Further memorandum from the Department
for Work and Pensions (DDB 115)
QUESTIONS RAISED
IN THE
CLERK TO
THE SCRUTINY
COMMITTEE'S
LETTER OF
15 MARCH
(Q1) Are any estimates now available
regarding the definitive global costs to local authorities, and
private clubs of the proposals? If not, what is the timescale
for completing this part of the cost assessment?
(A1) The draft RIA uses existing data sources
to analyse the potential costs and benefits in respect of the
measures which impact on local authorities and private clubs.
The Government is confident that it provides a sound foundation
in the lead-up to the introduction of the full Bill, at which
time we will publish a revised version of the RIA.
In support of this work, we are planning to
carry out public consultation exercises on our proposals for draft
Regulations using the powers laid down in the clauses concerning
public authority duties and private clubs. These consultations
will enable us to ensure that we have got the nature and balance
of the Regulations right. That will include reviewing our assumptions
on the costs of complying with the new duties.
We will give full consideration to submissions
to the Committee from organisations like the Local Government
Association (LGA) which have suggested that some costs may be
an under-estimate.
(Q2) We are concerned by the lack of
information regarding the monitoring regime for these new proposals.
It would be useful if the RIA provided further information about
the systems used for monitoring and how often this would take
place. This should give a good indication of how soon the department
expects the measures to be fully implemented and what will constitute
success or failure. Can this information be provided?
(A2) The Disability Rights Commission (DRC)
has a statutory duty to monitor the Disability Discrimination
Act (see s2 of the Disability Rights Commission Act 1999) and
as part of this duty commissions independent research, where appropriate.
The work of the DRC, including research, is a significant contribution
to ensuring that the DDA is properly and effectively monitored
and supplements the Government's own monitoring processes.
We have regard to a wide range of data such
as Employment Tribunal, Employment Appeal Tribunal and court cases
taken under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), that provided
by organisations like the Office for National Statistics (eg the
quarterly Labour Force Survey), and DRC statistics on issues raised
by callers to its Helpline and considered by its conciliation
service.
The DWP has commissioned a series of research
projects monitoring the provisions of the DDA as they apply to
both employers and service providers. The findings from these
have informed our publicity campaign for the current year, which
will focus on small and medium-sized businesses.
We will also be commissioning further significant
baseline research with service providers and small employers on
both the Bill's proposed duties and the October 2004 changes to
the DDA. The data gathered, which will be widely disseminated,
will help reinforce future actions to enhance and encourage compliance.
We are currently planning ongoing monitoring
in support of the provisions of the DDA more generally. Further
research will be developed in support of the Bill and DDA's provisions
and will be used to measure how the Bill is operating.
This wide range of measures and initiatives
allows us to ensure that the legislative framework is effectively
monitored.
(Q3) The RIA does not explicitly address
the risk that the Bill's measures might not be complied with and
therefore be largely inefficacious. How is this risk being addressed?
(A3) Experience of the DDA in operation
has shown the Act has been widely accepted across those sectors
it affects. However, the Government wants to do more to raise
awareness. That is why we are launching high profile campaigns
aimed at wide areas of society.
Most of the specific measures proposed in the
Bill have already been consulted upon nationally as part of our
public consultation document "Towards Inclusion". Further
consultations are planned to complement this activity.
The majority of the draft Bill's measures were
proposed by the Disability Rights Task Force which had membership
from disability organisations, the private and public sectors,
and trade unions. Many of its members were themselves disabled
or had first hand experience of disability issues and were able
to provide a valuable insight during the work of the Task Force.
The Task Force has set the agenda for civil rights change and
it is that to which we are responding with our proposals in the
draft Bill.
It is clear that a well paced approach to taking
through new disability discrimination legislation, involving widespread
involvement and consultation, has ensured appropriate debate and
greater acceptance. The new legislation is responsive and sensitive
to the needs of both disabled people and the sectors on which
new duties will impinge.
For these reasons, the Government is confident
that the risk of non-compliance is low. This is supported by experience
of levels of non-compliance to date, based on the numbers of formal
complaints and use of the DRC's conciliation service on access
issues, amongst all disabled employees covered and all disabled
customers.
The DRC's Codes of Practice, its ongoing enforcement
activity and awareness raising campaigns by both the Commission
and Government will continue to contribute to ensuring that the
Bill's duties, once in place, are understood and met.
(Q4) For each of the following measures
total costs will depend upon what are considered "reasonable"
adjustments to make:
— extension of scope of DDA to "functions"
of public bodies;
Given that these measures are as yet untested
this introduces uncertainty into the cost estimates as the full
extent of changes and adjustments which might be considered reasonable
for bodies to carry out is not yet known. What assessment has
been made of the sensitivity of the estimated costs to changes
in the underlying assumptions, in particular what is deemed "reasonable"?
(A4) Under s53A of the DDA, the DRC can
issue Codes of Practice on matters covered by the Act. The Codes
are an effective means of helping those with new duties to understand
and implement them and to restrict inadvertent non-compliance.
They include guidance on what actions might be regarded as reasonable
It is important to bear in mind that the provisions
in the draft Bill on reasonable adjustments—which reflect
existing provisions of the DDA—would require landlords,
public authorities, private clubs and local authorities to "take
such steps, as it is reasonable in all the circumstances of the
case to have to take . . .", when the duty is triggered.
Ultimately, it is for the courts to decide what steps are reasonable
in the particular circumstances concerned, having regard to DRC
Codes of Practice.
The courts are experienced in interpreting reasonableness.
We are aware of nothing which undermines the assumptions in the
RIA. They are based on knowledge and experience of how existing
duties in the DDA operate and on research into what employers
and services providers actually do in practice.
(Q5) Will any attempt be made to quantify
the Bill's benefits in order to facilitate a more robust comparison
of the balance of costs and benefits to the disabled and the wider
community of each proposal?
(A5) The draft RIA quantifies costs and
benefits to organisations of the proposed changes in the draft
Disability Discrimination Bill. The gains to disabled people,
and the rest of society, will in part be financial and are already
captured in the draft RIA.
However, there will also be other gains which
are non-financial in nature, such as improvements in personal
well-being and changing attitudes and perceptions to disability.
There are also benefits to society from removing institutional
and other barriers to participation for disabled people, and the
changes we are proposing in the draft Bill will do this in a way
which minimises the costs.
March 2004
| 
