---

UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

asked Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to promote the United Nations Convention on disability. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I want to raise a number of issues about the UN Convention on disability and the related optional protocol. But first I congratulate the Government on their outstanding leadership in establishing this potentially powerful instrument. The convention and, indeed, the protocol can dramatically affect the lives of the world’s 650 million disabled people. That is a gigantic aim, and a wonderful one. They reinforce the rights laid down in other treaties by interpretations relevant to disabled people who were hitherto excluded. It will be of enormous benefit to millions of disabled people seeking to establish their human rights. So, the first question I want raise is now that we have commendably helped to establish the convention, and signed it, why do not the Government ratify it? I know that Ministers feel that our signing of the convention indicates our intention to ratify it, but every country can say that and it does not necessarily follow. It certainly does not for some of those countries which do not have Britain’s record of disability legislation. Twenty states need to both sign and ratify the convention before it enters into force. So far, only one state has ratified it—Jamaica. I have seen far too much admirable legislation on disability become moribund because it was not ratified, implemented or monitored. There is a world of difference between a government intention and a government’s signed commitment. Where there is just an intention, a government can be knocked off course for a thousand reasons, but not if there is a written commitment. So I would welcome from my noble friend an explanation of the Government’s view on ratification, and perhaps he can tell us precisely where the Government stand on it. Personally, I think it is time for an unequivocal commitment, and I would welcome that today from the Government. The next issue of concern is the optional protocol, which allows individuals and organisations to petition the UN Committee on the rights of persons with disabilities about alleged breaches of the provisions of the convention. This protocol is important because without it disabled people are unable to challenge the deprivation of their rights. But the attitude of our Government is far from clear. One Minister has said that it is not their custom to sign protocols because there is not necessarily enough value as the petitioners petition a monitoring committee, not a court of law, and therefore cannot offer compensation or legal interpretation. That may be true, but the Minister went on to say that it was not necessarily the case that the Government would not sign protocols in the future and that the issue was under consideration. I really would like clarification. Does the term ““under consideration”” mean that the Government are kicking the issue into the long grass or is it being actively considered? This debate is an opportunity for the Government to give a categorical answer. Will they sign the protocol or not? Another key issue is the full involvement of disabled people in the implementation and monitoring of the convention. The machinery for implementation and monitoring is now being constructed, but it will be built on shifting sands unless disabled people are actively involved. It is important that we utilise the rich fund of experience and expertise available for contributing to these vital decisions. I am heartened by the fact that Jane Campbell—the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell—is chairman of the disability committee of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights. She and her disabled colleagues in this House who have contributed so much to the disability movement, such as the noble Baronesses, Lady Darcy de Knayth, Lady Wilkins and Lady Masham, and Colin Low—the noble Lord, Lord Low—will no doubt play a major role. They will be massively supported and supplemented by my noble friend Lord Morris of Manchester, who plays an important role in these events. However, in the vast area of the world to be affected, the authorities must bear in mind the paramount importance of the involvement and active participation of disabled people. Once the convention and the protocol become fully operational, they can resolve a whole range of injustices affecting disabled people. For example, on a disability of which I have personal experience, deafness, many people are denied their rights in Britain and elsewhere. The convention emphasises the need to provide access to communication support, including sign-language interpreters, and it places a duty on Governments to ensure that deaf people are no longer excluded from a wide range of activities. This will be a great boon to deaf people everywhere. Another example is the need to rescue disabled people if they are being abused when local authorities place them in privately owned care homes. Judges, in their wisdom or otherwise, have ruled that private care homes contracted out by a local authority are not covered by the Human Rights Act, which is astonishing. Presumably, any kind of behaviour by the owners which flies in the face of the Human Rights Act provisions is permissible. This outrageous situation cannot be allowed to continue and the convention can play a vital role in ending it. The establishment of this convention is, let us make no mistake, a major development crucial to many millions of disabled people throughout the world. But it can easily become a dead letter unless it is followed up by energetic, organised, determined and enthusiastic action. We need to tackle the evident lack of knowledge of disabled people’s rights and their failure to claim them; a major awareness campaign is a priority. We need to deal in specifics rather than generalities and our Government can make a start by accepting my Disabled Persons (Independent Living) Bill, which imposes specific duties on public authorities and confers specific rights on disabled people. I hope that my noble friend can tell us where the Government stand on this and what other action they intend to take to mark this historic event of the United Nations convention.