Skip to main content

ERK

Let me explain: The Commission for Equality and Human Rights has chosen to re-arrange its name the the Equality and Human Rights Commission - which results in the homophone acronym ERK.

You will see, from November 2007, I have been having minor running communications with this new body which took over from the Disability Rights Commission in October 2007.

In my opinion the DRC did an excellent job and I never had any difficulty getting advice and information from them. My own first contact with the DRC was in February 2004 when I had experienced discrimination at the hands of the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement and Health which led to my resignation from PPI Forums. The advice then was that, as a volunteer I had no rights under the existing Disability Discrimination Act - a measure of just how much the DDA 2005 has changed things.

One of the most far reaching changes in that latter Act was to institute the DISABILITY EQUALITY DUTY (DED) which imposes a legal duty on all public bodies (and bodies commissioned by them to perform their public functions).
What is the
Disability Equality Duty?

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 has been amended by the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 so that it now places a duty on all public authorities, when carrying out their functions, to have due regard to the need to:

• promote equality of opportunity between disabled persons and other persons
• eliminate discrimination that is unlawful under the Act
• eliminate harassment of disabled persons that is related to their disabilities
• promote positive attitudes towards disabled persons
• encourage participation by disabled persons in public life
• take steps to take account of disabled persons’ disabilities, even where that involves treating disabled persons more favourably than other persons.


The Disability Rights Commission went further than this: it resolved to pursue and if necessary prosecute public authorities which were in breach of the DED.

However, in the run up to the ERK taking over, there was some media disquiet around possible political moves to dilute the powers that the DRC had enjoyed (the DRC had threatened the Department of Health with legal action) during the change to the ERK.

Now this may just be the usual rumourmills in action but I have to say that the advice and information I have tried to get from the ERK has only resulted in what smells to high heaven like prevarication. Here is the latest:

I received a letter dated 10.01.08. from Keith Ashcroft, Legal Officer to the ERK. The letter says:

“Thank you for your letter dated 1st January 2008 (see pplog for that date - my parenthesis). I understand that the Commission has already responded to your third enquiry relating to the new Commission's willingness to take enforcement action against public authorities which may be in breach of the Disability Equality Duty.

In relation to the first two enquiries that you make, I would advise you that your initial contact should be with our helpline (Telephone Number 08457 77 88 78). It may also be useful for you to visit the relevant website at dotheduty.org if you have not already done so.

Thank you for taking the time and trouble in bringing these matters to our attention.”

I have written this in reply, with a copy to the Information Commissioner:

Dear Mr Ashcroft.

I have your letter dated 10th January 2008. There are some anomalies here in that I have heard nothing at all from the Equality and Human Rights Commission in response to my three inquiries, made on the web inquiry form on the helpline section of
http://www.equalityhumanrights.com

On the above web inquiry form on 11th November 2007 I asked:

“1. The Norfolk and Waveney Mental Heath NHS Trust has a practice which excludes service users not in receipt of secondary mental health services from membership of its Service User Council and from the Service User Section of its prospective foundation trust membership. I think this is discriminatory and a breach of the Disability Equality Duty. Can you please advise.

2. Similarly, I am of the opinion that the use of eligibility criteria for the provision of services may also be a breach of the Disability Equality Duty. Can you also please advise on this.”

On 22nd of November 2007, I used the web inquiry form again saying: “On 11.11.07. I sent you the following enquiry: (a repeat of the above queries but adding:) A few weeks before that I enquired if the new Commission will pursue prosecution of public bodies in breach of the DED as the DRC did. I have heard nothing from you. Please treat these inquiries now as Freedom of Information Act requests.“
My letter of 1st January, 2008 to which you refer, states clearly “I have heard nothing from you” That is still the case - I have heard nothing whatsoever from the Equality and Human Rights Commission apart from your letter of 10th January 2008 (the Disability Rights Commission did always respond to my queries).
Let me put it another way overleaf.
I have asked the Equality and Human Rights Commission three questions:
The Norfolk and Waveney Mental Heath NHS Trust has a practice which excludes service users not in receipt of secondary mental health services from membership of its Service User Council and from the Service User Section of its prospective foundation trust membership. I think this is discriminatory and a breach of the Disability Equality Duty. Can you please advise.
I am of the opinion that the use of eligibility criteria for the provision of services may also be a breach of the Disability Equality Duty. Can you also please advise on this.
Will the Equality and Human Rights Commission pursue prosecution of public bodies in breach of the Disability Equality Duty as the Disability Rights Commission did.
I have had no response at all from the Equality and Human Rights Commission on these questions and they have been asked as a Freedom of Information Act request which has not been complied with. Please correct this.
YET AGAIN WE AWAIT A PROPER RESPONSE!!!

Comments

Anonymous said…
Sounds like a case of here we go again Mike.

All those layers that keep shifting and either back to the same place or 1 step forward (which turns out to be 5 steps backwards).

Do you think the government and those influenced by it re-create bureaucracies to stop people from getting anywhere?

I have this image in my head of a small group of people (all really pally with each other) sitting in a room and a government minister going "Right John, you can have race relations", "Alan, you do human rights, "Josie, you can have Charities and "Sid, you are on tea duty, again...but don't forget that the prime directive is to maintain the status quo and keep the public off our backs"

Popular posts from this blog

SURVIVOR HISTORY NEWSLETTER

>From Andrew Roberts Secretary Survivors History Group http://studymore.org.uk/ studymore@studymore.org.uk telephone: 020 8 986 5251 home address: 177 Glenarm Road, London, E5 ONB Survivor History Group Summer 2012 Newsletter The July London meeting of the Survivors History Group will be held on Wednesday 25.7.2012 from 1pm to 5pm at Together, 12 Old Street, London. Everybody is welcome and refreshments will be provided. The September meeting has had to be moved from a Wednesday to Thursday 27.9.2012 (subject to approval by this Wednesday's meeting) because of the availability of a room at Together.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the July meeting will be drawn up at the beginning of the meeting, but it will include Peter Campbell's regular report back on the research he is leading on the history of Survivors Speak Out and discussion of material received from other people about Survivors Speak Out.  Rick Hennelly has se...

The DLA and Workfare Scandals.

This ConDem Coalition is exploiting the apparent helplessness of disabled people by taking essential money away from them and forcing vulnerable people, for example, people with mental health difficulties. I remember, when I was a practising social worker, the horror experienced by service users when they received a letter summoning them to undergo a medical examination (25 miles away in Norwich). Some became absolutely terrified at the prospect and the stress of having to get to and face the appointment led to one or two relapses and hospital admissions. Against local authority policy, I always took them to the appointment, went in with them and supported them through the interview acting as advocate. The doctors at these reviews were employed by the Benefits Agency and usually retired from practice. They were also usually empathic with the service user and mostly helped to reduce the terror of the interview. The new 'Workfare' reviews which every DLA claimant will have to und...

inappropriate!!!

I tried to respond to a Patient Citizen Exchange blog by Laura Greene today. I said: Hello Laura. Welcome - and my admiration? for you "single-handedly representing the entire health voluntary sector and 1000+ PCX membership..." My first question has to be: what is the composition of the Strategic Advisory Board? And my second question: what proportion of service users to professionals is there on that Board? There are indeed millions of impatient citizens out there. They are called Service Users (primarily because 'Patient" carries the labels 'One that has things done to her/him'; 'One that is subservient to the "We know what is best for you" approach'; 'One that is at the wrong end of an imbalance of power.' etc). The Americans prefer the term 'consumers', but whatever, we should avoid the term with the negative connotations. I was listening to the 5 Live debate this morning on the Strictly Come Dancing row about whether...