|
Made
to the Scottish Executive by the Access Panel
Steering Group.
28
August 2003.
Since
the production of this report the Scottish
Disability Equality Forum (SDEF) was chosen by a
majority of panels to provide an umbrella body
for panels. SDEF successfully applied for funds
to undertake this task. From April 2004 they
will be the national point of reference for
access panels. Contact them at www.sdef.org.uk
Contents:
Subsequent
paragraphs are numbered for ease of reference.
Introduction
1).
In early 2002 the Scottish Executive
commissioned research into the present situation
and needs of access panels in Scotland. The
Access Panel Steering Group, which is supported
by the Scottish Executive and facilitated by the
Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (SCVO)
oversaw this work.
2).
This research targeted those key stakeholders
directly involved with the work of access
panels: access panels themselves, organisations
of disabled people, local authorities and a
number of other relevant bodies, for example the
Disability Rights Commission.
3).
The resultant report entitled ‘A Review of
Access Panels in Scotland’ was published in
March 2002. It gave a comprehensive picture of
the then situation and five key recommendations
for the future.
- Funding
should be provided by the Scottish Executive
to a national umbrella organisation, in
close consultation with access panels.
- Earmarked
funding should be set aside, perhaps through
local authorities, to support the setting up
of new panels and the ongoing work of
existing panels.
- Scottish
Executive guidance should be issued to
ensure that the role of the Local Authority
Access Officer is given more formal
recognition and support in relation to both
funding given to local authorities and
training and information offered to Access
Officers.
- Government
bodies operating in the area of the built
environment and/or disability should be
encouraged to consider their role in
relation to local access panels. Key bodies
in particular would include the Disability
Rights Commission, Communities Scotland and
Historic Scotland, among others.
- The
research has shown that further work is
needed to promote the rights provided by the
Disability Discrimination Act to disabled
people.
The Disability Rights Commission
should seek to work closely with access
panels and other local organisations of and
for disabled people to achieve this.
4).
The full report is available in hard copy from
SCVO or online at the ‘Equalities Programme’
section of the SCVO website under
‘Disability’ then ‘Access Panels Research
Report’. Currently this can be accessed
through this link:
Access
Panels Research Report
If there are any
problems accessing the link please contact SCVO.
5).
It was clear that more work was required to
fully realise and bring to fruition the future
that the report envisaged. Recommendation five
in particular could not be actioned as it was
written because the role of the DRC is directed
by UK ministers and the DRC cannot take
direction from elsewhere.
6).
To make sure that disabled people and other
stakeholders were involved directly in the
decision making process it was recognised as
imperative to involve a wider group of people
with an interest in this area on the Access
Panel Steering Group itself.
7).
Key criteria for the steering group were:
o
It
should include a majority of representatives
from the disability voluntary sector (and)
should also include a majority of disabled
people.
o
Key
constituencies within the disability voluntary
sector which should be represented include:
access panels, disability-led organisations,
service providing and/or carers’
organisations.
8).
As a result the group was expanded to satisfy
these criteria and presently includes
representatives from:
v
Communities
Scotland.
v
Convention
of Scottish Local Authorities.
v
Disability
Agenda Scotland.
v
Disability
Rights Commission.
v
Edinburgh
Access Panel.
v
Highland
Access Panel Network
v
Historic
Scotland.
v
Inclusion
Scotland.
v
Scottish
Council for Voluntary Organisations
v
Scottish
Disability Equality Forum.
v
Scottish
Executive Community Care Division.
v
Scottish
Executive Building Standards Division.
v
Scottish
Executive Equality Unit.
9).
To ensure that the wider group of key
stakeholders originally consulted had a further
opportunity to make their views clear, a
consultation document was circulated to them
during autumn 2002. It asked for ideas on how
the recommendations of the original report could
be put into practice. The results of this
consultation were collated and presented to the
Access Panel Steering Group in December 2002.
10).
One hundred and sixty consultation documents
were sent out. However, each of the thirty-two
local authorities received three sets of
documents. This was because the steering group
decided to raise awareness throughout each local
authority of this process by sending one to each
Chief Executive, one to each Chief Building
Control Officer and one to each Access Officer.
In the event, most local authorities chose to
send single replies and no local authority sent
in more than one reply before the deadline.
Because of this situation it is more sensible to
consider that ninety-six consultation documents
were sent out in total. Thirty-three went to
each access panel that the group knew of at that
time. The remaining thirty-one went to local
disabled persons groups and six ‘others’
(for example, the Disability Rights Commission,
the Royal Incorporation of Architects in
Scotland).
11).
By the deadline of November the following
responses had been received:
From:
Local authorities:
11/32 (34.37%).
Access panels:
14/33 (42.42%).
Disabled persons groups & others:
11/31 (35.48%).
The
return of 36 out of 96 forms equates to a good
response rate of 37.5%.
12).
There was a high level of agreement between
respondents to the consultation. While there
were many different suggestions most of them
were complementary rather than mutually
exclusive. They amounted to a clear picture of
what the future should look like. The group’s
recommendations are therefore closely based on
both the contents of the original report and the
results of the consultation.
13).
It was particularly important for the research
and consultation to collect the opinions of
disabled people on the future of groups whose
work has a direct relevance to their daily
lives. The good response rate from access panels
and disabled persons groups was therefore very
welcome. There was also a consultation event
held on 26 March 2003 to which all panels were
invited. They were presented with the draft
recommendations and invited to comment. Some
changes were made to the recommendations based
on these comments.
14).
The steering group firmly believes that unless
disabled people are involved in shaping their
environment then it will not be altered in ways
that are of any use to them. The steering group
has strong representation from disabled persons
and disabled persons groups among its
membership. This has further ensured that the
measures it has identified as necessary have
been formulated with the meaningful involvement
of disabled people.
The
Political Context
15).
The steering group believes that its
recommendations are a workable and effective way
forward for access panels in Scotland and for
those who work with them.
16).
They are in keeping with the vision of the
Scottish Office Social Inclusion Strategy
outlined in 1999.
“Our
vision is of a Scotland in which … everyone is
enabled and encouraged to participate to the
maximum of their potential. To achieve this
vision it will be necessary, in particular… to
eliminate discrimination and inequality on the
grounds of gender, race or disability.”
They
will also support the Scottish Executive to meet
its priorities in a variety of ways as noted
below.
17).
The original report ‘A Review of Access Panels
in Scotland’, stated that:
“Better
consultative links between local government and
disabled people, and a more accessible built
environment, are aims which mirror closely the
Scottish Executive’s Social Justice strategy,
particularly in terms of the targets to reduce
inequalities between communities, and to
increase residents’ satisfaction with their
neighbourhoods and communities. The improvement
to the built environment, which the voluntary
effort of local access panels brings, is
appreciated not just by disabled people but also
by the very old and very young in our
communities.”
18).
The recommendations of the steering group are
also in keeping with commitments contained in
the Scottish Executive’s Equality Strategy to
‘follow polices and programmes that seek to
address the inequalities and exclusion which
result from discrimination’ and to ‘promote
the inclusion of under-represented groups
in…decision making’
19).
Furthermore they tally with the provisions in
the Scotland Act 1998 for:
·
the
encouragement (other than prohibition or
regulation) of equal opportunities and of the
observance of the equal opportunity
requirements.
·
the
duties on public bodies to have due regard to
the need to meet the equal opportunity
requirements.
A
Note on the Recommendations from the original
report ‘A Review of Access Panels in
Scotland’:
20).
The first recommendation from that report is
that ‘Funding should be provided by the
Scottish Executive to a national umbrella
organisation, in close consultation with access
panels’. If that recommendation is accepted
this body will be responsible for taking forward
many of the other recommendations in detail. It
will work closely with panels, local
authorities, their departments and others to
enable effective and supportive working
relationships between them to be established
and/or maintained and to establish best practice
and work to ensure that it is followed across
the country.
21).
Many panels and other stakeholders will
recognise that they are already working in many
of the ways that are outlined in the
recommendations. This is a welcome situation and
the steering group hopes that in future all
panels and stakeholders will receive the support
they need to do the work that they are all so
committed to.
22).
It is in the context of all of the above that
the Access Panel Steering Group has produced its
recommendations for submission to the Scottish
Executive and it is now for the Scottish
Executive to respond to them.
The Access Panel Steering Group recommends the following:
A
National Umbrella Body for Access Panels
23).
An independent national umbrella body for access
panels is created. It will have fully equipped
offices, a paid staff and a governing board (or
equivalent) that will manage the body. This
board will feature a majority membership of
access panel representatives. Other invited
members will join as those representatives see
fit.
24).
The umbrella body could be entirely new or it
could be administered by a body already in
existence. However, if the latter course is
followed panels will not have to become members
of the existing body
in order to be involved in their own umbrella
body.
25).
After further consultation with access panels
the steering group recommends that the Scottish
Disability Equality Forum (SDEF) takes on the
responsibility for establishing the umbrella
body as per its proposal of 27 June 2003.
Appendix 3 provides more detail.
26).
Meetings of the umbrella body board are
accessible. This will probably involve the
provision of various communication methods,
material in various formats, the creative use of
modern technology and meetings taking place at
various locations around Scotland throughout the
year as opposed to being always held either in
the central belt or in a major city.
27). All panels join the umbrella
body as members to ensure a consistent level of
support across Scotland. A situation where lack
of membership affects the ability of the
umbrella body to properly support a particular
panel should be avoided.
28).
The original report ‘A Review of Access Panels
in Scotland’ made the following
recommendations on the role of an umbrella body
and the Access Panel Steering Group supports
them.
“Funding should be provided by the Scottish
Executive to a national umbrella organisation,
in close consultation with local access panels,
to:
·
offer
support and information to panels
·
facilitate
communication between panels
·
form
a national network or advisory body on access
issues*
·
develop
common standards for access panels
·
organise
training and seminars
·
promote
and publicise the work of local panels
·
liaise with national bodies on access issues”
*
the board of the umbrella body will fulfil this
role, supported by the paid staff.
29).
Furthermore the Access Panel Steering Group
recommends that
§
The umbrella body should seek to
establish best practice and to develop, over
time, the capacity and competence of access
panels.
- The
setting of standards, priorities and
activities for the umbrella body should be
done by the board of the umbrella body in
conjunction with the Scottish Executive and
other relevant parties, including local
authorities, individual access panels,
disabled people, professional practitioners
and the private sector.
- The
umbrella body attempts to ensure that there
is a balance between the input of ‘access
professionals’ and ‘users of services’
in the area of work that access panels are
meant to cover.
30).
Access Panels work together through the board of
the umbrella body to identify standards,
priorities and activities that will apply to all
panels across the country.
These will be for the benefit of panels
and the communities they serve and they will not
compromise the ability of panels to respond
effectively to various local priorities.
31).
Panels continue and expand upon their present
work and consequently that they:
- 32).
are consulted on relevant planning and
building applications in their local
authority area and given time to provide
access solutions to identified issues. The
definition of ‘relevant’ should be a
matter for decision by the panel together
with the local authority but the umbrella
body should seek to provide guidance at an
early stage of its existence.
- 33).
are partners in local authority inspections
of completed buildings and submit further
recommendations if necessary.
- 34).
seek to work in an appropriate form of
partnership with those undertaking access
audits and producing access strategies
whomsoever is the lead body or agency or
contractor for any given audit or strategy.
- 35).
ensure they are both properly constituted
and insured in such a way as to protect
members of panels against any legal action
that might be taken as a result of any
advice, recommendations, guidance or other
information supplied by those panel members
when acting in their capacity as panel
members (see Appendix 2).
§
36).
provide general information, undertake
awareness-raising & training, produce access
guides and campaign for good access for all in
various circumstances. This activity should no
longer be considered to be solely with respect
to buildings but should include the general
built environment (particularly among those
responsible for designing and constructing
various parts of it, for example, pavements,
parks, pedestrian crossings) and transport. It
should also include various services delivered
by and for diverse groups both within and
without the built environment and in both the
public, private and voluntary sectors. The scope
of services that are covered by the above is
large and is intended to guide panels in their
work. Examples of services are also given in
Part 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act
itself and there is clarification in the Code of
Practice to Part 3 available from the Disability
Right Commission. The exact services that access
panels chose to prioritise is a matter for
individual panels to decide.
- 37).
work together through the umbrella body to:
- 38).
produce uniform good practice advice
for addressing accessibility issues that
can be used by those who wish to go
‘beyond the minimum standards’
stipulated in current official national
and international guidance (e.g. BS8300).
This may necessitate panels to organise or
even provide disability awareness
training.
- 39).
develop access awards to flag up and
reward accessible places and services and
simultaneously develop constructive ways
of highlighting deficiencies that will
lead to their improvement.
- 40).
receive appropriate training (which may be
accredited) to enable them to fulfil their
role.
41).
Panels are led by disabled people and strive to
represent those with different impairments. It
is particularly helpful for panels, especially
when undertaking access audits, to represent
disabled people including those with visual,
aural and mobility impairments, hidden
disabilities, mental health issues and learning
difficulties.
42).
A designated Access Officer attends meetings and
acts as an advisor to the panel and key
professionals working in relevant fields (for
example architects, building control officers,
planning officers and those in health and
education) are identified and formally invited
to join panels as advisors or as members as the
panel sees fit. If this approach does not yield
regular attendance by relevant professionals
panels should strive to obtain expert advice, as
they require it, and the Access Officer should
have a key role in ensuring this happens.
43).
Representatives from other sectors of the
community who are particularly affected by
access issues (for example parents and older
people) and those with responsibility for taking
decisions that could affect the work of panels
(for example local elected members) are invited
to join panels as advisors or as members as the
panel sees fit.
Note
to the above:
It
is important for any panel that the definition
of a member and an advisor and their roles and
responsibilities are clear before a panel
decides in what capacity interested parties may
best serve the panel. This is likely to be
addressed when panels formally constitute
themselves as referred to in paragraphs 35 and
73.
Funding
44).
Funding for the umbrella body is linked to its
standards, priorities and activities and
provided directly by the Scottish Executive.
45).
Funding for individual panels is linked to their
standards, priorities and activities.
46).
Local authorities are required to support the
panel(s) within their area in an appropriate and
practical way so as to allow them to carry out
their role.
47).
The umbrella body will hold and administer a
general fund, consisting initially of monies sourced from central government, which will be distributed to
panels as appropriate upon application to the
fund by panels for specific purposes or
projects. Any panel applying to the fund would
have to seek and obtain the support of their
local authority first before they were eligible
to apply to the fund. It is to be hoped that
this will encourage panels and local authorities
to work together.
48).
If an access panel for any reason is unable to
obtain the support of it’s local authority the
umbrella body will be available to work in
conjunction with that panel and with that local
authority to identify what barriers exist to
such support being secured and to attempt to
overcome them. This may involve the
identification of various types of support for
that panel from other appropriate sources.
49).
It is not the intention that receipt of funding
from any one source will preclude any panel from
attempting to source funds from elsewhere.
50). All funding from national and
local government is allocated for a fixed term
to be not less than three years at a time. Funds
would be paid out as with normal funding regimes
(quarterly or annually) and subject to the usual
annual auditing process and monitoring and
evaluation procedures.
51).
The issue of sustainable funding for access
panels and any supportive national umbrella body
beyond the initial three years is carefully
considered and properly planned for.
N.B.
- The
intention for the umbrella body is that it
will have the resources and staff to carry
through an ‘exit strategy’ from its
initial funding period. It is to be hoped
that any such structure put in place will be
successfully sustainable. However, the
Access Panel Steering Group was concerned
that there was an expectation that all
individual panels will speedily become
self-funding organisations once they are
given initial funding and supported by an
umbrella body.
- While
it is true that presently some individual
access panels (as a part of a small
voluntary organisation) have access to
resources such as stationary, office space
or even staff time, a large number operate
with only very minimal resources and in-kind
contributions from the local authority. Most
access panels operate only with volunteers
(who may or may not claim travel expenses)
- and consequently a
high turnover of members - and a few hours per week of assistance from a
paid member of local authority or voluntary
sector staff. Given the wide variation
across the country of level of development,
support and range of functions, many access
panels may not be in a position to become
self-funding either within three years or
for several years to come. While the
umbrella body can support any panel to
attempt reorganisation and self-sufficiency
there is no guarantee that all such panels
would be successful especially given that so
many sources of potential funding would be
the same for all panels (e.g. National
Lottery, charitable trusts). A lack of
central funding to panels is what has
resulted in the present ad
hoc
situation nationally and it is hoped that
this situation will be avoided in future.
52).
Charging for their services is subsequent to the
appropriate constitutional and legal
relationships being in place and panels are
clear whether this is possible or necessary
depending on the role that any given panel
wishes to adopt in their locale.
53).
Planning and building applications already
involve paying a fee to the local authority.
Depending on local circumstances panels and
local authorities could consider whether or not
there was a scope for part of this fee or the
introduction of a panel specific fee could be a
viable source of sustainable funding for access
panels.
54).
The original report ‘A Review of Access Panels
in Scotland’ made the following
recommendations about funding and the Access
Panel Steering Group supports them.
“Earmarked funding should be set aside… to
support the setting up of new panels and the
ongoing work of existing panels, to ensure all
panels have access to:
·
accessible
meeting space
·
travel
and out of pocket expenses for volunteer members
·
administrative
support
·
funding
to fulfil access requirements of members e.g.
sign language interpretation, information in
different formats etc
NB. Due regard should be given to the larger number
of panels and additional costs incurred in
widespread rural areas.”
55). Accessible meeting space
should feature accessible convenient parking.
56).
Communication support should also include the
provision of panel publications in accessible
formats.
Disability
Access Officers
57).
The title given above - or something similar -
is used to reflect the role of the officer
around disability and related access issues. It
is acknowledged that the issue of ‘access’
is of importance to everyone but the title
‘Local Authority Access Officer’ has already
been enshrined in the Land Reform process to
refer to officers involved in general ‘right
of way’ access. A local authority may chose to
create a post that deals with access in its
widest sense and this is a matter for local
authorities to consider.
58).
A Disability Access Officer is a full time
position as opposed to part time or part of a
wider remit.
59). The local authority can
appoint or contract a Disability Access Officer
from any appropriate source within or without
the authority and position them in any
appropriate location within or without the
authority to enable them to function most
effectively.
60).
Regardless of the source of the post-holder the
local authority would need to be satisfied that
individual is suitably qualified, experienced
and able to do the job and to put in place
suitable financial and managerial arrangements
as necessary to support the Officer.
61).
The Disability Access Officer:
- 62).
sits as an advisor to the panel and provides
professional advice and tuition, as the
panel requires.
- 63).
has disabled people’s interests as his/her
primary concern (rather like a solicitor
with a client) and his/her professional
expertise complements the personal
experience of disabled panel members.
- 64).
if a panel is facilitated by a local
authority, assists the office bearers in
organising the activities of the panel.
- 65).
acts as the primary link between the panel
and the local authority and others,
including experts and key professionals.
- 66).
brings access issues of concern to the
attention of the panel (see paragraph 36 for
the possible scope of such issues) and takes
panels’ advice in formulating
recommendations to overcome any
difficulties. (In the case of planning and
building applications
both before and after completion of work).
- 67).
ensures that the local authority building
control department presents these
recommendations to planners, developers and
any other relevant parties and attempts to
ensure that any such recommendations are
acted upon.
- 68).
stresses the relationship between good
access provision and compliance with
relevant legislation and highlights where
non-compliance could be an offence under the
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 or any
other pertinent legislation, for example the
imminent Building (Scotland) Act 2003.
- 69).
has a position within the local authority
that allows them direct access to and
regular contact with both building control
and senior management.
- 70).
is paid or otherwise compensated for
attendance at panel meetings which is
considered to be normal work activity.
- 71).
has access to accredited training, in the
areas noted below, as the Officer requires
it. The Officer should, in conjunction with
the Officer’s employer or contractor, be
responsible for identifying suitable
training providers. Training costs should be
met by the employer or contractor.
- Disability
Awareness.
- Disability
Equality.
- Access
Auditing.
- Legislation.
- Building,
Planning and Transport: Practice,
Procedure and Regulations.
- Inclusive
Design and Adaptations.
- General
Access Issues pertinent to the full range
of impairments.
- Community
Development.
- Management
Skills.
72).
That no change is made to the current situation
whereby the local authority is legally
responsible in the first instance for advice,
guidance, instruction and other information
given by its officers in the discharging of
their duties on behalf of the local authority,
whomsoever the local authority has consulted in
the formulation of such advice, guidance,
instruction and other information (see Appendix
2).
Relationship
to Local Authorities and other public bodies
73).
Panels be constituted as independent groups that
work in close partnership with local authorities
and others.
74).
Local authorities and the access panels in their
area consider and recognise one another as
empathetic partners in a mutually beneficial
process and their working relationship reflects
this. The precise nature of this relationship is
a matter for negotiation between them.
Ultimately the intention is that all access
panels – aided by the support that will be
made available to them
– will come to be recognised by local
authorities as expert advisors in this area and
their advice will be perceived as among the best
available. Local authorities will look to access
panels in the first instance for relevant advice
while also take cognisance of any other relevant
good practice advice, guidance and legislation.
75).
Whoever bears legal responsibility for decisions
made that involve access panel advice is
properly covered by indemnity insurance. At
present the local authority is legally
responsible for the decisions and actions taken
in its name by its officers. Given the
recommended relationship between the Disability
Access Officer and the access panel everyone
involved should be satisfied that it is clear
where responsibility lies for decisions or
actions taken and recommendations given.
76).
Local authorities consider producing - or
enabling the production of - a local access
strategy in conjunction with local access
panels. Under the Education (Disability
Strategies and Pupils Educational Records)
(Scotland) Act 2002 local authorities are
obliged to produce an accessibility strategy for
their schools. A local access strategy would
deal with general access issues in their area in
a similar way. This could be of assistance when
ensuring continuing local authority compliance
with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and
also in publicising its requirements to people
within the local authority area.
77).
The umbrella body takes on the role of
developing and maintaining relationships with
relevant public bodies particularly:
- The
Disability Rights Commission.
- Central
government (including agencies and
committees, for example, Mobility and Access
Committee for Scotland (MACS), Communities
Scotland).
- The
National Health Service.
And
also:
- Community
Planning Partnerships.
- Disability-led
and other community organisations.
- Bodies
that represent business particularly
property developers.
- Tourist
boards.
- Enterprise
boards.
- Professional
bodies (particularly those representing
architects, planners, surveyors &
building control officers).
- Historic
Scotland.
- Various
qualifying bodies to ensure they have access
awareness built into their curriculum.
Appendix
1: The Highland Access Panel Network
78).
The network is an informal meeting of
representatives from the following access panels
for the purposes of communication and mutual
support .
Sutherland.
Caithness.
Ross and
Cromarty.
Lochaber.
Inverness.
Nairn.
Badenoch and
Strathspey.
Appendix
2: The Legal Situation.
79). There is some confusion as to
the exact source of the suggestion to set up
access panels in Scotland. The following is as
much information as appears to be available:
80).
In 1979 the report of the Silver Jubilee
Committee on Improving Access for Disabled
People was published by the Department of Health
and Social Security and was titled ‘Can
Disabled People Go Where You Go?’ The report
recommended that local Access Panels be set up
to promote access for disabled people to/within
buildings and the appointment of Access Officers
to provide a link between the access panels and
the local authority (LA).
81).
In Scotland the initiative for establishing the
Panels came from the Access Committee of the
Scottish Council on Disability. COSLA contacted
local authorities requesting that a building
control officer be designated as an Access
Officer.
82).
Any recommendation from the Scottish Secretary
to local authorities in whatever form would
appear to have been in support of this request
rather than the source of it.
83).
Panels were to be volunteers whom the LA could consult and
the LA would pay for their costs. The panel was
in effect, part of the LA
and the LA was the official provider of advice and therefore legally liable should it prove
lacking. In other words if there was a problem
leading to legal action the claimant would have
to sue the council not the panel, although it
could be argued that the nature of the
relationship was legally ill defined.
84).
At that time there was also a different
legislative context. The building regulations
enshrined in law provided for access. Even if an
alteration was made to improve access based on a
local authorities advice (after having
themselves ‘consulted’ with a panel) it is
likely that it would not stray too far from
legislative requirements. If it did it may be
done in an effort to make even better provision
and not to cut corners. However, some legal
ambiguity still existed because if somebody did
make an alteration that was not in keeping with
the law and somebody did suffer because of it
the person who had made the alteration would
have no reason in
law
for the adjustment having been made.
85).
Now there exists the ambiguous legal concept of
a ‘reasonable adjustment’ (DDA 1995) and the
more concrete need for buildings to address
‘accessibility and usability for disabled
people’ contained in the Building (Scotland)
Bill 2002 (which will soon become the Building
(Scotland) Act 2003). There
are also many more accessibility standards and
guidelines which do
not have
the force of law. E.g. BS8300 and the increasing
professionalisation of access advice continues
in the form of paid access consultants and
consultancy firms.
86).
This leaves access panels in the following
position:
87).
If they remain part of local authorities (as in
the past) and it is only
the local authority that consults them before
providing its advice then it will be the local
authority that is liable for that advice.
88).
If they are independent
(in
whatever form) from the local authority and/or
if they offer their advice to others beyond
the local authority (for example a supermarket
chain) then they are putting themselves on the
same footing as a professional consultant. In
fact, if they are independent they will be
offering their advice to the local authority as
if they were just any other client.
89).
It will be crucial for the panel and the client
to have a very clear written understanding as to
on what basis advice is being given (as it would
for a professional consultant) because it will
then be the case that the independent panel is legally liable for its own advice.
Example:
90).
A supermarket chain is worried whether it
satisfies the requirements of the DDA. It asks
the panel for an access audit. The panel access
audits a supermarket. It finds some problems and
it recommends a change. The supermarket chain
asks whether this advice will ensure their
compliance with the (ambiguous) DDA. The panel
indicates that it will. The adjustment is made.
Later on a disabled person shops at the
supermarket and cannot use the facility that has
been adjusted for whatever reason. They end up
taking the supermarket to court. The supermarket
might get away with saying that has made a
reasonable adjustment already but if it does not
and it has to make changes then it might try to
claim the cost of any changes against the access
panel that it claims gave it bad advice.
91).
Or if a physical adjustment that is made causes
injury to some person who sues the supermarket
chain then the chain may again take legal action
against the panel because of bad advice given.
92).
The legal situations outlined above may be
unlikely but they are possible. It is not a
question of a panel avoiding such work but
simply making sure that they are properly set up
and covered for it. A panel needs to be insured
and properly constituted so that a situation
does not arise whereby individual panel members
are legally liable for such costs.
93).
It is for those that the recommendations might
effect (panels, local authorities etc) to decide
how far they go in acting upon them but covering
themselves in the proper way is no more than any
professional access consultancy would do.
Appendix
3: The Umbrella Body.
94)
In July 2003 the thirty-five access panels known
to SCVO were sent details of the two alternative
proposals for the way that their supportive
umbrella body could be established. One was by
the Scottish Disability Equality Forum. The
other was drafted by SCVO using the model of a
typical ‘umbrella body’ voluntary
organisation. Panels were asked to choose
between the two. As a member of the Access Panel
Steering Group the Executive received copies of
both proposals and were aware of the balloting
process.
95)
The results were as follows:
96) By the deadline
(August 15 2003) of the thirty-five
ballot papers sent out twenty-one completed
ballot papers had been returned by post or fax.
This is a return rate of 60%. Furthermore, in
case there had been problems with the post
(which it seems that there had been in some
areas) SCVO endeavoured to make contact with
others. Five were contacted in this way, making
a total return rate of 74%.
97) Both groups
showed majorities in favour of SDEF. The postal
ballot was 14 to 7 and the phone calls were 4 to
1, a total of 18 to 8. In percentage terms SDEF
won 51% of the total possible vote, 66% of the
postal/fax vote and 69% of the
postal/fax/telephone vote.
98) One letter of
abstention was received and another letter that
described the panel’s position as follows:
"The merits of the existing SDEF proposal (with the proviso that no financial
statement is available to read) probably
outweigh those of
a yet-to-be formed stand alone group."
99) These two responses bring the return rate up
to 80%.
|
