current transport policy, making it more effectively administered, tougher on fraud and easier to understand. The aim is to continue to help people with the most severe mobility problems to get around more easily and is part of the older and disabled persons improved mobility agenda.

5. Preliminary Department for Transport Thinking

5.1 The following paragraphs set out the Department's thinking on the four matters listed in paragraph 4.1 and the County Council's proposed response.

Eligibility

5.2 To make sure that the Scheme is available to those who need it most and that it is as fair and consistently administered as possible.

5.3 There are currently 2.3 million Blue Badges in England. Those in receipt of the Higher Rate Component of Disability Living Allowance (HRMCDLA) (approx one-third of all badges) are automatically eligible for a Badge. The other main category is those with a severe and permanent inability to walk for a period of at least three years who do not automatically qualify for HRMCDLA (just under two-thirds of all badges) and are assessed. Inconsistency arises at present because those automatically qualifying through Disability Living Allowance have conditions which will last less than three years or have a severe mental impairment.

5.4 The Government proposes to try and make the criteria for the assessed categories more consistent with HRMCDLA. Proposals may include:

(i) revising assessed eligibility to include severe mental impairments/extremely disruptive behavioural problems;

(ii) adjusting the badge issue period to less than three years for people with short term mobility problems; and

(iii) adjusting the young children age category for assessed eligibility to under 3 (currently under 2).

5.5 Other Government initiatives for greater mobility through `Non-Blue Badge' options for people not qualifying for the Scheme will be pursued separately.

5.6 Proposed Response: To support these proposals for ensuring greater consistency and fairness between those with comparable mobility needs. The limited widening of eligibility should not create undue competition for the limited amount of on street parking.

5.7 The process of assessment needs to be rigorous and consistent within and across local authority areas. The administrative cost is likely to rise because of widened eligibility. Assessment criteria need to be very clear, to avoid generating numerous appeals, which could add significantly to this cost and cause unnecessary stress to those with severe mobility needs.

5.8 It is recommended that badges be issued for a three year or a one year period, depending on the circumstances of the disability.

Concessions

5.9 The proposals are to:

(i) retain the existing yellow line parking concessions (up to three hours) in the short to medium term;

(ii) simplify the rules for visiting badge holders in the central London exempt zone;

(iii) investigate the feasibility and desirability of enabling other local authorities to adapt their schemes to meet local circumstances; and

(iv) investigate how off-street parking concessions should best sit alongside their on-street counterparts.

5.10 Vehicles parked on yellow lines, particularly in traffic sensitive streets, can be disruptive to the safe flow of traffic and since there is no control on where the vehicle is parked this is entirely contrary to the network management duty placed on Highway Authorities under the Traffic Management Act. There is therefore a case to consider removing this concession completely, provided alternative parking arrangements are made for badge holders both in on-street and off-street bays.

5.11 Market research suggests that the current yellow line three hour concession is less in demand than other on-street concessions, mainly because of uncertainty about the rules and, possibly, fear of vehicle damage in vulnerable locations. Suggestions for differing rules depending on the traffic sensitivity of the road in question, or local choice on this matter could be a recipe for greater public uncertainty and could have yet more signing implications. Although badge holders would quickly become familiar with local restrictions, it is unlikely they would understand rules applying elsewhere.

5.12 Proposed Response: To support the retention of time limited parking on yellow lines and the Government's intention to look at off-street parking concessions.

Better Administration

5.13 Suggestions are:

(i) Secure and machine readable badge to help prevent fraud and aid enforcement. Badge abuse currently centres on use of lost, stolen, duplicated and forged badges and through misuse of valid badges by others. Enforcement usually falls to local parking enforcement officers under Decriminalised Parking Enforcement and detection of abuse is often through resource intensive surveillance, etc.

(ii) Review enforcement powers of local authorities to deal with abuse.

(iii) National framework for securely sharing Blue Badge data. By law, registers of badges and users vehicles are currently kept locally by issuing local authorities. Inability to share this data with other local authorities makes cross-boundary checking difficult and inefficient.

(iv) Data storage that supports efficient, secure and streamlined administration. This would require appropriate legislation to protect personal data whilst ensuring transparency and scrutiny.

5.14 Proposed Response: To support all these proposals, subject to robust privacy and security safeguards on data sharing.

5.15 The current maximum fee of £2.00 was introduced in March 1983 and the proposal is that local authorities should be given the discretion to raise the fee to a level which would more properly cover the local costs. Scotland has already raised the maximum fee to £20 and the British Bankers' Association estimates a processing fee of £12 to £25.

5.16 A balance needs to be struck between charges for vulnerable users and covering the costs of administration, which will increase under these proposals. Blue Badges are not means tested and not all those applying will be on low incomes. The current fee is probably more expensive to collect than its value so badges should be free or set at a reasonable level which makes the fee worth collecting.

5.17 Proposed Response: To recommend a national charge of £20 for a three year Blue Badge and £10 for a one year Blue Badge with £10 for the second consecutive year and the third year free.

Alternatives to the Blue Badge Scheme

5.18 The Government is reforming the Blue Badge scheme as part of a wider programme of work to improve the mobility of older and disabled people. This includes:

(i) continuing to making public transport more accessible so that people with disabilities have real alternatives to the car, including improvements in public transport and associated infrastructure making buses and train stations physically accessible; and

(ii) the national concessionary fares scheme.

5.19 The report notes that the majority of badge holders do not regularly use public transport, citing reliability, cost, accessibility, individual disability and health issues as the barriers. However, the report says there is evidence that less severe cases of mental impairment and behavioural problems might be met by taxi vouchers and enhanced community transport. Also, people with Colitis and Crohn's Disease, who may need urgent access to public toilet facilities, might be catered for with initiatives other than issuing Blue Badges.

5.20 The Council has promoted the introduction of accessible public transport where this is affordable, however operators do not always maintain accessible buses on these routes.

5.21 The Council also supports a network of dial-a-ride services across Hampshire to meet the needs of those who cannot access conventional public transport.

5.22 Proposed Response: It would be helpful if there were requirements of public transport operators were required to maintain accessible buses on routes where significant investment has been made by local authorities linked to the availability of such buses. Regulations requiring all buses to be accessible by a given date will eventually remedy this, but in the intervening years there is waste of public investment to support the mobility impaired if the bus operators are allowed to withdraw accessible vehicles from such routes.

6. Impact Assessments

6.1 Assessment of the Race Relations (Assessment) Act has been considered in this response but no adverse impact has been identified in terms of race, creed or gender.

7. Conclusion

7.1 The proposed reforms to the Blue Badge Scheme should be supported as it will enable people with severe mobility problems to park near to their destination though improved access to on-street parking.

LINK(S) TO CORPORATE STRATEGY
	Yes	No
Hampshire safer and more secure for all	_
Maximising well-being
Enhancing our quality of place

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers
The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.
NB the list excludes:
1.	Published works.
2.	Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE	LOCATION
None

1625Rpt/AQ