PARLIAMENTARY COLUMN

Parliamentary column Lisa Nandy MP (above) recently secured a parliamentary debate on the difficulties facing people with disabilities who use the transport system. Many MPs used the debate to challenge the government cuts agenda which would make a bad situation much worse. Lisa, who is also a member of the RMT parliamentary group, highlighted the threat posed by the McNulty Review, “The McNulty review recommended closing 675 ticket offices around the country. “I am aware of the economic realities, but I would like to see a commitment today from the Minister to assure us that he will not sanction proposals that would leave ticket offices unmanned. “Many people contacted me in advance of this debate to say that so much of the staffing issue is about feeling safe on public transport— having the security of being able to get to where they are going without being stranded, which had happened to them in too many cases,” he said. Labour MP Jack Dromey drew MPs’ attention to the campaign against ticket office cuts that were already being proposed on London Midland, “The company is proposing—the proposals are on the Secretary of State’s desk right now—to make significant changes, including to the manning of stations... 18,000 representations have been made, including many from the disabled, objecting to the proposals and seeking to bring home what they would mean...London Midland cannot be allowed to blunder on regardless if the disabled are the casualties of its actions,” he said. Another RMT Parliamentary group member, Jeremy Corbyn MP, also warned the McNulty review threatened to remove all guards and this would particularly impact on vulnerable passengers to passengers. “How many times have we seen people trying to get on or off trains at remote or suburban stations at night, when there are no staff on the station or the train—only a driver, who cannot see everything or be everywhere? “It is then a great struggle simply to get on or off a train. “The McNulty proposal to go to a largely driver-only-operated service means that many suburban and rural services will have no member of staff on them, and in addition there will be unstaffed stations. “That is obviously a huge deterrent to anyone who has special needs getting into the station and on to the train. “I hope that the minister will make it clear that he does not want that aspect of the McNulty proposals to be introduced. “It is often difficult for people, particularly those with sight difficulties, when there are no staff on the station and only ticket vending machines are used. “The machines are often the wrong height or badly placed and getting a ticket and getting on the train when there are no staff becomes a nightmare. “It is unnecessary and wrong to have such arrangements; they are uncivilised and we should put a stop to them. Sixty per cent of people with disabilities have no access to a car, public transport is the only option for them. “Buses and trains must be accessible, stations must be staffed and the staff must be trained to assist people as necessary, that is the only right and proper thing to do,” he said. Shadow Transport Minister Lillian Greenwood MP also highlighted the impact bus cuts would have on people with disabilities. “English regions have already lost more than 1,000 bus services—over a fifth of all those supported by local authority funding. Overall, the government are taking away half a billion pounds from local transport funding, causing unaffordable fare rises and the closure of routes, which will hit everyone in our communities. “Disabled people, who are often on low incomes and especially reliant on public transport, will be hit even harder,” she said. As a result of the debate the minister agreed to set up a working group to consider the improvements needed public transport for people with disabilities. For a full transcript of the debate and to find out more about the campaign visit www.rmt.org.uk MPS WARN RAIL AND BUS CUTS WILL HIT MOST VULNERABLE RMT helpline 0800 376 3706 :: november/december 2011 :: RMTnews 9 The European parliament has voted to impose the EU model for railways – fragmentation, separation and privatisation – across the continent. The consultative EU body rubberstamped a European Commission dictat to ‘recast’ all EU rail directives in order to ‘establish a single European railway area’. This EU privatisation model, first implemented in Britain, demands a split between train operations and infrastructure and ‘open access’ rules in order to fragment the industry to force market mechanisms into the industry. Now the Commission is seeking to break up "holding companies" through which France and Germany have maintained a common parent company with separate accounts to avoid outright privatisation. The new ‘recast’ EU rail package also demands further fragmentation with "more flexible" service facilities for train maintenance, cleaning, refuelling and shunting to boost outsourcing and subcontracting in rail services. The directive also encourages private finance initiatives (PFI) for design, commission, development and operation of railways and repeals legislation on safety of staff, rolling stock, working conditions and social rights of workers and consumers, and imposes strikebreaking clauses in commercial rail contracts. Under the new regime national rail companies will no longer control transport planning, which undermines co-operation between national transport authorities and railway operators. RMT general secretary Bob Crow said that the EU’s aim is to fragment national rail systems to ensure permanent private ownership and bumper profits for investors achieved on the backs of cuts to safety, jobs and services. “This EU business model for rail is remarkably similar to the McNulty report which demands even more fragmentation and more privatisation of the rail industry,” he said. Left MEP Sabine Wils said that the vote was bad news for integrated public rail companies and paved the way for private profiteering in Europe's railway sector. “With possibilities opened up for privatisation of marshalling yards, maintenance facilities, operating services and subcontracting, the notion of integrated public railway companies where safety rules are paramount has been destroyed. "Although the practice in the UK already shows that this is the wrong policy, the further liberalisation of the railway sector and the further separation of rail and operating services to the detriment of employees, passengers and safety measures is now being implemented in Europe," she said. EU IMPOSES RAIL PRIVATISATION