Inclusion Scotland
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S2M-2707, in the name of Sandra White, on support for the Inclusion Scotland manifesto. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament congratulates Inclusion Scotland on the recent launch of its "Manifesto for Inclusion" document which seeks to promote, amongst other things, independent living for disabled people, allowing them to have the same choices, controls and freedoms as any other citizen; notes that the document calls for a significant transformation with regard to expenditure between institutional and non-institutional care, and considers that all of Scotland's politicians should read and support the calls made in the document, such as the right to live in the community with appropriate support and not in an institution, a greater emphasis on self-assessment in the existing community care assessment process, that the "duty of care" retained by social work should be redefined, that all planning partners should develop advocacy services for all people with a mental health disorder to meet the requirements of the Mental Health Care and Treatment (Scotland) Act 2003, and that there should be varied and flexible housing across all tenures for disabled people, the inclusion of key disabled stakeholders in the formulation of transport strategies and associated legislation at all levels, increased resources to support mainstream educational opportunities for all disabled children and adults, a coherent strategy to meet the needs of disabled job seekers and employees, improved portrayal and inclusion of disabled people in the mainstream media, inclusive access for all to all public spaces, the enactment of a single equality bill as an urgent priority, a complete review of wheelchair/power chair services in Scotland, acknowledgement that disabled people are also sexual beings with attendant health and emotional needs and, finally, increased awareness and funding of disabled patients' independent advocacy services.
When I look at the Business Bulletin, I realise that the text of the motion is rather long. I have been told that it has set a record. However, the "Manifesto for Inclusion" covers so many meaningful and important areas that I felt I could not leave anything out.
I congratulate Inclusion Scotland on producing such an excellent report and I welcome its representatives to the Scottish Parliament. They are behind me in the gallery. I thank them for all the work they have done. When I took them for a coffee earlier, they were at pains to tell me that the manifesto was written not only by them but by disabled people throughout Scotland. I thank them very much.
I am a member of the Equal Opportunities Committee and I want to thank the committee and its staff. At this very moment we are carrying out an inquiry into disability issues. Many people have spoken to me about the motion and they will agree that all the groups we have spoken to, and all the people who have contributed to our investigation in every area we have visited, have raised exactly the same concerns that the manifesto highlights. That says something about the work that Inclusion Scotland has done in producing its manifesto.
It is estimated that one in five of the population of Scotland is disabled. That is 1 million people—an awful lot of people. More than one in three households have a person who is either disabled or suffering from a long-term illness. Those people face discrimination in everyday life—in housing, education and employment. That is appalling.
In my speech, I want to cover a number of areas, highlighting particular concerns raised in the manifesto. The first is poverty. Approximately four in 10 of all households with a disabled person—42 per cent—have an income of £10,000 or less.
The second is employment. Among the population of working age, 45 per cent of disabled people are in employment, compared with 82 per cent of non-disabled people.
Next is housing. Households with a disabled person, or a person with a long-term illness, are more likely to rent accommodation than they are to own their own home.
The last is education. A total of 58 per cent of disabled people, with or without a long-term illness, have no qualifications, compared with 24 per cent of non-disabled people.
On top of all that, one in five disabled Scots has experienced harassment at some time or other because of their impairment.
Poverty is a real issue for disabled people. The benefits system is a reserved matter but areas such as community care assessment and direct payments are within the powers of this Parliament. We can address them. We must have a comprehensive review of the assessment process, and greater emphasis must be placed on self-assessment in community care.
Direct payments go some way towards increasing social inclusion, which is obviously welcome. However, the take-up rate is quite low, especially among those with learning difficulties and mental health issues. From constituency cases, I have experienced at first hand just how difficult it is for people from certain areas to get their local authority to fund community care packages that are tailored to their needs—I am sure that many other members will have experienced that, too. We must look into that if we really want to give people the choice of living independently rather than being in residential care. The issue is raised with me continually in my constituency office and in letters.
Transport has figured highly in the Equal Opportunities Committee's investigation and also features in the "Manifesto for Inclusion". Although we all appreciate the moves towards integrated transport services, disabled people still face various difficulties. Without access to services, people are excluded from participating in activities that most people would consider to be normal. We welcome the concessionary fares scheme that is being rolled out across the country but, when we read the legislation, we discover that the scheme will not be fully implemented until 2016 or 2017. People will have a concessionary card to travel, but the transport might not be available because it does not have to be in place until 2016 or 2017. The latest date for implementation—2020—seems quite far away, as is highlighted in the manifesto. It would be advantageous if the Scottish Parliament could set a date for implementation that is well ahead of the designated timescale. I leave that in the hands of the minister and suggest that she could address the issue when she responds.
Of all the services, access to meaningful education is one of the most important. Education can open doors to employment, lift people out of poverty and lead to a fulfilling life. However, we hear over and over again—not only in the evidence that has been given to our inquiry but in the manifesto—that disabled people are being let down by our further education colleges. They are sent on courses that do not benefit them. Young adults and others are being given colouring books and are being told to clean windows and given other tasks that do not lead to fulfilment or qualifications. During our inquiry, we heard of one young woman who was told to clean the classroom. Rightly, she said, "No. I am here to get a qualification." That sort of thing is happening everywhere and we must examine it further.
This morning, we had a debate on further education and I hope that the needs of disabled people will be considered closely by the Minister for Education and Young People. We must tackle inequalities in that area if the lives of disabled people are to be improved and social inclusion is to have any real meaning.
I would like to cover many other areas but I expect that other members will deal with them.
I admit that there have been improvements in the social inclusion of disabled people. The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 should make a positive difference and we must ensure that it does. The "Manifesto for Inclusion", which is written by disabled people, gives a voice to disabled people that we must listen to. As legislators, we must implement policies that will fully integrate all of the peoples of Scotland.
I end by quoting article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
The four most important words in the "Manifesto for Inclusion" are the ones that are written on the front: "Written by disabled people". Those people are standing up and speaking for themselves, not being patronised or having others speak for them but talking directly about the barriers that they face and what they think about them. That is a powerful message. The Equal Opportunities Committee's inquiry is carrying that message forward by making an effort to go out and allow disabled people to speak for themselves about what prevents them from achieving their full potential, such as the things that we put in their way because of our assumptions and our lack of awareness about what we can do to give people equality of opportunity, which is a basic human right.
I detest waste and I think that there is an enormous waste of human resource because we do not make it possible for people to have access to education and work, to make a contribution to society or to socialise and enrich the lives of others around them. Often, that happens because of a lack of small adjustments and expenditure; sometimes, that happens because of a lack of large adjustments and expenditure. That expenditure ought to be made.
I congratulate Sandra White on her motion, which is almost a speech. I could almost make the contribution that I want to make to the debate just by reading it out. There is an enormous amount in the "Manifesto for Inclusion" and we cannot pretend that it will all happen tomorrow. However, we must ensure that we make steady progress towards providing everything in the manifesto so that there is no longer a need for it. At that point, we will see people as people and will not regard their disabilities as a barrier to their full inclusion in society.
I say at the outset that I regret that I cannot stay for all the speeches because I have a family duty to carry out tonight.
I thank Sandra White and Inclusion Scotland for the debate. Like others, I note that there are many issues in the motion and I am sure that I will be forgiven for picking out just one or two. The motion states that the "Manifesto for Inclusion" promotes
"independent living for disabled people … the right to live in the community with appropriate support and not in an institution … advocacy services … and … housing".
I have a particular interest in advocacy services in relation to the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003. On housing, I am pleased to say that at this week's meeting of the Communities Committee we took evidence from a panel of representatives of disabled groups, who highlighted many issues and discussed whether or not they should be covered in the Housing (Scotland) Bill.
Another issue that I have picked out from the manifesto concerns the needs of disabled jobseekers and employees. Sometimes, we get so focused on the care and support of disabled people that we forget that if they are to be socially included and lead independent lives, we should also encourage them into employment.
There is no doubt that much is happening to address many of the issues in the motion. As Nora Radcliffe said, we are looking for steady progress, and change will not be achieved overnight. However, I am reminded of the implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and of one of my favourite glossy brochures from the first session of Parliament, "The same as you?" It is an excellent document and only one of its recommendations is still to be implemented: the closure of all long-stay hospitals for people with learning disabilities.
I welcome the manifesto from Inclusion Scotland and appreciate its value, particularly as it represents—as Nora Radcliffe said—the collective voice of those whom it plans to help, which gives even more weight to its conclusions. It represents a diverse group of people and its theme is that disabled people should be allowed independence and self-determination. Inclusion Scotland clearly seeks to aid and encourage everyone to accommodate the distinct impairments of disabled people and allow them a leadership role in that.
Manifestos such as the one that Inclusion Scotland has produced help to give a voice to people who are prevented from participating fully in society as a result of their impairment. I welcome that, and no organisation should think that the manifesto or debates such as this one do not carry significant substance. The debate has forced us to read the manifesto and think about it, and as we go about our parliamentary business in the two years until the next election we will think about the aspects that we are talking about tonight. That applies not only to MSPs who are in the chamber but to others who are listening in their offices. It is clear from organisations and individuals who contact MSPs and cross-party groups that one of the most infuriating aspects, which many people talk about, is the feeling that people in positions of power are not listening or paying attention. Tonight we are undoubtedly listening.
I will pick up on one or two comments from the manifesto. One aspect that we discussed quite often during the first session of Parliament is unmet need in care in the community. We know that there is unmet need in the health service and it is time for us to consider how long people wait for home care or the care package that they need. Another aspect is independent advocacy and the fact that disabled people should be recognised as the real experts. They, and not the need to fit into existing services and budgets, should be the focus of support. We have often heard that disabled people have to fit into what is provided rather than the service fitting their needs.
I will read just a couple of comments from the manifesto, which says:
"charging disabled people for services which they rely upon to achieve a basic degree of social inclusion is fundamentally unfair."
We must consider that in future. The manifesto also says:
"Means-testing also effectively double-charges those who have already paid national and local taxes."
The argument about that will continue.
The Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 is to be implemented in October. I still have concerns about staff shortages and whether we will have enough social workers, mental health officers, psychiatrists and psychologists. When the 2003 act was passed, we needed an additional 57 psychiatrists and the national health service had 58 vacant posts. Perhaps that need will be met by October; I sincerely hope so.
I have already mentioned the evidence that we heard on the Housing (Scotland) Bill this week, so I will move on to direct payments. I could not agree more with what the manifesto says about the low take-up of such payments. It also says:
"Direct Payments are potentially the most significant statutory measure … since The Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968 and The National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990."
I have advocated direct payments and have probably asked more questions than anyone about them. I know the Executive's commitment, but the facts about the very low take-up speak for themselves.
I could talk for another five minutes about the merits of direct payments, but I am sure that listeners to the debate know about them. However, at a recent meeting of the cross-party group on autistic spectrum disorder, I was shocked to find that many parents had not heard of them. The issue is not just that local authorities are reluctant to implement such payments; a huge communication exercise is required to inform carers of them.
My final point is about advocacy. We might not be totally there yet, but I commend many of the services that are up and running and particularly the Highland advocacy service, with which I work regularly and which provides wonderful support to many people who are in need.
As is normal, I pay tribute to my colleague Sandra White for lodging the motion. It is lengthy, but that illustrates the complexity of the multifaceted issue that must be addressed. Numerous problems transcend an array of matters that are covered in Parliament and elsewhere.
It is appropriate that the debate follows the debate—in particular the deputy minister's speech—about victory in Europe day. She stated eloquently that the war was waged against fascism and tyranny. We should remember that people gave their lives, limbs, youth and whatever else not only to defeat fascism and tyranny, but to create a better world. That is why, in the election in 1945, a war hero who was instrumental in delivering the defeat of fascism was overwhelmingly defeated by Labour. People returned from the war or left the factories desiring not simply the benefits of victory, but to change the world to make it a better place for them and future generations. The battle had been waged and they expected the world to benefit all, not merely some or a minority.
I pay tribute not to Labour Governments that have been elected recently, but to the Labour Government that was elected in 1945, which sought change. It did so and made many advances, but as time has moved on we have perhaps not made the changes for which we hoped. There is still a long way to go—that is not a criticism of any Government or party.
As I said, we have failed to deliver some of the changes that were sought to create a fairer world. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 provides one way to make progress, but it is appropriate to recognise that not only legislative change, but cultural change is necessary. I know that today has been a long day, that earlier debates were heavily attended and that numerous other events are taking place elsewhere, but it is perhaps symbolic that the turnout is lower than it has been at other junctures.
People do not necessarily see the problem, which is that many of the difficulties that disabled people experience and many of the issues that the manifesto raises are hidden. Therefore, it is important not only that we introduce legislation to ensure that rights are available to those who suffer from disabilities of whatever form, and that we enforce that legislation, but that we address the cultural attitudes that exist in us all. I have to put my hand on my heart and confess that I have often been guilty of ignorance of the difficulties that people who have mental or physical impediments face.
We must acknowledge that we need not only legislative change, but cultural change, but if we wish to achieve cultural change—whether in this matter, in respect of binge drinking or something else—we have to set a tone at the top that makes it clear that we desire a society that includes everyone. Therefore, it is important that we have this debate and that we address all the issues. I welcome the progress that is being made on the DDA, whether in Westminster or on aspects that the Executive brings to Parliament.
Inclusion is not simply a question of imposing a moral right that those who have disabilities should be included in aspects of society that the rest of us who are able bodied take for granted; in Scotland in the 21st century, it is also an economic imperative. We know that we have a demographic crisis, that we must get fresh talent and that we need all hands to the pumps. When I walked up Holyrood Road yesterday, all the cafes, bars and hotels on that street were advertising for staff. We do not have the labour supply to meet Scotland's economic needs. It is not only a matter of imposing a moral right that disabled people should be able to participate in the fruits of the society in which they live; if we wish our society to maintain its economic progress—never mind its social progress—we must take steps to allow disabled people to participate. We need them on board, just as they have every right to participate, like the rest of us.
I am happy to join in the debate. I pay tribute again to my colleague Sandra White for having brought this important matter to Parliament's attention. The DDA is the way forward, but we must get to cultural attitudes and change minds as well as law.
I add my congratulations to Sandra White on securing the debate and to Inclusion Scotland on the contents of its manifesto. The motion covers so much ground that members have the luxury of choice, which does not always present itself. I will touch on a few issues.
In the first instance, I will discuss housing. Mary Scanlon mentioned the Housing (Scotland) Bill, with which the Communities Committee is dealing. I am sure that the minister has already been made aware of some of the discussions that took place at the committee's meeting this week. For example, Ownership Options in Scotland argued that the bill's proposals would
"diminish … the financial support given to disabled people to adapt their homes"
and that the Executive
"can afford to give Scottish disabled people the same right to grant as disabled people in the rest of the UK."
That is something that we need to take every bit as seriously as employment legislation, because the right to request that an employer make reasonable adaptations to the workplace is of little use if a person cannot get out of their house to go to work, or if the emotional barriers that are a consequence of a physical barrier in the home prevent them from job seeking and getting ready for work. I am sure that the minister is already considering those matters, and that we will have opportunities to discuss them.
The motion also mentions the need for a single equality bill. I very much support that and, if the Queen's speech includes a commitment to early introduction of such a bill, I will welcome that move. At some point, we will need to go further and not only amalgamate the Disability Rights Commission, the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Commission for Racial Equality, but raise the level of protection—including on provision of goods and services—in all strands of equalities, not just those that are currently covered by European directives. However, any progress in the right direction is to be welcomed.
I thank the few members who managed to come to the reception that Cathy Peattie and I hosted in Parliament a couple of weeks before the election. Perhaps one should not host receptions a couple of weeks before elections if one wants MSPs to turn up at them, but I am grateful to Malcolm Chisholm for speaking at it. We also heard from the Department of Trade and Industry and from Scottish equalities organisations.
I was particularly pleased to see the references to sexual health in the "Manifesto for Inclusion". I previously worked in a role supporting a group who experience society's assumptions about sexuality, sexual behaviour and sexual identity. Many people of various identities and walks of life have assumptions placed on them by society about their sexuality. Disabled people often have the assumption made about them that they have no sexuality, so I was pleased to see that the manifesto challenges that assumption and acknowledges that people should be treated equally with respect to the delivery of information and services about sexual health matters.
The Executive's recently launched sexual health strategy was originally developed by a working group that included people who have from their professional lives significant expertise regarding disabled people and the issues that they face. Because of that, the original strategy was quite strong on issues of diversity. I have about seven pages in front of me that show the differences between the original strategy and the final strategy, which most people would acknowledge to be weaker on some issues.
It is important that the national advisory committee on sexual health, for which the Executive is currently recruiting, make a significant effort to bring back that level of expertise to ensure that the targets that are set, and on which the Executive will monitor progress on sexual health, include targets that challenge service delivery in terms of accessibility, outreach and providing information and education to different communities, including disabled people. I very much hope that we will hear soon from the Minister for Parliamentary Business that we will have a debate on the sexual health strategy, so that the issues can be debated more widely and with a few more MSPs present.
I will share an observation that I have made before, which arose from a meeting I attended at Glasgow City Council quite a number of years ago, before I was an MSP, when I was representing the city's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender organisations. That meeting was a coming together of various different equality strands and organisations. I ended up having a bit of an argument about the social model of disability. The social model is very much part of the basis of the manifesto. It has great value and has helped to move the debate on and to increase understanding of how people are disabled not necessarily by their condition, but by the condition of society and the barriers that society places on them. There are difficulties applying that model to other equality organisations, however. A representative of a disabled people's organisation tried to argue that we should apply social models to racism, homophobia, sexism and so on, but there are limits to how that model can be applied. It is not so long ago that other minority groups in society were medically marginalised, as disabled people have been medically marginalised. Application of the social model carries the danger of going backwards for some groups who have already overcome that problem.
We need to support disabled people and their organisations and representatives in challenging the physical and social barriers that still apply to them.
I am delighted to add the Scottish Executive's congratulations to those of other members, who have already expressed their recognition of the importance of the debate. The issue is very dear to my heart.
Perhaps I may make a gentle point to you, Presiding Officer. I recognise that the number of members attending the debate this evening is low. I ask you to take back the reflection that the late notice of the subject of the debate might have excluded some people who would have wished to prepare themselves and make a contribution to the debate. I would like to devote a lot of time to the matter. I think that some people were not able to rearrange their commitments to be here this evening. That is simply a procedural point.
As I said, the issue of disability is dear to my heart and I am delighted that the Equal Opportunities Committee is conducting an inquiry on it. I very much look forward to its consideration of the issue.
I understand that representatives of Inclusion Scotland are here tonight. I am pleased that the organisation has taken the initiative and provided a clear account of disabled people's views and an indication of the kind of things that it believes should be done at Westminster, by the Scottish Executive and locally. I make the commitment on behalf of the Executive that we will work with Inclusion Scotland and other organisations that represent people with disabilities in developing an agenda that ensures that there is equality, access and a lack of disadvantage.
To respond to Kenny MacAskill's point, when we have this kind of debate about disability issues we can mark progress that reflects a change in what people believe politics to be about. When I became politically active many years ago, there was a view that politics was about the economy and giving people sufficient income, for which the trade unions were a powerful lever, and that other things could be sorted. Over the years we have seen a growing understanding that inequality, exclusion and disadvantage come in many forms and that it is the business of politicians and our broader community to address inequality however it is expressed and to understand how it expresses itself in order to challenge it.
That is why the Executive has been working closely with Inclusion Scotland for a number of years. We consider it a key partner in delivering our equality strategy and our work to tackle prejudice and discrimination and promote equality of opportunity for disabled people. A feature of the work of the Parliament and the Executive is an understanding that to change people's lives we have to work with those who best understand how inequality is expressed now. We work with people to deliver change; we are not in the business of doing things to or for people. If we act on that basis, we will never get policy right. By understanding that people have the solutions and that we must work closely with them to develop policy, we will have more success.
I am delighted that we have been able to support Inclusion Scotland through funding of more than £650,000 to help it deliver its programme of engagement with disabled people and disability groups throughout Scotland. That has been tremendously valuable for us and we have learned a great deal through our work with Inclusion Scotland. It contributed a huge amount to our work on the European year of disabled people in 2003 and we are continuing to work with it in our strategic disability working group, which aims to establish priorities for the Scottish Executive and partner organisations, to promote equality for disabled people in Scotland and to develop proposals for longer-term mechanisms for engaging with the disability sector.
Promoting access to services and equality of opportunity are fundamental to ensuring that disabled people can participate in Scottish society at all levels. The Executive has a long-standing commitment to promoting equality for disabled people and has taken significant action across departments through legislation and partnership working. I believe that we have made a real difference to disabled people's lives.
I remember talking to a friend of mine whose child, who is now a young adult, has a learning disability. He described to me how caring for his child was often a battle to get the appropriate help and support to meet their needs and to support him in allowing his child to reach their full potential. It ought not to be a battle. I salute those who have not only battled on behalf of their children and the people for whom they care but have taken the time to contribute and demand policy changes at every level. People who have experienced that battle will ensure that the battles will diminish for others in future.
The Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Act 2000 introduced a duty on education authorities to educate pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools unless certain specified exceptions apply. Education within mainstream school is the norm for the majority of pupils with additional support needs in Scotland. That is not, however, about closing special schools. Ministers are committed to ensuring that a range of provision exists to meet the needs of the individual child.
The Education (Disability Strategies and Pupils' Records) (Scotland) Act 2002 requires education providers to have in place accessibility strategies to improve access to education for children with disabilities. The Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 modernises legislation on the assessing and recording of special educational needs. Some £12 million was set aside for 2004-05 and some £14 million was set aside for 2005-06 to support the implementation of that.
I heard what Patrick Harvie said about housing. We will ensure that there is a rigorous debate on the implications of the proposed housing legislation for people with disabilities and I reassure him that the Executive will not act in a way that reinforces discrimination.
I highlight the fact that there has been a great increase in the number of direct payments over the past three years and in their value. In 2001, there were 207 payments; in the year to 31 March 2004, there were 912 payments. The value of payments has increased by nearly £6.2 million, from £2.1 million in 2001 to more than £8.3 million in 2004. It looks like the interventions that have been made are beginning to have an effect. The focus for 2005-06 will be on increasing direct payment uptakes by groups that are currently eligible, particularly by users of disabled children's services and mental health services. We will work closely to deliver such uptakes.
On transport, I heard what Sandra White said about timing and so on, but she will be aware that the matter is Westminster's responsibility. However, people at every level have responsibilities and I will ensure that the Scottish Executive makes its contribution so that where there is a connection between our areas of responsibility and our commitments, we will ensure that people work in the best interests of those with disabilities.
We are working to understand disabled people's transport needs and we have established a Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland to advise ministers. I feel strongly about transport. In my city, being part of the parallel transport liaison group—which works with users of internal services that take people to special schools, adult care centres or wherever—has been a great privilege. The group works with those people, carers and groups that advocate on behalf of people who use the transport services and it sits beside those who deliver the service.
If everybody sits in a room together, they will understand better how a service can be delivered—that has been a powerful lesson. It is not the theory that matters. Somebody said to me that it was just a bus that was being discussed. I am talking about making a difference for somebody who cares for a parent with Alzheimer's disease and worries about the time a bus will come because of the consequences for the rest of their day that will result from the distress that will be caused if a bus is late.
I commend Glasgow City Council for recognising that harnessing people's energies and their understanding of their own experiences is a powerful way to deliver a quality service. Taxi drivers in Glasgow now have to go through disability awareness training in order to get their badge. We know that such training will improve the experience of people with disabilities. That also fits in with the message on advocacy and the power of talking to people who understand how services impact on them.
In the national health service, as part of the fair for all overarching equality and diversity strategy, a fair for all disabled people initiative has been established. The initiative is a joint initiative with the Disability Rights Commission to support NHS Scotland in implementing the requirements of part 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The initiative will provide strategic guidance to NHS Scotland and implement a range of activities to support the development of good practice.
We are also funding disability organisations throughout Scotland. For example, we are supporting the development of the local access panel network across Scotland and progressing the recommendations of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations' review of access panels in Scotland. Some £800,000 has been allocated to date, including a £500,000 package to support the network of local access panels. We are trying to make real the idea that we can harness that energy.
Patrick Harvie talked about the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which is an important tool. It is possible to raise, address and scrutinise issues as the bill progresses rather than wait until the legislation is on the statute book.
Of course a great deal of work has still to be done if disabled people are to participate fully in public life. There are people in the disabled community who have the energy and drive to ensure that that work will be done. The new duty to promote equality of opportunity for disabled people, which has recently been introduced through the UK Government's Disability Discrimination Act 2005, will help to ensure that we eliminate discrimination and promote equality in all that we do. The new duty will mark a shift in the nature of disability legislation from compliance to proactivity and will drive the mainstreaming of disability equality across all activities of the public sector, which is a critical element in challenging discrimination.
The issues can, of course, be complex. Disabled people are not a homogeneous or a small group. Some estimates suggest that there are around a million disabled people in Scotland. The range of impairments and diversity of needs are also broad. We must have policies that recognise that.
Clearly, there are many issues that we need to consider in order to deliver the new duty. We should not underestimate the challenges that we face or the complexity of some of the issues. The Inclusion Scotland manifesto reminds us of the many issues that disabled people see as key to achieving change. However, we should not be deterred from addressing those issues. As members from all parties have said, it is in the interests of all of Scotland that we have a Scotland to be proud of, which means a Scotland with equal opportunity for all.
Meeting closed at 17:45.