2nd Reading House of Lords
Monday 15th October 2001
Thursday 11 October 2001
RNIB supports the creation of a single regulator for the converging information, communication and broadcasting industries. We recognise the huge potential of convergence for deepening and extending the social, economic and cultural inclusion of disabled people but caution that many are in danger of being excluded from the benefits altogether.
We are concerned that there is no reference in this paving Bill to the principal objective of the new regulator, no intention to create a shadow consumer structure and no provision for disability access or representation.
These omissions reinforce our concerns that the digital communications agenda is being driven forward with a lack of practical commitment to securing the full inclusion of visually impaired people.
Now is the time to make that commitment. The White Paper said that OFCOM would be required to give due weight to the need for improved access to communications services for people with disabilities. Rather than take this on trust, Parliament should ensure that it is built into the new regulatory framework from the outset.
The Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) is the largest organisation representing the interests of 2 million visually impaired people in the UK. Key to their interests is full and equal access to the digital communications revolution – an area in which RNIB is heavily engaged. We are:-
· Developing or supporting the development and testing of new accessible technologies; and
· Campaigning with visually impaired people for changes to legislation and additional resources to make equal access a reality.
RNIB strongly supports the idea of a single regulatory body for the converging information, communication and broadcasting industries and applauds the Government for bringing forward this Bill. However the new regulator’s flexibility to allow for the benefits of new technologies must be married with a recognition of the disadvantages of new technologies if they are not "universally accessible" to disabled people.
The OFCOM paving legislation needs to signal an awareness of and commitment to protecting and promoting the interests of visually impaired and other disabled consumers. If this is not part of the vision from the outset we have serious doubts as to whether it ever will be. Such are the risks of exclusion from the digital communications revolution for disabled people that OFCOM, even in shadow form, needs to be thinking and working to a vision of inclusivity. Parliament should set this vision and do it now rather than leave such critical matters to appointees.
Thus far Government has not demonstrated to visually impaired people that it takes their desire for full access to digital TV at all seriously. This is an issue visually impaired people feel passionately about and where the market has demonstrated that it just won’t deliver on its own. Government’s refusal to date to accept responsibility for ensuring people with sight problems are able to receive audio described programmes on the digital terrestrial platform is deeply disappointing. If this laissez-faire approach is to be the one which dominates the early thinking around OFCOM, we are deeply worried.
The potential in convergence for deepening and extending social, economic, educational and cultural inclusion for disabled people is huge. All we ask is that this vision is embraced now.
Convergence will provide many opportunities for a wider range of services for everyone. If there was full provision for equal access the convergence of information and communications technologies could help transform the social and economic position of visually impaired and other disabled people. Visually impaired and other disabled people, more than any other group need access to the educational and employment opportunities, on-line public services and health information which full access to the internet and interactive digital TV could provide.
Not everyone is caught up in the exciting and fast-moving modern world of communications. Many people are in danger of being left behind. Not least blind and partially sighted people who are currently excluded from many developments through exclusive design, the cost or technical difficulty of access, the absence of suitable equipment and the lack of training.
RNIB uniquely understands that the enormous growth of screen based technologies threatens to deny blind and partially sighted people the benefits of the communications revolution. Digital television and radio, electronic programme guides (EPGs), WAP mobile telephones, personal data assistants (PDAs), the internet, public information kiosks and automatic telling machines (ATMs) could all easily be made accessible to blind and partially sighted people but overwhelmingly are not.
Future converging technologies will have even greater capacity for screens or other visual data output devices and therefore there will be an even greater danger that they will exclude people who have restricted sight.
The relevant industries have demonstrated, by and large, that despite intense lobbying they are not prepared to put the research and development resources into designing inclusively, and they feel that there is no statutory regulatory requirement for them to do so, or even standards for them to follow. The previous propensity of markets in the medium to long-term to develop common standards is rendered obsolete by the pace of change. In this context public sector leadership is vital, especially as people are being excluded now.
Access to audio-described programmes on digital TV – a case in point
The current priority of blind and partially sighted people themselves is for full access to audio-described programmes on digital TV. Audio-description is as vital to them as subtitling is to hearing impaired people. RNIB has launched the Get the Picture campaign to fight for equal access for to television and other communication technologies in the new digital age
Television plays a hugely important role in the lives of blind and partially sighted people. It is their main source of information, education, entertainment and indeed “company”. But without audio-description - an additional narrative which describes visual action and context that would not normally be picked up by viewers with sight impairments – most TV programmes are difficult or impossible to follow and viewing enjoyment is greatly curtailed. Currently only a very small number of people (45 to be precise!) can get the digital terrestrial television audio description service. Special equipment, known as a module, is needed to receive these audio description transmissions. In addition there is a limited audio description service on digital satellite.
RNIB is calling on the Government to fund the production and distribution of at least 20,000 “plug in” modules so that blind and partially sighted people can start to access audio description on digital terrestrial television. This is the only way access will be achieved since the market refuses to deliver. We have yet to receive a positive response to this. Indeed the response has been staggeringly inadequate. Government appears content to set targets (or in our case freeze them) for broadcasters without any concern for whether any of the audio-described programmes actually reach their intended audience. Government needs to encourage digital rollout and here is a relatively large group screaming out for access that they are completely ignoring.
RNIB will fight to ensure that the draft Communications Bill addresses these issues. We want substantial levels of audio description on all digital platforms (rather than the paltry 10% target for digital terrestrial only) and a mechanism to ensure that equipment can receive transmission. Our goal is a target of 50% of programmes audio described. We want a mechanism for providing visually impaired people with access technology to ensure that all visual instructions and information (e.g. electronic programme guides, channel changes) can be accessed. We want programme guides/listings to be made available in a range of formats for print disabled people. And we want a mechanism for ensuring all aspects of the technology are designed for universal access.
No reference to the regulator’s principal objective
RNIB believes the paving Bill should spell out the principal objective and general duties of the Secretary of State and the new regulator. We would want something akin to the principal objective set out in the Utilities Act 2000 which marries protection for consumers with the promotion of effective competition and includes specific reference to the Secretary of State and the regulator’s duty to have regard to the interests of disabled people, pensioners, people on low incomes and individuals living in rural areas. Visually impaired people fall under each of these categories with, for example, 90 per cent being over the age of 65 of whom 9 in 10 live on an income of less than half of the national average. Ideally we would want reference to promoting full access to communication services for all disabled people.
As we understand it the plan is to have a Chairman and the rest of the board in place by next spring – before any principal objective and general duties have been established and before the detail of the Communications Bill has received any scrutiny. Key appointments will be made without reference to any principal objective. Unless it is clear what the primary objective of the new regulator is we fail to see how the right appointments can be made. It is essential that the board know at least in essence what their overarching purpose is and how consumer protection features. In any case, a commitment to disability equality and a real understanding of the access issues for disabled people in relation to the different technologies should certainly figure among the criteria for appointments. RNIB would argue that one member of the board should be required to have personal experience of disability and hold a brief to represent the interests of disabled people.
Since the board is apparently to play a key role in setting the vision for OFCOM we think it essential that Parliament gives them a clear steer in this Bill. As things stand parliamentarians are effectively being asked to entrust appointees with the vision for OFCOM.
Furthermore if there is going to be an argument about the principal objective, and in particular what giving “due weight” to the need for improved access to communication services for people with disabilities means it should be had now before we get into the detail promised in the draft Communications Bill. There is a pressing need to ensure the shadow framework has a clear overall purpose if the needs of visually impaired and other disabled people are not to be an afterthought.
It is perfectly sensible to set up OFCOM in a shadow form and make arrangements for a smooth transfer to the new regime once the main Communications Bill has been enacted. However, the same principle is not to be applied to the consumer structure. Energywatch was set up in shadow form and overlapped with the outgoing gas and energy consumer structures. There is no reason why the same approach should not feature in communications, especially in view of the pressing need to put disabled people in the picture. Our fear is that the absence of such a structure for communications signals a relatively weak consumer regime. We would argue for a shadow, independent consumer panel - with appropriate representation for visually impaired and other disabled people and strong powers - to be put in place sooner rather than later.
There is no hint as to how the single regulator is to include disabled people in its structures. The Bill allows OFCOM to set up committees as it sees fit. In other words, it does not guarantee any structure devoted to the needs of disabled and/or elderly people. The Government may say this will come later or be left to the discretion of the regulator. That won’t be good enough. OFCOM needs an equivalent of DIEL the Advisory Committee on Telecommunications for Disabled and Elderly People (which has a statutory basis) to ensure the interests of disabled people are fully recognised and represented in the preparatory phase and to enable there to be an effective transition from DIEL.
No indication on accessibility of regulator for disabled people.
There is no indication as to whether OFCOM is to be required to secure (and have the necessary funds to implement) full access for visually impaired, deafblind and other disabled people to their services. Disabled consumers should be entitled to expect that they will be able to interact with OFCOM using their preferred format (for written information) and means of communication. OFCOM should be required to have and implement an accessible information policy. RNIB believes this needs to be put firmly in place during the preparatory phase.
These are the kinds of issues RNIB would be interested to see debated further at committee stage.
While RNIB welcomes the Bill we wonder whether some important principles –disability access, accountability - have not been overlooked. The marginalisation of visually impaired and other disabled people from the debate on communications convergence should end here. The current pace of change is rapid and the needs of visually impaired people must be addressed, and provided for, as early as possible to ensure that they are not even further socially isolated from new and exciting technological developments. This Bill provides an opportunity to usher in a new era in which the civil and human rights of visually impaired and other disabled people take centre stage in the preparation for a single regulatory body. We hope it is taken.
Contacts:
§ Caroline Ellis, UK Parliamentary Manager. Tel: 020 7391 2096; mobile: 07881 540426. Caroline.Ellis@rnib.org.uk.
§ Dan Vale, UK Campaigns Manager. Tel: 020 7391 2395. Dan.Vale@rnib.org.uk.
§ Denise Evans, Head of Broadcasting. Tel: 020 7391 2314. Denise.Evans@rnib.org.uk
Public Policy Office, RNIB, 224 Great Portland Street, London W1W 5AA. Fax: 020 7388 2706.