| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Rev. Martin Smyth: The hon. Gentleman has been dealing with clause 4. Paragraph 8(4) of schedule 3 states:
- "The Commission may refuse to receive oral representations made on behalf of the person concerned by a person (not being counsel or a solicitor) to whom the Commission reasonably objects as being unsuitable."
Mr. Oaten: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that intervention, which reinforces my belief that there should be a cooling-off period before a discrimination notice is issued, so that there may be a private dialogue to establish the facts. I should be concerned if, as has already been said, the commission had the power to refuse to enter into a dialogue. Perhaps the Minister will deal also with that specific point.
I should like to deal with another matter that concerns me, and to be clear about the commission's powers to act in a specific example that I shall give. I hope that the House will bear with me as I try to stumble through an explanation of the circumstances of a case in my own constituency.
About six months ago, Winchester city council received a sudden surge in planning applications--we received about 15,000 of them--for homes, and no one could quite understand why they were all being made. I shall not name the builder involved, but, once we made some initial contact, it became clear that the applications were being
made because the builder thought that, although he had no intention of building the homes for many years, lodging the applications was a way of avoiding observing the Government's changes to the building regulations, which have not yet been implemented. The builder therefore thought that, in four or five years' time, once the legislation had been implemented, he would not have to meet the new building regulations requiring full disabled access.
What powers will the commission have to step in in such circumstances? Will it have the power, for example, to take out an injunction against an organisation that is not committing a form of discrimination, but is engaged in the physical act of making an application or building a home that would fall foul of the commission's future objectives? Such acts would certainly seem to fall foul of some aspects of the legislation. I am not clear on how the commission's powers would operate in that example, in which a physical act or planning application is imminent which no number of non-discrimination notices will stop. Has any thought been given to whether additional powers are needed to take out injunctions to stop such activities?
The Liberal Democrats warmly welcome the Bill, which is long overdue and will be a major step forward in establishing civil rights. The point of my questions is not to be critical, but to make sure that the commission is successful. We do not want to have a debate in two or three years' time about how it has failed, how there have been no orders against individuals, how practice has not changed and how homes have been built without disabled access. That would set back so much of the progress that hon. Members have been trying to make for many years.
Ms Helen Southworth (Warrington, South):
I join many of my right hon. and hon. Friends--and the one or two Opposition Members who are here--in welcoming the Bill. We have waited many years for legislation to give comprehensive and enforceable civil rights to disabled people.
I am a new Member of the House, and I have come here as a member of the Government party. Before that, I spent 18 years in community voluntary organisations, working with people with a disability. We attempted to undertake normal activities, and I want to describe the sheer frustration for people with a disability of making arrangements to live a normal life in what we would expect to be a normal society at the end of the 20th century.
Having decided to go somewhere, I have telephoned to check that the building is physically accessible because someone coming with us is a wheelchair user. I have been assured that it is, but arrived to find a series of steps to the room that we are to use; or to find that we cannot use necessary facilities, such as toilets, because of steps.
I have tried to make arrangements for transport, and found that there is no public transport that can be used because of the disabilities of some people. I have found how extremely difficult and expensive it is to make
arrangements to hire transport that is accessible. A person with disabilities needs sheer bloody-minded determination not to be left out of our society.
I have been turned away from places because I have been with people with learning disabilities, people who have mental illness or people who have a physical disability. That was not necessarily because people wanted to turn us away, but because they were not aware of the arrangements that were necessary to make their service accessible, or because they had not made the investments that were necessary to make their service accessible.
As I said, I worked for 18 years in community and disability organisations. A tremendous number of community organisations are making sincere efforts to remove barriers for people with disabilities from pubs, offices, houses, railway stations and bus stations, and to allow people who want to go to town to buy things to do so.
People in communities are working extremely hard to raise awareness, and to work with and to facilitate disabled people in playing a full part in our society.
There is not a disabled community out there. There are brothers and sisters, parents and children, and relatives and friends. We all want to be part of normal life. We want to make our towns, cities, schools and leisure facilities open to everyone and equally accessible. We want to go out and do things together.
Charities, good employers and businesses, individuals and groups have not been supported by the legislative framework, which has not worked. There has been good will in many places, but no infrastructure. There has been no inducement to change.
One of the clearest pictures that I had when listening to the debate was of a young man who is a wheelchair user explaining several years ago to a senior politician the experience of exclusion from employment. He was told that that could not be, because there was a Disability Discrimination Act; there was incomprehension from the politician. The young man knew that discrimination existed. He was an able young man, who was unable to find employment--and was desperate to find it.
Prior to the Government taking office, a deaf person in my constituency found that his employers sold the business, when the new employers did not allow him an interpreter during the contract negotiations in which his hours and conditions of employment were reduced.
There have been heroes in Westminster, such as Lord Morris of Manchester, Lord Ashley of Stoke, my right hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge and Chryston (Mr. Clarke) and the many other hon. Members that my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood (Mr. Berry) named. They were heroes to us out there, and they still are. They made slow, but determined progress.
When the previous Government--acting under duress--at last, and reluctantly, passed the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to outlaw discrimination, they did not create a commission to enforce the law. The Act was a vehicle without an engine. The right hon. Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) did not gain much from sticking to his party rather than what he now says were his principles. He now has the double misfortune of being the Leader of the Opposition.
When my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, East (Mr. Howarth)--as Under- Secretary--set up the disability rights task force, it was exceptionally welcome,
not only in this House, but outside. It demonstrated the involvement of people with disabilities, and operated on the principles of inclusion and transparency. It involved people with different disabilities from different parts of the country.
I welcome the fact that the task force has brought a new attitude to the legislative framework of this country; a positive attitude that is promoting the rights of disabled people. That is a significant change. It is a gentle touch that will allow people to work effectively to try to achieve the society that we want--but it is able to take effective action against those who do not share that aim.
The Bill, which is receiving Government time, will be a vehicle by which many of the parts of the Government strategy can move forward. The new deal for disabled people will be supported by the Bill going through the House at the same time. It will open up fair opportunities to people with disabilities to gain and retain employment. It will be underpinned by guidance, good practice for employers and the ability to take enforcing action. We are not leaving disabled people to fight their own fights any more. They will have support from legislation.
I welcome the decision by Ministers that training in disabled awareness for benefits advisers will take place. I welcome also the openness of the Departments to learning and good practice as part of the process.
Ministers will know that I have met local organisations which work with disabled people in my constituency to discuss the issues. They asked me to raise the issue of education and gaining skills. In the past, too many people have not been able to achieve their potential because they have been excluded from educational opportunities. I hope that the commission will consider how to take that forward.
Others issues are important, such as the development of an integrated transport strategy that is accessible for everyone. Consumer rights and labelling are also important, as many people with disabilities--and hidden disabilities--find it crucial to know the ingredients in what they are to eat. I welcome the way in which the Government have taken those things into account across different Departments.
The commission will drive change. It has a style of inclusion and will involve people with a disability and those who have had a disability. They will have major representation. That is so important because, frequently, people with disabilities have been marginalised to such an extent that everyone knows what is best for them, and they are left to know how much they are excluded.
Some things can and must change rapidly although we all accept that others will take time. The commission will play a key role working with people who misunderstand, are embarrassed by, or have not had the opportunity to learn at first hand about, disability. They do not know what the barriers are or how to take them away.
The commission will work in a new way, solving problems through dialogue wherever possible, which is sensible and welcome. It will be very supportive of change. Many people want to make our communities inclusive and to address their own shortcomings but do not know how. It is about time that we gave them support.
The commission will have to tackle difficult issues and it must be fully empowered to do so. My hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood spoke about policing. I want to
add my voice to his. We must ensure that all aspects of policing, including the operation of statutory functions such as arrest and surveillance, are applied fairly and without prejudice. That is crucial to our civil society.
Some people with disabilities from time to time display symptoms that can make them look as though they are likely to cause difficulties and people can become disturbed by them. People with diabetes can sometimes appear to exhibit aggression when they are suffering from rapid blood sugar changes, and that can easily be misinterpreted. We must also give serious consideration to people with communication difficulties. They have not received all the support that they deserve from our police services.
I have noted that the task force is to consider the extension of the legislation to cover statutory police functions. That is very welcome and many of us look forward to hearing its proposals. It is also welcome that the powers of the commission will include human rights issues relating to disability.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |