Consultation on Building Standards Verification Improving Choice in Verification of Building

CONSULTATION ON BUILDING STANDARDS VERIFICATION – IMPROVING CHOICE IN VERIFICATION OF BUILDING STANDARDS

10/06/11

Capability Scotland works with disabled people of all ages and their families and carers throughout Scotland to provide a broad range of flexible, personalised care services. We are also a campaigning organisation, committed to using the influence we have to ensure disabled people achieve the same human and civil rights as the rest of society.

GENERAL COMMENTS

1. Capability is pleased to have the opportunity to comment on the proposed changes to verification of building standards in Scotland. While we do not feel qualified to offer an opinion on whether the National House-Building Council (NHBC) is an appropriate organisation to take on the role of verifier we do have some concerns about how the proposed changes will impact on how accessible buildings in Scotland are for disabled people. In particular, we would urge the Scottish Government to consider the following points.

1. We appreciate that the Scottish Government has done a lot to improve the physical accessibility of buildings, particularly by increasing the level of accessibility expected under the Building Standards. It is essential that accessibility continues to be a priority for all those involved in enforcement and verification of the standards.Disabled people continue to face massivebarriers in accessing many of Scotland’s buildings, including residential, educational, commercial and public premises. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the Building Standards are not always consistently enforced and that disabled people are denied access to places which, according to the Standards, should be fully accessible. This is not only frustrating, but also has a serious impact on the inclusion of disabled people in Scottish society and upon their ability to live independently. Access to education, employment, culture and social activities can all be severely limited by physical obstacles and it is essential that the Scottish Government, local authorities and any new independent verifier remain aware of this and take positive steps to improve the accessibility of buildings.

1. The general equality duty under the Equality Act 2010 requires public bodies to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations in the course of developing policies and delivering services[1]. The aim of these obligations is for public bodies to consider the needs of all individuals in their day to day work, in developing policy, in delivering services, and in relation to their own employees.While NHBC is not a public body listed in Schedule 19 of the Equality Act 2010, NHBC (or any another independent verifier), will be subject to the general duty in its capacity as a body carrying out a function of a public nature. The Equality Act defines a public function as a function of a public nature for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998. Although the Equality and Human Rights Commission has not yet produced guidance specific to the planning and design of the built environment, the Disability Rights Commission stated in the equivalent guidance in relation to the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 that, “verifiers and approved inspectors are likely to be carrying out functions of a public nature in relation to the interpretation and implementation of building regulations.”[2]

1. We would like to highlight that building control officers in England, who can be private individuals like NHBC, are variable in their application of Part M of the Building Regulations. We believe that Local Authority officers are more likely to hold their ground during the process of verification whereas external agencies may be more likely to succumb to pressure.

1. We appreciate that in many cases there is very little discretion involved in the verification of the Building Standards and little opportunity for verifiers to do anything to advance equality of opportunity. However, this will not always the case and the following should be considered by the Scottish Government, local authorities and any independent verifiers in considering how to fulfil the general duty:

• In some cases there is a large amount of discretion involved in determining whether a development has made reasonable provision for access. For instancein the Building Standards relating to access for disabled people[3]:
  

-standard 4.1states that on street parking bays should be reasonably level

-standard6.1.2 states that entrance doors should be well lit and clearly signed

-standard 8.3.6 states that chair stairlifts should only be installed where it is not practical to install a wheelchair stairlift

Making a judgement as to whether these standards have been met will require an in-depth understanding of disability and the access requirements of disabled people. Otherwise, verifiers will not be in a position to judge what is ‘reasonably level’ for a wheelchair user or what qualifies as ‘well-lit’ to someone with a visual impairment.

It is therefore essential that potential verifiers (whether local authority or NHBC) have received comprehensive disability equality and access training and are fully aware of the range of disabling barriers that people experience when accessing buildings. It is particularly important that verifiers understand the importance of the Building Standards in relation to both physical and non-physical impairments. During our recent housing involvement events, for instance, there was clear evidence of a widespread failure to understand the barriers people with non-physical experience when accessing buildings. An example of this is the importance of appropriate levels of lighting for those with Autistic Spectrum Disorder.

• Another step that verifiers could take to fulfil the general duty would be to undertake a biannual internal audit of how the access requirements in the regulations and technical handbook are being met. This was suggested by the Disability Rights Commission in relation to fulfilling the general duty under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005. Such a step would allow for useful information on compliance to be collected.

• Any independent verifier should also take action to ensure that disability equality is engrained in the culture of the organisation and that they are prepared to take on the responsibilities of performing public functions. For instance, the consultation document lists the stakeholders represented amongst NHBCs committee andwe would like to see this extended to include a disability equality or access representative.

• Finally, it is essential that verification is carried out to an equally stringent standard by local authorities and any other independent organisation. If there is a failure to do this there is a risk that two tiers of verification and compliance will be created. This will result in inconsistency of outcome and a lack of certainty for disabled people. It could also lead to developers choosing to be verified by one organisation over another because they have a reputation for being lax in relation to accessibility standards.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this consultation.
Hanna McCulloch
Senior Policy Advisor
Capability Scotland
11 Ellersly Road
Edinburgh
EH12 6HY

0131 347 1025

1

[1] s149. Equality Act 2010

[2]A Guide to the Disability Equality Duty and the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 for Local Authority Departments Responsible for Planning, Design and Management of the Built Environment and Streets’

[3] BS8300:2009+A1:2010; BSI Publication: ‘Design of Buildings and their Approaches to Meet the Needs of Disabled People’