|
|||||||||||||||||
SDEF Newsletter No.14 -�July 2004 |
<back> | ||||||||||||||||
TRIBUTE
TO THE LATE MISS ELMA MITCHELL, M.B.E., WHO DIED ON�
It was with great
sadness that the death of our Convenor, Miss Elma Mitchell, M.B.E., was
announced at the Access Panels Meeting on Monday, 8th March 2004,
with the following words:-
�
Not
“How did she die?”�
But “How did she
live?”
Not
“What did she gain?”� But
“What did she give?”
Not
“What was her station?”�
But “Had she a
heart?”
And
“How did she play her God-given part?”
�
Not
“What was her shrine?”� Not
“What was her creed?”
But
“Had she befriended those really in need?”
Not
“What did the piece in the newspaper say?”
But
“How many were sorry when she passed
away?”
�
Was
she ever ready with a word of good cheer
To
bring back a smile or banish a tear?
These
are the units to measure the worth
Of
a woman as a lady, regardless of birth.
�
These words surely
summed up Elma’s contribution to life more than any others could.
Those of us who attended
her cremation and heard the wonderful tribute paid by the Rev. Alex
Mitchell, B.D., realised that we had lost a valuable friend and that her
passing would affect the whole disability movement for a long time.
Elma had been diagnosed
with a progressive illness at an early age and her life story is one of
courage and resilience in the face of everything that came her way.�
She was supported by the love and care of devoted parents and it was
plain for all to see that doors didn’t close for Elma, they only opened.�
She was an able scholar at school and held an exemplary position in
business as a secretary.
Elma and her colleagues
set up Dunfermline Forum on Disability, and one only has to read the end
results of some of the projects undertaken, to realise the commitment
involved.� She was awarded the
M.B.E. for this work.
In 1995, Elma became
involved with the aspiration to have a Scottish Forum on Disability, and was
one of the founder members of the steering group.�
Her aim was to make the world a better place for people with
disabilities and she gave unstintingly of her time and energy.�
Through all our bad patches she inspired us to keep going without any
thought of self.
When the new Parliament
Building is finally opened we will be remembering that Elma had a hand in
the access provisions there.� She
was the first non-M.S.P. to be invited to be Vice-Convenor of the
Cross-Party Group on Disability.� This
was all due to the high esteem in which she was held.
At her service, we were
left with a picture of Elma sitting by the Rhine, while her carers went
shopping.� This episode was to
leave us with a lasting memory of the lady who played her God-given part.��
Note:�
A full transcript of the service at Dunfermline can be obtained from
the SDEF office.
***
THE
SCOTTISH DISABILITY EQUALITY FORUM
A conference was held at
Erskine in September 1995, called “The Empowerment of Disabled People”
and attended by service users, service providers and local authorities.�
Three hundred people attended this conference and strong links were
made among several disability bodies.
In December 1995 two
members of Kilmarnock Forum, who were also office bearers of Strathclyde
Forum on Disability, had a vision for an all-Scotland disability group and
wrote to a great many disability organisations - around five hundred
organisations.
Once interest was
established, a Steering Group of interested parties was set up, namely
Lothian Coalition of Disabled People, Aberdeen Action on Disability,
Disability Alliance in the Scottish Highlands, Nithsdale Coalition of
Disabled People, Stewartry Coalition of Disabled People, Dunfermline Forum
on Disability and Strathclyde Forum on Disability.
A letter dated 18.7.96,
which is on file, from the then Scottish Office to Ms. Jean Dunlop states:
“I refer to my letter
of 13.5.96 and am now in a position to respond to your request for support
to facilitate an inaugural meeting to set up a national forum on disability.�
I am happy, therefore, to make �1000 available towards the cost of
the inaugural meeting.� I do,
however, see a need for your organisation to work closely with ‘Disability
Scotland’ to get the initiative off the ground.�
Therefore, I suggest that ‘Disability Scotland’ provides ongoing
support to service the national forum.
Please keep me informed
so that I can arrange for the money to be released to your organisation.
(Signed) Gavin
Anderson”
�
Arrangements were made
for the Inaugural Conference of The Scottish Disability Equality Forum , at the
Scottish Office, Edinburgh, on Wednesday 5th November, 1997.
There were about seventy
delegates from all over Scotland at what became a rather heated day.�
First, there were those who did not want to work with Disability
Scotland and a number of delegates who were not aware of the work that had
been done by the Steering Group and had not seen the draft constitution.�
There were those who were calling for an independent body to be
Secretariat of the new Forum.
In the final summing-up,
it was clear that the wish of the majority was that Disability Scotland be
the lead agent in the establishment of the Forum and that the Steering Group
be re-convened and extended and the Constitution finalised.
The establishment of the
Scottish Disability (Equality) Forum will go forward and its ultimate
success will be of lasting benefit to people with disability in Scotland.
Following the Conference
nominations were sought and the Steering Group extended to fifteen members.�
A suggested date for the launch of the Forum was 01.04.98 which
proved to be unachievable.� The
extended Steering Group was established on 10.02.98 and the first meeting
scheduled for 20.03.98.
The Constitution was
completed by May 1999 and the findings of the Steering Group were circulated
and members were invited to vote on the proposals.�
This resulted (in September 1999) in a clear mandate to establish a
Scottish Forum to finalise the constitution and to support Disability
Scotland’s role as Secretariat.
The voting results
were as follows:-� (sixty four
groups responded)
1.�
To see a Scottish Forum established -����������������������������������������������
100%
2.�
To support the draft constitution in principle -������������������������������������
87.5%
3.�
Support a Forum with Disability Scotland acting as Secretariat
The above was discussed
at a meeting on Tuesday 30th November 1999 in Glasgow.�
At this meeting an interim committee was formed to consider
membership, to send out application forms and to arrange a meeting in
Edinburgh for 15th March 2000.
Miss Elma Mitchell,
M.B.E., was appointed Convenor, (a position she held ‘till her untimely
death in March 2004), and a Management Committee formed.
A letter from the
Convenor, dated 4th May 2000 states, “We feel it is essential
that policy and important decisions be made at grass roots level and that
the wider membership feels it is involved at the earliest stage”.
A letter from Disability
Scotland, dated July 2000, re their financial suggestions was short-lived
when a press release on 8th September 2000 revealed that
Disability Scotland had a cash crisis.�
This could have spelled the end of S.D.E.F. but for the dogged
determination of the newly formed Management Committee which was not
prepared to let this happen.
So we entered a period
of struggle to survive.� With no
money and nowhere to meet it was dedication that kept us going.�
It was then 27th September 2000 that Elma arranged a
meeting with the Equalities Unit of the Scottish Executive.�
Her comment that until we had money of our own we were strangled and
our real work couldn’t progress.� We
appealed to our membership if they would be willing to give a ‘one off’
donation.� This gave us a small
income for eventualities.� Finding
a meeting place was impossible (a room could cost �40 to �60), but we had
no money.� Elma’s letter of 16th
September highlighted just how difficult it was.�
However, comment to a City Councillor in Aberdeen resulted in her
arranging a room for us at C.O.S.L.A. so that our meeting with Yvonne
Strachan of the Equalities Unit could go ahead (27th September
2000).� The Management Committee
gave unstintingly of its time and resources, paying all travel expenses etc.
At all times we had you,
our members, in mind and our resolve to do your will never changed.�
S.D.E.F. was there for you and it was you who made the trials
worthwhile.
With the support of
S.C.V.O. we were able to go forward, so, as we neared the end of their
contract, we were in a position to stand alone.�
Funding was obtained.� We
moved toward becoming a Company Limited by Guarantee and became the Umbrella
Group for Access Panels.
The S.D.E.F. Board of
Directors is there to serve you, so we need to know what you want us to do.
The reason for this
potted history of S.D.E.F. at this time is a further tribute to Elma
Mitchell, but for whom we may never have survived since those far away days
of 1995.
�
A
NOTE FROM THE EDITOR
First, I must apologise
for the lateness of this edition of� “Open
Door”.��� I hope you
will find something of interest to you in its content .
Following the Access
Panels’ Conference the posts for the additional staff to service the
Access Panels, have been advertised and we are in the process of arranging
interviews, in consultation with representatives from Access Panels.
Our projects are
progressing and some should soon be completed.��
We have our Staff to thank for this.�
There is always work to be done on our Business Plan which needs
monitoring for ourselves and the Scottish Executive.
We are represented on
ReTSAG (Wheelchairs),� B.E.R.G.
(Built Environment Group of D.R.C.), Cross-Party Group on Disability and the
setting up of Access Audit Training in conjunction with Heriot-Watt
University, to name but a few of the things that are keeping your Directors
busy.
We,
in turn, would like to know what you, our Members, are doing and a
Newsletter can only succeed if we have input from you.��
No matter how small or how big your project is, please let us know.��
It might just inspire somebody to do something new.
�
Lynn
Waddell - Disability Nurse Advisor
Lynn is a married to
Colin, a police sergeant with Central Scotland Police Force, and has a
nineteen year old son, Colin.
She is a Disability
Nurse Specialist, working within NHS Forth Valley.�
The Disability Service addresses the needs of patients and staff in
fifty seven medical practices and twelve hospitals and advises the
contracted services.� Her role
has featured on the BBC “See Hear” programme and she has been on the
radio on several occasions.� Being
brought up within a profoundly deaf family Lynn has never known a time when
she could not sign.�
Lynn teaches at both
Stirling and Queen Margaret University on Disability issues and worked on a
consultancy basis at Carstairs State Hospital and NHS Education for
Scotland.� Lynn also advises on
the Scottish Executive Physical Disability Steering Group and is currently
on placement to the Scottish Executive Health Department to work with the
Disability Rights Commission to develop the current “Fair for All”
model.
She is a registered
nurse, lip speaker, deaf blind guide communicator, CACDP Tutor in Deaf
Awareness and Communication Tactics and has completed several courses with
the RNIB.� She also recently
passed with distinction her “Universal Accessibility Auditing Certificate
of Competence” awarded by Caledonian University.
In April 2004 Lynn’s
guidelines for midwives were published by the RNID and National Childbirth
Trust in their recent book on “Pregnancy and Birth” a Guide for Deaf
Women.
�
Honours
& Awards
1995/96
3M Community Nurse of the year for UK
This was in recognition
of the work Lynn achieved within Forth Valley to enable people with a
hearing impairment to access services and the development of a service to
support care staff throughout Forth Valley.
November
2001 “Queens Nursing Institute Awards for Partnership Working”
This award was given in
recognition of the joint working with Central Scotland Police in ensuring
the wellbeing of people with a disability in their own homes.�
This was in particular in relation to “Bogus Callers”.�
Lynn and officers from Central Scotland Police designed an aide
memoir card and tape which has been used successfully by 5000 people within
the Central area.
Hobbies
& Interests
Lynn’s main activities
are reading, cooking, retail therapy and cleaning up at the back of her 19
year old son.
Lynn may be contacted
at:
Disability Nurse Advisor
Forth Valley Primary
Care NHS Trust
Old Denny Road
Larbert�
FK3 4SD�� -��
or Tel: 01324 404092
�
Poor
Service for an Air Passenger with a Disability
All providers of goods
and services should be sensitive to the needs of people with disabilities.�
The requirement, enshrined in the Disability Discrimination Act, is
particularly acute when the person has a mobility problem and the service
provider is in the travel business.� We
recently heard of an unfortunate incident involving an air passenger from
the Isle of Lewis.�
Catherine Aitken was due
to fly from Stornoway to Edinburgh with British Midland Airways (bmi) in
April this year.� She had made
the booking six months earlier and had asked for wheelchair assistance.�
On arrival at the airport, Catherine was delayed by the wheelchair
assistant being otherwise occupied and was the last to reach the departure
gate.� There was no steward at
the top of the airline steps to meet her and, when one appeared, she was
told she had been allocated a seat at the rear of the plane.�
Catherine states she, “then had to make a humiliating, embarrassing
and slow walk to the rear of the plane”, albeit many seats were vacant at
the front.
Having complained,
Catherine was told by bmi that she had informed the airline that she would
require wheelchair assistance to the plane, but that she would be fine to
make her own way along the aisle.� Naturally,
this is disputed as a matter of fact and logic.�
British Midland also states that, although there were many vacant
seats at the front of the plane, these wee reserved for Business Class
passengers, adding that, in their opinion, a seat closer to the toilet at
the rear would be more suitable for a disable person.
This seems odd, when bmi
was under the misapprehension that Catherine could negotiate the aisle
without difficulty.� However,
there seem to be more fundamental issues at stake.�
Firstly, on all the aspects of this unfortunate incident, the airline
should perhaps look again at its policies.
If assistance has been
requested, it should be available upon arrival and the individual should not
be discriminated against by being the last attended to.�
Appropriate allocation of seats should be reviewed:�
with all the Business Class seats currently at the front, people with
a range of disabilities are forced to walk to the rear, unless they can pay
for an upgrade� It would also be
reasonable, routinely to negotiate with passengers, at the booking stage,
whether a seat near the toilet is preferred.
Having contacted British
Midland Airways, SDEF can confirm that both the captain and stewards have
the discretion to allocate seating on an aircraft, including upgrades.�
It would surely have been in the interests of both the passenger and
the airline, in terms of its formal responsibilities and its customer
relations, to handle this episode with greater sensitivity.
�
Extract
from a Scottish Executive
Motion debated,�
That the Parliament
notes the difficulties experienced by people within local communities who
have secured disabled parking spaces outside their homes;�
deplores the fact that these spaces can become a focus of conflict
within communities where people seek to sue such a space, despite not having
a disabled parking badge;� notes
with equal dismay the figures published by the Baywatch campaign group that
show that over 20% of disabled parking bays in supermarket car parks are
being used by non-disabled drivers;� recognises
that the current legal position, which distinguishes between courtesy
parking spaces and those supported by traffic regulation orders, creates
problems for people with disabilities who need to rely on a designated
parking space outside their home’� appreciates,
in the case of car parks on private land such as those belonging to
supermarkets, the frustration of disabled drivers where the store management
appears reluctant to enforce its own parking policy;�
acknowledges that, for their part, some store managers are not clear
about their powers to compel drivers to move from specially designated bays;�
notes that this situation leaves supermarkets vulnerable to future
legal action under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (as amended);�
therefore believes that the Scottish Executive, local authorities and
all relevant agencies should work together to develop an awareness campaign
to highlight the rights of disabled people and to emphasise the
unacceptability of harassing those who have been allocated disable parking
spaces, and considers that, if a satisfactory solution cannot be found, the
possibility of legislating to address the problem and giving local
authorities the appropriate enforcement powers should be examined.
Mr.
Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab):�
I thank Johann Lamont for working with me to secure the debate.�
I will focus my speech on the problems that disabled drivers face in
private car parks and on the work that the Baywatch campaign has done.
Let me give an example.�
A young woman who is the primary carer for her mother came to me at a
surgery in Inverkip in my constituency.�
She told me that the highlight of her mother’s week was her outing
to the shops in Greenock - as soon as she was back in the house after one
trip, she was looking forward to the next. That is a simple pleasure, I am
sure members will agree, but it is made almost impossible to enjoy through
selfishness and indifference.� Fresh
from the young woman’s Herculean efforts to get her mother up and dressed,
they get to the shops only to find the disabled parking spaces filled with
the cars of perfectly able-bodied people.�
That is unacceptable, unless sheer bone idleness is counted as a
disability.
When disabled drivers
and their carers make representations, they get a shrug from the car park
attendant or warm words, but no action from the store management.�
That is not a clever move.� Turning
a blind eye could leave stores facing legal action under the Disability
Discrimination Act 1995 - indeed; they are vulnerable to legal action now,
not just in October when the additional rules come into effect.
As every member here
tonight knows perfectly well, the case to which I have referred is not an
isolated one.� A survey
conducted by the campaign group Baywatch shows that the rate of abuse rose
from 18.5 per cent in January 2003 to nearly 21 per cent in January 2004.�
In other words, more than one in five disabled parking bays are being
used by non-disabled drivers.� Although
we might not like to admit it, we in Scotland are the laziest and most
selfish of the lot.� We abuse
the system at a rate of 27 per cent, whereas in Wales only 23 per cent of
bays are dishonestly occupied, and only 19 percent of bays are abused by the
far more considerate English.
A survey of more than
800 car parks that belong to the big four supermarkets throughout the United
Kingdom showed that in more than a third - 37 per cent - of stores
disabled people were unable to park in a designated space because of abuse
by non-badge holders.� All
supermarkets have seen an increase in abuse levels.�
People who complain to stores say that the response they receive has
worsened, with only 30 per cent saying that stores responded well to
complaints, compared with 32 per cent in 2003.
What can be done?�
First, the anger and frustration of disabled drivers and their carers
must be recognised, as must the severe impact that the abuse of disabled
parking bays has on their quality of life.�
Secondly, I ask for the minister’s help in getting all the
interested parties round the table to discuss the powers that are currently
on the statute book, how they can be used and by whom.�
Thirdly, will the minister assure me that, if those steps fail, we
will examine the possibility of extending the powers of local authorities to
allow parking attendants or environmental wardens to enforce parking
policies in private car parks?� It
is sad that we might need to stop appealing to people’s better nature and
to start appealing to their pockets, but if that is what it takes to make it
‘game over’ for the space invaders, that is what will have to happen.
Johann
Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab):�
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate.�
Our motions deal with designated parking spaces and the disregarding
of the needs of people with disabilities.�
Before going on to the substance of my speech, however, I will simply
mention two related issues that need to be considered - the blocking by
cars of step-down pavements and the abuse of parent-and-child spaces at
supermarkets, which can cause a lot of difficulties.
The misuse of designated
parking spaces and the abuse of people who have been deemed to be entitled
to disabled parking spaces reflect the discourtesy, antagonism and
intimidation that too often is the experience of ordinary people in our
communities.� In demanding
action on the matter, we reinforce our commitment to the creation and
sustenance of safe communities in which people can go about their business
free from harassment and intimidation.�
We should not see the issue as an isolated one;�
we should see it in the context of action against bullying and
intimidation in all its forms.
I will focus on
designated parking bays outside people’s homes, many of which are courtesy
bays that the local authority deems to be appropriately placed.�
Those spaces often do not have traffic regulation orders attached to
them, not least because of the nature of the process that is required to
establish such orders and the cost of enforcement.�
As someone who requires a bus bay to park in, I must confess that it
had never crossed my mind that an enforcement procedure might be required.�
In my innocence, I thought that, if a person was deemed to be
entitled to a space, they would simply be allowed to use it.�
I have been shocked by examples not only of spaces being used by
people who do not have a disability, but of people who are entitled to
spaces, being abused, insulted and intimidated by those who resent their
having such a space.
It is sometimes argued
that, because the system for securing a space is weak, that somehow
justifies abusing anyone who has one.� Fair
enough - if the system needs checking, that should be done, but the fact
that some people might be abusing the system does not justify berating
others in the street.� People
with disabilities should not have to negotiate their rights on the street.�
Some people feel that those who have secured a space have somehow got
one over on everyone else and have won a privilege, but the reality is that
no one aspires to a courtesy parking space or a blue badge -they are not a
privilege, but a recognition of need.� As
the mother of a disabled daughter said, if people want the parking space,
they can have the disability that goes with it.
Clearly, there is a
particular problem in parts of our cities where parking spaces are at a
premium, which can be used as a rationalisation of selfish behaviour.�
Of course, by definition, areas in which there are more cars than
space are the very areas where disabled spaces are important.�
If an able-bodied person cannot park beside their door, all that
happens is that they need to walk a little further, but if disabled spaces
are taken up, that is much more of a difficulty for people who have mobility
problems.� “ …”��������
What action should we
take?� As the motion says, we
need a hard-hitting, in-your-face campaign to challenge people’s laziness
and self-justification with clear messages about the consequences of their
actions for disabled people.� However,
as Duncan McNeil said, a campaign is not enough;�
it needs to be backed up with enforcement.�
As members will be aware, in other aspects of policy, I am in favour
of persuading first and taking hard action afterwards, but we must recognise
that there should be consequences.� I
am all in favour of winning hearts, but I will settle for hitting pockets.
Members have been
pursuing the issue for some time.� I
seek direct assurances from the minister that he will not simply reiterate
the current position, because that position is unacceptable.�
I urge him to confirm that hard and creative thinking will be done to
address what is a serious problem for people with disabilities.�
The existence of the problem diminishes us all in a society that
claims to be tolerant and fair,
The
Minister for Transport (Nicol Stephen):�
“ …”� My mother has
a disabled badge and I know that some incidents at disabled parking spaces
are disgraceful.� Humanity can
be seen at its worst - at is most selfish and greedy - in such
situations.
That most supermarkets
are now making parking spaces available for disabled people and parents is
good, but there are still significant shortages at some supermarkets.�
Mike Pringle highlighted some of his frustrations in that respect.
“ … “�
People must challenge their consciences and they must be challenged
to be more considerate.� Such
people are, in effect, preying on the weakest and most vulnerable people in
our society.� There are parking
spaces and for rules to try to support people with disabilities and make
more equal an unequal world.� If
Parliament or I, as the Minister for Transport, have any opportunity to
champion the cause of the disabled and of taking tougher action to enforce
such parking spaces, I am prepared to consider what must be done.
Duncan McNeil - who,
with Johann Lamont, is to be congratulated on lodging the motion -
challenged me earlier to try to pull together individuals and organisations
that have an interest in the matter and to do more.�
I am happy to say that I will do exactly that and will try to
approach supermarkets, local authorities, disabled users and disabled
users’ groups to discuss what more can be done with Baywatch to give the
issue a higher profile.
However, more than that
will be required.� We can
advertise from now until the cows come home and we can urge people to behave
more responsibly.� That will be
effective with perhaps 90 per cent or 95 per cent of people, but there will
be a core of 5 per cent who - because they are selfish - simply will not
respond to all the urging, advertising and highlighting of problems.�
As other members have said, such people will not respond positively
if they are challenged, whether by supermarket staff or by passing MSPs.�
I suppose that, at the end of the day, supermarkets exist to make
profits from selling their goods rather than to deal with such difficult
situations, but they could be encouraged to work with disabled groups and to
think about ways of doing more.
One of the problems is
that traffic regulation orders can be costly and time consuming to put in
place.� The Executive supports
strongly the use of traffic regulation orders by local authorities.�
We should make it clear that local authorities can put in place
traffic regulation orders in respect of supermarket car parks, but it is not
done because supermarkets do not ask for it and local authorities do not
regard it as being a priority.� That
would be one possible way ahead;� if
it were done, the Executive would support it strongly.
Road traffic regulation
orders are given statutory status by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984,
which is legislation on a reserved matter. �To
try to amend the regulations to make them more straightforward and give
local authorities blanket authority to introduce them in supermarket car
parks would require amendment of that legislation.�
Finding solutions will not always be straightforward, but I am happy
to approach the UK Government on the issue if that is what is required.�
The blue-badge scheme is a devolved matter.�
So far, we have tried to have an integrated UK-wide scheme, but if we
were to regard changes to that scheme as a priority, I would be willing to
consider introducing such changes in Scotland.
It has been mentioned
that some of the parking spaces outside people’s homes are often courtesy
spaces that are not covered by traffic regulation orders;�
the same is true of spaces in supermarket car parks. The co-operation
of the public in ensuring that those spaces are not used by people other
than blue-badge holders is important, and in many communities the space
outside an individual’s home is respected.�
Nevertheless, that is not always the case, and there can be fierce
arguments between neighbours about such spaces.�
I believe that we will, in time, have to do more legislatively to
ensure enforcement.� Under civil
law, owners of private car parks can fine drivers and remove their vehicles
if they are determined to take that course of action;�
however, many supermarkets do not wish to take such action against
individuals who are their customers.� Clamping
by supermarkets and others is not allowed under the law in Scotland.
I agree that the
Baywatch survey, which shows that more than 20 per cent of disabled parking
bays in supermarkets are being used by drivers who are not displaying blue
badges, highlights a big problem and a major concern.�
That is one of the reasons why I would be prepared to approach the
major supermarkets for their ideas on how the problem can be overcome.�
There was an early positive start from the supermarket groups and
early enthusiasm for the matter, but something needs to be done to refresh
the momentum and to get focus back on the issue.�
Increasingly, people - particularly disabled people - feel that
they are facing an uphill struggle.
The Executive has been
working directly with Baywatch to identify ways to improve public awareness.�
Following consultation with the Mobility and Access Committee for
Scotland, we are in early discussions with councils with a view to carrying
out pilot schemes that will examine the disabled parking problem and test
possible solutions.� If,
following this evening’s debate, members of Parliament want to suggest
possible solutions, or if they know of disabled groups that can suggest ways
ahead, I will be happy to put those suggestions to the group that I intend
to pull together.
I pledge to everyone
here tonight that I am prepared to write to the supermarkets, to disable
groups, to local councils and to others.�
If members believe that there are individuals with expertise in the
subject who should be involved, I would be pleased to receive that
information.� It is time we
started to campaign to raise the profile of the issue and give people some
hope that action will be taken.
We have already
introduced new legislation in Scotland.�
As recently as 1st January 2004 we gave police, traffic
wardens and local authority parking wardens the powers to inspect blue
badges� Those powers were aimed
at tackling the problem that has been aired this evening;�
abuse of the scheme by able-bodied people who are using badges that
are not their own, or who are forging or tampering with badges.�
Amazingly, all those things happen;�
people forge, or tamper with, blue badges.
“ …”�
Executive will continue to take the issue seriously and, following
today’s debate, that we will do something about it.
List of contributors to
the debate:� Mr. Kenny MacAskill
(Lothians) (SNP)
�����������������������������������������������
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD)
�����������������������������������������������
Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green)
�����������������������������������������������
Mrs. Nanette Milne (N.E.Scotland) (Con)
�����������������������������������������������
Trish Godman (W.Renfrewshire) (Lab)
A copy of the full
report is available from the SDEF office.
�
PENFIELD
Countryside
Enjoyment for all
If visiting Dumfries and
Galloway, why not visit the Penfield Project, a Centre of Excellence in
countrywide access for all.
Watch out on the A75 for
Penninghame Pond near Newton Stewart, and Whitefield Loch near Glenluce.
See
www.penfieldproject.netfirms.com
Our
Rights Our Choices
On 21st April
2004, an event was held at Dynamic Earth, Edinburgh to launch the document,
“Our Rights, Our Choices”.� This
came at the end of a year in which SDEF had participated on a steering group
looking at the additional problems faced by people with disabilities from
the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) communities.�
The publication summed up the group’s findings and also reported on
research by the Centre for Education in Racial Equality in Scotland (CERES).
The executive summary
noted that, “Disabled people and non-disabled black people experience
discrimination, but black and minority ethnic disabled people experiencing
discrimination often remain unclear whether they are being discriminated
against on the grounds of colour, race, culture or disability.”
Amongst the key findings
were:
����
A general attitudinal ‘negativity’ to
people with complex communication requirements
����
The tendency for some professionals to act
as gatekeepers, inhibiting access to services and service-related
information
����
A ‘stereotyped’ perception that BME
families “look after their own” and therefore do not always access
services
����
A view among some agencies that BME people
are non-conformist in their outlooks, expectations and needs, i.e. they are
seen ‘not to fit’ the services available
����
A failure of organisations to address the
poverty related issues which disproportionately affect BME people
����
The failure of service providers to plan
for the costs of translation/interpreting services or alternative formats
����
A lack of joint working between the public
and voluntary sectors
����
A lack of established networks within BME
communities and lack of contact with disabled white people
����
A general lack of information in the wider
community on disability matters
����
Mental health issues being treated as taboo
in some sectors of BME communities and cultures
����
A perception in some BME communities that
an impairment can have something other than a biological cause, leading to
disabled people and/or their families experiencing exclusion, guilt or
blame.
Although there is
equality legislation in force, including the Disability Discrimination Act,
The Race Relations Act and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act, there is
clearly along way to go before people from BME communities overcome many of
the problems highlighted.� The
document gives a good description of where the key problems lie, as well as
action points for tackling the difficulties.�
“Our Rights, Our Choices” is published by the Disability Rights
Commission and is available on their website at: www.drc-gb.org
or from their helpline at 08457 622 633, in a number of formats.
�
Legal
Advice for People with Disabilities
Readers will recall that
SDEF has been participating during the last twelve months in a “Thematic
Pilot Partnership”, looking at some of the difficulties people with
disabilities face in accessing legal advice.�
Our partners have included representatives of the Scottish Executive
Justice Department, the Scottish Legal Aid Board, Citizens Advice Scotland,
Update, other representative voluntary agencies and solicitors in private
practice.
The work has been one of
four partnerships looking at the provision of legal advice in Scotland, ours
being the one taking an equalities perspective.�
The other three have been examining general legal advice in
geographical areas;�� these
being Edinburgh, Fife and Argyll & Bute.�
An event was held in Dunblane, 25th May 2004, to review
progress and to present the various reports.
The remit of our
partnership had been to examine how to enable people with disabilities to
access advice and information in a barrier-free way, in compliance with the
Disability Discrimination Act and with proper respect and dignity.�
We had been asked to assess how the quality and availability of
advice could be improved and look at the role of national partnerships in
bringing this about.
The first task had been
to look at the current supply situation and note the impediments to full
access.� The findings included:�
a lack of solicitors specialising in disability law;�
general public ignorance of disability rights;�
difficulties around physical access to buildings;�
variable quality standards in service provision;�
and potentially high costs.
From the perspective of
the prospective user of services, it was considered important that they
know;� that a right exists;�
that they qualify and where to go to access their rights.�
In many cases it is important too that people persist and receive
support from others.� Volunteer
agencies and advice givers should also, therefore, be better informed about
how to access the legal system and when a case becomes ‘justiciable’
(i.e. subject to resolution by a court or tribunal).
It was clear that there
were problems both from the point of view of the service provider and the
service user.� The group made a
number of recommendations, including;� better
training for solicitors and law students on disability equality issues;�
standard setting by the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Legal Aid
Board;� an insistence, through
funding criteria, that such standards and training be mandatory; a
requirement on all bodies seeking public funds that they include a strategy
on accessibility;� greater
access auditing to examine the gamut of issues including, physical access,
information formats, induction loops, lighting and the availability of BSL
translators;� the production of
directories n where to find legal services;�
greater publicity to inform people of their rights and where to
locate advice agencies;� and
steps to raise general public awareness of disability rights, such as
courses in schools.
At this stage, there is
also a recommendation that an agency be established to provide support to
local advice-giving agencies, to ensure the needs of people with
disabilities are met.� This
would require public resources and will be the subject of further
discussions.� We will keep
readers informed of developments.
***
�
FALKIRK
WHEEL
The
long awaited boats with wheelchair access are soon to be operational.�
We shall include an up-to-date article in our next issue
�
THE
CAIRNGORMS
Turn now to the
Highlands and head for Cairngorm.� What
better than a run along Loch Morlich culminating in a trip on the Funicular
Railway.� Booking may be
advisable in high season.
To book call:�
01479 861261
�
ONE
COMMISSION
The government has
decided to bring together the Commission for Racial Equality, the Disability
Rights Commission to create a single body.�
In 2006 the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights will be
formed to promote equality for all in society, combat discrimination for
specific groups, and tackle barriers to participation.
Internet fans may also
be interested in visiting the DRC’s interactive website
which campaigns to
improve access for disabled people to local services, provides information
on the Code of Practice for service providers, and welcomes stories from the
public of discrimination and good practice.
***
contact
a family
Parents
and Paediatricians Together
Contact
a Family launches a major new partnership with
�
ReTSAG
- Rehabilitation, Technology, Service Advisory Group
S.D.E.F.
is involved with this Group.� The
present situation is that a draft copy of ‘Wheelchair Standards’ for
wheelchair services in Scotland will be put to the Board for comment in
July.
We
are informed that NHS Lothian has an excellent leaflet on wheelchairs in
their area.
European
Year of Disabled People
The report of the
Steering Group has just been published.�
S.D.E.F. was represented on the Steering Group from its inception.
Now that the ‘Year’
is over it is time to reflect on where we’ve got to, where we need to go
next and how we are going to get there.
While celebrating its
many achievements there’s still a long way to go.�
The report of the Scottish E.Y.D.P. Steering Group aims to publicise
achievements, identify learning points and provide a forum for future
action.
Quote - “E.Y.D.P.
brought together various disability groups and forums which may not
traditionally have worked together.� As
a result we found much consensus arising around disability issues and
problems and a shared service of working together.”
The Report concludes
with the suggestion that there might be events in 2005 and 2006 for disabled
people to consider progress.
�
Articles
submitted are not necessarily the views of Scottish Disability Equality
Forum
CONTACT
US!� If you would like your
organisation to feature in the next Newsletter.�
�Please send your article of interest to:
The
Editor, Mrs. Agnes Stewart, �either
c/o SDEF, or directly to:
72
Riverside Drive, Aberdeen AB10 7LE
�or
e-mail to : [email protected]
�
Scottish
Disability Equality Forum, 12 Enterprise House, Springkerse Business Park,
STIRLING, FK7 7UF
or
e-mail to :
[email protected] or
�
Tel:
01786 446 456��Fax: 01786
450 902 ��email:[email protected]�����
www.sdef.org.uk
Scottish
Disability Equality Form
Working
together with people affected by disability
|
|||||||||||||||||
<back> | |||||||||||||||||
|