|
�
Policy Papers
Response to the Scottish Parliament Equal Opportunities Committee
TAKING
STOCK MEETING ON DISABILITY � JANUARY 2002
The Scottish Disability Equality Forum
is a membership organisation open to all disability organisations, or any
individual with any type of impairment.� Every
person, organisation and network has an important role to play in ensuring the
voices of people with disabilities are heard in the new Scotland.�
The Forum seeks to enable this.
Since
receiving support from the Scottish Executive in April 2001, we have already
almost reached our first year target of recruiting fifty member organisations.�
We also have a wide range of supportive associate members and individual
members. The Forum is presently seeking to restore a network of groups dealing
with access throughout Scotland to share expertise and add value to the work of
local groups.
SDEF is guided by the needs of its
members.� Particular priorities for
this year are to:
- build SDEF�s membership to make
it more fully representative;
- provide full information about our
work and help organisations learn from each other;
- work closely with other
infrastructure bodies;
- continue to work with our members
to identify the gaps in support for people with disabilities and their
organisations.
Taking Stock � Formulating our Response
As a membership body we appreciate the
opportunity given to participate in this exercise.� It is very useful to us to know in advance of your meeting
with relevant Ministers and to be able to contribute to your discussions with
them.� However, we would like to
state that the timescale from 14th December � 16th January is very
tight especially at this time of year when many groups shut down for 2 weeks.�
This endeavour should have a far reaching effect and is therefore worthy
of a well reasoned and in depth response, which is just not possible within this
time.
This criticism is not just aimed at this
particular paper, but is equally relevant to other consultations by both the
Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive.� If consultation is to be really meaningful and involve all
stake-holders regardless of their size and resources, then more time must be
allowed.�
Despite the short timescale, we
consulted our members by email and telephone to aid us in developing this
response, which was vigorously debated by our elected management committee.�
Several of our members will also have responded directly to you.
Assessing the views of people who are
disabled has been greatly hindered in the last 18 months since the disappearance
of Disability Scotland in August 2000, which was the natural co-ordinator of
responses.� This was untimely, as
the Scottish Disability Equality Forum (SDEF), which had been accepted as its
successor, did not receive funding of any kind until April 2001.�
This left a large gap in the disability movement for this period, and
delayed progress in improvements in the lives of people with disabilities.�
However, SDEF is now up and running, and we are working towards taking
over the role previously carried out by Disability Scotland.�
We welcome the fact that consultation is
certainly being seen to be done, but still appears to be tokenism as the feeling
persists that the Official Mind is already made up before the process is
complete. A particular recent example of this is the Scottish Executive�s
Transport Mobility consultation - asking for views on a name, then proceeding
throughout the documents to refer to MACS.��
Local government and health are also at fault here - hence the apparent
apathy of the general public.
Another point regarding the consultation
process which is worth mentioning, is that this involves a great deal of time
and commitment on the part of those who become involved.�
Even where only a paper discussion document is concerned, there is a
great deal of reading required, before the preparation of a reasoned and
informed response.� This is very
time consuming for smaller organisations and individuals,�
many of which are unpaid or part of small groups which receive very
little funding.�
Consultations can also involve attending
discussion meetings which means travelling - not an easy thing for people who
are disabled.� Ministers or Scottish
Executive officials may not realise fully just how difficult and costly this can
be.� However, if dedicated people
did not overcome all these barriers to make their voices and views heard,
Ministers and officials would not get a balanced view of the silent majority of
people with disabilities.�� We
want their invaluable input recognised and reimbursed.��� In some cases there is at best a reluctance, and
at worst a downright refusal to meet genuine out of pocket expenses.�
If the Scottish Executive wishes people who are disabled to meaningfully
participate, as it very laudably claims, then the above must be acknowledged and
action taken.
With these general comments in mind,
your letter asked specific questions about the situation for people with
disabilities today.� We discuss each
of these in turn below.
Current provision
and facilities to ensure integration of people with disabilities
Policy,
strategies and reports are well written, and mostly the sentiments expressed
cannot be faulted. However, implementation and enforcement lag far behind.�
For example, the equality strategy, as written, reads well but there is
not much evidence it is being put into practice.���
This is perhaps most true for the most marginalised groups, and often
hinges on lack of funding and a lack of willingness to enforce standards.�
We set out some examples of shortfalls below.
Transport
Our members feel that there are still
too many loopholes which can be exploited, particularly in transport (carrying
people with mobility problems, and most recently carrying guide dogs). Penalties
for non-compliance are not harsh enough and exemptions can be easily obtained.
We accept that legislation alone cannot overcome people's attitudes,
particularly in the short term, but harsher penalties might help to make the
laws more effective.
Lead-in times tend to be too long. Buses
are given 20 years, and taxis given 10 when the vehicles are changed about every
3 years in the latter case. Licensing is too lax in many places. Buses have been
bought in large numbers to beat the deadline.�
Where there is a statutory duty to consult, this is generally done, but
there appears there is not a duty to listen and a reluctance to act.
Support
for independent living
In order for people with disabilities to
attain independence, there is a need for full availability of independent living
centres, where individuals can view, test and evaluate equipment and aids, as
well as receiving information on facilities and services.�
Our members tell us of independent living centres closed as part of cost
saving measures � a major loss to the people in the area.
Another need, which some of our members
have identified, is the creation of �Job Clubs� for people with disabilities
to receive support and assistance in locating training and skills to secure
mainstream jobs.
If people with disabilities are to be
assisted to achieve integration, the Scottish Executive must provide local
authorities with adequate sustained funding to allow them to fully provide
support services.
Housing
In Building Regulations the 6th
amendment does not go far enough in ensuring equal access especially in housing.
The building lobby has too strong a voice. Bringing this in gradually does not
work because developers are still complaining and seeking exemptions on any
grounds, even with this minimal concession.�
Inaccessible new housing is being put up in large numbers, which even
with the building methods employed today, should last at least 40 years.
Planning applications are being pushed through before new regulations come in.�
�Visitability� criteria are no good,
and must be drastically improved.� Facilities
do not even have to be useable, only accessible - in other words a person should
be able to get into the toilet but not necessarily be able to use the w.c. or
shut the door.� All housing should
be built to barrier-free standards, which would mean not only a house built for
an individual with a disability would be suitable, but a person who is�
disabled could visit neighbours and friends and even stay overnight.�
The arguments that this will cost more
are largely spurious.� As with all
other matters, mass production brings the unit cost down.� Level or ramped access, if part of an integrated design, is
no more costly.� There is an
unreasoning resistance to change traditional ways of thinking.�� Again it is claimed there is lack of resources to
ensure compliance, and there are lenient penalties.
However, on the positive side the DDA
appears to be having some good effect, with more plans being submitted for
alterations to existing business premises which include ramped access and toilet
facilities.
Progress in the
implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act
Our members tell us that the effect of
the DDA is patchy because knowledge of its contents and consequences is patchy.��
Large firms are naturally better informed and also have the resources of
knowledge and finances.� Smaller
firms, whether regarding employment, access to goods and services and the fast
approaching 2004 access to buildings, are largely ignorant and think they are
not involved.� It would be helpful if some financial assistance could be
given, by the way of grants, to small businesses which want to improve their
facilities for people with disabilities, but just can�t meet the costs out of
meagre profits.
We would like more done to raise
awareness generally with active publicity given through public service
advertising and programmes on TV and other media � similar to drugs awareness
campaigns.� More needs to be done to
publicise the DDA to people with disabilities as well as the wider public.�
Disability organisations report that their members feel empowered by
having the support of the DDA when they receive information about it.
However, the DDA still lacks teeth, and
one drawback is the onus which is put on the individual to raise and prove a
case on grounds of discrimination due to disability.�� The cost of this and the hassle involved puts off many
potential claimants from taking the necessary action.��
Discussion documents have been issued on
education integration. However, with so many old buildings which are not
suitable for conversion, integration, no matter how much this is desired, cannot
be implemented. Even where special units have been set up on the same school
campus, they are separate and the pupils do not mix.
Architects and designers and their
clients do not understand requirements for buildings.�
Others do not understand the effect of �people� management issues.�
We recently responded to the draft
Education Bill regarding Disability Strategy and Pupils records (and would refer
you to our reply).�
This is a prime example of a well-researched paper with good
recommendations, but it will be very difficult to implement and monitor.
European
year of people with disabilities 2003
We feel this needs to be more widely
publicised � many of our members were not aware of any plans.�
It should be used to provide a platform to revitalise progress towards
full civil rights.� The aim should
be to ensure the highest standard for access and inclusion achieved by
individual nations becomes uniform throughout the European Union.�
We would suggest an international conference be held in Edinburgh with
high profile speakers of renown.
Many of the issues outlined above also
impinge on European legislation regarding freedom and choice of the individual.
Unless a person who has a disability can have access to a private vehicle,
mobility is impaired. The public transport provision is not uniform to those who
have a disability which is not catered for by the vehicle. There is difficulty
for people with disabilities in finding suitable accommodation in other parts of
the country or abroad and this can prevent people from seeking employment
elsewhere.
Conclusion
This paper has been necessarily brief.�
We would welcome an opportunity to meet with committee members to discuss
the issues raised in more detail, or to take part in any further inquiry the
committee may choose to undertake.
For more information about our work,
please contact our Secretariat.
�
� | 