Dear Transport Scotland,

I understand that the Scottish government contributed £60 million to the commissioning of the new Caledonian Sleeper stock.

Caledonian Sleeper have confirmed that despite provision of an en suite toilet and shower on board in some cabins, there will not be any accessible shower facilities available for disabled people, en-suite or otherwise.

This is a great disappointment to me, and will prevent me from travelling.

This is also an access issue for disabled people in general. Many disabled people's impairments, including mine, mean that they need showers more than non-disabled people. The same impairments mean that it is much more effort to use showers in stations - getting dressed and undressed, and dried and all the rest of it, is a massive effort, logistically and otherwise. Going direct from bed to a shower then back onto the bed to get dried and undressed cuts out so much of this.

The PRM-TSI or RVAR don't mandate accessible showers, but they are the minima, and it is a great disappointment that accessible showers will not be provided. It feels discriminatory and has the effect of preventing me travelling on this service, which I was so looking forward to.

Transport Scotland, the Scottish Government, the ORR, DFT and so on are subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty, which obliges bodies to have due regard to advance equality of opportunity between people with the protected characteristic of disability, and those that don't; and similarity to eliminate discrimination against disabled people. Given the substantial investment of £60 million of the £100 million cost of these new carriages, all involved should have considered the impact on disabled people of all elements of the design and services of the new carriages.

Please provide me with the recorded information held by yourselves that demonstrate the consideration of accessible shower facilities on the new train, the importance of such to disabled people, and the process by which it was decided not to put in an accessible shower.

If you are considering an exemption, another public body would be better placed to respond or you consider that a differently formulated request is more likely to result in provision of more relevant information, please exercise your duty to provide advice and assistance to me in better formulating my request.

Yours faithfully,

Doug Paulley

Dear Transport Scotland,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Transport Scotland's handling of my FOI request 'Wheelchair accessible showers on Caledonian Sleeper'.

You have employed an exemption which I don't think is applicable and your consideration of the Public Interest Test was too cursory, in my opinion.

Your reliance on S36(2) Breach of Confidence is spurious in my opinion. I’m far from convinced disclosure would constitute an actionable breach, and you merely assert that it would, without explaining why. Also it is generally a defence to an action if the discloser can show that it was in the public interest, so although it is an absolute FOISA exemption, I’d expect you to consider this public interest point.

I don't understand your attempted use of the s33 exemption. s33(2)(b) only applies where the substantial prejudice is to an “administration” (ie a government, per s28) but you don’t mention an administration in your response. Further, your consideration of the public interest test is cursory - hardly any factors in favour are cited.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...

Yours faithfully,

Doug Paulley