HL Deb 13 July 2004 vol 663 cc1126-8

2.57 p.m.

Lord Ashley of Stoke

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether it is intended that the proposed new Commission on Human Rights will have a disabled commissioner and a disability committee on which half of the members will be disabled people.

Baroness Andrews

Yes, my Lords. We published the White Paper Fairness for All: A New Commission for Equality and Human Rights on 12 May. In it we set out our proposals for distinctive governance arrangements for disability. These proposed arrangements include a statutory requirement for at least one disabled person (or a person who has had a disability) to be appointed to the board, and the establishment of a disability committee where disabled people (or those who have had a disability) represent at least half of its membership.

Lord Ashley of Stoke

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. The White Paper has been warmly welcomed. But in view of the proposed developments in the White Paper and legislation and the Government's splendid and extensive programme for legislation on disability, can we have an assurance that provision will be made for specialised expert staff and special money for the disability committee? Can we have that assurance written into legislation for the new Commission on Equality and Human Rights?

Baroness Andrews

My Lords, I am grateful for the warm welcome that my noble friend has given the White Paper, not least because of his outstanding record in promoting the rights of disabled people. It would be unthinkable for the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR) not to employ a good number of disability experts to support the committee's work. It will take forward the very energetic agenda that the Disability Rights Commission (DRC) has in mind. We certainly expect staff from the DRC to have the opportunity to transfer into the CEHR under the normal TUPE arrangements, and to maintain its excellent work.

In response to the second point, we are fully committed to ensure that the CEHR is adequately resourced so that it can implement the programme. There would be little point in doing otherwise. However, I do not think that we want to constrain the board in any way as regards its internal arrangements. I hope that my noble friend will be satisfied with that reply.

Baroness Howe of Idlicote

My Lords, I am sure that noble Lords will agree on the vitally important role played by the Equal Opportunities Commission in promoting equal opportunities for women. In the light of that, do the Government believe that the proposed new combined commission can be anything like as successful in carrying forward and sustaining the issues that still remain to be tackled in this field, not least in ensuring that all our public bodies promote equality of opportunity?

Baroness Andrews

My Lords, already two distinguished Members of the House have set high standards indeed for the EOC. I am convinced that each strand of the equality work, including the EOC, will go forward and will be expanded in relation to new challenges, in particular in relation to the human rights element. We have a unique opportunity to address the public agenda and make sure that public authorities live up to those responsibilities. We also anticipate in the White Paper a new gender duty, which will oblige public bodies to ensure that their actions as employers and service providers will guarantee equality of opportunity.

Lord Addington

My Lords, will the Minister confirm that if we are to have a committee to back up a commission, the committee will not only be drawn from disabled people, but from disabled people from a wide range of disability backgrounds? Although it may be easier for a person who, say, has a mobility problem to empathise with someone who has a similar one, first hand knowledge will be important. Hidden disabilities and movement problems must be represented across the board to ensure that this committee achieves its full potential.

Baroness Andrews

My Lords, absolutely. The Disability Rights Commission, in its three or four years, has already established the width, breadth and scope of expert investment in the disability field. I particularly take the point made by the noble Lord in relation to learning disabilities, because I know that he is concerned about those. I am sure that those people will be well represented.

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff

My Lords, can the Minister confirm that provision will be made for all posts to be open to women and disabled people who may be unable to work full time? Will the disabled commissioner have a duty to represent the views of the disabled in the central body?

Baroness Andrews

My Lords, I am sure that if we can look to any organisation to have equal opportunities in their employment practices, it will certainly be the new commission. I can also confirm the noble Baroness's second point.

Baroness Wilkins

My Lords, the proposed disability committee will be subject to a mandatory review after five years. Can the Minister outline how such a review is likely to be conducted and with what level of parliamentary scrutiny? Can she also assure the House that disabled people and their organisations will be fully involved and listened to in the review?

Baroness Andrews

Yes, my Lords, I can give an assurance on the last point. Parliamentary scrutiny will not least be part of the obligation to prepare an annual report and even a Select Committee inquiry. In terms of the five-year review, we do not have that degree of detail yet. I am sure that in the consultative process, which is not yet concluded, there will be attention to that sort of detail. I will write to the noble Baroness if there are aspects that I do not have a grip on.

Baroness Wilcox

My Lords, we too welcome this move. To what extent do the Government envisage that a disability committee within the CEHR would be free to set its own strategy and develop its own policies with respect to disability issues? What powers would the committee possess?

Baroness Andrews

My Lords, the detail of the powers is to be worked out over the coming months as the new steering board makes the transitional arrangements for the development of the full board, which will not come into operation until the end of 2006. We have been concerned not to constrain or restrain any of the administrative detail. The disability committee, having inherited the work of the Disability Rights Commission, will be able to set its own remit. I am sure that it will want to follow along the lines that it has already started.

Lord Carter

My Lords, will the commissioner be able to deal with a situation where the easy-read version for the learning disabled of the Fairness for All White Paper, which deals with equality, was produced only yesterday; some eight weeks after the standard version and almost two-thirds of the way through the 12-week consultation period? Is that the proper way to involve disabled people in matters that really concern them?

Baroness Andrews

No, my Lords, it most certainly is not. I am sorry to hear of the length of time that it has taken to get that document out. It is rather a specialised document, but there is no excuse for that. I know that when the noble Lord chaired the Joint Scrutiny Committee, he was able to ensure that both versions of the document came out at the same time. We absolutely welcome responses from disabled people, particularly those with learning disabilities. The door is not shut on 6 August. Given the shorter period of consultation, I am absolutely sure that if they make a response it will be taken seriously.