Examination of Witnesses (Questions 364
- 379)
WEDNESDAY 17 MARCH 2004
MS ANDRE«E
DEANE, MR
STEPHEN DOBLE
AND MR
KEVIN SMYTH
Q364 Chairman: Thank you very much
for coming in. I think you heard an announcement at the beginning
that there will be a transcript which you can check. Also, the
acoustics are not particularly good in this room, so if you could
speak up it would be very helpful. As I said to the previous witnesses,
you are being web-cast, so if you would be kind enough to introduce
yourselves for the record.
Ms Deane: Andre«e Deane,
Fitness Industry Association.
Mr Smyth: Kevin Smyth, General
Secretary, Working Mens Club Institute Union.
Mr Doble: Peter Doble, the Chairman
of the Association of London Clubs.
Q365 Chairman: Thank you very much
indeed. Can I ask you the first question? Do you think it is right
to bring private clubs fully within this legislation?
Ms Deane: If I could start by
saying that I actually feel rather a fraud being here, because
the Fitness Industry Association has been invited to comment on
this particular clause and, in fact, it only applies to a very
few out of one thousand six hundred of our operator members. I
have pointed that out to the clerk. I think the definition of
"private" in the exercise and fitness sector is very
different to the definition of "private" in clause 5.
We classify private health clubs as clubs that offer facilities
to the public—facilities and services—as long as they
can pay for them. So in fact most of our members have always had
to comply with the DDA since 1997. The very small percentage of
our members that will have to comply with the advent of this new
clause 5 will be those corporate fitness facilities that are offered
by companies who are endeavouring to invest in the health and
fitness of their employees; but they are only a very small percentage
of our clubs and they are very willing to comply.
Q366 Chairman: If you wish to comment
on the other issues, of course, you are free to do so as we go
through the questions. Mr Smyth, Mr Doble, would you like to comment?
Mr Smyth: Traditionally, of course,
clubs have been private in nature, and, indeed, they still are
a very important aspect of our argument with Government over all
sorts of other issues. They are very private in nature. Having
said that, I think clubs have always welcomed disabled members.
I cannot recall ever visiting a club where I have not seen a disabled
member of one sort or another in the club, often with parents,
where the parents find it is useful for them to go into the club,
rather than public houses or otherwise, because they know they
can be with their children, or with their parents, depending on
the age of people, and I think it has evolved pretty well over
the years. Certainly we did a survey recently and we were quite
surprised at just how many clubs have made tremendous improvements
in recent years. I think it is evolving quite well and I do not
think there is any need for it to be statutory.
Mr Doble: I largely concur with
the gentleman on my left. Our organisation is small (53 members),
quite obscure and unusual with, probably unusually for you around
this table, no axe to grind at all. The London clubs have always
welcomed disabled people into what they describe, members describe,
as, of course, their second home, and I am sure most people would
agree that there is absolutely no need for legislation in your
own home.
Q367 Lord Rix: Could I ask how welcoming
you would be or are being for people with a learning disability?
Mr Smyth: Me?
Q368 Lord Rix: All three of you?
Mr Smyth: There are a number of
people with learning disabilities in ordinary working men's and
social clubs. I see it on a regular basis. I do not perceive that
there are any problems. Often the members have a fatherly attitude,
if I can put it that way, to them. Again, I was in a club in Swindon
only last week where a girl was profoundly disabled both mentally
and physically; yet the way people came up to her and said, "Hello",
and that light of recognition, I thought, "Yes, they are
really doing a good job for the community here. They are giving
this girl an outlet that perhaps she would not have in other areas."
Lord Rix: Good.
Q369 Chairman: Are there still working
men's clubs which do not allow women members?
Mr Smyth: That is where we do
discriminate, I regret to say. Fifty-three per cent of clubs in
our organisation do have women with full rights, but under the
Sex Discrimination Act we are allowed to discriminate. It is a
matter that caused a bit of a hoo-ha only last week so
that I was immediately summoned to GMTV and had to appear on it
two or three times to try, in my opinion, to justify the indefensible.
Clubs do have the right to determine their own criteria, and,
as I say, 53% do give women full rights, but it is those 47% that
we have to keep working on. Again, it is evolving, but slower
than I would like.
Q370 Lord Addington: Do you have
any idea about the possible financial costs and benefits to your
members from the measures in the draft Bill?
Mr Smyth: I think the costs vary
in proportion to the size of the club. If you have an historic
building, obviously that could well clock up the pounds. Larger
clubs, I think, probably do have facilities now, because perhaps
they have the funds available or are modern clubs. Some clubs
are in a very built-up area. There are still a number of clubs
in terraced streets virtually. They would, I think, find it rather
difficult: because with ramps you have to be very careful as to
which way you put them or else the local authority will say it
is sticking out too much and can cause other problems. So costs
would vary pro rata for clubs, but the survey we did recently
shows that over 60% of clubs now do have wheelchair ramps and
a number of disabled toilets. That pleased me no end. If you had
asked me to put money on it, I would have gone for a figure much
lower than that. So clubs, I think, are doing it as and when they
have the money. Some clubs have money; they will do it; other
clubs are just about holding their heads above water. Club life
is not quite what it was 20 years ago.
Q371 Lord Addington: Also about the
benefits. Has any analysis been done by the membership that you
would encourage?
Mr Smyth: No, we have not done
any analysis on it. We believe that because clubs already welcome
applications from people with disabilities—it probably would
not encourage a great deal more. I do not think there are people
out there who think, "I would join if only something was
done." I have never heard of that anyway in 25 years.
Q372 Lord Addington: You would not
though, would you?
Mr Smyth: I do not know. People
do write in and say, "This is a disgrace", about so
and so, but I have not had a disgrace about disabled access or
anything like that.
Mr Doble: I would say that probably
80% of the Association of London Clubs live in a Grade I or Grade
II listed building, and therefore there would, of course, be significant
financial cost to implementing the Act as it may be wished to
be. My plea to you today would be to be so kind as to remove the
hoops and barriers which we would face, after you have legislated,
before you introduce legislation. In this respect I draw your
attention in particular to English Heritage. We have had a number
of problems over the years where the clubs have wished to introduce
measures to assist all different types of people and, for reasons
which you will all be aware about, English Heritage do not permit
it. The result of this is that the burden is left on the individual
club, whereas I personally feel that that should not be the case,
that it should rest with Parliament who should resolve this before
legislation is made, if I may.
Q373 Lord Addington: So you think
there is a real problem, not just for you, but in the entire heritage
design of buildings?
Mr Doble: Absolutely. I know in
fact of at least one London club where they have asked to put
in a lift and have been refused permission to do it. They have
asked to put in ramps from the front door on to the street and
they are not allowed to do it.
Q374 Lord Addington: Does English
Heritage have any sort of guidance available about how to do the
least damage—
Mr Doble: I am sorry, I could
not hear.
Q375 Lord Addington: I am sorry.
Any sort of guidance about what would be the best way of fulfilling
these duties? Has English Heritage taken that on board?
Mr Doble: I think that is a very
complex question which I would not be qualified to answer. I have
personally had experience in putting in other legislation to do
with fire precaution works in clubs, where you come up with an
answer from your architect and English Heritage say, "No,
you have to do it this way", and, as far as I am aware, they
have an absolute veto on what you may or may not do to a Grade
I or Grade II listed building. Therefore, any legislation which
you pass will, of course, affect us in that way, is the only point
I make.
Chairman: If you have some specific examples
that would be helpful to us. Amongst your members if you have
any examples of this and you could write to us, that would be
extremely helpful.
Lord Tebbit: I think I might be able
to give you two examples privately.
Q376 Lord Addington: Yes, I could
do the same. Could I ask the fitness industry, have you any thoughts
about this?
Ms Deane: We have many examples.
I think this issue of cost and the word "reasonable"
is something that our members would like more clarification on,
because I think the general perception of the fitness industry
is that it is buoyant and it is made up large clubs like David
Lloyd Leisure and Holmes Place, and others, whereas, in fact,
about 50% of our members have turnovers of less than £300,000,
and they are very small, medium enterprises, very small businesses
that are local community oriented and would provide a very welcoming
place for disabled people. The cost is an issue, particularly
in older listed buildings: we have one example of a small club
in Wallingford in the High Street where they are not allowed to
change the door, which would allow wheelchair access, because
it is a listed building with a high street frontage, they cannot
enable access to the showers upstairs because the corridors are
not wide enough, not just for wheelchairs but for anybody with
impaired mobility, and the access audit analysed that the cost
would be in the region of £500,000, and that is without the
door being changed because that was not allowed. Clearly, with
a turnover of less than £300,000, that cannot be deemed reasonable,
but we feel that clearer guidelines are needed.
Q377 Lord Addington: May I just take
that a touch further, with permission, Chair. What about actual
use of fitness equipment? For instance, people in wheelchairs,
etc. There will be certain aspects of a gymnasium which would
be helpful to many of them, etc. That sort of cost and that sort
of training of staff?
Ms Deane: Yes. There is an initiative
called the Inclusive Fitness Initiative (IFI) that has been pioneered
by the English Federation of Disability Sport. That has been given
£5 million worth of lottery funding in order to develop qualifications
and training. We have in the sector a register of exercise professionals
that is Department of Health grant-aided and endorsed and has
levels of qualifications that are demanded of fitness instructors,
and a Level 3 equivalent NVQ is required to teach mentally and
physically disabled people. It is expensive, it can cost about
£1,000 per individual to train, plus the time away from work,
but there is some funding available for our local authority centres,
not private clubs, and the equipment suppliers have embraced this
initiative very impressively and have designed equipment that
is suitable for wheelchair access, and for all types of mental
and physical disabilities and that only costs about 5% more than
a standard gymnasium fit-out to actually equip a new gym. Therefore,
the equipment provision does not seem to be the problem. It is
access to the buildings and facilities that is much more difficult
for our smaller members to accommodate in terms of finances.
Q378 Tom Levitt: Could I come back
to the point that Steven was making a few moments ago? All your
clubs are already covered by the DDA insofar as the employment
of your staff is concerned; and it is already well-established
that in the definition of "reasonable adjustment" that
damage or changes to the nature of listed buildings can be taken
into account in deciding whether an adjustment is reasonable or
not, and therefore an adjustment can be deemed to be not pursued,
authorised to be not pursued, if it is going to make an unreasonable
change to a listed building. Why do you appear to be suggesting
a different criteria of reasonableness might be applied under
this Act than under the DDA?
Mr Doble: My Lord Chairman, I
was not implying that at all. I was simply pointing out the practicalities,
the difficulties, with which I happen to be aware people have
been faced. I am at a slight disadvantage at this meeting this
afternoon, I have to say, in that the questions only arrived on
Monday and so I really have not had time to consult widely amongst
the Association; but, as Lord Tebbit has said, I could certainly
give, although I would prefer not to, examples of private London
clubs which have faced these specific difficulties, and I am sure
that everybody round the table would agree they exist.
Q379 Lord Tebbit: Could I return
to a matter which was a concern of Andre«e Deane? A lot of
private health clubs, fitness clubs, are in fact normal commercial
businesses, and so they are bound by a lot of the legislation
already obviously; but where a club has, for example, a swimming
pool, is it thought in the industry to be reasonable that in order
to provide access to the pool for a severely disabled person they
should purchase hoists, and that, if that person requires assistance
in the water, that for no charge other than what would be made
to an able bodied person to use the pool an attendant should be
available to look after that person? Would you interpret the legislation
in that way, or is that taking it too far?
Ms Deane: It is only the larger
clubs that tend to have swimming pools. Therefore, it is more
reasonable, I think, to expect those clubs to conform to the DDA
and to comply with regulations and therefore to provide those
facilities if they are needed. I think what we are finding with
some of the larger chains in the sector is that there is a degree
of tokenism towards the DDA at the moment because they feel that
they are never going to have to cater for that level of disability.
It is only in this last year, since the FIA initiated a code of
practice and have made operators aware that if they do not comply
to any relevant legislation then their insurance will be invalid,
that there has been more a serious attitude towards the legislation;
but in my research of our one thousand six hundred operator members
there was not one club that had ever been called upon to provide
a hoist either for the swimming pool or for the gym, so that the
issue has not arisen. I have not asked the question as to whether
they would think it was reasonable to provide that, but I can
certainly ask that question.
|
