The Scottish Government S Draft Delivery Plan 2016-2020

Scottish Disability Equality Forum
Shaping and Leading Disability Equality in Scotland

SDEF Response

The Scottish Government’s Draft Delivery Plan 2016-2020

United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)

Scottish Disability Equality Forum (SDEF) works for social inclusion in Scotland through the removal of barriers to equality and the promotion of independent living for people affected by disability.

We are a membership organisation, representing individuals affected by disability, and organisations and groups who share our values. Our aim is to ensure that the voices of people affected by disability are heard and heeded within their own communities and at a national and political level.

About this consultation

The Scottish Government launched their consultation on their plans for action on the United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

They wanted disabled people to tell them what you think of this draft delivery plan. The plan sets out what actions they will take to ensure that disabled people enjoy their human rights under the UNCRPD.

This delivery plan sets out the Scottish Governments approach to implementing UNCRPD in Scotland over the period 2016-2020. It looks in detail at the outcomes – or changes – that they want to achieve and the evidence that supports the need for change. It details a range of the commitments for each of the four outcomes that they are aiming to achieve.

Response

Scottish Disability Equality Forum (SDEF) works for social inclusion in Scotland through the removal of barriers to equality and the promotion of independent living for people affected by disability.

Before completing this response to the draft plan SDEF held three roadshow events between September and November 2015 in Dundee, Orkney and Edinburgh. Attended by 64 people these events allowed disabled people and their representatives to discuss the outcomes and commitments within the draft plan. We also polled our members, made up of individuals, organisations and Access Panels, with an online survey about the draft plan. We have gathered summaries of workshop discussions and 57 individual responses to the survey to help develop our response.

Over 90% of our online respondents wanted the four outcomes within the plan to change the lives of disabled people and for the Scottish Government to work effectively with partners to achieve them. It was felt that, given the importance of social care services and the impacts of cuts to these services to disabled people in Scotland, social care should be given explicit prominence in the stated

outcomes and not subsumed into ‘support for independent living’ in outcome 2.

The key obstacles mentioned by disabled people in terms of the Scottish Government actually achieving these outcomes were as follows:

The absence of a clear and robust evaluation and monitoring framework within the plan that includes timescales and milestones for each commitment. Many online respondents wanted to know how the commitments were going to be ‘enforced’. There were numerous responses that alluded to the plan being enabling on the face of it in terms of aspiration but with little to suggest that concrete action will be taken to remove the barriers to equal and inclusive access for disabled people. Evaluation and monitoring was felt to be crucial in terms of accountability and developing trust with disabled people that the plan will lead to rights actually being realised.

A number of online respondents felt that disabled people do not yet have the advice, advocacy services, and access to suitably trained legal professionals to use human rights and equalities legislation to enforce their rights. The comment below summarises these concerns:

‘It is no use whatsoever giving rights to disabled people unless those rights can be enforced in the courts. All too often, when disabled people seek redress in the courts for disability discrimination, they are left entirely on their own with no help available. This is because legal aid is not available for small claims under the Equality Act and the Scottish Courts Service will not provide shorthand writers, assistance to deaf or blind people, help for those suffering from dementia or any other disability assistance in the courts. Without access to the courts, disability rights are completely and utterly useless’

Without a supportive body of case law relating to community care, housing, transport and other policy areas in Scotland it was felt that UNCRPD rights will continue to be used purely as a framework for policy development rather than a mechanism by which disabled people can effectively challenge decisions and practises that disadvantage or discriminate against them.
The experience of many disabled people who try to access services is that of a ‘post-code lottery’ dependent on practices, policies and procedures operated by their local authority. Respondents felt that the outcomes, whilst positive, were very open to interpretation, particularly when local government resources are being cut. In light of these responses SDEF notes with concern that COSLA have developed a separate Disability Delivery Plan for local authorities that has not been subject to the same degree of involvement and consultation with disabled people as the national Delivery Plan. We need assurances that national and local government is going to work together to achieve the outcomes stated in this plan.
Good partnership working was a key issue for a number of respondents – all agencies need to ‘sing the same song’ to achieve the outcomes. At present disabled people tell us that agencies such as health, social work and housing do not work well together to achieve positive outcomes for disabled people even when supportive legislation or policy is in place. For example, one respondent had thought that self-directed support (SDS) ‘would ‘give us freedom, independence and our voice’ but felt that in reality, a failure by agencies to work together to agreed outcomes has meant that SDS ‘has given us a voice but with no choice’.
The gap between policy and practise was mentioned by a majority of respondents in their comments on the plan. These gaps can be an everyday experience for disabled people trying to access support or services and can feed a sense of profound frustration that the plan will not lead to significant improvements in disabled people’s lives in Scotland. ‘It will only work if it is made to work, otherwise it is just false pacification [of disabled people]’
The timing of the plan coincides with a ‘perfect storm’ - cuts to public spending centred on welfare and social care which have a disproportionate impact on disabled people in Scotland. The lack of targeted resources specifically allocated to each commitment within the draft plan means that respondents were ‘very sceptical that resources will be made available to achieve these outcomes’.
The failure by public authorities in Scotland to consult and involve disabled people at the earliest stages of development of services or infrastructure permeated many of the responses to the plan. ‘It is necessary to seek views of people most affected by these issues so that there are no unintended consequences due to lack of consultation’.
Many respondents felt that attitudinal barriers, in part fuelled by the negative portrayal of disabled people in the media discourse around welfare reform, can prevent more favourable treatment of disabled people even when this is required by public authorities to prevent disproportionate disadvantage.

Outcome 1 - Equal and inclusive access to the physical and cultural environment, transport and suitable, affordable housing

Transport accessibility

The majority of respondents support the commitment to create a Plan for Accessible Travel and wish to see long-term engagement with disabled people in monitoring of the plan.

Respondents felt that all too often transport providers do not effectively consult with disabled people at the earliest stages when commissioning services or infrastructure and this is the root of many access problems:

‘Aberdeenshire First Bus has just bought a new fleet of buses which have limited disabled seating, difficult stairways anda narrow dangerous open corridor passing the stairs to a toilet. Where was the consultation on that?’

In general respondents felt that much more needs to be done to improve overall access to transport services. It was felt that specific solutions within an action plan would help but even the basic transport infrastructure is not in place in rural locations in Scotland which can further isolate disabled people.

Respondents also felt that one of the main barriers to disabled people using transport services is attitudes; not only from staff and drivers, but from passengers as well.

At the Transport Scotland summit held earlier this year, many transport providers were in attendance and many were in agreement that not only does accessibility across all transport modes needs to improve, but there is also the need for additional training to staff.

In response to the Transport Scotland summit, SDEF are one of four organisations holding an Accessible Travel Sub-Group tasked with finding solutions to the issues and working on a strategy to progress these. The sub-group will consist of disabled people, transport providers and other relevant groups who will work together to this aim.

Design for Ageing

Our members welcome any improvement to planning and design which will benefit disabled people. Our members feel that disabled people and older people can have similar needs.

However SDEF are keen to stress that the under-supply of housing suitable for disabled people with mobility
impairments must be specifically addressed by the Scottish Government and not subsumed into the housing for an aging population agenda.

The commitment is to consider the scope for research into the impact of demographic change and an ageing population on design and planning and the potential benefits for disabled people. Many respondents felt that this commitment fell short of what is needed to improve housing for disabled people in Scotland:‘Research takes a long time to complete. Audit of (the) immediate need of current service users might be more accurate’.

Given the human rights implications for disabled people unable to access suitable housing in Scotland we need further commitments within the disability delivery plan on specific action to address the shortfall in accessible housing.

The final plan should also provide more detail about the focus of the research and its scope and how recommendations or required actions arising from it will be taken forward.

Feedback suggests that all houses should be built to an accessible standard to avoid expensive adaptations later on.

Raising awareness of accessible design

The majority of our respondents said that the issue of accessible design urgently requires attention. Many have commented on the poor design of shared spaces and how dangerous these areas are now for disabled people.

Respondents also commented on the difficulties they face using facilities that are deemed to be ‘accessible’ and believe that the sharing of best practice may help to mainstream access and improve facilities for disabled people - ‘this (award) is really needed, we have been in disabled toilets that are more like broom cupboards!’

Respondents were keen to point out that accessible design is not all about ‘lifts and ramps’ but should include a holistic approach to access for all disabled people, including those with mental health problems: ‘accessibility can be due to sensory issues associated with autism and mental health and not just physical disabilities.’

Respondents felt that the award could showcase examples where design had led the full range of disabled people’s access needs being met. It has also been suggested that disabled people need to be involved in the judging of the award and setting the criteria for it.

Respondents were keen to stress that the award will not be effective in improving practice if it is not sufficiently publicised.

Whilst many respondents agree that the award is a good idea, they are concerned that one award is insufficient to mainstream approaches to accessible design. ‘This is not enough. Accessibility does not require awards just common sense, planning and legislation.’

Some respondents also paint a picture of an unsupportive and bureaucratic planning system that does not take the access needs of disabled people into account and have suggested that it will take more than an award to tackle these issues:

‘Local council planning departments in my experience do not take disability into account when assessing planning applications. It took 2 1/2 years and 3 appeals including one to the Scottish government to finally gain agreement to make our own home accessible for our disabled son. The stress this places on individuals is unacceptable.’

My son’s brand new multimillion pound school is not fully accessible. It has a student social area which has no wheelchair access and stairs without handrails. 5 months on the situation is still not rectified. A new school with existing wheelchair users and it couldn't be planned to be fully accessible!’

‘At present within EDC, we have a Chief Executive Officer who was invited to a meeting with the National Access
Survey Team (NAST) who are in partnership with Scottish Disability Equality Forum (SDEF). He was invited along with others to discuss how we could go forward in involving local Access Panels in the planning and decision making process which affects all of us. He did not answer any communication, and did not attend.’

Scottish Disability Equality Forum is currently researching and producing content for a new Inclusive Design Website. The website aims to improve awareness and implementation of best practice in accessible design for planners, architects, and other building professionals.

There will be two key parts to the website:

The first element will focus on providing links to existing European and Scottish Building Standards, regulations, policies and legislation. However, it should be noted that we feel existing standards and regulations often only deliver the bare minimum when it comes to creating an inclusive CS response environment.

The second element is to create a resource that will promote best practice in accessible design; this resource will consist of:

Articles that highlight best practice both nationally and internationally.
Case studies that provide examples of best practice (e.g. housing, public and commercial buildings, tourist attractions, Commonwealth Games venues).
Interviews with professionals who have a track record of implementing best practice. The interviews will be recorded and published to the website as a podcast.

We look forward to working with the Scottish Government to see how this work can be promoted to best effect in support of this commitment.

Homes which are more accessible

Respondents see suitable Building Standards for new build housing as critical to creating the kind of housing stock in Scotland that will meet the demographic challenges we will face in the future. The suite of standards around accessibility therefore needs to be built upon and improved in order to future-proof our housing stock.

In principle SDEF welcomes a commitment to ensure that houses developed on land that has been banked by developers or subject to protracted development processes will be built to the most recent Building Standards. However many of our members were sceptical about the impact this would actually have on accessibility:

‘Builders and architects will do all they can to avoid building these properties.’

However our support for this commitment is caveated by our concerns about accessibility standards being reduced within the Building Standards for new build housing in Scotland.

The recent review of Building Standards included proposals to amend the technical guidance that support Building Standards which we felt could undermine accessibility for disabled people in new build housing. These proposals included:

Changes to the layout and amount of space available for the installation of a future shower within new build housing.
Proposals to expand guidance allowing the length or breadth to be reduced in an enhanced apartment within a small dwelling.
A reduction in the minimum locations for robust wall construction for the fitting of grab rails
Door width guidance proposals that allow for the upper storey en suite facilities in new build housing to be provided without wider accessible doors.

These proposals all point towards providing less space in new build houses for the facilities that disabled people need. This is very troubling to our members who feel that space is already at a premium: ‘doors and hallways are getting narrower - not wider - due to probably economic and profit reasons’

The concerns raised about these proposals by SDEF, Glasgow Centre for Inclusive Living, Capability Scotland and other disability organisations were, to some extent, addressed in the final amendments to the Building Standards published by the government in 2015.

However, although the reduction in accessibility standards was less than originally proposed in the consultation we were still disappointed by the decrease in door width for upstairs en suites and the lessening of the surface area in shower/bathrooms which should be able to safely take a grab/support rail.