Skip to main content
Loading…
Chamber and committees

Equal Opportunities Committee, 09 Mar 2004

Meeting date: Tuesday, March 9, 2004


Contents


Disability

The Convener:

The papers on our disability inquiry were circulated with the agenda. Members will have already heard Marilyn Livingstone's report on the issue. I invite members to discuss some of the issues that they would wish to include in our paper or among its action points.

Members will recall the background to our inquiry. Many of the things that the participants at the event that we held on the European year of disabled people said have been included in the issues paper in front of us. There are similarities between Marilyn Livingstone's report and that paper. However, we need to think about the scope of our inquiry. It does not make a lot of sense to hold an inquiry into all things—there would in fact be very little that we could do if we attempted to do that. We need to think about the kind of inquiry that we want to hold, and we need to think about the issues that are there. The clerks will produce a scoping paper for 20 April, but we need to hear the members' views on the paper, on any issues that are missing, and in particular on any issues that members feel strongly ought to be included.

Marlyn Glen:

The paper seems very wide ranging. That is always the difficulty. I would not want to miss out the issue of "Young people/opportunities/education", which seems to be really important. On the other hand, the second issue, "Access to services", is also a suitable topic, as long as we are sure that that means everyone's access to services and access in all its forms. I was thinking about access to services and physical access to places. I have received a letter about access to cinema complexes, for example. I know that Elaine Smith is interested in the third issue, "Families affected by disability", from the poverty point of view. It is apparent that families with even one disabled child have great difficulty, and really need support.

The fourth issue is

"Creating opportunities for disabled people."

We have also spoken about employment and leisure—I realise that I am hardly cutting down the scope of our inquiry here. The issues paper also mentions housing. I have been thinking about all the housing recommendations for asthma sufferers and about linking that into the wider idea of mainstreaming. This is obviously too big for our inquiry, but architects also came along to the informal meeting that was held on the matter, so they are interested in all this.

I have looked at one of the last sections of the issues paper, on employment. It cites written evidence that stated:

"Disabled people hold only 2% of public appointments."

That fits in nicely with the issues of increasing diversity, the apprenticeship scheme and shadowing for public appointments, which I have spoken about before.

On increasing diversity, I wonder whether we should use the disability inquiry to widen that out to everybody—to all groups that are discriminated against. That goes along with the idea of a single equality body. We could use disability to get in, and then consider questions of different services and access for different people. I am afraid that I am not helping you to focus. The area is terribly wide and there is so much to do.

Mrs Milne:

Following on from what Marlyn Glen said and from what is in the committee paper, I think that it is important that we look at access to services in remote and rural areas outwith main centres. It is a problem if people have to travel many miles to access services.

You are right. We could look at transportation.

It is a wide-ranging and important issue throughout the country.

The Convener:

I wonder about access to information and advice. The general strand that runs through what we hear from people is that it is hard to get information and advice and that advocacy is not always available. People rely on the voluntary sector to provide a service, which is a really good one. There is a very good organisation that does advisory work with cancer patients. Although the funding from the health boards has been cut, the health boards still expect that work to happen—that is not possible.

The issue is almost the funding of voluntary organisations, although that is a much wider issue. However, this issue touches on that area and it might give us more information to go on.

Frances Curran (West of Scotland) (SSP):

A few years back, the CABx decided to specialise in debt counselling because of the complexity of debt and the fact that it is rising massively. Is there any specialisation in the area of disability rights and benefits? That kind of service is often voluntary and the DLA is a nightmare. We are not in a position to take evidence on the matter, but I bet that we would have an avalanche of evidence if we did. The CABx have said that the situation is impossible. There are two benefits that even they do not understand because the benefits are so complicated—the DLA is one of them. We would have to consider a whole range of services and benefits if we were to look at specialisation in welfare rights. I do not know whether that service exists. I have never heard about it, but it might exist in other areas.

The Convener:

Some work on welfare rights and people with disabilities is done in some areas, but it tends to be done by small voluntary organisations that specialise in disability issues. In fact, it is people with disabilities who run such services on a voluntary basis. The availability of advice is sporadic. Some local authorities offer good services that provide special information, but we should promote mainstreaming. However, we have to start with what is already there.

We have to cross the divide between what is and what is not reserved, but the issue is getting information to people and thereby improving their quality of life. We can look at that in the committee paper.

Mrs Milne:

Deafblind Scotland put up a good case for access to help for people with dual sensory loss. Perhaps we should look at that in more detail. Having seen the interpreter at the meeting in Glasgow, I was most impressed with their communication skills. There are not enough interpreters to cope with need throughout the country.

It might be a good idea to look at who is doing what. We also need to look at the language that we use because we should be talking about people with a disability rather than about disabled people—in a sense, that puts a label on folk.

On 26 March, we are going to speak to both deaf and blind organisations. We will write up the evidence for that so that it forms part of our inquiry. I am sure that those issues will come up in the inquiry.

Deafness and blindness are hard to bear for those who are afflicted with them, but to be both deaf and blind is worse because communication is so difficult.

The Convener:

There is also the issue of access to learning British Sign Language for people with hearing difficulties. They believe that if BSL were mainstreamed in their education, they would not have a disability because they would be able to communicate. That would then mean that whoever could not use BSL would have the disability.

Information should be readily available to blind people. There is a lack of readily accessible information for them. In fact, the issue of communication is crucial for people with a disability.

The Convener:

The theme running through what we are saying is access, for example to information and advice, or to transport. There is also the issue of how the voluntary sector supports individuals with advice and services. It will be difficult to narrow down the scope of the inquiry to allow us to do something that will bring about change. What we do not want is a talking shop. We do not want people to come along and give evidence and then feel that we have not done anything with it.

Shiona Baird:

The Deafblind Scotland letter has a comment about England and Wales having different rules from Scotland, which affects access to benefits. Can we ensure that the section 7 guidance to which the letter refers is extended to local authorities in Scotland?

We can consider including that topic in our inquiry so that we can ask the appropriate questions on it.

What we are mainly talking about is access to information and all the things that people need to improve their quality of life.

The two big headings are access to information and access to services.

Yes.

Mrs Milne:

The other specific matter that I remember from our meeting in Glasgow was the blind girl who had difficulty accessing computer facilities at college. That kind of situation will probably be covered by the European access rules that will be introduced in October. Facilities such as those that would help that blind girl are probably relatively simple to implement and not massively expensive, but they would make a huge difference to enabling disabled people to get from the school education stage into further and higher education and employment. Having appropriate facilities would help to bridge a gap for young people with disabilities, who have difficulties in accessing employment. Colleges and other educational institutions put barriers in disabled students' way by not having adequate facilities. That is an important issue, which will probably be a key part of the European legislation that will be introduced in October.

The Convener:

So the issue is disabled people's access to learning aids and adapted equipment that help them to work. I know someone who was able to bring their adapted computer equipment to work, which allowed them to type and so on. Some organisations might not have such important adaptations, which are necessary to allow disabled people to work.

We will see what the clerks come back with on 20 April. Are people happy with what we have so far?

Is the discussion of Deafblind Scotland's letter part of the inquiry or are we dealing with the letter separately?

The letter is just for information, but it will form part of the inquiry's scoping.

About access to services.

Yes.

So you would take evidence.

Absolutely.

As I said, the clerks will bring back a scoping paper on 20 April to allow us to consider what we want to do.

Meeting closed at 11:23.


Previous

Reporters