Chronically Sick and Disabled (Survey) (Hansard, 8 July 1976)

§ Mr. Alfred Morris

I have placed a copy of the Report in each Library together with my comments as follows:

COMMENTS BY THE MINISTER FOR THE DISABLED ON BIRMINGHAM UNIVERSITY SOCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH GROUP'S STUDY, BY PROFESSOR MALCOLM J. BROWN AND MR. RIC BOWL, OF LOCAL AUTHORITY SURVEYS OF THE CHRONICALLY SICK AND DISABLED.

1. I am grateful to Professor Malcolm Brown and Mr. Ric Bowl fo their report. The study was commissioned in 1973 to examine the action taken in the year 1971–72 by the former local authorities to inform themselves, in pursuance of Section 1 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, of the numbers and needs of disabled people in their areas.

2. The report was originally expected early in 1974, but was delayed for anumber of reasons. The position it decribes is now long out-of-date, as the continuing increase in the numbersof disabled people registered with local authorities since 1973 makes clear,^* Moreover, apart from London, the local authorities examined by Professor Brown no longer exist. Yet the report will be of some interest 660W in revealing the successes and failures of some of the first essays by local authorities to discharge an entirely new statutory duty. Here it must be borne in mind that, although the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act received the Royal Assent on 29th May 1970, Section 1 of the Act was not brought into effect by the previous administration until 1st October 1971.

3. The then Government, in 1970 and 1971, advised local authorities that sample surveys were a satisfactory way of implementing Section 1 and of building up a total picture of the numbers, categories and needs of disabled people. Views on the value of sample surveys vary, but the authors of this report show that, on the whole, such surveys generated extra resources locally and also focussed new attention on the practical problems of helping the disabled.

4. Inevitably there are some statements made in the report about which I have reservations. For example, I do not accept that Section 1 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act is ambiguous. In fact, in drafting the Bill I had the benefit of most expert advice. Nor have I any reason to believe that the Courts would take the view that the Section is ambiguous, even although some local authorities may have felt it to be so. Again, we are told in the report that a third of the surveys were done well and it must, therefore, be an exaggeration to say that, as a means of estimating numbers, local surveys added little except confusion to the findings of the National Survey.†

5. Apart from such reservations arising from the text, it has to be recognised that the report relates to action carried out in a much different financial climate from that of today. I am strongly convinced that, as financial constraints have become more stringent, the task of obtaining reliable information on the numbers, categories and needs of disabled people becomes all the more important. If resources are limited, authorities must try and concentrate them on those who need them most. Obviously they cannot do this unless they know all their disabled and, therefore, who their most needy clients are.

6. I have already made it clear that under Section 2 of the Act, once a local authority has determined that a particular need exists in respect of one of the services listed in the Section, then it is under a duty to make arrangements to meet that need. Clearly it will help local authorities in the discharge of their duties under Section 2 if their implementation of Section 1 of the Act enables them to identify disabled people on an individual basis.

7. I congratulate the local authorities which have sought fully and humanely to implement Section 1 of the Act. One local authority, for example, has increased the number of disabled people on its registers from 1,104 to 23,064 over the past five years. Many others, in widely differing parts of Britain, have made notable progress over the same period.

8. The important tasks of determining the overall incidence of disablement, and of maintaining a dynamic programme of identifying individual disabled people in need, are the 661W principal requirements laid upon local authorities by Section 1. These are on-going requirements and, although this report is published later than was originally planned, it is nevertheless timely as a reminder of the continuing importance of the Section.

9. In regard both to the overall incidence of disablement and the identification of disabled people, it would be of great help to have a uniformly agreed system of nomenclature and classification. I have been studying with great interest the important work of such experts in this field as Professor Kenneth Warren, Dr. Philip Wood and Dr. Margaret Agerholm. It is my intention to arrange for a meeting of experts in the Autumn, so that we can consider how best to move forward towards a uniform system of nomenclature and classification.

10. I shall be discussing Professor Brown's report and other matters relating to disabled people, including other more recent surveys under Section 1 of the Act, with the local authority associations. I shall do so as soon as possible and will also be having discussions with the All-Party Disablement Group in Parliament. In taking account of these discussions and of other representations received, I shall then consider the issue of further guidance to local authorities.

^* The number of people on the general classes register increased sharply from 234,000 at December 1970, to 580,000 by 31st March 1975. Returns from fifty-six local authorities in England, responsible for 60 per cent. of the numbers on the registers at 31st March 1975, indicate thatthere was a further increase of some 13 per cent. in the number of registered disabled people by 31st March 1976. My Department estimate that the number of people in the general classes registered at 31st March 1976, had risen to the order of 650,000, The total number of disabled people registered with local authorities in all classes by 31st March 1976 is estimated to have risen to around 850,000.

† Handicapped and Impaired in Great Britain by Amelia Harris: OPCS 1971.

Alfred Morris, M.P., Minister for the Disabled. 29th June 1976.