Page

This is a web page preview of a Microsoft Word document from the LDDA - The Liberal Democrat Disability Association site. It is generated by a computer and is not manually edited. Formatting and content may be displayed differently to the original document, and should not be regarded as definitive.

I have set out some ideas about our future and I would like your comments and suggestions. I'd also like you to volunteer to do some work! At the moment we rely very heavily on the goodwill and time of just a few people (and I'd particularly like to thank Gemma Roulston).

So how can we all get involved and what else should we be doing? If you have local or Assembly elections near you then please volunteer to help with those, THEN contact LDDA and give us your ideas.

Being the first Bill I had dealt with as a Front Bencher, I was unsure what to expect from the proceedings on the Welfare Reform Bill, which has now passed through the Commons and has had its Second Reading in the Lords. I certainly noted a great deal of cross-party consensus on the principles behind it, in particular the need to encourage greater responsibility from benefits claimants on the one hand, and to offer greater reciprocal support from Government to enable people to get back into work on the other. That is a philosophy that Liberal Democrats support very strongly.

Having said that, sometimes political consensus gets too cosy. The Committee certainly was not cosy; it was friendly and frank, and both the criticisms and the ministerial responses—and, occasionally, concessions—were perceptive. None the less, too cosy a political consensus is not good for the soul, and things can often seem too cosy from the outside, too. So at the Bill's Third Reading in the Commons, I took the opportunity to offer a few pointers on issues that need to be taken further, beyond proceedings on the Bill. On some of them, there will again probably be cross-party consensus. Firstly, the issue of funding and support, particularly for the pathways to work programme as it is rolled out, is important. We must make sure that the programme is genuinely available to the 1 million claimants who are currently receiving Incapacity Benefit but who would like to work. I am sure that this subject will be probed further in the House of Lords.

On a related subject, in respect of the roll-out of pathways to work and the use of the private and voluntary sector, the job has been half done. The Government are taking steps in the right direction, but they still have not fully grasped the opportunities that can be gained by taking advantage of the innovation of the private and voluntary sectors, and their potential to deliver some of the services. I hope that, in due course, the Government will have greater confidence in taking more radical steps in that direction. We Liberal Democrats will certainly develop our own policy on the subject in months to come.

Crucially, to me, it is striking that the Bill has often seemed like a supply-side device to get people ready for work. Too little attention is paid, both in the Bill—although that is perhaps natural, given its context—and generally, to the importance of tackling disability discrimination among employers, and raising disability awareness and confidence among employers. That must be done if we are to avoid a situation in which, because of the successful implementation of pathways to work, hundreds of thousands of former claimants are ready for work, but are unable to take advantage of the opportunities available to them because of other barriers, which might relate not to their disability or impairment but to attitudes in wider society. That is why it is so important to take the social model of disability as a conceptual basis for the Bill.

My colleagues in the House of Lords will continue my work in the Commons to press for a social understanding of disability to be better reflected in this Bill, so it consequently better reflects the experiences of people with disabilities in our society.

Every Disabled Child Matters (EDCM) is a campaign to get rights and justice for every disabled child. EDCM has now achieved its initial target of signing up 10,000 supporters across the UK. 230 MPs from all political parties have also signed up in support of the campaign. The campaign has enjoyed particular support from Annette Brooke MP, who launched the campaign at the Liberal Democrat annual conference in September 2006, and Danny Alexander MP who, along with Annette, is co-sponsoring the Disabled Children (Family Support) Bill. You can sign up to support the campaign at http://www.edcm.org.uk to show your support and find out how to get involved.

EDCM was set up by four organisations working with disabled children - Contact a Family, the Council for Disabled Children (CDC), Mencap and the Special Education Consortium (SEC). EDCM has three key areas of focus in the early part of 2007. Firstly, the campaign is promoting the Disabled Children (Family Support) Bill, adopted by Gary Streeter MP as a private member's bill, which seeks to give families with severely disabled children a right to short breaks from caring. Families with disabled children consistently state that short breaks are the most important service they could receive to support their caring responsibilities. Yet only a tiny minority of families receive breaks at present, contributing to family breakdown and increased levels of poverty. The Bill has its vital Second Reading in Parliament on 23 ^rdFebruary 2007, and all our supporters are urged to lobby their MP to support the Bill through the campaign website at www.edcm.org.uk

Secondly, EDCM is supporting the on-going HM Treasury / DfES review of children's services, which has a priority theme on disabled children. The review is gathering momentum - it was highlighted in the Chancellor's pre-budget report, and an evidence report published in January is expected to be followed by a policy options paper in the spring.

The momentum behind the review has been increased by the publication of the report from the parliamentary hearings on services for disabled children in October 2006. This report (available from www.edcm.org.uk ) calls for significant new investment in services for disabled children, in addition to new national and local targets to improve services. It also calls for a `core offer', or national minimum service standards, which every family with a disabled child should be able to expect to receive.

Our third key area of campaigning is around the EDCM local authority Charter. The Charter encourages local authorities to commit to providing a range of services for disabled children and their families by January 2008, and also to addressing the needs of disabled children in their strategic planning and local area agreements.

Ten local authorities have signed up so far, and many more are using the Charter as an opportunity to review their plans for disabled children's services, with a view to signing up in the coming months. You can find out more about the Charter, and check if your local authority has signed up, at www.edcm.org.uk

EDCM is now looking to sign up 25,000 supporters by the time the Comprehensive Spending Review is launched in July 2007. Please take a moment to show your support by signing up at www.edcm.org.uk - and ask everyone you know to do the same.

We are delighted that Liberal Democrats at all levels have been putting pressure on national and local government to deliver the necessary support for disabled children and their families. We'd also like to congratulate all Liberal Democrats for signing up to the pledge to End Child Poverty, and Danny Alexander MP in particular for pressing the point that child poverty targets will not be met without specific measures to address the issues for disabled children and their families. We look forward to your continued support over the coming year.

For further information please go to www.edcm.org.uk or email info@edcm.org.uk

In 2006 HM Treasury and the Department for Education and Skills announced a cross-cutting review of services for disabled children and their families. Ministers asked two Labour MPs to set up a process to gather evidence and to put forward recommendations to be submitted to the comprehensive spending review later this year. Three special parliamentary hearings were arranged during July, 2006. I was very pleased to be invited by the Chairman, The Right Honourable Tom Clarke MP, to be a member of the MPs `Hearing Panel'. Our Report was published in October 2006 and is available on the Every Disabled Child Matters campaign website www.edcm.org.uk.

Our Panel took evidence from a wide range of individuals and groups including: parents, young people with disabilities, Ministers, Councillors, and the Children's Commissioner for England.

The hearings covered: early years; family support and children's services; and transition stages to adulthood. Briefings informed us that there are 770,000 disabled children in the UK, over 90% of who live at home and are supported by their families

Only 1 in 13 families get support from their local social services, and 8 out of 10 families with disabled children are now at breaking point. There were some moving presentations from parents, including one where a mother explained how she was sent home from hospital with a baby with severe disabilities and a list of 21 people she could or should contact! Early support is obviously vital.

The saddest part for me was that I did not learn anything that I didn't know already. As a Councillor for 17 years, and as an MP since 2001 with a longstanding interest in disability issues, I had heard many times about the pressures that families face. For so long not enough support has been available and the provision of vital services has been very much a postcode lottery with variations across the country

The recommendations of the parliamentary hearings report are wide ranging and important, 7 or more Government Ministers from different Departments attended the sessions. For me perhaps the most important recommendation was for the provision of more respite: `families with disabled children should have a statutory minimum entitlement to a short break service, set to reflect the level of their child's needs and that of the family'.

This recommendation has been carried through into a private members bill - the Disabled Children (Family Support) Bill - which will be presented by Gary Streeter MP and which I am co-sponsoring. The second reading of this Bill is on Friday, February 23^rd and so it is important that supporting MPs are here in large numbers that day.

After the hearings, I recalled each parent who gave evidence saying, why is everything such a battle? I hope Liberal Democrats can contribute to real policy changes for families with disabled children and reduce the number of `battlefields.'

The Department of Constitutional Affairs in November issued new regulations aimed at improving disabled people's access to the electoral system. These regulations focus on the voting system itself but little attention has been paid to how parties communicate their messages.

As the deadline for Focus gets nearer, producing copy and finding accompanying pictures is understandably at the forefront of our minds. Ironically after all this hard work producing it in a format which will help to maximise the numbers of people reading it is something which is not always considered.

There are around two million people in the UK with a visual impairment; one in ten people are dyslexic and about 1.5 million people with a learning disability. These people are potential voters and most of them would benefit from a few simple changes to literature design.

While we often have so much to say that it is tempting to squeeze it in, the RNIB recommend that a minimum type size of between 12 and 14 point is used. If a person requests large print a type size of 18 and above is recommended.

In general the larger the font the easier it is to read, however the style of font is also important. Recommended font types are the more plain and include Arial, Helvetica Verdana and Sans Serif. All of these have clearly defined letters. Remember that while a decorative or handwriting style of font may appear more personalised, they are harder to read. If you are producing `blue ink' letters try and find somebody in your local party with nice clear handwriting. Avoid using blocks of capital letters, underlined, shadowed or italicised fonts and consider replacing them with bold text.

Text layout should also be considered, aligning text to the left with jagged right hand margins helps to create more distinction between the words. If possible avoid using tabs or indents. If you are using columns a vertical rule between them helps to distinguish one passage from another.

Aim for high contrast between colours, black text on yellow paper tends to be a good contrast whereas yellow writing on white paper is harder to read. While ALDC will probably shoot me for this blue writing on cream paper provides a better contrast than blue writing on blue paper - so if you always use blue on blue it is perhaps worth considering mixing it up a little!

The type of paper used can also make a big difference, the glare of glossy paper is harder to read than matt paper - not to mention the fact that it is often more expensive. But try not to go too cheap - thin paper may mean that the text shows through from the other side.

Other areas of good practice include consistency of literature design. In other words the layout is similar and headings / pictures are in the same place. Try to use plain English, avoiding abbreviations and symbols such as `&' for and, accompanying pictures can help to tell a story and also be of benefit to people whose first language is not English.

Finally consider offering to produce literature in other formats, for example recorded onto a cassette or relaying literature over the telephone or by e-mail. Local disability organisations, residential homes and disabled people's networks may be more willing to distribute your literature if you have made it accessible.

The RNIB can provide further information on accessible literature and can be contacted at:
Royal National Institute of the Blind
105 Judd Street
London
WC1H 9NE Tel: 020 7388 1266
                Or log onto:                              http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/publicwebsite/public_printdesign.hcsp
  Don't forget making your electronic communication accessible.

The RNIB DLA campaign was launched on the 10^th August with the publication of a campaign report 'Taken for a ride'. The report highlights the injustice of denying people with serious sight loss the chance to claim the higher rate mobility component of DLA.

One of the core objectives of disability living allowance (DLA) is to assist people who have difficulties with walking around outdoors safely and independently. The higher rate of the DLA mobility component is intended to help those people who are completely unable to walk outdoors or who cannot walk to their intended destination outdoors without assistance.

By any objective test, RNIB believes that the higher rate mobility component of DLA should be available to people with serious sight loss. They face some of the greatest difficulties moving around independently in the external environment. Even with the aid of a white cane or a guide dog, the streets can be a hostile and potentially dangerous place - a journey can include crossing busy roads, navigating pavement and road works, avoiding street furniture and dodging cyclists and cars parked on the pavement. Research, including a Government survey carried out in 1995, has highlighted the frequency of accidents and injuries in the street environment.

Many blind and partially sighted people have written to their MPs to raise this issue. 216 MPs have signed an Early Day Motion supporting the campaign and 1,200 people attended a mass lobby of Parliament in December. We will continue to put pressure on the Government. If you would like more information about the campaign please call RNIB's Campaign Hotline 020 7391 2123.

When I volunteered to write this article I was not sure what I was letting myself in for. Having done a bit of research on the net, I decided that it would be easier to explain what my life is like.

So what are hidden impairments? These are physical and/or mental impairments that re not readily apparent to others. These include asthma, mental health issues, diabetes, cancer, autism, allergies, dyslexia and a whole range of neuro-diversity conditions. Having one of these conditions can affect daily life but having several makes life interesting. At the last count I have: asthma, Raynaud's syndrome, food allergies and intolerances; Auditory Processing Disorder (ADP) and tinnitus.

I was 18 when I first became allergic to nuts, nobody knows what the trigger was, but as a young child I could eat the Kent cobs off the tree. Back in 1970s not much was known and my parents just thought that it would go away. There are not the internet resources available but by avoiding all nuts I have coped. However the problem is that food labelling then was very poor and there have been some tragic cases. I have had two anaphylactic shock episodes where I ended up in hospital.

When I was elected a councillor, I realised that this could be a problem so I now carry an Epipen and I have a Medic Alert bracelet. Food labelling is still poor. Often the caterers at council functions do not know what is in their food. This is because the people who serve the food are not always those who prepare the food. Our council has outsourced its catering function so it is a never ending process of education. However I then developed another problem.

Have you ever noticed that all buffets in this country are what I call “brown” food: sausage rolls, quiches, sandwiches, filo pastry bites etc. So I developed wheat intolerance. So I always carry spare food as despite ordering special diets at meetings you cannot guarantee that you will get something to eat. My latest problem is that I am becoming intolerant to sulphites which of course are increasingly used in all manner of foods, especially in wine!!! This can give me asthma.

Now Raynaud's is another problem, which is triggered by changes in temperature. Keeping warm is important. As one loses a lot of heat through one's head I now wear hats. I of course make a feature of them, so I am known as the councillor with a hat. (At last count I think I had some 50 hats) Well if others can have a shoe collection I can have a hat collection. I hate delivering leaflets as I am permanently cold in the winter. My long suffering husband does the bulk of the deliveries. In the summer I have to put on a jumper or a coat if I go into supermarkets, as the air conditioning is too cold. This is feature of some modern trains, so I always carry extra layers of clothing.

Now you may think that is all manageable, well it is but added to fact that I have since a bout of shingles some three years ago I have developed tinnitus on top of the APD(best explanation is on the website www.apduk.org ) that I already had. This was a good article on the BBC “ouch site”

about the actor Graham Cole from The Bill, whose has tinnitus. It is a real nuisance. The ADP means (amongst many other problems) I have difficulty sorting out sounds. Meeting rooms are incredibly noisy what with air-conditioning units, coffee machines and other noises. Now on top of that I now have a racket going on in my head. One of the ways of counteracting this is to use a hearing aid which links into loop systems. You can guess the problem: most loop systems do not work.

Access issues seem to be mostly about wheelchair access and loop systems are usually not installed, or forgotten about. At the county council, there is a check list of access requirements for meetings especially those which involve the public, this is buried somewhere deep in the intranet. Most of the officers I have spoken to do not know that it exists or if they do, no one appears to be responsible to see that the check is carried out. Since the council has had to write its disability equality scheme DES, it has become more aware but the next barrier is breaking down the attitudes of councillors. Many assume that if they shout louder that one can hear them.

Some loop systems work intermittently which gives one a headache as they come on and off. I have seen people remove the radio mikes and just shout instead. Have you noticed that most speakers especially if they have power point presentations are talking to the wall?

All of this is to say that you should not judge a book by its cover. Hidden disabilities are real. I know that many of you have all sorts of different problems and although mine may seem mild in comparison to those who have mobility problems nevertheless they do affect how I managed every day especially as a councillor.

“Following two incidents in which one of our groups was discriminated against I thought I would send the following to all members of our group and other concerned people. Part of this also results from people not understanding how a loop system works.

“An induction loop system consists of a control box, a long loop of insulated wire which encircles the listening area and receivers/ microphones. The loop works on a magnetic field produced by running a wire round a room, and plugging both ends of the wire into the control box, and placed in front of the speaker. Speaker(s) and listener(s) usually sit inside the looped area where reception is best. The magnetic field of the loop is picked up by the “T” switch on the listener's hearing aid, or by a separate receiver with an earpiece and volume control. The impulses are then converted back to sound.”

Loop systems enable hearing aid users to enjoy clearer reception of sound with reduced background noise. Some systems are more powerful than others. The small table top sets are usually only useful in small areas but are often too low powered for many users and have a limited range. Loops also require the speaker to speak into a microphone. Shouting does not help as there is no input to the circuit. Shouting also distorts the lip pattern for people trying to lip read.

Hearing aids are just that- aids to hearing - they are not a “cure” nor do they “restore” hearing to normal. Not all hearing difficulties are helped by hearing aids. Tinnitus (I am a sufferer) which is the word used to describe noise, which is heard in the ear such as buzzing, whistling, ringing and other sounds. Often as children we were told to put a shell next to one's ear to listen to the sea. Imagine that sort of noise at different pitches going on constantly 24/7 then you can get some idea of the racket that goes on. There is no cure but when in public meetings if speakers use microphones it enables sufferers to concentrate on what is being said.

When in the course of our duty as councillors wherever we are we should be mindful of the needs of the public and our members. No assumptions should be made. In any meeting were the public can attend there will be hearing aid users and other people with hearing difficulties.

I think the Royal National Institute for the Deaf people (RNID) quote is “ONE in SEVEN” people have a hearing problem. On the County Council website there is a checklist of requirements needed to hold a meeting involving the public.

`The Disability Equality Duty is a new way for public authorities to tackle disability discrimination in a practical way by introducing policies that actively promote opportunities and so prevent discrimination taking place. By taking an organisation-wide approach you can achieve tangible outcomes and improvements for disabled people.'

We all want to live in communities where we can participate fully and equally. We all want our children to do well in school, we all want to be able to use services like the local library or hospital and not feel excluded. Yet, as many readers of this newsletter will know, in reality this is not always the case for disabled people. There remains considerable work to be done.

As I hope you noted, just before Christmas, a legal duty was placed on the public sector to address this issue. Called the `Disability Equality Duty' (DED) the new duty requires public authorities, including your local district council, local school, local hospital, as well as central Government and Government funded bodies such as the Audit Commission, to proactively look at ways of ensuring that disabled people are treated fairly. A similar duty was introduced on race equality a couple of years ago.

The new duty is not necessarily about changes to buildings or adjustments for individuals (although these may be included) it's about including equality for disabled people into the culture of the public authority in ways which are practical and demonstrable. This means incorporating disability equality into everything from the outset rather than `just' responding reactively to individual disabled people.

The DED not only looks at promoting equality of opportunity and eliminating discrimination, public authorities must also have due regard to eliminating disability related harassment, encouraging participation of disabled people in public life, and promoting positive attitudes to disabled people. Underpinning this is a requirement to take into account disabled people's disabilities, even where this involves treating a disabled person more favourably than a non-disabled person.

This part of the duty builds on the requirement to make reasonable adjustments and emphasises the fact that equality of opportunity cannot simply be achieved by treating disabled and non-disabled people alike.

To comply with the DED, public authorities will need to know what outcomes they want to achieve, what success will look like, what their particular responsibilities are, and how they will know if they are making progress. Some listed public authorities have specific

duties at the heart of which is the duty to publish a disability equality scheme (DES). As part of the scheme, actions will need to written into an Action Plan, Public authorities had until December of last year to draft their DES although schools in Wales have until April of this year and English primary schools December.

The DES sets out the structure for achieving the outcomes outlined above. In developing its DES a public authority must involve disabled people, and it must set out in the scheme its arrangements for gathering evidence, produce an action plan, and state its method for assessing the impact of policies and practices on disabled people. The actions set out must be carried out by the authority. The DES is a public document which I would urge members of the LDDA to read for any public authority they are involved with.

Successfully implementing the DED will not only improve the performance of public authorities in relation to disability specific services or activity. It is also an essential component in meeting wider objectives and improving public service delivery. With up to one in five adults having a disability, and possibly more in particular areas, ignoring issues around disability equality will jeopardise progress in key areas.

For example primary care trusts are charged with improving the health of the local community they serve. This is reflected in the range of Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets which central Government requires them to meet. Yet an 18 month study by the DRC into the health care received by people with a mental health problem or learning disability found unequal access to primary care services. As a consequence not only were both groups likely to experience more chronic symptoms, they were also less likely to receive the evidence based health care checks and treatments which other patients receive. As a consequence they die younger.

Using the DED will provide an essential framework for ensuring that the delivery of primary health care meets the needs of disabled people. It builds on the duty to make reasonable adjustments such as different appointment lengths, text or telephone reminders, accessible appointment cards and specific waiting arrangements - all of which help to ensure an equitable service [these are required anyway under the DDA]. Unless services are designed, from the start, with disability equality in mind, public bodies like primary care trusts will fail disabled people by not offering a service which will meet their needs.

In the end the application of the DED is about ensuring that all disabled people are able to participate fully in society, and have improved life chances.

There is further information about the findings of the DRC's investigation into the primary health care service offered to people with a learning disability and/or a mental health problem along with recommendations for action at www.drc-gb.org/healthinvestigation