§ 3.16 p.m.
§ Lord Henderson of BromptonMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to introduce legislation, as recommended by the Manpower Services Commission in 1981, to provide for a statutory general duty on employers to take reasonable steps to promote equality of employment opportunity for disabled people and for a code of practice.
Viscount LongMy Lords, in view of the mixed response to the Manpower Services Commission's proposals to promote equal employment opportunity, the Government decided to retain the existing legislation on the employment of disabled people for the time being. In addition, the Government asked the commission to examine the suggestions put forward by the Select Committee and others for improving the effectiveness of this legislation within the existing statutory framework and at the same time to press ahead with preparing a code of good practice on the employment of disabled people with a view to its being introduced on a voluntary basis. Work is in progress on both these developments and I understand a draft code is likely to be considered by the commission in June.
§ Lord Henderson of BromptonMy Lords, I thank the Minister for the information that a draft code is in hand. I have myself the MSC report of 1981 on the quota scheme. Would the Minister not agree that that report shows conclusively that the statutory quota scheme for the employment of registered disabled people is widely disregarded, cannot be enforced and is impossible to be implemented because the number of registered disabled people is less than the 3 per cent. quota? That being so, should not the Act of 1944 which brought in the quota be repealed and replaced as soon as possible by legislation on the lines recommended by the MSC in 1981? Further, if the Government do not wish to introduce such legislation themselves, will they consider giving drafting assistance and providing parliamentary time next Session for a private Member to do so?
Viscount LongMy Lords, I agree with certain of the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Henderson of Brompton. As he says, it is not possible to enforce the present legislation as originally intended. Only registered disabled people count towards the satisfaction of a 3 per cent. quota. Since the 1950s the 143 number of disabled people choosing to register has been declining. In fact, registered disabled people at present account for only 1.1 per cent. of the total workforce, and it is mathematically impossible for all employers who come within the scope of the existing legislation to satisfy their obligations. Whatever the level of quota, many unregistered disabled people are in employment but because they do not choose to register they are not reflected in the national levels of quota compliance.
In answer to the second part of the noble Lord's supplementary question, that is why the Government asked the Manpower Services Commission to investigate the problems, including the problem of legislation, in connection with invalids and disabled people. Their findings will come out in June. As to the latter part of the noble Lord's supplementary, I think he was asking about a Private Member's Bill in the future. I would say to your Lordships that when the commission has completed their investigation there will perhaps be ample opportunity to debate their findings.
§ Lord RentonMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that mentally handicapped people are in a different and more difficult employment situation compared with other disabled people? Rather than using any kind of legislative compulsion with regard to them, would it not be better to give the fullest support and encouragement to the Pathway Scheme of the Royal Society for the Mentally Handicapped?
Viscount LongMy Lords, various different institu-tions have been invited to join the commission to consider the best ways to legislate for invalids. Until their findings are known, I cannot refer to any one particular suggestion.
§ Lord SomersMy Lords, is it true, as I have been told, that only about two out of every 100 Private Members' Bills finally reach the statute book? If so, is that not rather a faint hope for my noble friend's suggestion?
§ Lord Dean of BeswickMy Lords, is the noble Viscount the Minister aware that, for the Government to expect this very serious subject to be dealt with on a voluntary basis, is complete nonsense and that some of the good employers will respond while most of the others will not? Will the Minister agree that any exercise on behalf of the disabled, giving them increased employment opportunities, will be meaningless till the existing general rates of unemployment are reduced dramatically?
Viscount LongMy Lords, I do not really agree with the first part of the noble Lord's question, and I do not think that I need to answer the second part.
§ Lord StallardMy Lords, will the noble Viscount accept that the 3 per cent. quota has been the subject of discussion ever since 1944 when it was first 144 introduced, and that the replies from Government Benches of all kinds have been almost exactly the same as the reply that has been given today? Is he aware that there is a strong body of opinion in the country that the educative process, so called, has not produced the results it ought to have done or which we expected it to do? What is needed now is legislation to deal with the discrimination that exists against disabled people seeking employment.
Viscount LongMy Lords, I think that the Government have not found any of the discrimination which the noble Lord has talked about. But it will be up to the commission to present its findings and for the House to debate them. If there is discrimination, and if the noble Lord has heard of any, then I shall inform my right honourable friend of it.
§ Lord BoardmanMy Lords, is not the problem, as my noble friend said, that employers cannot force disabled people who are employed by them to register, and that many employers who have well over 3 per cent. disabled will fall short of the statutory target of 3 per cent. registered disabled?
Viscount LongMy Lords, I quite agree with my noble friend. It is extremely difficult when many of the disabled do not even allow their names to go forward to be registered. The problem at the moment is that the legislation does not hold up at all.
§ Lord EnnalsMy Lords, I wonder whether the noble Viscount will give further consideration to the question put by my noble friend concerning the level of unemployment among disabled people? Does he not accept that it is extremely high and very disturbing indeed? Bearing in mind that this House gave a Second Reading, Committee stage and Report stage to the Bill of my noble friend Lord Longford on the question of discrimination against disabled people, would it not be appropriate that that question should also be considered by the Manpower Services Commission and by the Government as well?
Viscount LongMy Lords, I have to go back to my original reply that we have to wait for the report from the commission itself. When that report comes through we shall all know exactly which way everybody is thinking. But at the moment it is very difficult to carry out the legislation.
§ Lord Henderson of BromptonMy Lords, in relation to the question of the noble Lord, Lord Somers, about Private Members' Bills, is the Minister aware that Private Members' Bills often have a very good chance of success if the Government are benevolent and provide drafting assistance and parliamentary time? Is this not a matter of urgency, in view of what we have heard about the serious state of unemployment among the disabled?
Viscount LongMy Lords, I am speaking to a noble Lord who is very experienced in how Bills are handled in this House. I admit to the noble Lord that the matter is urgent, but I also have to say that the report from the commission does not come through till June. 145 As I said before, when that report comes through we shall have a chance of debating it and we shall know which way we are going.