Network Rail admits: ‘We have no idea how many inaccessible bridges we’re building’
Network Rail has been forced into a “deeply troubling” admission that it has no idea how many inaccessible footbridges it is planning to build across Britain, while claiming it is too time-consuming and expensive to find out.
The public body, which owns and runs most of the country’s rail infrastructure, has previously claimed it had plans to build 17 inaccessible footbridges across England, Scotland and Wales in 2022, 2023 and 2034.
But it has now admitted that it keeps no central records of how many footbridges it builds that are not accessible to disabled people and others who cannot use steps.
It has accepted that the true number would be higher than 17.
It has also admitted that the information it previously provided to Disability News Service (DNS) was “neither accurate nor comprehensive” but that to provide accurate figures would impose a “disproportionate burden”.
DNS had asked why Network Rail was claiming there would be no new inaccessible footbridges in its southern region when plans for at least three stepped bridges had emerged: in Hounslow, west London; in Wokingham, Berkshire; and in Egham, Surrey.
All three of these bridges will allow people to cross railway lines but are not within train stations.
Two disabled campaigners spoke out this week to raise concerns about Network Rail’s actions.
Doug Paulley, who has helped expose its plans to build new inaccessible footbridges, including one at Copmanthorpe, near York, said: “It is really telling that Network Rail are unable to say how many inaccessible footbridges they are building.
“The fact that it is so commonplace is totally unacceptable; we should not be building new inaccessible infrastructure in 2023, and the fact that they do not have any register of the accessibility of things they are building tells me that they truly don’t care about access, no matter what smooth words they spout.”
Paulley pointed to Highways England’s guidelines for road footbridges, which also apply across Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, and state: “Access by stairs alone should only be evaluated in exceptional circumstances and with the agreement of local access and disability groups.”
He said: “Highways England evidently has better standards than Network Rail.”
Flick Williams, who has played a key role in campaigning against the Copmanthorpe plans, said: “The news that Network Rail has no idea how many inaccessible footbridges it is building is deeply troubling.
“It suggests they have no regard to their responsibilities under the public sector equality duty and seem to think they are somehow exempt from meeting the duties laid out in the Equality Act.
“As someone who was told in person by Network Rail executives that my access needs are ‘not value for taxpayer money’, it comes as little surprise that equal access for whole communities is not a concern for them.
“They are confirming that they regard all of us with protected characteristics as second-class citizens.”
The admissions came in Network Rail’s internal review of how it handled an initial request for information from DNS under the Environmental Information Regulations.
It said that it operated a “devolved business model” which means “it is occasionally more difficult to gather large volumes of information when it’s spread across the company”.
And it said there was “no central repository of information that shows the bridges that have been constructed or that will be constructed in any given year”, with this information “held at a regional level by a number of different teams”.
To gather the information requested would likely take at least 60 hours, it said, which would be seen as a “disproportionate burden” under the regulations.
It said it accepted that the DNS request had an “inherent value” because making the railways more accessible was “a key commitment” of Network Rail and the government, but it claimed that the benefit of knowing how many new footbridges were accessible to disabled people was “marginal at best”.
This was because a number “doesn’t explain anything about the local conditions which have led to a footbridge being constructed in a particular way”.
21 September 2023
Anger as Labour omits ‘vital’ promise on disability rights from policy document
Labour has broken its promise to implement the UN disability convention into UK law if it wins the next general election, according to confidential party policy documents.
The party was insisting until at least July this year that a Labour government was “fully committed” to incorporating the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) into law.
The pledge was part of the party’s manifesto at the last general election in 2019.
UNCRPD is currently not incorporated into UK law, which means that its protections, including article 19, which provides a right to independent living, and articles on areas such as health, inclusive education and housing, are not legally binding in the UK, although they can influence court decisions.
Labour leader Keir Starmer backed the policy during his leadership campaign in February 2020, telling Disability News Service (DNS): “Before I was elected as an MP, I was a human rights lawyer and I spent a career championing human rights and the work of organisations, including the United Nations.”
And the pledge has been repeated more recently by the party’s shadow minister for disabled people, Vicky Foxcroft.
On last December’s international day of disabled people, she tweeted: “We promise to incorporate the UNCRPD into UK law to tackle discrimination and ensure better support and protection for the most vulnerable.”
And in July, in an email to a disabled campaigner, Foxcroft said: “Regarding your questions on policy, Labour is fully committed to incorporating the UNCRPD into law and working in co-production with disabled people in our entire approach to policy.”
But this week DNS obtained a copy of Labour’s National Policy Forum (NPF) documents, which have not been published.
The documents will form the basis for Labour’s general election manifesto and will be put to the party’s annual conference in Liverpool next month.
Although the NPF document on equality repeats Foxcroft’s pledge on co-production, there is no mention of the promise to incorporate the UN convention into UK law.
Instead, the party says: “We will honour our commitments to the United Nations’ Convention for the Rights of Disabled People and ensure its principles are reflected across government to create policies which remove barriers to equality and focus on disabled people’s representation at all levels of government.”
Kathy Bole, chair of Disability Labour, said she was “angry” that the party had not kept its “vital” promise on the UNCRPD.
She said: “The failure to make a pledge on the UNCRPD shows an inherent failure to commit to making things better in the UK for disabled people and shows that the party isn’t listening.
“If we don’t get the UNCRPD enshrined in UK law it leaves the door open to further discrimination against disabled people.”
Mark Harrison, a member of the steering group of Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance, said: “What we know with this Labour leadership is that the rhetoric doesn’t match the reality.”
He said that Labour’s co-production in recent months and years had in reality been “tokenistic consultation” and that the reference to honouring commitments to the convention “isn’t worth the paper it’s written on”.
He said: “After 13 years of being on the sharp end of the Tories war on disabled people we know that to undo the damage and level the playing-field a Labour government will have to have a radical programme and invest massively in righting the wrongs.”
Nuala Toman, from Disabled People Against Cuts Northern Ireland, said: “Disabled people in the UK have experienced nothing but neglect, discrimination and marginalisation at the hands of successive British governments.
“The commitment made by Labour in 2017 [and 2019] to incorporate the UNCRPD into domestic law presented a real opportunity for change.
“Incorporation of the UNCRPD would ensure that the rights of disabled people are protected in domestic law alongside greater investment in services and financial support.
“By turning their back on this commitment, Labour are turning their backs on disabled people at a time when we need them most.”
Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, declined to comment on specific elements of the NPF documents this week.
But she told DNS in a statement: “The National Policy Forum plays an important role in shaping Labour’s policy platform, but this is not the end of the journey.
“The report outlines a credible and ambitious policy programme that will be further discussed at our party conference and we will set out our manifesto in full before the next general election.
“Unlike the Tories, Labour is committed to co-production and ensuring we work with disabled people right from the start.”
In the NPF equality document, the party also promises to “take its responsibility to conduct equality impact assessments of major announcements seriously”.
And it says it will “ensure that political parties can take the action necessary to deliver and maintain diverse elected representatives, including greater representation of Women, Black, Asian and minority ethnic people, disabled people and LGBT+ people, through positive action measures”.
October’s party conference will decide which parts of the NPF documents are included in the party programme.
Ahead of a general election, Labour representatives will then attend a so-called clause V meeting to decide which elements of the party programme will be included in the manifesto.
21 September 2023
Labour has ‘caved in to vested interests’ on social care, leaked documents show
Labour has been accused of caving in to “powerful vested interests” after failing to include any reference to scrapping care charges in documents that will form the basis of the party’s next general election manifesto.
One leading disabled people’s organisation said the statement “confirms our worst fears”.
The section of the documents on adult social care talks about “supporting independent living”, ensuring disabled people have “choice and control” over their support, and ending “the postcode lottery for care”.
But there is no mention of a Labour government taking any steps to end care charging, despite being told repeatedly that tens of thousands of disabled people across the country every year are having debt collection action taken against them by their local authorities over unpaid care charges.
Labour leader Keir Starmer supported the idea of free social care, funded by national progressive taxation, with a universal right to independent living “enshrined in law”, when he was campaigning to become leader in February 2020.
But instead of a pledge to scrap care charges, or even to gradually reduce charges, the document says Labour would create a new National Care Service that would be “a needs-based, locally delivered system, where people are helped to stay in their homes for as long as possible and where disabled adults have choice and control over their support”.
The details are included in the party’s National Policy Forum (NPF) documents, which were passed to Disability News Service this week but have not been published.
Mark Harrison, a member of the steering group of Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance (ROFA), said: “This policy statement confirms our worst fears.”
He said the statement was “a step backwards” from the policies of the last Labour government, which lost power in 2010, and its policies such as the Improving the Life Chances of Disabled People strategy, Right to Control and Putting People First.
Harrison said: “Rather than coproducing a policy with disabled people and our representative organisations, they have listened and caved in to the powerful vested interests in the social care industry.
“There is no mention of article 19 of the UNCRPD, direct payments, no commitment to scrapping the tax on disability that is care charging, no re-imagining social care as ROFA has done in our National Independent Living Service (NILS) vision, and no recognition of the vital role of peer support through DDPOs* delivering direct payments support.
“There is also no commitment to reopening and expanding the Independent Living Fund, as Scotland has done and Northern Ireland intends to do.
“Whilst we welcome some elements, including the commitment for people to be supported to live independently in their own homes, we recognise that this is not realisable while being delivered by cash-strapped local authorities in continuing and enduring austerity.”
Kathy Bole, chair of Disability Labour, said: “Labour needs to scrap care charging as soon as possible.
“Many people are going without care because they can’t afford the charges. This then puts further pressure on family carers.
“Again, the Labour party is avoiding making a commitment to disabled people.
“A commitment to scrapping charges would show a true difference to what the Tory government has done for 13 years.”
Ellen Clifford, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts and author of The War on Disabled People, said: “The strategy of the current Labour leadership is to appeal to Tory voters to secure election victory.
“Their priority is to head off criticisms that the Tories might throw their way in their pursuit of electoral power.
“Commitments that were made to Deaf and disabled people in the 2017 and 2019 Labour party manifestos play no part within this strategy.
“They are asking us to trust them – to trust that once elected they will work in co-production with us to formulate policies that will benefit disabled people.
“If they get elected with their current fiscal policy then the scope of what can be achieved with co-production will be very limited.”
Commenting on various concerns raised about the NPF document, Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, told DNS: “The National Policy Forum plays an important role in shaping Labour’s policy platform, but this is not the end of the journey.
“The report outlines a credible and ambitious policy programme that will be further discussed at our party conference and we will set out our manifesto in full before the next general election.
“Unlike the Tories, Labour is committed to co-production and ensuring we work with disabled people right from the start.”
October’s party conference will decide which parts of the NPF documents are included in the party programme.
Ahead of a general election, Labour representatives will then attend a so-called clause V meeting to decide which elements of the party programme will be included in the manifesto.
*Deaf and disabled people’s organisations
21 September 2023
Fear over council policy that could force disabled people into care homes
Disabled activists have said they are “very frightened” by council plans that could force people who rely on social care into residential homes against their wishes, and which they believe breach equality and human rights laws.
Bristol City Council this week blamed cost pressures, reduced government funding and increased demand for social care for its proposed Fair and Affordable Care Policy.
The policy, which is now out for public consultation, would allow the council to force a disabled person into a residential or nursing home if “a care package to remain at home would substantially exceed the affordability of residential care”.
It also warns that exceptions to the policy “are likely to be rare” although “each person’s situation will be looked at individually”.
The policy says that if the council and disabled person cannot reach agreement, the service-user could be offered a direct payment “up to” the amount of a residential care package but would then be expected to meet the rest of their needs themselves.
The council claimed it was taking “pre-emptive measures” to ensure it met its duty to have “sufficient resources to meet the needs of all persons who require care and support in its area”.
In its equality impact assessment of the proposals, the council admits: “Applying this policy could therefore have an impact on some citizens with protected characteristics who previously may have had their care and support needs met in a different or less cost-effective way.”
It also admits that the policy “could have an impact on the percentage of individuals who receive care in their own home and an increase in number of older people who are accommodated in residential or nursing care”.
The consultation was launched this week and closes on 30 October.
Campaigners warned earlier this year that a draft version of the policy could have “catastrophic implications for disabled people’s independence”.
There were concerns then that the policy could breach the Care Act, the Human Rights Act and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The version put out this week for consultation has not changed substantially.
The grassroots disabled people’s organisation Bristol Reclaiming Independent Living (BRIL), which first raised concerns about the draft document with Disability News Service (DNS), said this week that it was “very frightened” by the policy paper.
A BRIL spokesperson said: “Our message to disabled people throughout the country is if Bristol bring this policy in, your area may be next.”
Disability Rights UK (DR UK) has written to the Labour mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees, and the leader of the council’s Green group – the largest political grouping on the council – to express its “deep concern” about the policy.
Kamran Mallick, DR UK’s chief executive, says in the two letters: “It is absolutely unacceptable that the draft policy talks about overriding the option to receive care and support in the home if the council decides this would not be ‘cost-effective’.
“We understand that in the round, councils need to have regard to their wider obligations to the public.
“However, at no point should this strategic consideration mean that individual Disabled citizens are refused care and support at home because it is more expensive than residential accommodation.”
He says the policy is incompatible with the Care Act and is “nowhere near strong enough in setting out the council’s Care Act duties to promote well-being, provide person-centred support and meet eligible needs”.
He adds: “We see no way to make this policy workable and would ask that it is withdrawn.”
A Bristol City Council spokesperson said: “The Fair and Affordable Care Policy is currently out for public consultation until 30 October 2023.
“This proposed policy was co-developed with the Bristol City Council Adult Social Care Equalities Forum, which includes representation from disability advocacy groups, and people who draw on care and support, as well as a number of third sector organisations across the city.
“We will consider all the comments and feedback received during the consultation period before any decisions are made and would encourage people to share their views with us here: www.ask.bristol.gov.uk/fair-and-affordable-care-policy-consultation.”
In its equality impact assessment of the policy, the council describes the meetings of its equalities forum that “co-developed” its proposals.
As a result of those meetings, and other engagement work, including with local disabled people’s organisations, the council said it had “expanded and amended some of the wording of the policy to make it more accessible” and now plans to “add some other examples of what best value might look like”.
21 September 2023
Anger at ‘shameful’ failure to include DWP deaths inquiry in Labour policy document
The Labour party has sparked anger over its “shameful” and “inexcusable” failure to promise a public inquiry into deaths linked to the actions of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) if it wins power at the next general election.
Confidential policy documents that will form the basis for the party’s general election manifesto, passed to Disability News this week, do not include any mention of an inquiry.
Evidence stretching back more than a decade has shown how DWP repeatedly ignored recommendations to improve the safety of its disability benefits assessment system, leading to hundreds, and probably thousands, of avoidable deaths of disabled claimants.
It also shows how DWP ensured that key evidence linking its actions with those deaths was not considered by the independent reviews it commissioned into the assessments.
Disabled activists and relatives of those who have died – backed by Disability News Service – have repeatedly called for a statutory public inquiry into the deaths.
Labour shadow ministers have met with relatives but have refused to promise a public inquiry.
Now the policy documents, produced by the party’s National Policy Forum (NPF), suggest that Labour has no intention of ordering an inquiry if it wins the next general election.
It may have calculated that the decision of the Labour-led Commons work and pensions committee to launch an inquiry into DWP safeguarding would ease calls for a public inquiry.
But Imogen Day, whose sister Philippa’s death was caused by widespread flaws in the disability benefits system, said Labour’s failure to promise an inquiry was “shameful”.
She said: “It feels like they are more comfortable maintaining the status quo than making the necessary changes, and I’m not sure why.”
She said the committee’s inquiry would not produce the change that was needed and would not uncover the truth about DWP’s actions as a statutory inquiry would.
She said: “It’s not going to create the changes that we need and it’s not going to prevent further deaths.
“You have to know exactly why things fell apart to rebuild. If you don’t get to the bottom of this you can’t create systemic change.”
She said she would keep pushing the party to change its mind and promise an inquiry.
But she added: “We are running out of time. If we miss this opportunity, it is not going to happen and it’s not going to change.”
John McArdle, co-founder of Black Triangle, said it would be “inexcusable” not to have a public inquiry under a Labour government.
He said: “It is an insult to those we have lost and their families that such a glaring injustice is not being addressed.
“It is shameful that they have turned their backs on us.
“They are totally whitewashing the history of deaths and avoidable harm caused by the system.”
And he added: “They need to face up to their responsibility for introducing the work capability assessment system in the first place [in 2008, under the last Labour government].
“They must address the issues which we have consistently raised over the last 13 years.”
Commenting on various concerns raised about the NPF documents, Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, said: “The National Policy Forum plays an important role in shaping Labour’s policy platform, but this is not the end of the journey.
“The report outlines a credible and ambitious policy programme that will be further discussed at our party conference and we will set out our manifesto in full before the next general election.
“Unlike the Tories, Labour is committed to co-production and ensuring we work with disabled people right from the start.”
The section on social security in the NPF report says that a Labour government would provide a “reliable safety net” for those who cannot work because of “ill health or disability” and would allow disabled people to try paid work without having to be reassessed if the job does not work out.
It says Labour would ensure that “respect and dignity are once more at the heart of our social security system”, would end “punitive” benefit sanctions, and would promise that “every stage of the social security system will be supportive and accessible”.
It also promises to replace the current system of work capability assessments (WCAs) but provides no details of what it would replace it with.
This may alarm many disabled people already distressed by Conservative proposals to further tighten the WCA after the next general election – described by disabled activists as “cynical” and “horrendously dangerous” – and Conservative plans to scrap the WCA and rely instead on the personal independence payment assessment and the judgement of work coaches, changes that have been described as “heartless”.
Labour is also promising to “fix” the Access to Work scheme, with “improved targets for assessment waiting times at reasonable time scales”, and provide “in principle” awards to disabled people looking for work.
October’s party conference will decide which parts of the NPF documents are included in the party programme.
Ahead of a general election, Labour representatives will then attend a so-called clause V meeting to decide which elements of the party programme will be included in the manifesto.
21 September 2023
One in three ‘Disability Confident’ employers have employed no disabled people
More than a third of employers who signed up to the government’s discredited disability employment scheme failed to employ a single disabled person after they joined, according to a report commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
The report found that only 63 per cent of all employers who joined Disability Confident had recruited a disabled employee after joining the scheme, although this was an improvement on just 49 per cent in 2018.
Nearly a fifth (19 per cent) of employers with at least 250 employees did not recruit any disabled people after joining the scheme, according to a survey of more than 1,200 members of Disability Confident carried out on DWP’s behalf by Ipsos.
DWP declined to say yesterday (Wednesday) why the Ipsos report, which was completed in May 2022, was not published until this week, 16 months later.
Disability Confident has faced repeated criticism since its launch in 2013, particularly over concerns that the scheme is “trivially easy to abuse” and allows employers at the first two of its three levels to describe themselves as “disability confident” without being assessed by an outside organisation, and without employing a single disabled person.
The disabled Labour MP Marsha de Cordova said yesterday: “The findings from the Tory government’s Disability Confident scheme survey confirms what I’ve been saying for years: the scheme lacks accountability, transparency, and performance measures.
“That nearly a fifth of large employers who joined the scheme did not report recruiting a single disabled person, further demonstrates the scheme’s lack of impact and credibility.
“It’s time for the government to scrap it and replace it with a scheme that is fit for purpose. The government needs to stop failing disabled people.”
DWP declared itself a gold-standard employer of disabled people under the scheme – securing the status of “Disability Confident Leader” – just days before being found guilty of “grave and systematic violations” of the UN disability convention in 2016.
In July 2020, a company that bragged of being a Disability Confident leader sacked more than 50 disabled staff when it fell into administration, and then hired mostly non-disabled agency staff to replace them.
And in October 2018, the government-funded British Council, which is responsible for promoting the UK’s culture and education abroad, asked an employment tribunal to allow it to dodge its Equality Act duty not to discriminate against disabled people, despite being a member of Disability Confident.
The new survey also shows that satisfaction with the information and support provided through the scheme has declined since the last survey was carried out in 2018.
Only 55 per cent of members said they were satisfied with the information offered through the scheme, compared with 69 per cent in 2018.
Satisfaction with the support provided by DWP and its jobcentres was even lower, with just 43 per cent of members satisfied, compared with 56 per cent in 2018.
DWP declined to say if it the report suggested that the scheme lacked accountability, transparency and credible performance measures, and that it needed to be scrapped and replaced.
But a DWP spokesperson said in a statement: “We are committed to improving workplace inclusivity and progress is already being made with more employers hiring at least one employee with a disability or long-term health condition in 2022 compared to 2018.
“But we know there is more to do, which is why we continue to work with stakeholders to develop and grow the Disability Confident scheme to increase the number of inclusive employers in the UK.”
21 September 2023
Austerity changes are reducing impact of accessible housing funds, 12 years on
New figures have shown how government changes made 12 years ago have significantly reduced the impact of increased funding for a scheme that helps disabled people make access improvements to their homes.
They show how a key change to the way the disabled facilities grant (DFG) scheme operated – introduced by the coalition government in 2011 – led to a fall in funding from local authorities while central government was increasing funding over the last eight years.
DFGs provide funding for adaptations to disabled people’s homes, such as ramps, handrails, stairlifts and specialist equipment, with grants administered by local authorities.
Funding for the programme comes from both central government and local authorities.
Analysis of figures provided by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) in response to a freedom of information request shows it is now costing – on average – about twice as much in real terms government funding to fulfil each successful DFG claim in England than it did more than a decade ago.
Foundations, the national body for DFGs and home improvement agencies, which is funded by the government, told Disability News Service (DNS) that it was the 2011 policy change that explained the fall in council DFG funding.
Before 2011, local authorities had to provide £40 of funding for every £60 provided by the government for DFGs.
But in 2011, this requirement was removed by the coalition government.
Paul Smith, director of Foundations, told DNS: “Since this requirement was removed most local authorities have decreased the amount they contribute… this is why the number of DFGs hasn’t increased at the same rate as the increase in government funding.”
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has declined to say if it agrees with Foundations that the 2011 policy was to blame for the reduced impact of higher central government funding.
An independent review of the DFG scheme for the government in 2018 – which Foundations worked on – highlighted concerns that local authority contributions towards DFGs had fallen in recent years, and so the number of homes adapted had not significantly increased.
The review showed that local authority contributions to DFG funding had fallen from more than 40 per cent in 2009 to less than five per cent in 2016, following the change in policy in 2011.
In 2010-11, £167 million was allocated by the government for DFGs, while it was estimated at the time that about 40,000 grants would be made (roughly £4,175 per grant).
But the information released to DNS in the freedom of information response shows that this compares with £573 million in government funding in 2021-22, when 48,055 DFG claims were completed (roughly £11,900 per grant).
Allowing for the effects of inflation, DNS has calculated that it is costing approximately twice as much in central government funding for each completed grant as in 2010-11.
DLUHC claimed in its freedom of information response that it “does not hold data on how much additional funding was provided by local authorities towards Disabled Facilities Grants”.
DHSC, which is also involved in the DFG system, said the average grant amount had increased, while the costs of labour and building materials have been increasing, as has the number of more complex cases.
But Foundations said the increase in the average grant amount was “mostly down to inflation”.
Meanwhile, a DHSC minister has been caught claiming that extra government DFG funding is new money, even though it was first announced five months ago.
DHSC and DLUHC announced earlier this month that the government was providing an “extra £50 million home adaptation funding”.
Helen Whately, the minister for adult social care, announced that the “new funding” would “help thousands more people have homes fit for their needs – and faster”.
Although the press release said the funding was announced as “part of the Next steps to put people at the heart of care plan” and “has been allocated to local authorities from today”, it failed to point out that the “new funding” had already been announced in April.
Two non-user-led lobby groups – the Voluntary Organisations Disability Group (VODG) and the British Healthcare Trades Association (BHTA) – both welcomed the announcement and appeared to treat it as new funding.
BHTA said that “any additional funding for vital home adaptations is to be welcomed”, while VODG – which represents service-providers – also referred to it as “additional funding”, although it later accepted that it knew the money had previously been announced.
In July, DNS reported that DHSC had abandoned its pledge to consult on three key improvements to the DFG scheme.
21 September 2023
Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week
The deaths of dozens of patients at a mental health trust who took their own lives will be reviewed externally after fears of a “cover-up” were raised. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust initially said a review of all suicides since 2017 would be internal. The trust had been accused of adding to a patient’s records the day after he died to “correct mistakes”: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-66818173
Nearly three-quarters of disabled people have delayed contacting an essential service provider because it seemed too daunting, a survey indicates. The survey results were revealed as Experian launched a free “support hub” in collaboration with brands including HSBC UK, Nationwide Building Society, Co-operative Bank and Ovo. The hub aims to offer a “one-stop” portal for disabled people to tell multiple businesses how they need to be contacted and what support they need to access their service: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/experian-people-cooperative-bank-nationwide-building-society-tesco-bank-b2415496.html
A mum has spoken of her fury after her disabled daughter was forced to wear a nappy to school because there was no accessible toilet. Violet Heasley had attended Dunmurry Primary School for nursery and the first year of her formal education before she was pulled out of the school by her parents last year: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mums-fury-child-wear-nappy-30987618
21 September 2023
News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com
