DDB 117 Letter from Maria Eagle to Lord
Carter
Memorandum from the Parliamentary
Under Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (DDB 117)
Thank you for sending
me the Committee's schedule of suggestions and comments it
has received on the Disability Discrimination
Bill. You should by now have seen the Government to response to
each item.
The comments made on the
detailed points raised need to be seen in the context of the Government's
broader strategy for developing comprehensive civil rights for
disabled people, the timing of our implementation of this broader
strategy and role the draft Bill plays within this.
The proposed legislation
does not implement policy from afresh. We did not, as some of
the evidence you have received implies, approach the draft Bill
with the intention of excluding specific proposals. The
draft Bill aims to fulfil a specific Manifesto commitment and
covers the implementation of proposals making up that commitment.
As you know, these proposals follow directly on from the Disability
Right's Task Force's recommendations and the Government response
in Towards Inclusion, which
fully set out and explained our approach. There are two areas
(around the coverage of volunteers and the ability of an Employment
Tribunal to order reinstatement or re-engagement) that we have
not taken forward, but I must emphasise that the main focus of
the draft Bill is to fulfil
a very precise set of proposals to complete a Manifesto commitment,
adding to other legislative progress we have made, including last
year's Disability Discrimination (Amendment) Regulations.
There are issues raised
in the evidence you have received that are not included in the
draft Bill, because they are not part of these earlier
From the Parliamentary
Under Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
commitments. That is not
to say that at some time in the future such proposals will not
be considered, but, for the moment, these are proposals that we
do not believe are appropriate to the task in hand.
One reason for this is
that 1 am very concerned not to disrupt the activities of both
Government and others to improve understanding and awareness of
our legislation as we take forward a huge programme of implementation
leading up to October 2004 and beyond. Significantly changing
the underpinning concepts of the Disability Discrimination Act
(DDA) could severely undermine the effective implementation of
this important range of legislation.
I am anxious that those
who have obligations, or will shortly, can understand what they
are. Changing key concepts will undermine this understanding and
may not produce the best outcomes for disabled people. As you
will be aware, from the evidence you have received, while the
DDA and its key concepts are increasingly becoming familiar and
subject to a good body of helpful case law, there is still significant
misunderstanding even around what is currently in
place, let alone the future changes.
There is,
without question, a need to make significant
improvements to the original 1995 Act and this is what the wide
ranging measures taken in
the previous session
of Parliament, in recent regulations and in
this draft Bill
achieve. It is premature, however, to make fundamental changes
to key concepts underpinning the DDA, like the approach to defining
discrimination and disability, and the concept of reasonable adjustment
(and, in particular, the way that the triggers for reasonable
adjustment work). The existing and planned legislation needs more
time to be understood and to bed down thoroughly before we can
draw accurate conclusions on the case or priorities for further
change or reform.
Finally, the draft Bill
would actually achieve much of what some respondents are suggesting
it would not. Where it already
fulfils a policy intention either on a point of substance or drafting,
I have simply said so.
I look forward to appearing
before the Committee on 31 March when we can discuss some of these
issues further.
Maria Eagle MP
|
