Disabled Persons (Independent Living) Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am delighted to be able to congratulate my noble friend Lord Ashley of Stoke on reintroducing his Disabled Persons (Independent Living) Bill, especially so early in the Session. I also add my thanks to the Disability Rights Commission, especially Caroline Ellis and Dr Graham Nixon for their help and advice. Organisations of and for disabled people have given the Bill their warmest welcome, and endorse the words of the National Centre for Independent Living: "““It is now becoming an essential piece of new legislation””." I also congratulate the Minister on her announcement, in her closing speech when the Bill was introduced, of the review by the Office for Disability Issues of independent living. I hope that the Government’s appointment of the two disability experts, Dame Jane Campbell in the chair and Dr Jenny Morris to lead the team, demonstrated their commitment to tackling the wide range of issues that need action if the Government are to attain their objective of opportunities for all disabled people by 2025. That task is no easy one, and it desperately needs this Bill for it to succeed. There is one great sadness today, however. I know I speak for all noble Lords in missing the enormous contribution the noble Lord, Lord Carter, would have made to this debate. He has fought for the independence of disabled people, for our dignity, choice and control, all his personal and political life. He would want to be here, and he is very much in our thoughts. We send him and his wife Teresa our warmest love and best wishes. As I said when the Bill was introduced, I believe the Government need this Bill. In the words of NCIL, it will, "““provide the practical steps necessary to turn the Government’s visions into concrete reality””." NCIL goes on to say that, "““we have seen the presentation of the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit report, Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People, the piloting of individual budgets, the White Paper, Our Health, Our Care, Our Say, the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 with the new disability equality duty, all demonstrating this Government’s commitment to the principles behind independent living. And yet, in spite of this commitment in policy and principle, in practice social care appears to be in crisis””." As the noble Lord, Lord Ashley, has already pointed out, 70 per cent of local authority social services departments are now offering community care support only to disabled people whose situation is critical. NCIL goes on to say that, "““reports we are getting from our member groups indicate that direct payments are now being offered in smaller and smaller support packages. Many disabled people now have considerable difficulty getting support for anything other than basic life and limb support, with little or nothing available to support family life, or community-based activity””." I spoke at length when my noble friend first introduced his Bill and I hope not to repeat myself. But I want to concentrate again on the crucial issue of housing. I particularly welcome Part 4 which deals with housing, as I believe that accessible and affordable housing is the very bedrock of independent living. Our housing stock lasts decades, much of it for over a century, so it is essential that we act now to provide for the independence of generations to come. Yet, accessible housing it is not regarded with the urgency which it deserves, but I welcome the mention that it has received today. In its 2003 survey of physically disabled people the charity John Grooms found that 40 per cent of the respondents lived in houses that made them unnecessarily dependent on other people. Evidence from the 2003-04 Survey of English Housing published in April 2005 indicates that an estimated 1.4 million disabled people in England are in need of specially adapted accommodation. Of that total, nearly one quarter currently live in unsuitable accommodation. The current housing situation of disabled people is dire and the demands of our ageing society, the growth of single households and increasing expectations among disabled people will only make the situation worse. Yet, sadly, the Government’s action, or inaction, since the summer has failed to acknowledge the urgent need for action. As a result, the housing clauses set out in Part 4 of the Bill are even more necessary. First, on the inaction, we continue to await the Government’s response to the research that they commissioned from Bristol University, Reviewing the Disabled Facilities Grant Programme, which the ODPM promised for, "““the early part of 2006””.—[Official Report, Commons, 27/10/05; col. 13WS.]" That research clearly set out the need for a strategy across government departments that considered the costs and benefits of disabled facilities grants, linking them with other housing, health and social care policies in order to achieve the best use of resources. I hope that we will not have to wait much longer for the Government’s response. In the past few weeks the Government have published the revised PPS3—the planning policy guidance on housing and the revised code for sustainable communities. Neither of those has addressed the urgency for strong Government action on accessible housing and both documents have ignored the DRC’s recommendations. The DRC had argued that, as a minimum, all new housing should be designed to the lifetime homes standard to meet the needs of occupants as they change over time. While PPS3 places welcome emphasis on insisting that local authorities should plan strategically for the long term and states that developers and planning bodies must take account of the need to cut carbon emissions, the requirement that homes are built to the lifetime homes standard remains just a voluntary matter. While I welcome the Government’s commitment to environmental issues, the Department for Communities and Local Government has failed to seize this opportunity to incorporate lifetime home standards into building regulations, despite being urged to do so by successive government reports. These include the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit report, Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People, the Social Exclusion Unit report, A Sure Start to Later Life, as well as that of the Lords Science and Technology Committee. The DRC is firmly of the opinion that this would not represent an additional burden on business. In evidence, it cites the fact that Habinteg Housing Association states, "““that building to LTH standard adds less than 1 per cent to a housing scheme's development costs. This is then repaid in reduced expenditure on adaptations””." The DRC also points to the situation in Northern Ireland, and states that there, "““the cost to building to Part R (the equivalent to the English Part M) or increasing the standard to LHS ranged from £165 to £545 dependent on house size, layout and specification””—" that is hardly a large sum— "““This additional cost would be recouped between 3 to 10 years due to reduced expenditure on adaptations””." That is but one example of spending wisely in the present in order not to waste money in the future. Housing is but one aspect of this extremely important Bill, which also makes provision for not wasting government resources and spending wisely for disabled people. It is a broad and wide-ranging Bill, offering solutions to the current wasteful, over-bureaucratic and utterly frustrating situation which disabled people face today. It offers the Government a new legislative framework which could ensure that their vision of equality of opportunity for disabled people by 2025 would indeed become a reality. I hope that they will grasp the opportunity with both hands.