The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-13357, in the name of Duncan McNeil, on the extension of the blue badge eligibility criteria. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament acknowledges that it has been six months since Transport Scotland published the analysis of its call for evidence on extending the Blue Badge scheme to include people with mental health conditions; understands that there was overwhelming support for an extension in the evidence; notes in particular the evidence from Down’s Syndrome Scotland that “… some people with Down’s syndrome who can walk may still represent a danger to themselves and to the safety of others because they have little awareness of traffic … The extension of eligibility criteria would thus recognise that their condition may result in compromising their safety and posing a danger to others too”; considers that a discrepancy has emerged whereby children under 16 with Down’s syndrome and other conditions, in Greenock and Inverclyde and across Scotland, are assessed for a Blue Badge more strictly than those over 16, who can be assessed under the more flexible personal independence payment system; understands that a working group is to be established to consider the implications of an extension of the Blue Badge eligibility criteria; commends to that working group the understanding that Wales has led the way in Welsh Statutory Instrument 2014/3082 extending eligibility to people who, as a result of a mental disorder, are unable to follow the route of a familiar journey without the assistance of another person, and hopes that the working group can reach a swift conclusion.
17:05
I welcome the opportunity to have this debate and I thank the members from across the chamber who have supported the motion and have stayed behind this evening to participate in or to listen to the debate.
It would be useful to set out why I became interested in the issue. In January this year, I was contacted by a worried parent, Mr McLevy, whose son Aiden suffers from Down’s syndrome. I had the pleasure of meeting Aiden and Mr McLevy in my office. Aiden is an energetic child and is full of enthusiasm. He might have done a bit of damage to the office that day, but he is forgiven. They were there on a serious matter, which was that Aiden’s blue badge, which allowed his parents to park easily and conveniently, has been withdrawn, which means that they have to park some distance away from places such as the local supermarket, the doctor’s office and the family centre. As a consequence—as we all realise—they have to struggle with the day-to-day activities that most of us take for granted.
Due to Aiden’s condition, he has a lack of safety awareness and can be unpredictable in a way that can pose a danger to himself in a busy car park, and to his parents, who have to chase after him. He also has a lack of co-ordination and can trip easily. As a result, getting from the car to the entrance of a venue can be a daunting experience for his parents.
Aiden had his badge taken away because he does not meet the new strict criteria for the scheme. First, Aiden does not receive the higher mobility rate of disability living allowance, which means he does not automatically qualify when he applies to the local authority. If a young person such as Aiden does not receive the higher mobility rate of DLA, the local authority will then conduct an assessment. However, under the new criteria, if it is to issue a blue badge, the local authority must be satisfied that the applicant is
“unable to walk or virtually unable to walk”.
It is clear from meeting and speaking to Mr McLevy that, although Aiden did not meet that criterion, having a blue badge was essential to allowing his family to go about the day-to-day activities that most of us, as I said, take for granted.
This is not an issue that affects only the McLevys in Greenock. Down’s Syndrome Scotland has informed me that it has been contacted by a number of worried parents whose children’s applications for blue badges have been rejected. It is also impacting on parents with children who have autism who, due to their condition, can be prone to running off or who have learning difficulties that make it difficult for them to appreciate danger. I will read out an extract from a submission that was made by a concerned parent to Transport Scotland’s consultation on extending the blue badge to people with mental health conditions, which was launched in September 2013.
She said:
“my son refuses to walk at any time; unpredictably he also throws tantrums if we are in a strange place with loud noise. We live in an extremely busy place and there is never any parking at the Doctor’s or at the shops. My son has irrational fears; he does not speak, so we cannot calm him by talking things through. He literally needs to be handled very physically to stop him either running away into the road or refusing to walk at all.”
I hope that those case examples convey the difference that having a blue badge would make to the lives of those families, and how difficult their lives are made without them.
As I mentioned, Transport Scotland launched a consultation two years ago to gauge views on whether the blue badge criteria should be extended to include people who have, as a result of a diagnosed mental condition, little or no awareness of traffic or its danger, and are likely to compromise their safety or the safety of others as a result. The analysis of the results was published a full year later in December 2014. There was overwhelming support for such an extension by the 30 groups, individuals and organisations that submitted their views to the consultation. They included Renfrewshire Council, Orkney Council, the National Autistic Society Scotland and Advocacy Western Isles. The list is on the public record.
I understand that the Scottish Government has this month set up a working group to consider whether the blue badge scheme should be extended. We very much welcome that development. However, we cannot ignore the fact that it has been nearly two years since the call for evidence and the consultation began. The time to act is now.
Wales, of course, has led the way on the issue. In December last year, it extended eligibility so that people who, as a result of mental disorder, are unable to follow the route of a familiar journey without the assistance of another person, will automatically receive a blue badge.
As Down’s Syndrome Scotland has said, the longer it takes to address the issue, the more families will struggle to cope with everyday activities. The issue is significantly affecting the quality of life of children and adults with Down’s syndrome and autism throughout the country, including young Aiden, who has gone nearly 10 months without his blue badge.
I hope that the Scottish Government’s working group will agree to a change in the eligibility criteria and to implementing that change as quickly as is realistically possible so that families, such as the McLevys, can go about their everyday lives more easily. I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say on the matter. I hope that he will agree that progress should be made quickly.
17:12
I thank Duncan McNeil for bringing this important topic to the chamber. The member will recall that I was very much involved in blue badge issues through my member’s bill, the Disabled Persons’ Parking Badges (Scotland) Bill. At that time, we were looking at enforcement. We did not look at the eligibility criteria, but we ensured that reviews were part of the bill, so that local authorities had the power to make sure that reviews were carried out that met certain criteria.
I, too, have dealt with similar cases to the one that Mr McNeil mentioned, as I am sure MSPs in every constituency and region of Scotland have. I have had occasion to speak directly with families when a badge has been coming up for renewal. Their fear is that the badge will not be renewed, and there are several occasions on which that fear came true. My case was that of a young boy with autism who has, I think, well-recognised individual problems. His badge was refused because his benefits were no longer passported, because he did not receive the higher mobility rate of disability allowance. That decision was appealed. The appeal was assisted by a friend who worked in the local citizens advice bureau. Although that person was very articulate and understood the criteria and the forms, she was aware that the language that we use when we go through an appeal process needs to be highly specific to the appeal in order to be understood and to meet the criteria.
It is sometimes blatantly obvious that a blue badge is required. Often, a young person or even an adult with Down’s syndrome, autism or some other condition may not meet the walking criterion, but they still have a need for assistance and they still need to be able to have a parking space close to a facility—whether that is a doctor’s surgery or a leisure facility is irrelevant, to some extent—so that they do not have to walk through car parks or across very busy traffic junctions. That is why it is so important that we ask people to use a bit of common sense when they consider eligibility, and to look at the personal circumstances of each applicant.
When I promoted my bill, many people asked us to look at the blue badge criteria. That was outwith the scope of my bill, but it was an issue that I felt very strongly about, so I am delighted that Duncan McNeil has brought it to the chamber this evening.
17:16
I add my thanks to Duncan McNeil for bringing this important subject to the chamber for debate. The flexibility that the blue badge gives people who have mobility problems should not be underestimated, and the extension of the scheme to include passengers with disabilities means that drivers can take friends or family members to their desired location far more easily. Please excuse my voice—it is a bit croaky today.
The debate rightly focuses on Transport Scotland’s findings following its call for evidence on extending the scheme to include individuals with mental health conditions. Duncan McNeil’s motion makes explicit mention of Down’s syndrome, and I agree with him that parents in particular face huge challenges in everyday life with children who have the condition. Those challenges include, for example, having to park a long distance from shops on a high street that they intend to visit—never mind doctors’ surgeries.
Children with Down’s syndrome often do not have a full understanding of the dangers that are posed by traffic, and sometimes have a tendency to wander off or to be unfamiliar with routes. It should be emphasised and recognised that, just because a child can walk ably, it does not mean that he or she is not a danger to themselves or others when it comes to passing vehicles. A blue badge would help to address those concerns by allowing parents to park outside, or as near as they can, to the venue that they wish to visit.
The motion also refers to the discrepancy between the assessment process for under-16-year-olds, including young children and teenagers, and people who are over 16. Although I support the Conservative Government’s welfare reforms to tackle the culture of dependency, sadly one of the knock-on effects of such measures has been that changes in the rate that is paid in mobility allowance for children with Down’s syndrome has led to changes in the issuing of blue badges. I believe that that anomaly needs to be rectified as soon as possible, and I would support Transport Scotland’s working group investigating how we can close that loophole, which connects benefits and parents having blue badges for their children with Down’s syndrome.
Of course, Down’s syndrome is not the only condition that should be covered by the blue badge scheme. Autism alone affects nearly 5,000 people in Edinburgh, including approximately 850 children. Duncan McNeil has already spoken of his constituent, Aiden McLevy from Greenock, who has Down’s syndrome. I would like to mention one of my constituents, Owain Martin, whose nine-year-old son Theo has autism and has recently lost his blue badge as a result of changes in assessment. Although Theo can walk 40m, which is the new criterion for assessing eligibility, that does not take into account the fact that, when his father parks, he can no longer use a disabled space. Often, that means that he has to park some distance from their home in Edinburgh, with the consequence that Theo’s hand has to be held at all times. Children with autism often have sensory overload issues that can lead to them having what I understand is termed a meltdown, which is caused by noises and sounds such as those from vehicles. As Owain said to me, “You have to hold on to him the whole time, because if you turn round for a second, he’ll be off.”
Accordingly, I reiterate that this is an important debate that I hope Transport Scotland will take note of in its working group. Although we are all conscious that there are incidences of the blue badge scheme being abused by unscrupulous individuals, it makes perfect sense to me that the blue badge scheme should not be restricted to people with mobility issues. People with mental health problems, especially children, should not be discriminated against. I therefore wholly support the motion.
17:20
I congratulate my colleague Duncan McNeil on securing this important debate to highlight the need for the Scottish Government to extend the eligibility criteria for the blue badge scheme.
I take the opportunity to highlight the case of one of my constituents, Philip, who has autism. He is in his early 20s and has been told that he is not eligible for a blue badge. He was told that the assessment must be based on his walking functionality, not on his autism, yet his autism means that he is unable to negotiate traffic and has little sense of danger. He cannot go anywhere without his parents, who moved up to Scotland from Yorkshire to make a better life for their family but now are virtually trapped indoors. Sadly, as a result of the blue badge decision, my constituent has also had to give up a work placement that he secured.
Philip has been told that he will qualify when he has moved on to personal independence payments, but he is in one of the last groups to be moved over, so he just has to wait. No indication has been given of how long his wait will be. He has already been waiting for more than a year. That is simply unacceptable.
As members will be aware, the Welsh Government has already extended the blue badge criteria in Wales to individuals who cannot follow the route of a familiar journey without another person. If my constituent lived in Wales, he would be automatically entitled to a blue badge now. I know that the Scottish Government has established a working group to look at the issue, but progress has been too slow and the situation is undermining people’s quality of life.
As other colleagues have mentioned, having a blue badge is not just about being able to get parked. It plays a vital role in helping people to overcome the many barriers and struggles that they face every day in accessing jobs, services, leisure and social opportunities. Without a blue badge, many people such as my constituent Philip are being forced to become prisoners in their homes.
Duncan McNeil’s motion highlights that children under 16 are being assessed more strictly than those over 16; many no longer qualify for the higher rate of mobility allowance, which triggers a blue badge. Many parents and carers are now faced with walking long distances with their children. For the parent of an autistic child, as Cameron Buchanan said, that can be a challenge, especially when a child is prone to running off or having sudden meltdowns because of sensory overload or when a child has no perception of risk or danger. There is often little public sympathy or support. As a result, many families with children on the autism spectrum feel isolated and cut off from family and friends, from the wider community and from the activities that many of us enjoy and take for granted with our children.
I read an article in The Scotsman last week by Sophie Pilgrim of Kindred, which supports families with children and young people who have additional needs. She summed up the difference that a blue badge makes very well. She said:
“Getting a Blue Badge restores some of the ‘normal’ to family life ... Parking up right next to the shop door can make that dreaded shopping trip just manageable. If you have a child with ASD, you will know that any trip out has to be planned with an ‘exit strategy’ ... With a Blue Badge, at least you don’t have to walk for miles dragging a screaming, hyperventilating child to the wonder of passers-by.”
It is time for the Scottish Government to recognise the plight not just of my constituent and of other constituents that members have talked about but of families up and down Scotland. It is time to act. The longer it takes to get this sorted, the longer families will have to struggle to cope.
Will the member take an intervention?
No—I have no time. I am sorry.
Families are struggling to cope with day-to-day activities, which affects the quality of life and wellbeing of children in Dunfermline and across Scotland, so it is time for Scottish ministers to follow the lead of Wales. I look forward to hearing what the Minister for Transport and Islands has to say.
Extending blue badge eligibility would transform the opportunities that are available to my constituent, and it would help to transform the lives of many families across Scotland who have children with conditions such as Down’s syndrome and autism. The time for action is now. I am grateful to Duncan McNeil for bringing this important issue to the Parliament.
17:24
I highlight from my register of interests the fact that I am a member of the advisory committee for the National Autistic Society Scotland, in case I stray into areas that relate to it.
It is really difficult not to bring my personal circumstances into such debates, but I will try my best not to. We have never held or sought a blue badge for my son, so I will not speak from that perspective. However, I know of many individuals who have held a badge or sought to apply for one.
The points about the challenges that are faced by families with a child or an adult on the autistic spectrum were well made. It is often taken for granted how difficult and challenging it can be for such families to plan a family trip or day out, or even a trip to the supermarket. Although it is possible to use parent and child parking spaces at supermarkets, if they all happen to be full, families can find themselves parking a great distance away from the store. The child might have no concept of danger and be liable to escape. Those who have spent time with families with a child on the autistic spectrum will know that many such children are expert escapologists and that negotiating a car park can be a fraught and challenging experience. Many people would not have cognisance of that.
Will the member take an intervention?
I will give way to my friend Dennis Robertson.
I am grateful to my friend and colleague Mark McDonald.
Mr McDonald mentioned families. If a person has an autistic child or a child with Down’s syndrome, it is often more than just that child who has to be considered on trips; others have to be considered, as well. We are therefore looking at not just the child’s safety but maybe that of other family members.
I take on board entirely my colleague’s point. I have constituents who have three or four children, one of whom has a complex disability. That means that they often face difficulties in planning trips, for example. They cannot always give their full attention to the child who is on the autistic spectrum or the child with Down’s syndrome if they have to look after other siblings at the same time. That point is well made.
I highlight the case of Glyn Morris, who is a good friend of mine. He lives in Moray and is an ambassador for the National Autistic Society Scotland. He has a 16-year-old son named Gregor. He says that Gregor’s disability makes having a badge not a luxury but a necessity. Gregor’s focus is on getting to where he is going, which means that he has no regard for things such as traffic or people he may come into contact with. Although Gregor might be able to follow the route of a familiar journey unassisted, he might not be able to do so safely. We need to make that important distinction. The question is not just about an individual’s ability to walk unaided but about their ability to do so safely.
The point about the extension of the criteria was well made. I note the evidence that was received from the National Autistic Society Scotland. Perhaps the terminology is crude in its application. Referring to cognitive difficulties might be a better way of expressing something, because many would consider referring to a mental disorder or mental health impairment to be a crude way to describe Down’s syndrome or autism. Perhaps that needs to be looked at.
I will flag up one other thing, which probably sits outwith the debate but is worthy of consideration. I refer to the situation that Cameron Buchanan described and the impact of welfare reform. In particular, the reduction from 50m to 20m when it comes to the higher rate of mobility allowance could exclude a number of individuals. The MS Society Scotland has highlighted the potential impact of that. Following the consultation, the minister may want to turn his attention to that issue, because if that follows through into how people are assessed, individuals who currently qualify for a blue badge under the 50m regulation may find their blue badge being taken away from them, as the 20m regulation might not necessarily class them as people who require the higher rate of mobility allowance. I flag that up as a potential future consideration.
17:29
I thank Duncan McNeil for securing today’s debate.
In my many years as a Glasgow city councillor, many constituents came to me and questioned the fairness of the blue badge scheme. Historically, assessment of eligibility has been based on a person’s mobility and their ability to walk a certain distance.
The consultation on broadening the eligibility criteria to include people with mental health issues was welcome. The consultation responses show overwhelming support for broader criteria that look at a person’s ability to walk safely and independently, rather than just their ability to walk a certain distance. I whole-heartedly support any changes that will make the system fairer, extend it to those who require blue badges and enhance the quality of life of people who need badges most.
Down’s Syndrome Scotland highlights the unfair and unacceptable anomalies between children aged under 16 receiving disability living allowance and those receiving personal independence payments. One of the reasons why the Smith commission recommended the devolution of powers over benefits for people who are ill or disabled—which is welcome—was so that the Scottish Parliament could identify and respond to such issues.
I have one note of caution. When we broaden the criteria to include a wide range of disabilities and conditions, local authority staff will need the skills and ability to fairly assess the need for blue badges. There is little point in making the scheme more accessible if the law is still applied in an ad hoc manner.
Local authorities need to ensure that sufficient safeguards are in place to prevent the abuse of the blue badge scheme. On occasion I have seen blue badges used by relatives or friends, rather than the person for whom the badge was intended. I know that a lot of authorities are going through a lot of pain to address that important issue.
I take on board Hanzala Malik’s point. Does he accept that, if we are to widen the criteria to include individuals on the autistic spectrum, for example, we need proper awareness raising so that those people are not incorrectly identified as blue badge abusers? Although they do not appear to have a disability, they nonetheless require that support.
I take on board what Mark McDonald says. He is right. I would not want to embarrass anybody who needs a blue badge.
I have no hesitation in supporting the principle of widening the scheme. However, staff in the various authorities need the appropriate training to handle the situation.
When someone parks in a disabled bay, I do not want to see them opening their vehicle door, falling out of their vehicle and crawling to wherever they are going. I am making the point that the badges should be used appropriately, and people need appropriate training to carry out their duties. That is important.
17:33
I express my gratitude to Duncan McNeil for bringing an important matter before Parliament. It has focused minds and allowed me an opportunity to update Parliament.
It is right that we deliver a scheme that is focused and therefore does not become overwhelmed and ineffective, and one that is targeted to those that it can support. All members’ contributions have enlightened us on that point.
I will say something by way of an apology to Dennis Robertson and Mark McDonald, who raised the specific issue of terminology and language, on which I agree with them. I would not usually use some of the terminology that I will use in my contribution, but it hangs on in the legislation. For accuracy I have to use terms such as “mental disorder”, which is not how I would describe such conditions. If you will forgive me, Presiding Officer, I will do that for the sake of legislative competency, but I do not underestimate the sensitivity of the subject.
The blue badge scheme and the parking concessions that it provides help people across the country to access essential, lifeline services, many of which would be unobtainable without the use of a badge. There are approximately 228,000 blue badges on issue in Scotland. In managing the scheme, we must ensure that badges are available to those who are most in need and that badge holders can park where they need to. That is why the Scottish Government supported Dennis Robertson’s bill that became the Disabled Persons’ Parking Badges (Scotland) Act 2014, which came into force earlier this year. The act focuses on enforcement and the circumstances in which we can clamp down on fraud and misuse. It demonstrates our continued support to ensure that the scheme is best serving those who genuinely need to use it.
For clarity, it is important to set out the different ways in which someone can be eligible for a blue badge. A badge can be issued either without assessment, which generally happens where the applicant receives a passport from another benefit such as DLA or PIP, or following assessment by a local authority.
The scheme has gone through a significant reform process over the past few years with, as members have described, eligibility assessments that are conducted by local authorities focusing on those who are unable or virtually unable to walk. At the same time, independent mobility assessments were introduced, a Great Britain-wide database was set up and enforcement powers were strengthened through last year’s act.
Some of the most significant changes to the scheme happened as a result of the UK Government’s welfare reform changes, as Cameron Buchanan mentioned. When the personal independence payment was introduced to replace disability living allowance, the Scottish Government set out to maintain eligibility, as far as possible, for those who previously received the higher-rate mobility component of DLA. In 2013, we introduced regulations so that anyone who is awarded PIP at 12 points for the “planning and following journeys” activity or eight points or more for the “moving around” activity will be eligible. However, as the different benefits have different assessment criteria, it was not entirely possible to achieve parity. That is why, in 2014, we took the additional step of ensuring that those who were previously in receipt of a lifetime or indefinite HM Revenue and Customs DLA award will remain eligible.
Alongside that suite of reforms, we commissioned the call for evidence that Mr McNeil mentioned in order to look at extending the scheme to include people who, as a result of a diagnosed mental disorder, have little or no awareness of the danger from traffic. The aim of the consultation was to gather views on the viability of extending the scheme—as members have requested—and on whether an extension is needed, and to identify challenges to implementing such an extension. An analysis of the responses to the consultation has been published and it shows support for the scheme. It is clear that extending the scheme would bring benefits to people with a range of mental disorders and have a practical and positive effect on both individuals and their immediate family and carers by decreasing the level of anxiety.
As has been described, an issue that was raised through the call for evidence is the potential discrepancy in eligibility for under-16s. Although PIP is replacing DLA for people aged between 16 and 64, DLA remains in place for under-16s. As the benefits are assessed in different ways, there is a potential inconsistency, which mostly affects those with mental health conditions, between different routes into the system.
As a result of the issues that were raised through the call for evidence, a working group was set up that comprises local authority blue badge administration staff, health and social care professionals and representatives from disability organisations. The group is reviewing the evidence that has been gathered, considering the barriers that relate to the extension of eligibility and seeking to identify ways to overcome them with the aim of ensuring that there is, as far as possible, parity between those who are assessed via local authorities and those who passport from other benefits. The working group held its first meeting in July and the second is planned for next week. The group needs to ensure that any changes do not have an adverse impact on other parts of the scheme, and I look forward to hearing its recommendations in due course.
I thank members for their speeches, which will also help to inform that work. I have not had an intervention, which I was anticipating, so I advise members that that work will be—
Will the minister take an intervention?
We should be careful what we wish for in this place.
I thank the minister. I hope that the minister, in setting out a timetable, will take on board the results of the consultation and maybe consider how cognitive assessments might be included in the context of eligibility for badges. I hope that the minister acknowledges that we are not seeking blue badge eligibility for every person with Down’s syndrome or every person with autism. A cognitive assessment would have to take account of a person’s safety when unescorted. I sincerely hope that the minister will be able to tell us whether the Disabled Persons’ Parking Badges (Scotland) Act 2014 can be amended and perhaps put a timeline on that process.
I am grateful for the intervention, because the member posed the question that I was going to answer, which will also be of assistance to Mr McNeil—I will respond to the question on timescale, as well. We can debate how long it has taken us to get to this point, but what is important is the progress that we can make.
Everyone who is eligible might not take up the opportunity to apply for a blue badge, but we want to be as supportive as we can be of people who want to do so. On the timescale, I understand that the working group should have concluded its work by November. My commitment to the Parliament is that I will take any relevant legislative approach as soon as I can do after that. It might be possible to make changes through guidelines, without the requirement for legislation—I repeat “might”; I need to seek further guidance on that. If that is the case, I will act quickly to deliver the change as effectively, efficiently and quickly as I can do.
Thank you all for taking part in this important debate.
Meeting closed at 17:41.Previous
Decision Time