Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to undertake
an inquiry into the reasons why the COP26 summit venue did not
provide equal access for people with disabilities; and what steps
they are taking to ensure that similar events in future are
accessible to all.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth
and Development Office and Department for Work and Pensions
() (Con)
We are committed to an inclusive COP 26 which is accessible to
all. The venue was designed to facilitate that. The permanent
structures are fully wheelchair-accessible and the venue holds
gold-level accessibility status. A complete accessibility audit
was completed for the temporary structures and they were fully
compliant. There are blue badge spaces for delegates and two
fully accessible shuttle routes. Once we were made aware of the
situation, it was resolved and Israel’s Minister Elharrar was
content.
(Con)
My Lords, many things can be said about Monday’s
incident—overwhelmingly, that it was avoidable. Does my noble
friend agree that, had COP 26 been planned and delivered to be
inclusive by design, this would not have happened? Does she also
agree that, prima facie, it was a breach of equalities
legislation? As a result of this, what steps will the Government
take to ensure that all their events and services and all
departments of state are inclusive by design—sure, for the
benefit of disabled people, but more for the benefit of everyone?
(Con)
I spoke yesterday to my noble friend and the Minister for
Disabled People. The Minister is absolutely determined to get to
the bottom of this to avoid recurrence in future. We are acting
fast by meeting different people so that we can get to the bottom
of it and make a difference. On the point my noble friend makes,
we are committed to making sure that disabled people have all the
access they need. We clearly have more to do.
(Con)
My Lords, the incident was truly wretched and the publicity that
arose from it did a great deal of damage to all the things we are
trying to achieve. But can we try to take something positive from
that miserable incident? Karine Elharrar, the Israeli Minister,
was showing that, just because you happen to be disabled, that
does not mean you have lesser rights or abilities. She follows in
the footsteps of President Roosevelt, Wolfgang Schäuble and many
very fine and senior Members of this House. Can we use this
incident to ensure that we do not treat disability as a curse? It
is a challenge which so many people, including many Members of
this House, rise to magnificently.
(Con)
I can only agree with my noble friend. I reiterate and support
his point that, in this House and in public service, there are
fine people who battle against things which would floor most of
us. I completely agree with that. We will use this incident to
good effect.
(Con)
Does the Minister agree that, while our Government are firmly
committed to best practice for all with disabilities, the gap
between that policy and their achievement remains unacceptably
wide? Would she agree to a meeting for constructive discussion
with one or two Members of your Lordships’ House, whose
dissatisfaction is well grounded on practical parliamentary
experience?
(Con)
The Government are firmly committed to best practice for all
disabilities. Although progress has been made in recent decades
on accessibility and inclusion, far too often obstacles remain.
When the Minister for Disabled People was appointed to our team
in the DWP, one of the first things I did was ask her to meet
Peers. She has agreed to do that. Give her time to get her feet
under the table, and noble Lords will have ample opportunity to
discuss all those things with her.
(Lab)
My Lords, it is great to be back here at the Dispatch Box dealing
with women and equalities issues, which have been added to my
very small brief of health. Given that the Paris Agreement, and
before that the Cancun agreements, acknowledged that disabled
people are disproportionately adversely affected by climate
change—of course, this was an organisational and rather shaming
failure at COP 26—can the Minister inform the House whether
disabled people have been involved and heard at COP 26? Will
their needs be fully integrated into the delivery plans as they
emerge and are implemented?
(Con)
I, too, have had Minister for Women and Equalities added to my
responsibilities, which I am very pleased about. On the issue the
noble Baroness raises, we have to include disabled people in
considerations about climate change. I will ask my colleagues in
the environment department to write and confirm that to the noble
Baroness.
(Con)
My Lords, the experience of the Israeli Minister is a day-to-day
reality for millions of disabled people in the UK, including
myself. But perhaps we should congratulate the Government on
completing the hattrick: first, the widely derided national
disability strategy, then the removal of the UC uplift from
disabled households that cannot work, and now this. What message
does my noble friend think this latest example of discrimination
sends to the UK’s 14 million disabled people?
(Con)
My noble friend is understandably critical of the national
disability strategy and has made that quite clear. Again, one of
the first things I did when the Minister for Disabled People
crossed the threshold at the DWP was to ask her to meet my noble
friend, which she has agreed to do. It is not good that this
incident happened; I cannot hide behind that. We have apologised
and we are committed to making sure that it does not happen
again.
