I cannot blame DPTAC for requesting PSVAR compliance on all coaches. Why wouldn’t it? DPTAC’s job is to improve accessibility for disabled people.
It’s the government’s handling of changes that I have an issue with. I am all for improvements to be made, but the government needs to be responsible. It handled the implementation of the London ULEZ in an acceptable manner (although I didn’t much like the Mayor wanting to implement it a year earlier than planned). We all knew about it for several years and could plan accordingly.
I think that I may have known (or at least assumed) that PSVAR would become an issue for rail replacement. It was not publicised or spoken about, and the implementation has caught many coach operators out, and no doubt some will have gone to the wall over it.
PSVAR on home-to-school transport is another matter. I don’t know any operator which knew that it would become an issue for home-to-school much before 2019. The government didn’t do anything to let operators or manufacturers know. Arguably, just a single phone call from the government to the offices of routeone would have been enough to spread the word.
I suspect that the government will have to drop PSVAR from home-to-school as it would take many years at this point for enough accessible vehicles to become available. Then again, it probably won’t make the decision until the 11th hour, and this is very unfair to operators.
Many are now spending money (that they can’t really afford) on having conversions done. If the government axes PSVAR, those operators will be gutted. On the other hand, businesses which don’t have any PSVAR vehicles will find themselves on the wrong side of the law if the regulations come into force in September. We need to know what it going to happen now.
PSVAR is being forced on us without enough time for our businesses to plan for it and this is already causing operators to close down. The government needs to understand our industry and decide on a reasonable timeframe that will achieve the objective, without destroying viable businesses and the devastating effect that this has on owners and employees.
I think that lifts for coaches are a good thing. Many years ago I drove a coach with a wheelchair lift and I realised that many of the older folk that were travelling with me would not have been there otherwise. They couldn’t manage the stairs of a coach and needed the lift to get onboard.
If the government decides to accept DPTAC’s advice, then we will need the best part of 20 years to plan, as coaches currently last around 25 years in service.
Simon Hayes
Forest Coaches
Bucknell
