Schedule 1 - The Olympic Delivery Authority
London Olympics Bill
2:00 pm
Richard Caborn (Minister of State (Sport), Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Sheffield Central, Labour)
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? How can we instruct the ODA before we have set it up? However, I will try to answer the hon. Gentleman, because it is an important subject. There is no disagreement, but it is simply a matter of how we effect the process and take into account what was said when the amendments were moved and has been said by the Opposition parties. I do not disagree.
The ODA would satisfy all the criteria that suggest that it should develop a disability equality scheme. It will have significant dealings with disabled service users; a significant impact, as I have already said, on the lives of disabled people; it could be a significant employer of disabled people, and I hope that it will; and it will be of sufficient size to promote a scheme. I would imagine that Ministers in the Department for Work and Pensions are likely to regulate at some point in the next year to place the ODA, along with any other relevant new bodies, under the specific duties of the Disability Discrimination Act. I cannot give a definite time for that at this stage, but nor can I foresee any reason why that should not happen. I entirely accept the general points that have been made and we will pursue them.
The bodies subject to specific duties are listed in regulations. As yet, however, we do not have an ODA, although I hope that we shall have one when the Bill has been through all its stages in both Houses. I hope that the ODA can then be one of those listed organisations. I hope that that satisfies the hon. Gentleman that we take his comments and the sentiments behind the amendments seriously.
Amendment No.2 would require the ODA, when fulfilling its functions under clause 4, to ensure that premises and facilities are fully accessible to disabled people. Such an amendment is not necessary. From 4 December 2006, the general duties in section 49 of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 will require every public authority, in carrying out its functions, to have regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity between disabled people and others, the need to take steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities, even where that involves treating disabled persons more favourably than others, and the need to encourage participation by disabled people in public life.
The ODA will therefore automatically be required to take the needs of disabled people into account. In developing the Olympic park, in particular, it will be tied to the terms of the planning permissions already granted. Those insist on the production of an access-for-all framework approved by the local planning authority.