European Messenger

No 13 – April 2006





Hermes Network

Editorial

Dear Readers,

Welcome to the 13th edition of the “European Messenger” ! In this newsletter you will find latest news on the UN Convention to protect the rights of disabled people. The information is sent by Tony Aston, Chairman of the EBU commission on the Rights of Blind and Partially Sighted People. The newsletter includes materials from Albania and Montenegro. Sinan Tafaj, President of the Union of the Blind in Albania, describes how blind and partially sighted people in Albania were able to vote independently and in secret in the last year’s national elections. Our correspondent from Montenegro speaks about protection of the rights of blind people in Serbia and Montenegro.

Tony Aston has also provided us with information on discriminatory practices in Europe against people with disabilities. His information is based on a paper, presented at a symposium in Ankara in February 2006 on Disabled People within the framework of the European Union.

Should you want to express your thoughts or contribute to the Messenger, please contact :
Tony Aston, Chairman EBU Commission on the Rights of Blind and Partially Sighted People
E-mail: tony.aston@btinternet.com
Or
Audra Jozenaite
E-mail: audra@lass.lt


Back to contents




LATEST NEWS ON THE UN CONVENTION TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF DISABLED PEOPLE

By Tony Aston,
Chairman of the EBU Commission on the Rights of Blind and Partially Sighted People

 

In the autumn 2005 edition of 'The Messenger', I explained the how the United Nations (UN) was working to elaborate a Convention to protect the rights of disabled people. I described how the world wide disability movement had formed an International Disability Caucus (IDC) to work alongside the UN Ad Hoc Committee, established by the General Assembly to prepare the Convention. Ambassador McKay, Chairman of the AHC had, following its 7th meeting, produced a 'Chairman's Text' of a proposed Convention. This document, circulated in October, synthesised the observations made by the States' Delegations that comprise the AHC during the series of meetings that had previously taken place.

The Chairman's text took account of many of the views that had been expressed by the IDC at AHC meetings. During the three months prior to the 7th meeting of the AHC, the IDC looked in detail at the Chairman's Text and prepared a revised version, incorporating IDC's views on what the Convention should contain. This was available to the AHC State Delegations via the UN 'enable' website prior and during the AHC meeting. The World Blind Union (WBU) contributed to the IDC version by interaction through e-mail discussion pages.

The Chairman had indicated that he intended to work through the entire Chairman's text during the 7th Session and had circulated an outline programme of work, which allowed approximately two hours of discussion for each of the 33 draft Convention Articles. He also indicated that he expected States' Delegations to only propose changes where the Chairman's text was not acceptable to them; minor changes that did not materially alter the meaning were discouraged. The European Union (EU) circulated their proposed changes in advance of the meeting and some other Delegations circulated changes to specific Articles either in advance or during the session.

The last AHC session commenced on 15 January and closed on 3 February - an unusually long meeting as all other AHC sessions lasted for two weeks.

The IDC Convention text was referred to by States' Delegations repeatedly during this session. This, combined with the interventions made by IDC speakers, resulted in reasonably substantial influence by IDC on the discussions. As at previous AHC meetings, the IDC were invited to speak immediately after the completion of States' Delegations' observations and before any other representatives of civil society were able to speak.

Additionally, the Chairman invited IDC to contribute as 'experts' on particular issues during the part of the discussion dedicated to States' contributions. The WBU was represented at the AHC by several blind and partially sighted people. We prepared information sheets on issues of concern to WBU for circulation to States' Delegations, participated in IDC working groups on specific Articles, interacted with members of States' Delegations and spoke on behalf of IDC on some key issues.

At the end of this AHC meeting, the Chairman said that he considered there were relatively few areas where Delegations had proposed substantive changes to the 'Chairman's Text'. He concluded that the work on the Convention Articles was extremely well advanced. He thought that most Articles could be categorised as 'no significant issues remaining', few in the category of 'some issues remaining' and very few in the 'difficult issues remaining' category. He proposed that at the next AHC meeting in August, the AHC should concentrate on substantive issues which remain and on the monitoring Articles. Ambassador McKay envisages the subsequent stage to be referral of the draft text to a drafting Committee. This will review the text in such a way that no substantial changes of meaning will be made. The revised text will then return to the AHC for consideration at a short (1 or 2 hour) meeting prior to ratification by the UN General Assembly. So, we could have a UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled People in existence by this time next year !

The IDC is now beginning to review the draft working text of the Convention that has been produced following the 7th meeting of the AHC. At the August meeting, we will need to concentrate specifically on those issues that are of major concern to the international disability organisations, including WBU.

I think the new working text potentially provides disabled people throughout the world with a broadly based and comprehensive Rights Convention. However, there are some key issues that need to be addressed in the Convention and some of these relate to the needs of blind and partially sighted people. For example, WBU will wish to see in the Convention a definition of disability or a disabled person that is appropriate to people with sensory impairments, as well as those with other disabilities. There is a reference to the removal of copyright barriers in the working draft, but this is currently restricted to cultural aspects. We wish to see the reference positioned where it will have a wider application. The references to support for people in employment need strengthening if this can be achieved, as the Convention is currently not strong enough to facilitate effective supported employment provision. The article on education currently requires States' Parties to ensure that the education of disabled persons, and in particular children who are blind, deaf and deafblind, is delivered in the most appropriate languages and modes and means of communication for the individual, and in environments which maximize academic and social development. We will need to remain vigilant to ensure that this, or a similar reference, is made in the final Convention text.

We have now reached the stage where we must begin to consider how best to exploit the opportunities that this convention will provide. The EBU Commission on the Rights of Blind and Partially Sighted People will begin to address this at its meeting in April.


Back to contents



BLIND AND PARTIALLY SIGHTED PEOPLE IN ALBANIA VOTE IN SECRET NOW

By Sinan Tafaj,
President of the Union of the Blind in Albania

 

In 1984, the Union of the Blind in Albania decided to establish a project that would enable all eligible blind and partially sighted people in Albania to vote in secret in the national elections that were to take place in the following year. The first stage of the project was to persuade the Albanian government to change electoral legislation. Blind people can now vote without being accompanied, though they do not lose the right to have an assistant if this is preferred.

The total number of blind and partially sighted people eligible to vote in Albania is 8400. These are registered with the Union. Prior to 2005, there were no facilities that enabled blind people to vote in secret in Albania. To make it possible for blind and partially sighted people to vote in secret, the Union had to seek funding and the involvement and expertise of national and international organisations. The Union sought financial support from an number of international agencies, including the Organization for Security and Collaboration in Europe.

The philosophy of the process was:

To ensure a significant improvement in the status and civic participation of people with disabilities in Albania, particularly blind and partially sighted people.
To promote the Integration of people with sight impairments in Albania’s civic and political life.
To ensure conditions to use the right to vote for people with sight impairments.
To promote the education of blind and partially sighted voters on participation in national elections.
To ensure that it was practicable for blind and partially sighted people to vote in secret in national elections

The materials that were required to enable blind and partially sighted people to vote in secret were -

1. A larger sample ballot sheet for people with partial sight. A larger sample ballot sheet was prepared using normal sized print so as to guide the person with sight impairments to effectively use the mask applied on the ballot sheet. Copies were distributed to blind and partially sighted people prior to the election.

2. A mask to correspond to the ballot sheet. A mask was designed to fit to the official ballot sheet. The mask itself consisted of two sheets. The ballot sheet was to be placed inside the mask. The lower sheet of the mask had identical dimensions with the ballot sheet. The upper sheet of the mask folded onto the ballot sheet. It had openings that corresponded to the names of the candidates and to the names of the political parties. The upper sheet also displayed the numbers of the candidates in Braille and/or in normal letters in high relief next to the input openings of the mask. The mask covered the totality of the non-written part of the ballot sheet.

3. Explanatory Cassette and information material. The information concerning voting procedures and techniques was prepared on tape. The tapes were distributed in such a manner as to have an average of one tape for every two blind voters. Depending on geographical needs, some voters had their own tapes and others will share tapes with more than one other voter.

4. Sample Ballot Sheets in Braille. Sample ballot sheets in Braille were prepared. These sample ballot sheets were used to guide blind voters in filling out their official ballot papers, which were placed under the masks. The number of sample ballot sheets prepared in Braille corresponded to the number of blind voters able to read Braille. There were 2 ballot sheets. The political/coalition parties sheet would incorporate one hole of 0.5 cm diameter on its upper right side in order for the blind electors to be able to tell the upper from the lower side and the front from the back. The ballot sheet for the candidates incorporated two holes that would be in the upper right side and had the same purpose as the holes in the ballot sheet for the political parties.

As soon as the production of the sample ballot sheets and the sample masks was completed, the training of the trainers started. This was undertaken in all the prefectures of the Country.

Masks have different colours; the candidates mask was yellow and that for the political parties/coalitions was blue.

The dimensions of the masks were critical, as a small error in relation to the size of the ballot sheet could cause a blind or partially sighted voter to place his/her mark in the wrong place, resulting in an invalid or incorrect vote.

The mask for the ballot sheet has some gaps in the shape of a window. This corresponds exactly with the blank space on the ballot sheet, where the elector makes his/her mark. The elector, having made her/his mark, removes the mask and places the completed ballot sheet in the poll box in the same way as other electors. This ensures that blind electors can vote in secret.

Tapes were produced containing material that introduced blind and partially sighted electors to the election process and explained why it is important to participate in elections. The most important material that this tape contained was the nominal list of the candidates running in the general elections of 2005 and the list of the parties/coalitions, in the order they would appear on the ballot sheet. This enabled those people who cannot read large print or Braille to remember the order of the names in the ballot sheet and to count down the column of windows on the mask on the election day.

This was the only way to make sure that blind and partially sighted electors would be able to vote for the candidates and/or political party/coalition of their choice.

The ballot sheet containing the names of the candidates was different for every constituency, because every zone had its particular candidates. This information was reflected on the tapes, where the list of the names of the political parties/coalitions was unique for each constituency.

The tape recordings incorporated numbers for candidates on the recorded list. These numbers corresponded to numbers located on the masks. Additionally, these lists were produced in Braille and large print.

Three hundred masks were transcribed with Braille numbers. This was done to help Braille readers. Six thousand masks were printed with large print numbers to assist print reading voters. The remaining masks had no printed numbers. This is because many of the visually impaired people in Albania do not read Braille and cannot read large print. They had to rely on their memories and count down the windows in the masks until they reached the line corresponding to the name of their selected election candidate.

In the elections of 2005, the majority of blind and partially sighted people in the Republic of Albania were able to cast their vote freely, independently and in secret, achieving two main objectives:

The provision of all election materials and processes relevant to the needs of blind and partially sighted electors.

Enabling blind and partially sighted people to practice their right to vote independently and in secret.

It was also evident that the blind and partially sighted community was clearly identified as an integral component of society. Additionally society itself was made more aware of the problems and needs of blind and partially sighted people. However, the most important outcome was the fact that blind and partially sighted citizens were made aware of their role and importance in the electoral decision making process.

72% of the eligible electorate of blind and partially sighted people voted. This is a far higher voting proportion than the rest of the electorate in Albania in this election. No blind or partially sighted person was excluded because the use of masks failed to be effective or accurate.



Back to contents



THE STATUS AND PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF BLIND PERSONS IN MONTENEGRO

By Fadil Mucic
 

Blind persons represent a category of severely disabled persons, whose needs are specific and urgent and have serious implications on their material situation, social status and their daily lives. The Union of the Blind is a non-governmental organization (NGO), and is the authentic and legitimate representative organisation of blind persons. Special attention is payed to establishing and maintaining rights for blind persons. We estimate that Montenegro and Serbia have about 100 special rights for blind persons and about fifty general disability rights. These rights are based on a non-institutional model and address individual needs, adequate security and support for blind persons. The right to life and equality with other citizens, human dignity and some compensation for the costs of disability are included. The common objective of all these regulations is the integration of blind persons into normal life and to establish equality with other citizens.

There are two categories of visually impaired persons - blind and partially sighted. Montenegran law does not define the term "blind person". The definition of blindness in the laws and regulations, as well as in the Statutes of the Union of the Blind has been taken from the Congress of Ophthalmologists held in 1991 and states: "A blind person is a person having vision acuity with correction less than 10% (0.10), or the central vision of 0.25% (0,25), but the vision field restricted to 20 grade or less". The World Health Organisation definition of blindness is far more restrictive, because it considers that a person with more than 5% residual vision is partially sighted. In Montenegro, partially sighted persons are defined as having more than ten per cent of residual vision. Partially sighted persons are not members of the Blind Union, but they receive our attention, care and protection.

There is no special legislation in Montenegro regulating the status and treatment of blind persons. Consequently, the constitutional obligations of the state are crucially important. Montenegro has addressed its obligations by integrating international provisions into its internal legislation. The Constitution incorporates the following principles -

that everyone is equal before the Law;

that the needs of everyone are equally important;

that there must be a basis to ensure equal rights and opportunities for participation by everyone in education, health and employment;

provision of material security and guarantee of protection.

The Constitution of the Republic of Montenegro imposes the same duties on blind persons as as on other citizens, because society expects blind persons to take full responsibility for their actions.

The Law makes provision for the right of blind persons to inclusive, special, pre-school, elementary and higher edducation, as well as professional training. there are also provisions for accomodation, care and attendance at special educational institutes or departments.

Equality of employment for blind persons is guaranteed, regardless of personal characteristics. The cost of adapting the workplace and equipment is also provided for. Personal allowances are available whilst waiting for a job. An employee who has a blind child or is responsible for an employed blind person cannot be required to work away from home. An employed parent who is responsible for a child that needs extra care and is returmning to work after maternity leave has a right to work half of his/her full working time until the child is three years old. An employed blind person cannot be dismissed, until, with his/her agreement, he/she takes action to obtain their pension.

The most important rights of blind persons are financial. These relate to pension/disability insurance, health insurance systems, disabled veterans and social security systems. However, the most important financial right is the provision of the Care Allowance.

Blind persons also benefit from health protection priority measures, including priority of access to health services based on medical diagnosis, as well as the right to medical technical aids. Blind persons have the right to wages' compensation during temporary absence from work as well as to compensation of travel expenses for health treatment. Blind persons are not required to contribute to health protection expenses.

Blind persons who are covered by health protection insurance have the right to ophthalmic aids including glasses, contact lenses, eye protheses, as well as equipment for blind persons, such as white cane and special watches.

If a blind person is incapable of work and his/her incomes do not exceed a certain limit, or if he/she has finished school, he/she has the right to a family pension. The Care Allowance cannot then be a barrier to its provision.

Blind persons have the right to professional rehabilitation and professional training, and those who need these services have the right to accommodation in institutions or with a family.

Blind children who cannot achieve their independence have a child allowance that is 50% of the national minimum wage. War blinded veterans have special beneficial protection which includes Personal Disability Allowance, Care Allowance and Orthopedic Allowance.

The Government has legislated for a library for blind people in Montenegro, which will, in addition to library activities, also provide information and publishing services for blind persons. It will have the status of a public institution and will be financed by the State. The government is required to provide information services for blind persons, including Montenegran radio and TV programme schedules. Blind persons are free from paying fees for TV and radio.

The Law provides for several process rights for blind persons as participants in out-of-court proceedings and authorization of signatures or fingerprints.

The State is required to provide tax examptions and other benefits for the work and development of an organization for the blind, including examption from real estate tax. Such organizations also do not pay profit tax below incomes of 4,000 Euros, provided that the funds are applied in accordance with its founding objectives. Value Added Tax is not payed for the services provided by an organization of the blind, nor for imported products which are distributed without charge.

Blind persons and blindness organizations are free from paying customs on the import of special equipment, devices, instruments and spare parts. An organization of the blind and its members are free from customs duties when importing passenger vehicles.

Blindness organizations do not pay administration fees and blind persons are free from tourism fees, as well as from the yearly tax on possessing motor vehicles.

Rail, highway and ship transport charges for blind persons are reduced to 25%, and in air transport to 50%. Guides travel free, except in air transport, where they also pay 50% of the total price.

Blind persons traveling independently or with a guide should carry a white cane as a symbol of recognition for vehicle drivers. Vehicles providing transport for blind persons should be especially marked. Drivers of such vehicles can stop or park their vehicles at the places where it is normally forbidden, but the vehicle should be especially marked. Drivers are required to stop for blind pedestrians. Public transport vehicles must reserve two to six seats for blind persons next to the door and the information about that must be clearly visible in the vehicle. Traffic lights may have a sound signal to inform blind persons of the pedestrian phase. Guide dogs are permitted on public transport vehicles.

Organisations of the blind can send parcels by post free of charge and do not have to pay for PO Box services.

Blind persons have 500 fixed telephone impulses per month free of charge, they do not pay connecting fee, and blindness organization have 1,500 impulses per month free of charge. There is also the right to reduced payment for mobile telephony services. For example, the mobile network Monet GSM provides Sim cards free of charge, as well as connections to the network and no monthly fee. Impulses are provided free of charge up to 5 Euros per month, and after having exceeded this amount, a user pays 50% of impulses within the Monet Network.

A Law on the professional training of disabled persons is in preparation. It will regulate the training, professional rehabilitation and employment in the open labour market and under special conditions, introducing a quota system. The passing of the Law is expected in the first half of this year. There is also a campaign for the introduction of a Law on discrimination of disabled persons.

The Union of the Blind of Montenegro considers that two more laws should be initiated: a Law on associations of persons with disabilities and a Law on protection of persons with severe disabilities. For the time being though, we will follow carefully current legislative developments.

The challenge of protecting the rights of blind persons requires us to raise the consciousness of society and of each individual in society. The extent and the level of protection of blind persons that we have reached in Montenegro corresponds with current trends. this requires an understanding on the part of the Union of the Blind of the role of our organization in achieving changes in social policy, establishing high quality and sustainable services and and improvements in the status and protection of blind persons. We have had to establish a basis for partnerships and an interactive role with state institutions. This has been done in accordance with the principle of 'Nothing about us without us'.


Back to contents



DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES IN EUROPE AGAINST PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

By Tony Aston

I shall start by briefly explaining why people with disabilities experience discrimination, describe what the European Union (EU) is doing at present to combat discrimination and then identify some key areas of discrimination in Europe that need to be addressed. Finally, I shall explain why we need an EU non discrimination directive and why the proposed UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is so important to us.

The expert support given by Catrin Roberts, European Campaigns Officer at the Royal National Institute of the Blind and the valuable resource of information contained in papers prepared by Professor Colin Low and Dr Rodolfo Cattani are gratefully acknowledged.

Why are persons with disabilities discriminated against ?

Discrimination occurs when inaccurate assumptions are made about the abilities and limitations of people with disabilities. Misconceptions arise because of the focus on people with disabilities' impairments. This mind set arises from the application of the 'medical' model of disability, requiring people with disabilities to fit into society. We now recognise that most of the problems arising from disabilities are created by the social, economic, financial and material environments, where discriminatory barriers exist that prevent people with disabilities from living full and inclusive lives in the community of their choice.

Consequently, people with disabilities experience discrimination in all sectors of life, including education, employment, culture and leisure. This is because barriers exist in the built environment, public transport, access to information, use of technology, goods and services. Whilst these barriers exist, people with disabilities cannot exercise their fundamental right to be treated on an equal basis with others. Today, people with disabilities throughout the world are demanding their rights to full and equal access to all aspects of life and to all the facilities in their communities.

Whilst overcoming conflict in a post-war Europe was the original driving force of the EU, the European Commission today sees the prevention of discrimination as being one of its key objectives. In order to see whether this is indeed the case, I would like to briefly refer to some of the work EU has done to address this issue.


What has the EU done to combat discrimination ?

Several speakers at the symposium referred to the European Union Amsterdam Treaty of 1999. It established the legal basis that enables the EU to take action to combat disability discrimination, as well as discrimination against other groups. Article 13 does not confer any legal rights on individuals; it allows the Community to adopt legislation to combat discrimination. As I understand the Treaty, Member States may use this Article to combat discrimination; there is no requirement to do so.

Once the Amsterdam Treaty came into force, the EU had new powers to combat discrimination on various grounds such as disability or age. In the year 2000, the Council adopted two Directives (the Employment and Racial Equality Directives respectively) as well as a related Community Action Programme (2000-2006) to change discriminatory attitudes and practices in a practical way. Part of this Action Programme, which has a budget of around EUR100 million, is the "for Diversity against Discrimination" information campaign intended to promote the benefits of diversity. This campaign runs from 2003-2007.

Directives require Member States to either adopt the directive or amend existing relevant legislation. Directives set minimum standards, so Member States can set higher standards if they wish.
The scope of the employment directive includes access, recruitment, promotion and working conditions. It incorporates the concept of 'reasonable accommodation'. This requires employers to make adjustments to the workplace, working conditions etc. These adjustments are in practice judged to be reasonable unless they are considered to impose a disproportionate burden on the employer. For example, the adaptation may be too expensive or would not comply with health and safety requirements.

The Directive also enables Member States to implement positive action measures to facilitate the employment of people with disabilities if they wish to do so.

We should be aware that there are a number of variable factors that potentially influence the way in which the employment directive impacts on persons with disabilities. We have noted already that governments have considerable freedom to determine how to implement directives. The way that the concept of 'reasonable accommodation' and 'disproportionate burden' are applied in practice will vary according to the nature of the work and size of the employer. More would be expected of a large government department than, say, a small company employing only a few workers. Additionally, what may be considered to be 'reasonable' in a country that has considerable experience of applying this concept may differ from the way it would be applied in a country with little or no experience of the Directive's application.

The EU in 2004 published an 'Equality and Non-discrimination' paper. This took stock of what the EU had done over the previous five years (i.e. largely since the Amsterdam Treaty came into force) to combat discrimination and to promote equal treatment. It looked at how these initiatives related to other policy developments at European and international levels. It also examined new challenges that have emerged in recent years, including those linked to the enlargement of the EU and assessed the implications of this changing context for policy development in the field of non-discrimination and equal treatment.

In 2005 the European Commission published an employment policy paper entitled "Disability Mainstreaming in the European Employment Strategy". This recognised that people with disabilities are one of the groups who are disadvantaged in most Member States in relation to participation in the labour market.

It emphasises that in its policies for disadvantaged groups, the Commission adopts the mainstreaming approach. This means the needs of disadvantaged people need to be taken into account in the design of all policies and measures, and that action for disadvantaged people is not limited to those policies and measures that are specifically addressing their needs.

The Amsterdam Treaty, the Employment Directive and the Employment Policy Paper are three crucial documents that potentially influence the extent to which people with disabilities are disadvantaged in the labour market in EU Member States. I have asked myself the question - has the Amsterdam Treaty and the Employment Directive had an impact on the employment of people with disabilities - and have not been able to find a satisfactory answer. Before 1999 the level of unemployment amongst persons with disabilities in Europe was probably about 70%. I believe the proportion is the same today. However, there are a number of other factors that influence this situation. For example, the economic status of most if not all EU countries during the last six or seven years has deteriorated and unemployment amongst the population as a whole has increased. There have also been changes in the nature of work, caused for example, by the application of new technologies. It is in consequence very difficult to determine the level and nature of the impact of the Non Discrimination Employment Directive.

Two sets of actions recently taken by the EU will potentially have an indirect effect on people with disabilities and may help to reduce discrimination. Two directives revising European public procurement rules have recently been adopted and await transposition by Member States. They offer scope for contracting authorities to consider social and accessibility issues. The directives refer specifically to technical specifications relating to accessibility for people with disabilities and design for all requirements, as well as contract performance conditions, so it is crucial for us that the public authorities at all levels positively implement these provisions. In the UK, the Directives were implemented by the deadline of 31st January this year, however it remains to be seen whether the same happened in the other twenty four Member States.

Late in 2005 the EU approved regulations concerning the rights of passengers with reduced mobility when travelling by air. Once the Directive comes fully into force at the end of 2007, disabled passengers should no longer have to pay for assistance in airports, for example when boarding a plane. Disabled air passengers should no longer be denied boarding of passenger aircraft, except on the grounds of safety. However, it remains to be seen whether this new regulation will prevent the kind of discrimination recently practiced by Ryan Air when they 'bounced' a party of nine people off one of their planes only minutes before take off because they were visually impaired. It was considered that in consequence they constituted a safety risk.

That completes my brief outline of the principle actions undertaken by the EU to combat discrimination. I shall now consider aspects of discrimination against people with disabilities that are not being effectively address by the EU and suggest some possible ways forward.


What discrimination exists now for people with disabilities and what should the EU be doing about it ?

Older people with disabilities are at the top of my personal list of priorities.

The treaties, directives and other instruments have done little to address the needs and rights of older EU citizens. This is despite the fact that the Amsterdam Treaty specifically calls upon EU Member countries to address discrimination on the grounds of age. The proportion of older people in all European countries is predicted to continue to increase very substantially during the next twenty years. Of course, this means the numbers of people with disabilities in our population will also increase very substantially during this time.

We can understand the economic imperative that impels the EU to promote employment based initiatives. However, it is equally important to address the needs of the older population and to help older people to maintain independent lives. Their well being and ability to live inclusive lives in their communities will have a direct impact on the resources that national and local governments will have to allocate in future years to support our aging population. It is therefore essential for the EU to find ways to encourage member states to combat ageist attitudes in their policies and services.

There is anecdotal evidence that central and local governments' policies and practices differentiate between provision for people above and below 65 years of age. This is done regardless of any assessment of individual need and adversely affects people with disabilities over 65 years. There is also anecdotal evidence that some hospital services are less likely to provide treatments for older patients. Some governments' statutory benefits for people with disabilities are only available to those below 65 years of age. These practices are ageist and discriminatory. Whilst it is recognised that some of these issues are beyond the scope of the EU to control, EU could be giving a lead to its Members to address these and other instances of institutional discrimination against older people with disabilities that fall within its competence.

We should welcome the action being taken by the EU to combat violence against women and children, for example through the DAPHNE 2 programme. People with disabilities are subject to heightened levels of violence. This has recently been recognised in the UK, where new legislation imposes additional penalties on the perpetrators of violence against people with disabilities. EU should encourage other EU Member States to emulate this example.

Problems of access to polling stations and lack of special facilities to enable people with communications disabilities to vote prevent many people with disabilities from voting in secret. This is a violation of our civil rights as citizens of democratic countries and should be addressed urgently.

It is essential for EU to set an example of exemplary practice for access to information in the public domain. For instance, EU should ensure that all of its published documents, whether in hard copy or electronic format, are fully accessible to people at the same time as the information is available in formats for other citizens. Despite some advances in accessibility, the practice of just using PDF formats on the EU's Website is not acceptable, as PDF is at best difficult and at worst impossible for many people with disabilities to read through the use of access technology. Furthermore, the newly re-launched European Parliament website is not fully accessible! This is a cause for concern, especially as the EU recently published a communication on inaccessibility as part of the i2010 strategy with the intent of ensuring that a digital divide does not occur in Europe.

Another example of access to information that EU needs to address is the provision of communicators for deafblind people at EU events and meetings. Failure to provide this service discriminates against a group of very severely disabled people with disabilities with major communication difficulties.

In addition, the right of people with print reading disabilities to access books in alternative formats without copyright restrictions must be recognised.

We must acknowledge the important work that EU has already achieved in improving accessibility to public transport. Yet there remains much to be done before people with disabilities no longer experience discrimination every time they use public transport.

There are four main issues :

- the design of vehicles
- the provision of information
- free travel for personal assistants
- disability awareness training for public transport staff.

EU is in a very strong position to introduce accessibility requirements in the forthcoming Bus and Coaches Directive.

EU has recently taken an increasing interest in access to the built environment. This is welcomed, as there is a proliferation of access design practices developing in different EU countries relating to the built environment. Tactile surfaces at dropped kerbs and audible signals at controlled pedestrian crossings are but two examples. People with disabilities rely on such features to facilitate independent mobility. However, the variation of practice in different countries is causing increasing confusion amongst disabled international travellers. It is becoming increasingly important to establish EU wide standards in the design of the built environment for people with disabilities. The EU is in a key position to take the lead. Perhaps the first step should be to identify priority issues for consideration and then fund rigorous and objective research to identify examples of exemplorary practice in accessible environmental design that could form the basis for the establishment of standards in this field.

Most manufactured goods are not designed to take account of the needs of people with disabilities. Additionally, very few manufacturers provide instructions about their products and their use that is accessible to people who cannot read print. The UK places a legal responsibility on retailers to ensure that products are suitable for use by people with disabilities and require them to provide accessible product information. As a result, many products have to be adapted for people with disabilities at the point of sale. This is often less than satisfactory, as adaptations often do not enable people with disabilities to use the full range of products' facilities. Additionally, it often proves difficult for retailers to provide product information in an accessible format. The solution to this problem is to produce manufactured goods that conform to 'Design for All' criteria. Making products accessible generally ensures that they are easier for everybody to use.

We should call on the EU to address this discrimination by requiring all manufactured goods that are sold in EU countries to conform to 'Design for All' criteria and for manufacturers to be required to produce and distribute product information in a range of formats.

I have already drawn attention to the importance of the EU Directive on Employment. However, there are many people with disabilities who, perhaps because of multiple disabilities, are not able to work under ordinary conditions without extra support. Their needs are not adequately covered by this Directive. These people have the right to be able to make a contribution to their own financial needs by being given the opportunity to work under a range of supported employment conditions. The EU has not yet recognised this need and taken steps to encourage EU Member countries to develop policies and practice in this area. Anecdotal evidence indicates that the provision of supported employment in many EU countries in actually shrinking. As a result, more people with severe disabilities are becoming totally reliant on state benefits. EU should be urged to monitor levels of supported employment and also to identify levels of need for this important provision.

The EU should also be encouraged to support the concept of “disability leave”. This would help to ensure that people who become disabled whilst in employment are given a period of leave – similar to maternity or paternity leave – to become used to their disability and to undertake any new training that is required.

The EU has substantial programmes in the fields of culture, leisure, sport and library services. However, more could be done by EU to make these facilities and services more accessible, for example by helping to ensure that television programmes and receiving equipment are accessible to blind and partially sighted people. The EU could start by initiating an EU-wide information gathering exercise on the availability of assistive TV services for people with a sensory impairment. At present, people with disabilities, especially those who are blind and partially sighted and those who are deaf or hard of hearing, are largely unable to access mainstream cultural, leisure, sporting and recreational facilities. This is clearly discriminatory, as the means exist to provide access. The EU must take full account of access issues when developing and monitoring programmes in these areas. Access for all people with disabilities should be a strand of all EU funded and promoted programmes in culture, leisure, sport and recreation.


The need for an EU Non Discrimination Directive and a UN Human Rights Convention

I have briefly described a number of specific issues that the EU needs to address to combat the discrimination experienced by people with disabilities. These include attention to the needs of older people, access to secret voting, websites, information, public transport, the built environment, products, culture and leisure, and supported employment. There is however, one vital action that EU needs to take to ensure that discrimination against people with disabilities is addressed across the entire spectrum of EU activities.

The European Disability Forum (EDF) has proposed a disability specific directive on non-discrimination. This campaign was launched in March 2003 as part of the European Year of People with Disabilities. The proposed directive would encompass all fields of EU competence, and therefore help to break down discriminatory barriers in policy areas such as education, social protection, public health and telecommunications, as well as improving the accessibility of manufactured goods. This horizontal disability directive would also allow people with disabilities to benefit from equal treatment. It would ensure a level playing field across Europe and would make discrimination against people with disabilities illegal in EU countries that adopted the directive.

The EU and Social Affairs Commissioner’s staff mentioned at a meeting with EBU that a disability directive was a matter of “when rather than if”, however we must all push to ensure that this is indeed the case.

There has, to a certain extent, been a start with the Disability Action Plan, the second stage of which (2006-07) is currently being debated at the Parliament.

There is another potentially powerful instrument being developed. The United Nations (UN) has established an Ad Hoc Committee to elaborate a Convention to protect the rights of people with disabilities. This will set new standards for all States who sign the Convention to apply, so that the rights of people with disabilities are protected. Non discrimination is a key part of the development of the Convention, which will probably be submitted for ratification to the UN General Assembly in perhaps twelve months time. Its impact will of course only be felt in States that sign up. The EU, as I understand it, cannot be a signatory. So, I suggest that it is essential for us to continue to campaign for the introduction of a non discrimination directive as advocated by EDF. With both instruments in place, our ability to combat discrimination that is experienced by people with disabilities will be greatly improved.

Finally, I would like to draw your attention to some of the similarities, differences and relationships between the UN approach and that of the EU.

The UN Convention constitutes a 'rights' based approach. The Convention to protect the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is based on the contents of seven or eight existing UN Treaties and Conventions. These are all 'rights' based documents. However, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities does incorporate key strands of non discrimination. Indeed, it could not do otherwise, because it is not realistic to establish an effective framework of rights for people with disabilities without recourse to considerations of discrimination. After all, if a person's right is violated, then discrimination occurs. However, it must be emphasised that the Convention is first, and for most, a document whose contents emanate from the principle that human beings, whether or not they are disabled, have rights and equal rights at that.

The EU on the other hand approaches the task of ensuring equality for people with disabilities ostensibly from a non discrimination perspective. This is manifest in the Employment Directive. It has to be said that the concept of rights for individuals is not much in evidence in the EU approach. Yet, underlying this non discrimination approach is the principle of rights for individuals.

I suggest that in practice, we need to have both a rights and a non discrimination approach. Our need for rights exists I think, because we share the same rights as everyone else. That is why the UN Convention we have been considering is based on other UN Treaties and Conventions. This embodies the principle of inclusion.

The non discrimination approach starts from the premise that we are being treated differently to others. This is the realistic position that people with disabilities face every day of their lives. It is the removal of discrimination that will give us equality with others.
 

Back to contents