Accessibility

The consultation paper set out that previous feedback showed that some equality groups face additional challenges when accessing and using ferry services.

Responses to Question 15 by respondent type are set out in Table 19 below.

Organisations	Yes	No	Total
Community Council or Development Trust	6	0	6
Farming or land management organisation	3	0	3
Ferry Board, Committee or Group	6	0	6
Haulage company or representative body	1	1	2
Local Authority or HSCP	3	0	3
Public Body	2	0	2
Tourism business	2	1	3
Trade Union	1	0	1
Transport Partnership	2	0	2
Voluntary sector organisation	1	0	1
Other business or representative body	2	0	2
Total organisations	29	2	31
% of organisations	94%	6%	Not Applicable
Individuals	314	39	353
% of individuals	89%	11%	Not Applicable
All respondents	343	41	384
% of all respondents	89%	11%	Not Applicable

A majority of respondents – 89% of those who answered the question – would support a regular accessibility audit taking place with accessibility groups such as Mobility Access Committee Scotland (MACS), with the aim of improving accessibility at ports and onboard vessels.

Around 220 respondents made a comment at Question 15, including a Public Body respondent noting that they are committed to working with service providers to improve accessibility and support services for disabled passengers at ports and onboard vessels. They went on to suggest Disabled Access Panels, local to ferry terminals, should be involved in accessibility audits. They also gave examples of how this has worked to date, including the Oban Access Panel auditing cross modal connections from Oban bus and train stations to the ferry terminal and the Access Panel Orkney working with NorthLink. There were also calls for:

• MACS to be involved at an early stage as regards vessel design (access, egress and on-board) and port infrastructure (especially at ferry slip locations) to ensure that regulations and expectations are met.
• The accessibility needs of each ferry dependent community to be made evident through a rigorous Island Community Impact Assessment for that community.
• The new contract to include clauses to ensure that any accessibility issues should be addressed within an appropriate timescale.

Other respondents noted the importance of accessibility to delivering a lifeline service that meets the needs of the entire community, but also the potential of being seen as an accessible tourism option for older people. Most other comments were focused on what could be done to improve accessibility, with the most frequently made suggestions related to boarding arrangements and the design of ports.

Boarding-related suggestions included:

• Considering the movement of luggage; suggestions included providing separate luggage transfer facilities, equivalent to the service provided to air passengers, on the larger vessels.
• Installing better gangways, ramps and lifts.
• Making foot passenger lifts mandatory at all ports and ensuring that lifts are well maintained and always operational.

There were also references to repairs to lifts being an urgent action and appropriate accessibility as a condition of service for vessels.

In relation to ports, there were calls for a focus on removing physical barriers to people with reduced mobility to enable walking or wheeling to ferry terminals, and a Transport Partnership respondent commented that Regional Transport Partnerships and Local Authorities would be well placed to support addressing this barrier. They suggested that an early action could be to undertake focused audits of access to ferry terminals following the methodology developed for the HITRANS Active Travel Masterplans.

Other port and vessel-related suggestions included:

• Ensuring the next generation of small ferries are fully accessible for wheelchair users.
• Improving toilet and waiting room facilities.
• Dedicated spaces on vessels, including providing facilities for people with a neurodiversity, such as quiet areas.

Other suggestions included improving approaches to identifying and supporting those who need assistance. One proposal was for dedicated training for nominated staff on every shift to increase the skilled provision of ferry transport services for passengers with mobility problems, including wheelchair users. Other ideas included:

• Offices opening early enough for accessibility issues to be resolved before departure.
• Staff assisting wheelchair users up and down ramps and slipways and offering assistance with carrying luggage if needed.
• Ensuring the appropriate support for lone travellers who have mobility issues.

There was also a call for the new booking system and information on travel alerts and notices to recognise that not everyone has access to, or can manage electronically relayed messages, particularly the elderly.

Finally, it was suggested that the value of smaller passenger ferries and workboats to improve accessibility needs to be recognised, but that small boat operators will find it too expensive, or impractical, to comply fully with one-size-fits-all regulations.