Official Report 156KB pdf
Item 2 is evidence from the Scottish steering group for the European year of disabled people 2003. I apologise, as the committee was unable to obtain the services of a British Sign Language interpreter for the deaf. That highlights again the shortage of BSL interpreters in Scotland. Would the committee like me to write, on its behalf, to the Executive to get an update on BSL provision? I understand that the Executive BSL and linguistic working group met on Thursday 28 November, so we may be able to get an update from it. Is that agreed?
I welcome to the committee representatives from the Scottish steering group for the European year of disabled people. Members will know Yvonne Strachan from the equality unit, as she has appeared before the committee on many occasions. The other witnesses are Bob Benson, from the Disability Rights Commission; Gordon Matheson, from the Royal National Institute of the Blind Scotland; Mike Holmes, from Enable; and Ron Skinner, from the Scottish Disability Equality Forum.
Video evidence was shown.
I will suspend the meeting for a couple of minutes to allow the screen to be removed.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
I reconvene the meeting. As I said, that video can be seen on the Parliament internal feed and a copy is available from the Parliament's learning resource centre.
We have agreed that I will make a short introductory statement. However, I hope that, through questioning, my colleagues will engage with the committee and reflect their particular interests.
We will move to questions.
I start by apologising for missing a couple of meetings. The meetings of the Procedures Committee, which is going through a long report on the consultative steering group principles, take place at the same time as those of this committee. I have come straight here from that committee.
I know that the Royal National Institute of the Blind Scotland decided to limit its applications deliberately so that they were more likely to be successful. We will find out later today if that is the result. I do not know how other UK organisations have approached the issue. The fact that there may be fewer applications does not necessarily mean that there is less interest or that we will be less successful.
Is there a consequence in the budget? Is a figure allocated particularly to Scotland on a pro rata basis, or were Scotland's bids just some of the bids making up the global figure of 836 bids? Will there be an aggregate, so that the smaller number of bids scores the same when it comes to the financial settlement?
There were two types of projects—local and national. The number of bids across the piece meant that the process was well oversubscribed. More than 1,200 bids were made, and it was impossible for all to be successful. Criteria were set and a process was undertaken. We have Scottish representation on the national co-ordinating committee, and we were assured that there would be a breadth of distribution of projects so that the successful ones would not all come from one geographical area.
Is there not a Scottish figure?
Once the projects are announced today, we will know the number of successful projects in Scotland and will be able to judge how well we have done out of that. Our understanding is that we have done fairly well, and we have had no cause to believe that Scotland has been disproportionately or badly treated. However, there was such a heavy subscription for the grants that many bids will not be successful.
On what basis have the projects been selected for support during 2003, and has the UK group responsible for selecting projects involved the Scottish steering group in the decisions?
I do not have the list of criteria with me today, but I am more than happy to ensure that that is made available to the committee.
I will make a political point and suggest that in our devolved situation, it would have been a good idea for you to have been given the responsibility of being involved in bids.
I think that we would be better reserving the political points to when we are taking evidence from politicians.
Yes. I could not help myself.
I should point out that if any witness other than Yvonne Strachan wants to respond to a question, they have only to indicate. They do not have to press any buttons on the microphone console; their microphones will come on automatically when I call them to speak.
When Yvonne Strachan spoke at the beginning, she mentioned the make-up of the steering group. Although I obviously commend the organisations that are on the group representing people with disabilities, I am curious that there does not seem to be direct representation on the group from employers, either large or small. I accept that the groups that are represented are in themselves employers, but I am thinking of employers organisations engaging with small businesses or the Confederation of British Industry. Why are such groups not represented?
The original intention in bringing the group together was principally to bring together organisations of and for disabled people with a view to shaping the kind of work activity that disabled people would like to see in the course of the year. You are quite right to have flagged up the fact that others will need to be persuaded or engaged in the process, and that part of the exercise was, and is, being considered for the steering group's work. As a steering group, we did not extend the membership of the organisation to all the other stakeholders and people who may have to be persuaded, as that would have made the group rather large. We acknowledge, however, that the work will have to focus particularly on employers and business people.
It is important to have that on the record. I am comfortable with Yvonne Strachan's answer, as she seems to feel confident about engaging with the steering group and with other stakeholders.
As well as the efforts that we are undertaking as a steering group, each of the organisations will be campaigning during the next year. The fact that it is the year of disabled people will, we hope, lend weight to our individual campaigns. RNIB Scotland's principal campaign issue next year is employment, because the Scottish figures indicated that 80 per cent of blind and partially sighted people of working age are unemployed.
I am really glad that the committee showed the "Talk" video, because it is as relevant now as it was two years ago, when the campaign was launched to encourage active commitment from people to doing things, rather than just words.
I will build on what Yvonne Strachan said when she kindly outlined the steering group's four main aims. The first aim is to work towards the inclusion of all those who are affected by disability, because disablement affects not only the person who is disabled, but the whole family.
I will wrap two questions into one and ask a slightly different question about a rural aspect. For definition, what is the relationship between the Scottish steering group and the two groups that we know of at the UK level, which are the UK Government steering group and the national co-ordinating committee? What are the aims and objectives of the Scottish steering group for the European year of disabled people and how, if at all, do they differ from those of the UK Government steering group, apart from having a different target geographical area?
I will answer those questions quickly. The UK co-ordinating group has an external membership from a range of disability organisations that is comparable to our Scottish steering group. The Government steering group involves interdepartmental co-ordination that enables engagement from different Government interests, to provide assurance of support and engagement at an official level in the year's development and promotion.
It does. Thank you for your answer. You have painted with a broad brush the wider macro-scene in Scotland and the UK.
I will make a small general point, after which Mike Holmes will come in to reflect on the matter. Mr Stone makes an important point about rural issues and the responsibility to ensure that what we do on disability during the year is not central-belt focused. The steering group has discussed the matter, and the networks that each organisation has and those of the organisations with which they are in contact, are very wide. Although there is a Scottish focus through the steering group, we hope that delivery will be across the board. We hope, too, that the various local projects that are in place will reflect that.
I shall comment on the issue of delivery in remote and rural areas. I represent Enable and Gordon Matheson represents RNIB Scotland; a number of other organisations that are represented on the steering group are Scotland-wide. We are made well aware of the issues that face people who live in remote areas. This year, our annual general meeting took place in Thurso and the people there told us that it is as far from Glasgow to Thurso as it is from Thurso to Glasgow. We have had fed in to us the issues that affect people throughout Scotland.
I would like to follow up one or two points that have been raised. Given the impact on areas that are devolved to the Scottish Administration—such as education, transport and health—would not it have made sense for a Scottish group to have been able to select projects for funding in Scotland? I would like to hear various views on that.
As has been said, the steering group is not part of the decision-making process for awarding grants.
Yes, but I am asking whether it would have been better for a Scottish group to have been able to select which projects in Scotland should be awarded grants.
I shall make an observation on the logic of the UK decision-making process. I understand that the body at the UK level that decides to which projects awards should be granted has decided deliberately that its members will not make decisions about applications from within their own areas. That is an attempt to be completely transparent and to ensure that the applications are assessed only according to the advertised criteria. The Scottish representative on that committee will not—even at UK level—be considering Scottish applications.
So a particularly Scottish dimension will not be considered.
Perhaps I can answer that.
I will let Ron Skinner in. He indicated first that he wanted to answer.
When I was involved with the steering group, I raised that issue at an early stage. I thought that Scotland ought, on a per capita basis, to receive a tenth of the available money. Obviously, that was not acceptable at UK level, but because Scotland's population is roughly one tenth of that of the UK, I thought that that seemed to be fair enough; however, we did not win that point.
It is a shame that we are not meeting this afternoon after the announcements of successful bids have been made. If this afternoon Scotland ends up with less than one tenth of the pot, I will support Kay Ullrich's point of view. If we end up with more than one tenth of the pot, I will be quite happy.
It seems to be a pity that the decision has not been devolved in the same way as the Parliament has been devolved and as so many other matters that impact on disabled issues are devolved.
Perceptions were an important issue for the steering group. The steering group is networked into a vast range of other organisations—the very groups that were making applications. The steering group was very sensitive to that and did not want to be seen as the group that was making decisions, but which was also making applications from which the network groups might directly benefit. That was a primary part of the decision-making process in the steering group.
I agree with Mike Holmes that it would have been better to have this meeting after the allocations had been announced, but only time will tell.
The work programme indicates clearly that there will have to be a project management approach to each of the areas of work that we are considering. That will include the usual risk assessment, the full evaluations that need to be built in on the value of the time and money that will be expended on those processes.
Bob Benson has just picked up on the point that I was going to make, so I will state it simply. I will gauge the success of our efforts by whether something lasts beyond 2003. If we raise awareness or do something that is continued in the years thereafter, that will represent success.
To be frank, I believe that there are hard measures. We have reliable statistics that indicate an 80 per cent unemployment rate, so we should set targets for reducing that figure; that would be a hard measure. No matter what initiatives are taken next year or in the years to come, if that unemployment figure is not reduced, we will have failed.
Do you have another question, Kay?
No—but I would like to emphasise the point about the subject's being a continuing, lasting concern rather than its being merely the focus of an event.
I have looked at a list of the organisations that are involved in the steering group and it strikes me that there is a shortage of representatives of organisations that deal specifically with young people. I know that all your organisations have a remit in relation to young people, but there is no young disabled persons organisation involved. What benefits specifically for young disabled people would you expect to result from the EYDP?
That is an omission on our part. We have invited the Scottish youth parliament to send a representative to the steering group, but we did so once the discussion about our activity and focus had largely taken place. The group was clear that there had to be engagement with young people, but as members know, there are no specific organisations of young disabled people, so we had to consider other appropriate avenues. The representative of the youth parliament will join us on the steering group—it is my omission not to have pointed that out earlier.
We could build on some of the excellent work that has been done around education issues following the coming into force of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001, which underpins the individual rights of schoolchildren and young people. There is also a link with the new legislation on duties to plan, which has come through the Scottish Parliament.
I wish to re-emphasise a point that I made earlier. In addition to looking forward to the participation of a member of the Scottish youth parliament on the steering group, we are looking forward to an event that will take place in the summer, involving the youth parliament and COSLA's youth dialogue initiative. We are currently exploring how to develop those plans.
One of the EYDP's stated objectives is to
I will reply on behalf of Enable. We are a member of inclusion Europe, which is a group of like-minded organisations for people who have learning disabilities throughout Europe. We have already worked on an art exhibition featuring art by people who have learning disabilities. More than 1,000 pieces from throughout Europe were submitted to the exhibition, and 40 pieces have been chosen for exhibition. Three of those 40 came from Scotland, which is not a bad percentage. The exhibition will go to 11 countries throughout Europe, and another seven countries have expressed interest in taking the exhibition. Scotland has offered to host it.
RNIB Scotland is a member of the European Blind Union; a number of organisations have links with other European organisations for disabled people in their fields. At the most recent meeting of our steering group, someone made the point that we have to remember that we are talking about a Europe-wide initiative. Our efforts had focused, perhaps inevitably, on initiatives that we were going to develop in Scotland. When we planned our programmes and examined our priorities, we considered what we wanted to do within Scotland. We started by focusing on our priorities as organisations that are either solely Scottish or that have, as in the case of RNIB Scotland, devolved management. We thought about how we would then link to the UK and we thought that we had better not forget that we were talking about a European year of disabled people. We are aware of the European dimension and we will look to develop it over the year. I do not expect any junkets, however.
You sound very disappointed by that.
At the committee meeting on Friday, we heard that a European disability organisation was visiting Ayrshire to learn about best practice. That is a prime example of a European organisation coming to see what is happening in Scotland.
The organisation could not go to a nicer part of the country.
I believe that Ayrshire is open at this time of year.
It is indeed—it is open all year round.
Another objective of the EYDP is to raise awareness of multiple discrimination that is faced by people who have disabilities. I refer to gay people with disabilities, members of ethnic minorities with disabilities and, more especially, women with disabilities. How is the steering group ensuring that issues of multiple discrimination are highlighted during the year?
That is an important part of what the year will be about. There is recognition that the needs of particular communities within communities are often ignored, so there is often a one-dimensional approach to problems. One might focus on a person's disability, but the fact that the individual is a woman or is from an ethnic minority community might also have implications. We hope that the objective of engaging the widest range of people in discussion and participation during the year will allow that focus to emerge. We will also look at how we can foster exchange.
We will invite civic Scotland, including organisations such as the equality network, to engage with our efforts on the launch event. The disability organisations have tried to get ourselves together so that we have organisation and plans for the year. We are now at the point at which we are beginning to look out a bit to see how we can engage with other organisations.
One of our objectives is to give equal weight to the experiences, needs and aspirations of disabled people irrespective of their form of impairment, ethnic origin or other circumstances. The objective is that there should be recognition of multiple discrimination as well as a focus on specific disability.
I want to pick up on one of Michael McMahon's questions about young disabled people. Yvonne Strachan said that a representative of the youth parliament is now on the steering group. I spoke at a conference last week, which the Scottish Executive's "Equal Futures" conference sponsored. Most of the young people who were present said that they had not heard of the youth parliament and did not know much about it. The Scottish youth parliament is very valuable, but given the structure within which it operates, I am not sure how well it is able to pick up the feelings of young people at the grass roots. If young disabled people are not involved in the decision-making process, the youth parliament will not take on board their views. Can you explain in more depth how young people are being involved and how the specific problems that young disabled people face are being taken on board?
That is an important question. I understand that the person from the youth parliament who will join us has a disability.
I agree that we are all responsible for ensuring that the objective of involving young people is achieved. As Yvonne Strachan said, involving young people is not straightforward. RNIB Scotland runs family weekends and some of its officers have experience of working with young people. There is dialogue within RNIB Scotland about how we can engage our young members with the EYDP.
I reiterate what Gordon Matheson said. Because of the specific nature of their disabilities, young people with learning disabilities find it incredibly difficult to speak out and they are not supported in making their views known. Enable is involved in innovative work that is supported by the special educational needs innovative grants programme. Young people with learning disabilities are being teamed up with other young people, who support them in speaking up for themselves. That is a difficult and time-consuming process and it is almost impossible to pluck someone out to represent disabled young people on a particular body. A great deal of work must be done before that can happen.
In my local area—Stirling—it is very difficult to get young people, especially young physically disabled people, to engage with organisations. It might come as a surprise to the committee to learn that I was once a child and, to be honest, as a youngster I kept away from disability organisations. I do not know whether young people in my area are not engaging with disability organisations because they are able to integrate easily into the jobs environment and society. However, we have grave difficulty in involving youngsters in our organisation at local level.
I do not know whether there is an answer to my question. What has been said and explored is worrying. Does anyone know whether any of the projects that have put in bids specifically target young people and encourage some kind of overall organisation for them, given what Ron Skinner said about young people being less willing to engage in the work of existing organisations?
We will need to wait until this afternoon to find out about the bids. The committee might want to explore that issue again once we have found out which bids have been successful and which have not.
Perhaps the committee could indulge me a little longer. My organisation, the Scottish Disability Equality Forum, is considering an innovative project to engage with young people in relation to their going to and from school and their social lives in after-school activities. We are considering a special needs transport area in which there are more than 50,000 passengers a year. We would like research into their use of transport and what their problems are, which we could feed back into our organisations. However, there are difficulties.
The Madrid declaration recommends that local authorities should draft local plans of action on disability in co-operation with representatives of disabled people, and that they should set up local committees to spearhead activities for the year. What has happened in Ayrshire has been mentioned, but are there any moves by the steering group to encourage such activity at local government level?
COSLA has engaged with the steering group and I understand that the matter will be discussed with its equality network—which includes a range of organisations from different local authorities—with a view to determining how local authorities can engage in the process. We hope that local authorities will in their own right commit to the process. Activities that local authorities should undertake have been suggested and we hope that that will be a vehicle for them to follow matters up. I hope that the steering group will not just put out a diktat and say, "This is what you must do," but that there will be collaborative engagement through COSLA's offices and that there will be discussions about the work of the equality network.
You mentioned co-ordination. Are there any particularly Scottish dimensions to disability issues on which to focus during the year, which might need to be highlighted in any developments at European level? Are any mechanisms in place for doing that?
It is probably a bit premature to answer that question. However, the points that Gordon Matheson made must be borne in mind. The steering group thinks that whatever we do in the year must result in things that will last and on which we can meaningfully focus. There should be Scottish solutions to Scottish problems, but it would be premature for us to dictate what those solutions will be. We hope that, as a result of the debate and the raising of awareness, demands and issues that need to be tackled in the Scottish context will emerge, as well as matters that can then be flagged up in a European context.
I do not think that there are uniquely Scottish disability issues. Our job in Scottish organisations is to advance issues in the Scottish context. For example, there will be transport issues in more remote areas, although issues relating to the inaccessibility of transport exist throughout the world.
Jamie Stone made that point earlier.
The political structures that we operate within to try to advance such interests are largely devolved, so we operate in a different way.
As has already been highlighted, the unique problem is probably transport. We hear much about access to the built environment, which is all fine and good for someone who can actually get out of their house and travel to the place that they want to get into, but special needs transport needs to be examined specifically in Scotland, particularly because of the huge rural hinterlands that we have. In my area, we are well served with special needs transport by dial a journey in Stirling. I would like that sort of service to be rolled out throughout Scotland—
And for it to be affordable, into the bargain.
The Executive and the Parliament along with many public sector bodies have recognised that mainstreaming is the most effective way in which to make changes in the long term, particularly changes in service delivery and other areas that affect people's lives. That principle underpins the equality strategy and is the approach that we endeavour to take across the piece on disability.
I have a brief general point to make as an example of mainstreaming. More than 70 per cent of youngsters with sight problems in Scotland attend their local mainstream school, but RNIB research indicated that a quarter of those did not routinely receive their school books in a format that they could read and that a third had had examination scripts put in front of them in a format that they could not read. RNIB supports the presumption of mainstreaming, but mainstreaming needs to be resourced and individual needs must be supported.
I thank the witnesses for coming on behalf of the EYDP steering group. I am sure that the committee will work closely with you in the months ahead to ensure that the European year of disabled people is a success.
Meeting continued in private until 11:54.
Previous
Item in Private