beta

You're viewing our new website - find out more

Publication - Report

Consultation on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD): analysis of responses

Published: 18 Nov 2016
Part of:
Communities and third sector, Equality and rights
ISBN:
9781786525642

Presents a summary of the analysis from the consultation on our Draft Delivery Plan for 2016 to 2020 on the UNCRPD.

220 page PDF

1.3MB

220 page PDF

1.3MB

Contents
Consultation on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD): analysis of responses
3. The Four Outcomes

220 page PDF

1.3MB

3. The Four Outcomes

Section 2 of the delivery plan set out four outcomes the Scottish Government and its partners are working towards.

The four outcomes

1. Equal and inclusive access to the physical and cultural environment, transport and suitable, affordable housing.

2. Equal and inclusive access to healthcare provision and support for independent living, with control over the best use of resources, including support for disabled children.

3. Equal and inclusive access to education, paid employment and an appropriate income and support whether in or out of work.

4. Equal and inclusive access to the justice system without fear of being unfairly judged or punished, and with protection of personal and private rights.

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that together these four outcomes cover the key areas of life the Scottish Government and its partners must focus on to achieve the rights of disabled people?

Overall the majority of those who responded to this question agreed that these were the correct outcomes to focus on. Seventy-three consultees responded to this question. Nearly three-quarters (73%) agreed, whilst 12% disagreed and 15% said that they neither agreed nor disagreed.

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that together these four outcomes cover the key areas of life the Scottish Government and its partners must focus on to achieve the rights of disabled people?

Q2: Please comment here on your response above, or if you have any other comments on the outcomes

Sixty-four consultees responded to Q2. Most of those comments (43) came from consultees who said that they agreed with the outcomes. Table 2, below, shows the number of comments received, by response to Question 1 (agree/disagree with the outcomes).

Table 2: number of comments by response to Q1

Answer to Q1 No. selecting this response No. of comments
Agree 53 43
Disagree 9 8
Neither Agree nor Disagree 11 10
Not answered 18 3
Grand total 91 64

Those who agreed with the outcomes

Nearly three-quarters (73%) of consultees agreed that the four outcomes outlined by the Scottish Government were the right outcomes. However, even amongst those who agreed with these outcomes, there were a number of suggestions for things that could be added or given more priority in order to improve the outcomes. Table 3, below, shows the key themes identified by those who agreed with the outcomes.

Table 3: themes identified under Q2 for those who agreed with the outcomes

Theme identified Number of comments relating to this theme
Generally supportive 9
Would also add/give more priority to the following areas 38
Implementation of plan, including monitoring and evaluation 27
Comments on wording of plan and consultation and process of responding 7
Dissatisfaction with current systems and services in place for disabled people 4

Generally supportive

Some respondents commented that they were generally supportive of the four outcomes.

"Social Work Scotland is in agreement with the four outcomes and is committed to working with partners to create the optimal environment for supporting disabled people to participate fully in society and live their life with control, freedom, choice and dignity."

Representative body for professionals - Social Work Scotland Ltd

Would also add/give more priority to the following areas

The largest number of comments received related to things that consultees would like to see added to the outcomes or areas that they felt should be given more priority within the outcomes.

Some consultees felt that more priority needed to be given to the early years and to disabled children and young people. Disabled children are explicitly mentioned in outcome 2, but it was suggested that they should be referred to in all the outcomes or to have a separate outcome number 5 dedicated to them.

"We would also like to see more explicit reference to improved outcomes for disabled children and young people and the same breadth of policy consideration that has been applied to disabled adults within the plan."

Third sector / equality organisation - Capability Scotland

"For disabled children and young people who require targeted support, getting this right in the early years is fundamental to securing their future. The plan is an opportunity to include commitments around increased access to early learning and childcare for disabled children, and improved standards in early years support."

Third sector / equality organisation - National Deaf Children's Society

The importance of a highly skilled workforce working with children and young people was also highlighted.

A number of comments were received around Outcome 1 "Equal and inclusive access to the physical and cultural environment, transport and suitable, affordable housing".

These included adding support for personal, social, family and spiritual life and reducing social isolation, and comments around enhancing the focus given to transport, housing and access to buildings.

Outcome 2 was "Equal and inclusive access to healthcare provision and support for independent living, with control over the best use of resources, including support for disabled children". The majority of comments related to this outcome stated that there should be more focus on social care, and not just health care, given the importance of social care in helping disabled people to live independent lives.

"It was felt that, given the importance of social care services and the impacts of cuts to these services to disabled people in Scotland, social care should be given explicit prominence in the stated outcomes and not subsumed into 'support for independent living' in outcome 2."

Third sector / equality organisation - Scottish Disability Equality Forum

Outcome 3 was "Equal and inclusive access to education, paid employment and an appropriate income and support whether in or out of work." Comments were made relating to education, employment and volunteering. It was suggested that for those with complex needs a reference to "purposeful and meaningful age appropriate activity" should be made, as for some, paid employment will not be an option.

Outcome 4 was "Equal and inclusive access to the justice system without fear of being unfairly judged or punished, and with protection of personal and private rights." This outcome attracted fewer comments than the other outcomes, although there were suggestions that it should focus on justice in a wider sense, rather than just the justice system, and that more could be done to protect disabled people from becoming the victims of crime.

Comments were also made about access to property and financial matters and access to information.

Implementation of plan, including monitoring and evaluation

A number of comments were made about implementing the plan. The most common theme to emerge was the importance of meaningful engagement with disabled people and disabled people's organisations, when designing and delivering policies and services which affect them.

"The failure by public authorities in Scotland to consult and involve disabled people at the earliest stages of development of services or infrastructure permeated many of the responses to the plan. 'It is necessary to seek views of people most affected by these issues so that there are no unintended consequences due to lack of consultation'."

Third sector / equality organisation - Scottish Disability Equality Forum

Some consultees expressed concerns about how the plan would be implemented and if it would achieve its aims. It was mentioned that the plan needed to be "outcomes focused" rather than just a list of actions that the Scottish Government intends to take.

"ENABLE Scotland… believes that the Scottish Government's UNCRPD Delivery Plan must go further than to list what the Scottish Government has done or will do but rather be outcome focused and judged on what it delivers for disabled people over the four year period it is intended to cover."

Third sector / equality organisation - Enable

Linked to the mention of being outcomes focused were comments about the need for a robust monitoring and evaluation framework, so that progress could be measured and reported on. Reporting progress to disabled people was seen as a key element of the monitoring process.

"Evaluation and monitoring was felt to be crucial in terms of accountability and developing trust with disabled people that the plan will lead to rights actually being realised."

Third sector / equality organisation - Scottish Disability Equality Forum

It was also noted that in order to be effective the plan would require adequate resourcing. The need for cross-cutting partnership working and building on existing strategies was also mentioned.

"Good partnership working was a key issue for a number of respondents - all agencies need to 'sing the same song' to achieve the outcomes. At present disabled people tell us that agencies such as health, social work and housing do not work well together to achieve positive outcomes for disabled people even when supportive legislation or policy is in place."

Third sector / equality organisation - Scottish Disability Equality Forum

Consultees highlighted a number of issues that they considered to be obstacles to successfully delivering the plan. These included attitudinal barriers, the gap between policy and practice, disabled people not having the mechanisms in place to use Human Rights to challenge their treatment and local delivery (although one consultee considered local delivery to be a positive).

"The experience of many disabled people who try to access services is that of a 'post-code lottery' dependent on practices, policies and procedures operated by their local authority. Respondents felt that the outcomes, whilst positive, were very open to interpretation, particularly when local government resources are being cut."

Third sector / equality organisation - Scottish Disability Equality Forum

Finally, it was noted that policies put into place to support disabled people also had the potential to benefit others in the community too.

Comments on wording of plan and consultation and process of responding

There were some comments that the plan and consultation document could have been better worded and structured in order to make it more accessible. Some third sector/equality organisations outlined how they involved disabled people to inform their responses to the consultation (discussed in more detail in the introduction).

Dissatisfaction with current systems and services in place for disabled people

A small minority of consultees took this opportunity to express their dissatisfaction with current services for disabled people.

Those who disagreed with the outcomes

There were eight comments from those who disagreed with the outcomes. The most common reason for disagreeing was the belief that something fundamentally important had been omitted: outcomes did not take enough account of mental health; the definition of health for Outcome 2 was not broad enough and should encapsulate both social care and living life in a healthy way; civic and political life should have been included; civil justice as well as criminal injustice should have been included; as should discrimination faced by those with learning disabilities when trying to access financial services.

"We do not agree that together these four outcomes cover the key areas of life the Scottish Government and its partners must focus on to achieve the rights of disabled people. This is because they don't address the structural inequalities faced by people affected by mental health problems. Our principle concern is that people with mental health issues appear to have been omitted completely from the plan."

Third sector / equality organisation - Members of the Rights for Life Steering Group

"Healthcare is not just about funding or access to health services, it is about living a life that contributes positively to your health and wellbeing. The document talks about citizenship and the social model of disability, but does not seem to cover the social model of health."

Public Body - NHS Forth Valley (Women and Children's Sexual Health)

"Until the ratio of deaf or disabled representatives in the Scottish Parliament and local authorities across the country more closely reflects the ratios of one in five people who are disabled or the one in six people who are Deaf or have hearing loss in Scottish society, the delivery of equal access to full citizenship cannot be judged to be a success."

Third sector / equality organisation - Action on Hearing Loss Scotland

Broader reasons for disagreeing included a belief that a proper analysis of gaps and how to meet them was required, disagreement with the definition of disability used and a belief that the focus of the plan was disproportionately on Article 19 of the UNCRPD, "living independently and being included in the community", rather than focusing equally on all the articles.

"The disconformity between the definition of disability in section 1.3 of the consultation document and the definition of "persons with disabilities" in UN CRPD Article 1 risks causing inadvertent discrimination."

Representative body for professionals - The Law Society of Scotland

Those who neither agreed nor disagreed with the outcomes

There were ten comments from those who said that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the outcomes. Again, most of the comments related to gaps in the outcomes. There were also some concerns noted about the structure of the plan and how it would be delivered, as well as comments on some of the definitions used, and comments on the social model of disability used.

The most commented upon gap was children and young people. Again it was noted that children and young people were only explicitly referred to in Outcome 2, and it was felt that they should be included throughout the entirety of the plan. It was noted that the needs of disabled children and young people can often be greater than the needs of disabled adults, and it is therefore very important that these needs are considered and their rights protected. More specific gaps around disabled children and young people were also flagged up, such as the needs of looked after disabled children and young people, and the need to address relationships and sexual health issues amongst disabled young people. It was also noted that there was a need to make more explicit links between the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child ( UNCRC) and the UNCRPD.

"Even when they have the same impairments as adults, disabled children and young people face additional challenges. Extra measures are often required and particular attention given to ensure that they are protected, have access to services and are fully included in society. Moreover, by virtue of their age, they are usually more dependent on others. This means that States must take all appropriate measures to promote their independence and ensure that they are able to access services and achieve their full potential to allow them to participate fully in society."

Public Body - Children and Young People's Commissioner

Again, civic and political life was flagged up as an omission in the plan. It was also noted again, that social care deserved higher prominence and should not be subsumed into health care. Again, the right to a personal and social life was seen as an omission. It was felt that not enough attention was paid to inclusive communication and communication support needs, or transitions in education.

It was also felt that certain groups were under-represented in the plan, such as those with mental health issues or those from minority ethnic groups. It was felt that the plan did not adequately address the intersectionality between different protected characteristics. In addition, it was noted that certain commitments related only to specific conditions, when they would of wider benefit.

"Inclusion Scotland have always advocated a focus on intersectionality, and action to address the specific barriers that arise for certain groups of disabled people, particularly those with additional protected characteristics. Some commitments only narrowly refer to one particular impairment group when they address topics of great importance to many others ( e.g. commitment 2.18 on advocacy)."

Third sector / equality organisation - Inclusion Scotland

Concerns were noted about the structure of the plan, with commitments not necessarily being seen as being arranged in the most logical and coherent order. Concerns were also raised about whether or not the plan would achieve what it set out to do. It was noted that further engagement with disabled people was required.

"Whilst we are pleased with the overall direction of travel in identifying outcomes that mostly tally with priority areas set by disabled people, it is very unclear whether some of the commitments can meet these outcomes. Of particular concern are those that are vague, have no timescale, and do not provide requisite detail for disabled people to understand how a particular commitment will be delivered."

Third sector / equality organisation - Inclusion Scotland

Some comments were made about disagreements with certain definitions, for example it was pointed out that D/deaf people should not automatically be classed as disabled, but preferred to be considered as minority language users, whilst another response expressed displeasure at learning disabilities being classed as a mental disorder under Scottish law.

Comments were made supporting the use of a social model of disability, although one response pointed out that the language used within the plan sometimes reverted back towards the medical model rather than being consistent with the social model throughout.

A comment was made by a respondent who did not answer Q1 to say whether or not they agreed with the outcomes, to point out the conflict between human rights and the rights of the unborn child in relation to pre-natal screening for foetal abnormalities.


Contact