Government ‘was slapdash and chaotic’ in response to requests for accessible versions of key planning paper

The new government has been accused of a “slapdash and chaotic” response to a request from disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) to provide a vital consultation document on planning policy in accessible formats.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had already angered DPOs by failing to mention the accessible housing crisis in its consultation on reforms to the National Policy Planning Framework in England.

But they were also shocked that the department failed to publish the document in an easy-read format, or in British Sign Language (BSL), and only allowed eight weeks for responses, while also making it difficult for users of screen-reading software to read the document.

When DPOs contacted MHCLG to express alarm at its actions, the department agreed to provide an easy-read version, but it was only published on 24 September, the day the consultation was due to end.

MHCLG extended the consultation by just two weeks, but even then it failed to make that clear on the consultation web page.

And it still refused to provide a BSL version, apparently on cost grounds.

The framework sets out the government’s planning policies and how these should be applied by local authorities in England.

Manchester Disabled People’s Access Group (MDPAG) and Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People (GMCDP) both complained about the access concerns.

They described the government’s response to these concerns as incompetent, “chaotic” and “slapdash”.

They also said in their response to the consultation – along with Bristol Disability Equality Forum, and High Peak Access – that they were “extremely concerned” about the government’s failure to make any recommendations on accessible housing, such as ensuring that all new housing is built to the stricter M4(2) standard of accessibility, and that at least 10 per cent of all new housing is built to the M4(3) standard, which makes a home suitable for wheelchair-users.

Inclusion London also criticised the failure to include any recommendations on accessible housing in its response to the consultation.

Inclusion London said the NPPF “sets the tone and direction for local planning policies” and so it was concerned that the proposed reforms “fail to address the housing needs of Disabled people and do not explicitly encourage the delivery of accessible, adaptable housing and wheelchair accessible housing, of which we are in great need”.

It added: “We are disappointed that the Government’s current proposals do not make any reference to the link between the lack of accessible housing in the country, including the shortage of wheelchair accessible homes, and the rise in health inequalities among older and Disabled people and therefore do not contain any proposals to address this issue.”

Luke Beesley, co-chair of GMCDP, said: “The housing crisis is a pressing issue for disabled people all over the country, and it is absolutely essential that our insights and concerns are listened to at every stage of policy making.

“The slapdash and chaotic response of the department to being asked for very basic access adaptations is deeply worrying.

“Neurodivergent people and people with learning difficulties have been left in the dark even about how to contribute to this discussion – with the clear implication that the government doesn’t care what they have to say.

“We are also very worried, and very angry, about the department’s attitude towards the Deaf community.

“Deaf citizens speak a legally-recognised British language, and it is absurd and insulting that the government refuses to publish official documents in it.

“Community organisations, schools, and religious congregations provide British Sign Language translations despite the costs involved; and frankly it is inexcusable that a government department feels that they can opt out – especially on an issue that is so clearly related to social equality.”

The department told Disability News Service that it believed it responded as quickly as it could to the concerns and that it had made efforts to understand the barriers that disabled people were facing.

But an MHCLG spokesperson failed to respond to the concerns about the lack of a BSL version, and about only giving another two weeks for disabled people to respond after the easy-read version was published, and then not publicising this extension on the consultation page.

The spokesperson said in a statement: “We will always listen to how we can make our documents more accessible.

“That is why the page was made to be accessible to screen readers, and we commissioned an easy-read version as soon as it was requested.”

Picture: A Wyatt Homes property in Dorset

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…