Reporters
Good morning and welcome to the Equal Opportunities Committee's fifth meeting this year. We have apologies from Elaine Smith and Margaret Smith.
We will start with reports from our disability and gender reporters. The disability reporter's report was circulated with the agenda and I invite Marilyn Livingstone to speak to her paper.
I would like to report not only on my Highland visit, but on my Fife visit. As that took place yesterday afternoon, I will just give an oral report.
The committee knows that as disability reporter I have made two visits—one to Inverness and one to Fife—to inform myself and our disability inquiry. We had a day in Inverness, which turned out not to be long enough. It has been suggested that we should return to the Highlands, but perhaps not to Inverness, because issues outside Inverness have been raised. We will undertake that visit.
In Inverness, we spoke to mental health service user groups, carers and users from the Highland community care forum, People First and a wheelchair users group. A spread of organisations was involved and we spoke to user groups rather than large organisations.
I will report and take questions on the Highland visit first, then move on to the Fife report. I will draw out a few salient points made by the mental health service users group, although the report contains more issues. Members of the group find that accessing information about benefits and other entitlements, such as travel passes, can be difficult, which has a huge impact on their mental health. It seems to be a trial for them to go through all that.
Work still needs to be done to tackle stigma among professionals and the public alike. Many congratulations were offered for the See Me Scotland campaign, but it was felt that the work has to be sustained.
It is difficult for mental health service users to access employment opportunities. It is felt that it is quite easy to undertake training, but many of the people with mental health issues who spoke to us felt that the difficulty of obtaining disability living allowance and other benefits meant that coming off benefits for a short-term job then obtaining benefits again was stressful. I know that the issue is reserved, but they asked whether we could find a way to simplify the system.
Respite care is lacking, particularly in people's own communities, although the situation is better in Inverness. Many people felt that direct payments are a huge bonus, because they allow people to look for their own care package. They felt that more information about direct payments was needed, but that direct payments were a good way forward.
Users felt that more training and funding for advocacy work should be provided and that more information should be given to groups about available advocacy services. It was also felt that drop-in centres that offer services seven days a week should be established throughout the area. Users said that Monday-to-Friday services were fine, but that people often have problems at weekends, when services are limited.
The carers and users group from the Highland community care forum raised the broad theme of accessing information. Carers described the considerable problems that young people with disabilities face when they turn 16. It was felt that services should work together in young people's interests and that that should start at school. It would help if people had one point of contact, because it is quite stressful to deal with many people in different agencies.
The group said that disabled people are Scotland's hidden resource. That is well put. We are talking about demographic changes in Scotland and we have a huge resource that wants to play an active part in employment and to leave the cycle of learning. That is positive. What emerged was the positive contribution that people want to make. They just want the support to enable them to make that contribution.
Users and carers explained how essential it is for adaptations to be provided at the right time and how important it is for housing provision to be flexible enough to meet the needs of users. As I think I said when the minister was at the committee, if someone has a progressive illness, they need the aid or adaptation to be available at the right time. For example, we talked to someone with multiple sclerosis, who said that if the illness is at stage B or C, the disease might more quickly progress to another stage if they did not receive the appropriate aids or adaptations. A seamless approach to care packages is necessary.
Family life was another issue. If a disabled person who had been living alone was able to move on to family life, the house would need to be adapted to suit the whole family. There was a need for flexibility in housing provision.
People expressed concern that voluntary sector projects that were working very well might come to an end because their funding would run out. It was felt that there must be a way of ensuring the stability of projects, especially those that were demonstrating best practice and that were popular in the community.
It was also reported to us that people were moving to Inverness from other parts of the Highlands to access services. For example, we met someone who had moved up from Fort William for that reason. A parent carer said that there were long waiting lists for the respite that they thought was suitable for the person for whom they were caring.
Through People First, we spoke to people with learning disabilities, who said that they were still suffering from harassment and other problems that are caused by people's attitudes to them. They thought that there should be a sustained campaign to explain the issues around people with learning difficulties and the positive commitment that such people have to their communities, which makes them so valuable to those communities. They emphasised that it was important for professionals to understand their needs, and they thought that some people might need training and education. They said that a lot of good practice was happening, but that it was not consistent over all the services that they received.
Finally, we spoke to people in the wheelchair users group. Parents described the problems that they had encountered in obtaining suitable buggies and wheelchairs for their children—I have already raised that matter—and they said that the system was inflexible. They said that professionals should take on board parents' views about the provision of buggies, wheelchairs and other aids and adaptations, because such matters have an impact on more than just the child's lifestyle. For example, one family liked to take their child away for weekends—to the places that all families like to visit—but their child's disabilities were such that that was impossible without suitable transport. People said that being unable to get out and about in the community in the way that everyone else could had an impact on their lifestyles and on their mental health.
Families with children with complex needs did not think that their children had equal access to services—I raised that matter, too. They said that they had no problems in accessing mainstream services—for example, getting contact lenses—but when they needed a specialist service that related to the child's disability they thought that equal opportunities were not kicking in.
The parents whom we met said that wheelchair provision is not just an issue in the Highlands and Islands, but is a national issue that might require us to consider a national strategy. They told us that a lot of the wheelchairs that are available are not suitable for today's lifestyles.
Those are the main issues in my report from the Highlands and Islands. Shall I go on to discuss the report from Fife, or shall I take questions now?
Are there similarities in the two reports?
Yes.
Perhaps you could speak briefly about Fife.
We went to Fife yesterday afternoon, but we have not finished the Fife visit. Roy McMahon and I are going to Fife sensory impairment centre to speak to deaf and blind disabled people from Fife. Quite a lot of people want to speak to us, and because we need time to get the facilities correct and to get signers, we are going back on 26 March. I will fill the committee in on that later.
Although I have not highlighted it in my report, one of the issues that was raised in Fife was transport. In our inquiry, we will have to examine transport for disabled people. There is a cross-over with the Highlands transport issue, which is the availability of low-level buses for elderly people, disabled people and mums with young children. Access to transport was the biggest issue that was raised. In particular, people were concerned that they could not access rail or bus services, because stations were inaccessible. We were told that on Fife routes, only one side of a station is accessible in some cases. Therefore, although someone might be okay going out, they cannot get off at the same station when they come back; they have to stay on until the next station, then get transport back, which is crazy. There are also few low-loading buses.
It was felt that other countries are further ahead. Even though all the transport recommendations have to come into play by 2020, disabled people feel that transport authorities should be taking cognisance of their needs now. One witness said that it was easier to travel from Burntisland to South Africa than from Burntisland to Kirkcaldy, because of the difficulty with the trains. It was explained that the dial-a-ride service was the only way for many people to get to Kirkcaldy, but that there is a lot of pressure on that service.
I will take advice from the convener on this next point. Someone came along to speak to us about blue-badge criteria. We know that that is mainly a reserved issue, but Ruth Cooper is looking into the parts of the scheme that come under our remit. The tale that we heard was distressing and Ruth and I want to be of as much help as we can. The attendee had lost her husband due to a really bad asthma attack. He had been advised by doctors that he did not meet the blue-badge criteria. He had to walk up four flights of stairs, and although we do not know whether that contributed to the situation, a blue badge would have made life much easier for that asthma sufferer.
The attendee asked us to examine the criteria, because she believes that they are too open to interpretation, which can cause serious problems, as was the case with her husband. She asks us as a committee to ensure that people who need blue badges get them, that interpretation of the criteria is strengthened, and that people understand the criteria.
Another person raised the fact that agencies in Fife could have given support and advice to help the woman and her husband through their complex situation, but they were unaware of those agencies. Professionals and members of the public should know where they can go for advocacy and support. I do not know how we will tackle that issue.
On cross-cutting issues, the difficulty was information. People felt strongly that they were not aware of benefits, entitlements and services. They felt that they had to search for that information, instead of its being made available to them. It was all about word of mouth. We were told that Citizens Advice and Rights Fife was very good and that people can receive help, but people need to be made aware of the different levels of help available.
Direct payments for services were strongly supported. One attendee who had multiple sclerosis described how direct payments had made a huge different to her life, because she could choose which services she wanted and when she got them. Direct payments are viewed as good in the Highlands and Fife.
I see that the access assessment group is receiving extra funding from the minister. People described their involvement in the Fife access assessment group, which is now offering input to new builds and renovations of buildings that the council and health board are undertaking, by offering advice as well as pointing out potential problems in design. Ruth Cooper and I found it interesting that Fife disability network said that, after going through the designs for a public-private-partnership school and being able to make changes, it was able to visit the building once it was finished and say, for example, "That's not accessible, because the button to press to get in the door is not in the right place." It was good that people were not only involved in the original planning but got to go back and see the finished building. That was one of the most encouraging things that we heard.
On aids and adaptations packages, it was felt that the single assessment system that is being introduced will help—although we cannot rely on it alone. Under the previous system, lots of people had been involved, which users and carers did not like. On funding, perhaps there was not enough acknowledgement of the expertise of groups such as the Fife independent disability network.
Finally, on audiology, people were concerned about digital hearing aids and waiting times. One woman told us that it was difficult to get one-to-one learning support for her son.
I do not know whether Ruth Cooper wants to add anything; I think that I have covered all the points that I wanted to make. Before I finish, I thank the Highland groups and the Fife groups that came to gave evidence. The visits worked because they were informal. We did a mixture of things, such as visiting people's houses and speaking to the wheelchair users group and other organisations. That worked, because people were able to tell us what the issues were, a lot of which we are taking up. On behalf of the committee I also thank the Highland groups and the Fife groups for organising the visits and for being so open and frank with us. I also thank Ruth Cooper who came along, took notes and made the visit valuable.
Thank you, Marilyn. Lots of points came out of that. Given that we are planning an inquiry into disability, members might want to think about the areas that they want to include.
I suspect that what Marilyn Livingstone said would apply not only in Fife and Inverness but throughout the country—I have certainly picked up similar issues in the Aberdeen area. The first point that I picked up from what Marilyn Livingstone said was on accessing information about benefits. In my first few months as an MSP I learned from a citizens advice bureau in Aberdeen how it used to run outreach clinics in the local hospital, but the health board pulled the funding; it is not running the clinics anymore, but it would like to start doing so again. I did not have time to read the whole of the late paper that we received for today's meeting, but I noticed that it mentioned a similar issue. Outreach clinics, whether in health centres or hospitals, are worth while. The palliative care service that Macmillan Cancer Relief provides in Lanarkshire, which was mentioned in a recent members' debate, obviously works well. I wonder whether there is a means of taking that issue on board, possibly in our inquiry. We should tie in the valuable work that the CAB has been doing and would like to do, if it could get on-going funding. That would be of tremendous help to the disability groups that we are talking about.
The other issue that I wanted to mention was the accessing of services by children with complex special needs. That is obviously an issue in the north-east as well; we had a members' business debate about that. It seems that there is a difficulty; I am not sure whether it an access difficulty or whether it is simply that many of the specialists are not available in sufficient numbers.
The situation with audiology is slightly different, but there is a lack of audiologists, too. There is also a lack of speech therapists and of all sorts of personnel that are needed to cope with some of the disability issues. The problem is Scotland-wide; it does not relate to just one area.
Would Marilyn Livingstone like to pick up those comments?
The evidence on the blue-badge criteria was interesting. The lady who had lost her husband was not blaming the general practitioner or anyone else; she was saying that the problem was that the criteria were so complex that they could have been open to different interpretations. It came across that there was a lot of complexity.
Organisations such as citizens advice bureaux and CARF do good work. One of the disability groups' representatives who did some voluntary work with the advice project said that, if someone had disability living allowance, the blue badge was almost automatic. People just did not understand the tie-in with how the process works, and they felt that there was a lot of complexity around benefits. CARF and all the different organisations do a lot of good work in explaining matters to people. It is a question of how we let people in those situations know that such advice and support are available to take them through the different levels of complexity, which they find difficult to wade through. I think that Ruth Cooper will support me when I say that that is what we heard on practically every issue.
We are highlighting the issues that arose, but we heard a great deal about good practice and first-class professionals in the area. People said that, once they got a really good professional, they would hang on to them at all costs, because it was that person who would help them with their care. It was felt that there was a huge shortage in some areas; speech therapy was one area that was mentioned to us.
It is a question of rolling out good practice and trying to get similar provision of service throughout the country.
There is an issue about voluntary sector organisations receiving short-term funding to provide advocacy and advice, and a lack of recognition that they need funding to provide those services. Some people think that such work should be done for nothing, because the voluntary sector is involved. We can flag that up in our report.
I visited Dundee Citizens Advice Bureau yesterday. The section on funding in Marilyn Livingstone's report mentions the fact that projects are set up and work well, but then the funding disappears. Dundee CAB highlighted that—it said that it gets funding for a year. There is a need to carry on funding. I know that that is difficult, because the Executive has to balance its books and justify where money goes.
The Executive is not the source of the funding.
Yes, but the funding will originate from the Executive. I am sorry—to be fair, Dundee CAB was talking about a particular bit of funding that was going to be available only for a year. That highlights Marilyn Livingstone's point about how funding comes and goes. That does not provide the consistency that is needed; the disability is there forever.
In the section on attitudes, I was concerned to read:
"Parents from the Highland Wheelchair Users Group gave examples of treatment where they felt that they were not being listened to."
I know from comments made elsewhere that people feel that in audiology, too, there is a lack of empathy and that they are just not getting their concerns heard and understood. As folk without disabilities, it is very hard for us to appreciate what it is like to have a disability and to have to try to access information. That is one of our problems.
We are talking about a learning process involving the training of the people who are there to listen. We need to broaden out the issue to encourage people who deal with all kinds of disabilities to listen and take on board what is said. I do not know whether we can investigate that a bit more. Not being listened to must be very debilitating.
The access assessment group in Fife was excellent. People who use the service were able to comment on it before it was put in place. That is the way forward.
I will give an example that relates to transport. Everything is fine if the station platform is wide and the trains are low, but if the platform is too narrow, people have to try to do a 90° spin on their machines to get on trains. We were asked whether we could do that in our cars, to which our answer was, of course, that we could not.
When we are making plans, we have to consider how disabled people travel from A to B. The best people to advise us in that regard are disabled people. It is not enough just to make ramps and so on available to disabled people. When that is done, we should assess whether they can use the equipment that is available to them to get on and off trains without many problems.
One of the gentlemen to whom we spoke mentioned that if people want to use a ramp, they have to be able to say when they are going and when they are coming back. He said that if he is going to a ramblers conference, for example, he will know when he is going, but he may not know when he is coming back. He felt that that was an inequality, because none of us have to inform the railway station when we are making our journeys.
Many equal opportunities issues were raised. All those to whom we spoke felt that the access assessment group is an example of best practice and that its suggestions should be taken on board by the bus groups. They said that we should decide how to implement many of the transport plans before 2020.
I was glad to hear what you said about the See Me Scotland anti-stigma campaign, because I had heard grumblings about its cost. When such a campaign is established, it can be argued that its costs could have been better applied to central services. As Shiona Baird said, it is about balancing budgets. I welcome the fact that the campaign has been appreciated because I thought that it was good.
Many of the campaigns that we run involve continually trying to get the message across by means of the media. I would like to see an on-going campaign to raise awareness.
In the case that you mentioned earlier, was the person unable to access a buggy because of a lack of funding or because of a lack of availability?
The mother was used to carrying out research. She found a buggy that allowed her child, who had quite complex needs, to be strapped into the buggy in a certain manner, which was important. She said that she needed such a buggy because she wanted to take her child out and about. It was agreed by everybody that it would be first class. She was eventually given the buggy, but she was told not to broadcast that she had been given such a piece of equipment, in case everybody would want it.
The case raises some of the issues that we have discussed, such as the provision of information and people having to do research themselves. The equipment was not ready for them to use; they had to find out about it themselves. Such problems were constantly being mentioned.
So there may be a need to have small stores of equipment available that can be accessed as the need arises. I am thinking of things such as wheelchairs and crutches.
It was said that wheelchairs are available, but a small child who has multiple disabilities cannot be pushed over bumpy ground in a wheelchair, so it would be difficult to take such a child out on a coastal or country walk without one of these buggies.
Employment is a major issue and the employment market needs to be flexible for people with mental health problems or disabilities. It is difficult for them to have a 9-to-5, five-day-a-week job. In community businesses and social enterprises there may be flexibility in the work force and more opportunities. I do not know how much we can investigate that.
We might want to consider that. We have the report and we can add more from Marilyn Livingstone's report to help us to decide how to proceed with our inquiry. If we want to include employment, we can do that.
Flexibility in employment was certainly an issue, but there was also the issue of support in employment and the flexibility to allow people to go on to and come off benefits. Many people with mental health problems felt that the stress of going through that process again was too much. Perhaps the committee should consider the flexibility of benefits as well.
Thank you. That was very good and I am sure that you found it very interesting. It is sometimes quite difficult to be able to support people. We will include anything that you have said that is not already covered in the scoping paper for the inquiry.
We move on to consider the gender reporter's report. Elaine Smith is off sick this morning, but she has provided a paper, which has been circulated to members. Do members have any questions? I am not sure that I can answer them.
Elaine Smith has made some recommendations. If people have questions, she is happy to answer them at a future meeting, and she asks members to consider the action points in her paper. One of those suggests that the committee should write to the minister for her views on the displaying of pornographic images in retail outlets; perhaps we could do that now. If members want to wait to ask Elaine Smith for more information, that would also be fine.
The issue has been a personal campaign of mine as well. I do not know how far I can take it. I should declare an interest in that I have been tackling people in shops about their display materials. There have been interesting findings such as the fact that if a particular magazine sells well, it is moved down to what is regarded as the optimum shelf. The top shelf and the bottom shelf are not the optimum shelves; the one in the middle is and it tends to be at about 4ft, so that it catches the eye. I have raised the issue but I have not got very far, of course. It is about exploitation of women.
I would like some more information about how many such magazines are sold and who is buying them. They are on sale in supermarkets where the majority of customers tend to be women and children. Are they the ones who are buying the magazines? If not, why are those particular materials displayed so prominently? There are issues, especially in international women's week.
Absolutely. It is a good week for the issue to be on the agenda.
I support what Shiona Baird said. I would be pleased if we could write to the minister as Elaine Smith's paper suggests. I am not sure how much time we have to do anything more than that. I am interested in the subject and writing to the minister would be a good beginning.
I understand that the ministers are researching the issue and it would be helpful to have some kind of update as to where they are with it.
Can we clarify what the research was? Was it into the connection between pornography and violence? That is not what we are talking about; we are talking about retail outlets and about children and young people seeing such literature displayed.
The Executive is examining research into the links between pornography, abuse and discrimination against women and children. It would be interesting to find out where the Executive has got with that.
In my opinion, that is not a tenuous connection, but it will be difficult to prove. People's attitude to the display of pornographic material at child height, on the other hand, is quite obvious: it is obviously wrong. I would be interested to hear what the minister says about that.
Okay. We will write to the minister. When we receive the minister's reply, we can put the report back on the agenda, which will allow Elaine Smith the opportunity to raise any issues that she has. That is important, given that she spoke to the organisations concerned, and it would be useful if she could bring what she heard back to the committee. If this committee does not look into the issue, I am not sure what other committee will.