Publications Archive

New Beacon, July/August 2000, 80 (938)

Summary: The leading monthly magazine on issues concerning people

• In Depth
• Letters
• Insight
• In Brief
• News Extra
• Dear Welfare Rights Services
• DDA Q & A
• Leisure for all

---

Editor: Ann Lee

Royal National Institute for the Blind

In Depth

English Braille: Contracting out

Bill Poole reports on the outcome of a crucial meeting on English Braille

The second General Assembly (GA) of the International Council on English Braille (ICEB) took place in Baltimore, USA from 2 to 5 November 1999. Seven countries were represented: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Nigeria, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States. Not all were able to send their full complement of four delegates, but at the GA voting is on the basis of one country one vote. The British delegation consisted of Kevin Carey, Bill Poole, Mike Townsend and Isobel Yule, and all my colleagues made major contributions to the discussions and were extremely active behind the scenes. Peter Osborne also attended as an observer on behalf of RNIB.

The constitution was altered to enable most executive committee (EC) postholders to stand for a second consecutive term, to create a new post of Public Relations Officer, and to provide for an extra member at large. The newly elected EC was as follows: President, Betty Niceley (USA); Immediate Past President, Joan Ledermann (Australia); Vice-President, Darleen Bogart (Canada); Secretary, Raeleen Smith (New Zealand); Treasurer, Kim Charlson (USA); Public Relations Officer, Reinette Popplestone (South Africa); Members at large: Bruce Maguire (Australia), Jean Obi (Nigeria), Bill Poole (UK).

The unexpected death of the President in February has meant that Darleen automatically succeeded to the post. But since she already holds the onerous post of Unified Braille Code (UBC) Project Director, she does not wish to continue as President, and there will therefore have to be further elections in the coming months. All active member countries are currently represented on the EC, though there is nothing in the constitution which guarantees this.

Of the twenty resolutions which we passed, fourteen were concerned with policy matters. Although the UBC project is our primary concern at the moment, a number of these dealt with other important issues, since ICEB wishes to demonstrate that it is not simply a code development agency. Resolution 1 instructed us to “establish contacts with English speaking countries which are not currently members of ICEB” and encourage their participation. Resolution 2 asked us to press for the preservation of “universal free postage for braille materials”.

Resolution 3 urged “that member countries work together ... on the issue of copyright to ensure legal access ... to text information that is available to the population at large”, both within each country and between countries. Resolution 13 stated that “ICEB recognises that braille is the primary literacy medium for blind people and that the promotion of braille is one of its highest priorities”. A committee to address this issue was therefore appointed. Finally, Resolution 14 urged “that the ICEB Executive establish a tactile graphics project committee” with specified functions.

But the majority of our policy resolutions dealt with UBC, or as we are now beginning to call it, UEBC (Unified English Braille Code). In Resolution 5, after endorsing the principle of a UEBC “as a matter of urgency for adoption and use in many countries”, we went on to say that such a code “should be agreed and endorsed [by ICEB] at its third GA in 2003 and recommended for ratification to the national standard setting bodies. Resolution 10 outlines the timetable for this: Committees II (Extensions to the base code), III (Contractions) and IV (Interface with foreign language codes) “shall submit their final reports to the UBC Project Committee by June 30 2000”; Committees V (Formatting) and VI (Rules) “shall submit their final reports to the UBC Project Committee by July 31 2001”; the ICEB Executive will hold its interim meeting in New Zealand in January 2002, where it “shall pronounce on a UEBC, as embodied in the final report of the UBC Project Committee”.

Resolution 11 empowers ICEB member countries to “circulate materials transcribed in the proposed UEBC through their braille authorities and their local braille producers”; and Resolution 12 provides that “if the outcome [of the EC decision] is affirmative, then the President ... shall establish a technical committee ... to develop guidelines for training materials”. Other tasks are assigned to other committees in the run up to their final reports. In Resolution 6 ICEB affirms its commitment to upper numbers, as against lower or continental numbers, both of which have had strong adherents.

The intentions behind this project are laudable enough: to unify the braille code across different English speaking countries and different disciplines; to increase people’s access to the widest possible range of braille material in English and to make it less costly to produce; to facilitate computer assisted translation from print to braille and from braille to print, especially in technical disciplines such as mathematics; to make no major changes to the contraction system of Grade 2; to meet the needs of both beginners and established braille users; to simplify braille rules; to employ a symbol structure in which the boundary between contiguous symbols is unambiguously clear; to reduce drastically the extent to which the meaning of braille signs is dependent on position or context; to diminish as far as possible the discretionary element in braille translation; to ensure that braille is a faithful representation of print; to maintain fluency in the reading and writing of braille, and to ease the burden of learning it. People are going to have to decide how far these principles are fully compatible with one another, and to what extent the proposed code in its final version measures up to them.

Committee III held a face to face meeting under my chairmanship at the Imperial Hotel, London from 2 to 5 May 2000, which was attended by observers, including some members of other UBC committees. Most of our time was spent making decisions to be embodied in our final report, but we also made some recommendations for other committees to consider before completing theirs. We voted to abolish all Grade 2 word sequences and to delete thirteen of the 189 contractions.

While this is only 6.9 per cent of the total number of contractions, it represents the loss of a considerably higher proportion of the space saved by Grade 2 over Grade 1, and it may therefore be expected to have an adverse effect on the reading speed of some braille users. The contractions in question are: the group-signs EA, BB, CC, DD, FF, GG, BLE, COM, ATION, ALLY, and the wordsigns to, into, by. Arguments used in support of these changes included the following: that many of them facilitate accurate braille to print translation; that the rules governing some of these contractions, notably EA, are complex, or will become so under UBC logic; that there is an increasing use of medial punctuation in print, always widespread in the case of the full stop, and of medial capitalisation; that the use of Grade 1 indicators to identify initial hyphens or medial numeral signs would be cumbersome; that braille characters with multiple meanings are a stumbling block to young learners.

As regards sequences, it was argued that wherever there is any space between words or other items in print, there should be at least some space in braille; that there are too many rules associated with the use of sequences; and that they cause confusion to young learners both in the production of print output and as regards knowing which braille sequences are permissible.

There are two other Committee III decisions that I want to report. The first concerns bridging contractions, where it was agreed in principle to liberalise the rules applying to contractions which bridge a prefix or suffix joined to a base word, or where diphthongs are involved. The Chairs of Committees III and VI will progress this, following agreed guidelines. This will result in a simplification of rules, and represent a significant area of unification between countries. The second concerns the problem of shortforms. These do not conform to the rules of UBC symbol construction, and can generate gross errors in braille to print translation.

In summary, they will continue to be permissible when followed by S or apostrophe S or when adjoining a hyphen, but otherwise only 46 specific extensions will be acceptable. These will have to be learned as separate contractions, though most of them can be grouped in a way that will assist memory.

There was a strategic debate on whether it was preferable to restrict the changes we made to the minimum needed to comply with UBC logic and leave any further changes considered desirable until a later stage; or whether to introduce all changes considered desirable at once, so as to maximise code stability. In fact we compromised. Parallel with this ran another debate on the educational impetus towards change and the implications of this. It was pointed out that some contractions are perceptually difficult or conflict with the phonic approach to the teaching of literacy skills now favoured by many educators.

In addition, children in integrated settings may not get all the support they need from teachers in mastering the intricacies of the braille code, which are of no significance to their classmates. There has been a major shift towards the view that it is better to give children a grounding in Grade 1 first, and not to go on to Grade 2 until some years later. In addition, Grade 1 and Graduated Braille are becoming more popular with both children and adult learners, who may not always be motivated to go further. These debates will doubtless continue.

One of our recommendations to Committee II will be of interest to those who have been involved in the capitalisation debate. This was in relation to my proposal to use dot 6 followed by dot 3 as the sole capital terminator, irrespective of whether or not a blank cell follows. This would entail consequential changes if adopted into UBC. Nevertheless it was very well received, and the arguments in favour of it were clearly understood. It remains to be seen whether Committee II will agree to it.

At its meeting on July 18 BAUK will have to consider what to do next. In 1996 we decided (rightly in my view) not to conduct a full scale evaluation of the code in this country; after all, UBC was quite properly being promoted as a research project, and this must leave room for changes in some code features which could make a difference to how users evaluated it. We therefore only conducted a small pilot scheme.

Thirty people were invited to fill in the internationally designed questionnaire, of whom 19 sent in responses. Of these, two were in favour, one was equivocal, and 16 were against the adoption of the code as then defined. The full results of the international evaluation have not yet been published, but they make it clear that, though there are individuals who are strongly opposed to UBC in all countries, the only serious opposition comes from the UK and the USA, largely due in the latter case to UBC's failure to adopt lower numbers. This means that UBC in some form is likely to be adopted by some countries in four years’ time. This in turn means that an increasing number of people who are opposed to UBC are likely to be exposed to it after that date, either through books purchased from abroad or through braille downloaded from the internet. But we still in my view have to conduct a meaningful and credible consultation process before we could adopt UBC in this country. As yet we do not have a mandate to ratify it.

Letters

Concessions

As manager of a local society for the visually impaired I heartily applaud M K Cash's sentiments expressed on the subject of concessions (Letters, June). A visually impaired person's allowance should be automatically paid as soon as a person is registered as having a sight impairment. A copy of the BD8 form, with just a few minor amendments to include NI numbers and local DSS office address, could be automatically sent to the Benefits Agency to instigate a DLA or AA type of payment.

At the moment the system of claiming either of these benefits amounts to little better than a lottery for those who have a sensory disability. Unless the claimant can enlist the help of someone like myself with a benefits background and plenty of experience of completing the forms, they stand little chance of the claim being successful. Much of my time is spent asking for reviews of unsuccessful claims where a relative or friend of the claimant has done their best to fill in the form, but lacks the specialist knowledge needed.

Yet still the Government, and lately RNIB, spend large sums of money on advertising campaigns to tell people that they may not be claiming all the benefits they are entitled to. The word 'entitled' gives the false impression that these benefits are there for the taking, but we all know that this is not so.

I feel that it is time that RNIB mounted a savage campaign to tell the Government that if a visually impaired person is registered by a consultant ophthalmologist as being blind or partially sighted, there should be an automatic entitlement to a benefit similar to DLA or AA. Such a scheme would save the Government and other agencies the advertising costs they incur to promote take up of benefits, as well as the cost of adjudication officers who examine claims, and ensure that the benefit was paid to genuine claimants. The BD8 would be cast-iron proof of the disability. The time saved by local charities whose staff fill in claim forms could then be put to use in other ways to help the client group.

So, to RNIB, on behalf of all the members of our Society, I say: please start a campaign to lobby the Government for an automatic benefit to be paid to visually impaired people on proof of registration via the BD8. The free eye tests campaign was successful, and I am sure that the campaign I suggest would have wholehearted support throughout the country.
Viv Wright, Manager, Scarborough Blind and Partially Sighted Society

I would like to respond to the letter by M K Cash on the subject of concessions, and whether their role might be at variance with what blind and partially sighted people should be aspiring to.

Personally I do not have any objections to the concessions we have been afforded over the years, and see no reason why in principle these should not continue. While there may be times when we as visually impaired people should exercise a measure of discretion in what we can realistically expect, we have traditionally entrusted organisations which represent our specific impairment to act as an interface with the relevant authorities to elicit the best deal for us, be this via benefits or concessions. On the specific subject of the TV licence, I am personally delighted that visually impaired TV viewers, by virtue of the campaigning position of the likes of the National Federation of the Blind, now have a discount which transcends the anachronistic precedent of the original radio licence.

While I am surprised that we should be encouraged to effectively reject the merits of concessions by their concept, one should at least try to understand how some parties see the validity of such a position, and what the events are which might have precipitated this standpoint. It might be argued that the way specific concessions for pensioners have recently been introduced at a time when the general old age pension has been increased by a minuscule increment could be indicative of government thinking which seeks to dictate how people spend their money.

To put this another way, do we interpret the precedent which some claim the government has recently set for affording concessions to pensioners as pertaining to the visually impaired community as well? If the chief merits of a blindness allowance are, as espoused by the correspondent to this column, that such a benefit would give us as visually impaired people greater autonomy as to how we spend our money, the question remains as to whether any related campaigning should be undertaken with the specific quid pro quo on our part that we should surrender any concessions we have enjoyed thus far? How does this suggestion match up with evidence elsewhere?

In Germany, where there has been a rather generous blindness allowance for some time, which is administered by regional government, there happen to exist a variety of concessions, such as a full exemption on broadcast licence fees as well as generous travel concessions, including free passage to guides. These are triggered by usage of blind/disabled persons' IDs which are issued under nationally recognised criteria, which have their significance particularly in the domain of local public transport concessions when viewed against the ad hoc situation in the UK.

This is only a cursory observation, but I feel this sufficiently demonstrates how the blindness allowance and concessions complement each other in just one of our fellow EU nations. Meanwhile, it may also be of interest to point out that the blindness allowance has not escaped cutbacks in some regions of Germany, given the difficult economic climate of the late 1990s. How would we reconcile ourselves if having gone down the blindness allowance route in the UK, and having also forfeited those old fashioned concessions, we were faced with a future government wishing to cut back our blindness allowance in real terms?
Chris Biles (Mr), Newport, Isle of Wight

The last straw

In reply to Gordon Keen (Letters, June), the price of our Alva 40 Cell Braille Display is £3,900. Our web site also has this price within it - see www.professional-vision-services.co.uk
P S Wisbey, Managing Director, Professional Vision Services Ltd, Hitchin, Hertfordshire

In response to Gordon Keen's enquiry about my size, I'd really like to be able to put my hands up and say that an overstretched belt was the cause of the incident with the broken belt clip on a new piece of access technology.

Indeed, in the original “Comment” piece, I did admit to being 'cuddly', and even my nearest and dearest would admit that we all use this as a bit of a euphemism. However, two further pieces of evidence fly in the face of this entirely reasonable explanation for what happened. In the first place, a number of other users of varying degrees of cuddliness have told me that it happened to them. Secondly, when I rang the supplier to tell them what had happened I was told cheerily, "Oh yes, that always happens".

The fact that this "That's a common problem, mate" response has been given to me as explanation for failure throughout the access technology supply sector seems to suggest to me that not only are a lot of bum steers being sold, they're being sold knowingly but without prior warning. Any connection that readers may care to make between bum steers and cowboys is entirely coincidental.
Ian Macrae, West London

Ian Macrae, like so many others, has been accorded the IT equivalent of the bird, the whistle, the hoot, or just good old 'up yours'. In a world where more and more people use 'relatively' cheap technology which they do not understand and cannot repair, respect is not the first emotion experienced by a person flogging such gubbins. But take heart! We're too good for that sort of treatment and, what's more, there's some damn good stuff out there. So here are a few tips to note when buying and/or using unfamiliar technology.

Firstly, men must be very wary of professing blanket ignorance. It seems such a good idea at the time: "You'll have to treat me very gently. I know absolutely nothing about computers."

Unfortunately, this sends out the wrong message to the consultant or salesperson. If a man, he will find you mildly annoying and will place you in the 'dummy' category. To him, you won't be bothered about what sort of equipment you end up with.

If a woman, the situation is far more dangerous. She will see you as not only ignorant but arrogant to boot. She will lose all respect for you and, in the first case, you may find yourself sidelined.

The PACT Team has a very nasty way of punishing people who appear to know nothing. Such miscreants will find themselves landed with second-hand gear that has already proved itself unserviceable.

So ask specific questions, if you're not sure about anything, and make sure that you let your opposite number know whether or not you've understood the answers.

Secondly, read as much as you can about the technology you're going to be involved with. Try RNIB's excellent “Compute IT” and “Access IT” magazines, or read the technology bulletins published by the Consumers' Association. One of the 'Ask the experts' starts in July.

Also, talk to people outside your immediate user group. If there's a real-ale boozer near you, get down there! People at work told me:

"Never trust floppies. They're always going down." Back at the pub, I got a different story: "What you need is disks with a high clip value." Dysan disks were recommended. I've never looked back.

Thirdly, seek direct information, rather than expecting a dealer (or PACT) to do the walking.

Say: "I'm looking for a computer with RDRAM." Rather than: "Could you tell me if you stock any computers which come supplied with RDRAM please?"

Finally, don't forget those 'unsexy' issues such as power delivery. In the old days, a computer would receive squeaky clean electricity from a battery of batteries. So ask for a PC with a choke-regulated power supply. If you get nowhere, invest in a decent mains conditioner. Also, leave PCs switched on whenever possible. The components (particularly the hard drive) will remain stable and the power supply will be less likely to overload.

And replace any dodgy leads. (One or two supplied to me by PACT were somewhat naff.)

So demand respect. Things will only improve for blind and sighted technology-users alike if we want them to.

In the mean time, I'm using state-of-the art braille embossing technology that has stood by me for years without a hint of trouble. So come on everybody! Let's hear it for: The Perkins Brailler.
Simon Andrew Booth, Chester

Ian Macrae's Comment was framed as an open letter to the British Computer Association of the Blind, so as BCAB's Chairman I felt I should reply on our behalf.

Ian's experience is not exactly typical, but something like it happens all too often. BCAB is an organisation largely made up of blind computer professionals and users, so when our members need special equipment to enable us to do our jobs, we often have a reasonable idea of what we need. Even so, I know of many examples of inappropriate equipment, poor training and laughable technical support. How much worse then, as IT is now used for pretty much any work you care to think of, for somebody like Ian, who has no interest in the technology, but simply wants to be able to get on with their work as effectively and productively as possible.

Adaptive equipment is still expensive and complex. It does require specialist training and support, and perhaps most importantly it requires care and knowledge from the assessor, who decides what special equipment is needed in the first place.

So what can we, BCAB, do to improve things?

I cannot offer Ian any quick fixes, but perhaps two rays of hope.

Firstly, if the real disasters are to be avoided, then it is essential that the teams involved in assessment, and especially their technical advisers, are properly trained and selected. This must be recognised centrally, and we have a meeting arranged with a suitably placed minister from the DTI to discuss how to put this in place. This will be done in full cooperation with RNIB, who are also well aware of the issues.

Secondly, again in cooperation with RNIB, BCAB is working very hard in preparation for a new scheme which aims to guarantee quality of training in access technology. The first phase of this scheme is due to be launched in the autumn, and will cover training skills and knowledge of adaptive products. Government is keen for this to succeed since it will give relevant staff a consistent and high quality grounding in an area which has always been tricky because of its very specialised and fragmented nature.

In such a short space I cannot hope to address the issues in depth, but I hope this has shown that we are very much aware of the problems Ian cites, and doing everything we can to reduce the hazards from unforeseen hiccoughs and sneezes.
Peter Bosher, Chairman, BCAB

Signing confidential documents

I would like to bring to your attention the subject of signing documents, as I feel it is a very important issue concerning blind people. Firstly, documents such as banking information, mortgages, insurance policies, loans etc. should be produced in an accessible format to the satisfaction of the customer - i.e. tape, braille, large print or computer floppy diskette.

I speak as one who has had a bad experience with some banking sectors in this regard. In one instance I specified for a repayment loan but signed for an interest only loan on an endowment basis. This was clearly a mistake on the part of the lender, and happened in spite of a sighted person reading the very complex documentation, which I accepted at the time and signed. That is why a campaign for materials in an accessible format is vital if we are to have parity.

I write this as a warning to any blind person signing contracts and the like. They should be aware exactly what they are signing for and insist on having the material in the mentioned accessible formats. The small print is very dodgy indeed.
Francis Rwama from the Concrete jungle, Sutton

The first barrister ...?

I read with interest of, and was greatly encouraged by, the appointment of Dr Amir Majid, Reader in Public International Law at the Department of Law, London Guildhall University, as adviser to Margaret Hodge, Minister for Disabled People at the Department of Education and Employment (“New Beacon Insight”, June).

It is claimed in the New Beacon notice of his appointment that Dr Majid is the first blind person to have practised as a barrister in the UK, and is the first person in the world to achieve the dual qualification of barrister and doctor of civil law. This 'first past the post' claim is clearly untenable. There are, for example, several known instances of members of the Bar becoming blind and then continuing in practice, an outstanding example being Sir John Mortimer's father.

Furthermore, I can speak personally of a former student of the RNC who was called to the Bar in Lincoln's Inn in July, 1966, practised at the Chancery Bar for some fifteen years, became a non-practising Member in order to continue two businesses he had begun as hobbies, and has now been invited back into Lincoln's Inn chambers following his active involvement in protecting the interests of distressed Lloyds Names. Then there are distinguished blind academic lawyers, and the names of Theodore Tyler and Rupert Cross, who became legends at Oxford and beyond in their own lifetime. Others will know whether either or both was a doctor of civil law, or had been called to the Bar.

It matters not who was first, but to give the impression, or to stake the claim for Dr Majid, that he has been the first to tread the path is misleading and may well give the impression to those starting out that practice at the Bar is a near impossibility for a blind person, and that the chance of securing an appointment to which a barrister in practice at the Bar may aspire is in the case of a blind person not a realistic goal. It is a difficult path to tread, but the more of us who go along it the easier it will be for others to follow. There is no mystique, just hard work and determination, and the resolve that there is no acceptable alternative to success.
Frederick Thomas Poole, Cambridge

Insight

Disconnected? - A raw deal from utility companies

Hundreds of thousands of blind and partially sighted people may be getting a raw deal from utility companies. RNIB has uncovered cases of mis-selling, even after new licensing agreements were introduced. To highlight the problems, RNIB last month launched a Utilities Campaign Report, Disconnected?, at a Business Breakfast at Granada Studios in Manchester. The event, sponsored by Thames Water, was attended by senior executives of water and energy companies, and local MP Paul Goggins gave an address. Further breakfasts were scheduled to take place nationwide throughout June and July.

The report reveals that blind and partially sighted water and energy consumers are getting at best a mixed quality of service from the utility companies. More shockingly, there have been an alarming number of incidents in which unscrupulous salespeople working for gas and electricity companies have taken advantage of blind and partially sighted people. Some of these took place after OFGEM (Office of Gas and Electricity Markets) had instituted new licence conditions which were meant to stamp out mis-selling.

For example: Sharon is registered blind. In May 1999, a salesman called at her house claiming to be from her gas supplier. She let him in, since she was expecting a meter reading.

He claimed that Sharon was a 'valued customer', and entitled to discounts in the coming months. Forms were completed on her behalf, and Sharon was persuaded to sign, even though she could not see what was written. The following week, Sharon received written confirmation that she had, in fact, switched to another company. On this occasion, both companies respected her wish not to change when contacted, but she was caused quite unnecessary worry and trouble because someone had taken advantage of her disability in order to improve their sales figures.

"Even though steps have been taken to eradicate unscrupulous selling, there remains a clear danger that vulnerable people, such as those with a serious sight problem, will be the victims of uncaring and greedy salespeople", said David Mann, RNIB Utilities Campaigns Officer, the report's author. "Suppliers and regulators must monitor this closely."

Other specific problems described in the report include:

• Bills are often (but still not universally) available in braille or large print, but less often on tape, and hardly ever on disk. Other key documents, such as codes of practice for older and disabled people, are often not produced in formats that blind and partially sighted people can read.
• Almost half of those companies who do provide bills in alternative formats fail to send reminders in the same format.
• Over half the energy companies surveyed would only call back to read a meter when a visually impaired customer was initially out, if that customer insisted on a return visit.
• Water companies are better geared up to notifying blind and partially sighted customers of planned interruptions in supply than energy companies, with two thirds claiming to call personally and another third to use the telephone. In contrast, only a quarter of electricity companies contact customers by phone, and fewer than one in seven visited.

"Blind and partially sighted people do not have 'special needs', they have the same needs as everyone else: clean water, reliable and inexpensive supplies of gas and electricity, and courteous customer service", said David Mann.

"Some needs, however, have to be met in a variety of ways. For example, everyone needs to be able to understand their bill, to see whether they have used more or less than last quarter, or could do better with another company. The manner in which the bill is set out can help or hinder any customer in this task. Visually impaired customers simply need that information presented in a slightly different way”, explained Mr Mann. “Access to information is key to full integration, and alternative formats need to be readily available on request. These services shouldn't be seen as a burden to the utility companies, but as a way of adding value", concluded Mr Mann.

Information for the report was obtained by a survey of all the UK's water and energy companies in late 1999. Copies are available from: RNIB Customer Services on 0845-702 3153.

Accessible design - RNIB leads the way

RNIB has played a major role in a design trial to study the way elderly and disabled people find their way around public buildings. The 'Ariadne' project combined navigation technology, clear signage and physical alterations to make it easier for visitors to use a Norwegian town hall and a UK hospital.

The RNIB/GDBA Joint Mobility Unit (JMU) gave specialist advice to the project team. The JMU is a consultancy working to improve access to transport, buildings and the pedestrian environment for blind, partially sighted and deafblind people.

Gill Whitney, researcher at the JMU, said: "Public buildings such as hospitals and town halls are often very confusing places for visitors - particularly elderly and disabled people. Through this project we were able to gain a deeper insight into the problems these groups face and to study the effect of the combination of good physical design, signage and technology on the way people move around."

JMU consultants worked alongside designers and planners throughout the project to advise on accessibility. A combination of electronic technology giving audible signals to visitors was used in conjunction with lighting, signage and other physical guides.

The needs of disabled people were carefully considered throughout the project, and sixty-four disabled volunteers were involved in a final evaluation to give their feedback on finding their way around each site. The volunteers included blind and partially sighted people, deaf and elderly people as well as wheelchair users and people with learning difficulties.

Gill Whitney said: "From this project we know more about how different strands work together to give integrated accessible design. Technology is only part of the solution, and combining it effectively with other techniques is vital. The findings of this trial, and particularly the feedback of the volunteers will help improve design solutions in the future."

The Ariadne trials took place in spring and autumn 1999 at Baerum Kommungegaarden in Norway and the Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading. The results were presented to the European Union funding board in March 2000.

Questions to ask the optometrist – A new leaflet for carers

A new leaflet for staff and family carers was published by RNIB last month. The leaflet is designed to help discover the outcome of an eye test and is entitled Questions to ask the optometrist after the eye test of an adult with learning difficulties, or who has no obvious means of communication.

Launched by RNIB with input from the College of Optometrists, the leaflet gives helpful information to encourage people supporting an adult during an eye test to ask a range of practical questions. It is important to find out the results of an eye test and the future support a person will need, says RNIB, but staff and carers are sometimes unsure what points to raise during or after a consultation.

For example, if glasses have been prescribed it is crucial to ask whether they are for near tasks or for distance. Staff might also need to know why an optometrist has referred the person to a GP, or whether an eye operation might be necessary.

Questions are suggested on these themes, as well as on ways in which carers can maximise vision through the use of lighting or colour contrast.

Geoff Robertson of the College of Optometrists, said: "Optometrists are aware that staff and family carers of people with learning difficulties do not always understand the outcome of an eye test. This leaflet will give staff and carers the information and confidence to discuss relevant issues so that people with learning difficulties get the right help."

Mencap research has found that only a minority of the 1.2 million people in the UK with learning difficulties have regular eye tests, even though it has long been known that certain groups are at risk of having unidentified eye problems. As staff and family carers become more aware of the importance of eye care, it is vital that the people escorting them to an eye test get a clear understanding of what the optometrist has found and respond to it correctly, says RNIB.

The leaflet is available from RNIB Customer Services on 0845 702 3153 and costs 50p.

Deafblind services consultation

Claire Price (Department of Health) writes:

The Department of Health, in consultation with Sense, Deafblind UK, RNIB, RNID, the National Assembly for Wales, the Wales Council for the Blind and the Wales Council for the Deaf and the Association of Directors of Social Services, is reviewing the provision of services for deafblind people in England and Wales. We want to better determine the overall number of people who need services, help authorities identify these people and improve the services they receive.

The consultation is looking at how local authorities identify and track deafblind people in this area, the services they provide and what they can do to improve both identification and service provision. The first meeting of the Consultation Group was held in March 2000. The consultation will continue through the summer.

We want to know about initiatives to identify deafblind people, to provide service information to people who have a sensory impairment and who may be heading for dual sensory loss, and to find out about innovative methods of service provision.

If you would like to tell us about any local initiatives, please write to Janet Goodwin SC6B, Area 228, Department of Health, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London SE1 8UG or e-mail janet.goodwin.@doh.gsi.gov.uk by 16 June 2000.

Over the next few months more information will be added to our website at www.doh.gov.uk/scg/deafblind.htm. These will include recommendations as they emerge. A full report will appear on this website in the autumn.

In Brief

Rail Regulator launches new code

Tom Winsor, the Rail Regulator, has begun consulting on a new code of practice which will set standards of service and access for disabled passengers, and provide an achievable framework in which to deliver them. The first code of practice was published in July 1994, and the Rail Regulator has a duty under section 70 of the Railways Act 1993 to revise the code taking into account the legal requirements now imposed by the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Following an eight-week period for consultation which began on May 31st, the Rail Regulator will review contributions and incorporate these, where appropriate, into the revised code of practice which will be published later this year.

The consultation document Train and Station Services for Disabled Passengers” is available from the ORR website at reg.gov.uk/http://www.railreg.gov.uk/www.rail-reg.gov.ukreg.gov.uk/. It is also available on audio cassette, in standard type, large type, and in other formats from: Sue MacSwan, the ORR Librarian, Office of the Rail Regulator, 1 Waterhouse Square, 138 Holborn, London EC1N 2TQ - telephone 020 7282 2001, fax 282 2045, e-mail: orr@dial.pipex.com

Websites

RNIB New College Worcester Former Students Association now has a website at: http://www.rnibnewcollege.worcs.sch.uk/fsa

All former students of RNIB New College Worcester, Worcester College for the Blind and Chorleywood School for Girls with Little or no Sight are invited to visit this site. You are also invited to join the e-mail list and submit an entry for the members directory.

Dot com heroes

Julie Howell, who is RNIB's Access to Digital Information Campaigns Officer is a finalist for a prestigious Yell Award.

The UK Yell Web Awards 2000, organised annually by Yellow Pages, have selected two websites designed by disabled people as finalists in the 'Best Personal Website' category.

Julie was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) nine years ago. "When I was diagnosed, I didn't know anything about MS or anyone else who had it. It was a scary and lonely time", Julie explains. "I created “Jooly's Joint”, an on-line community of people with MS, so people living with the disease can get to know other 'Msers' around the world, to share experiences and give each other support." Jooly's Joint is at www.mswebpals.org

The Yell Awards have also recognised a person with a dual sensory impairment. James Gallagher's Website “A to Z of Deafblindness” (www.deafblind.com) is a comprehensive guide to the condition, aimed at deafblind people as well as anyone interested in learning more about deafblindness. James, who lives in Glasgow, hopes to make visitors to his site more aware of the issues faced by people living without sight or hearing.

"I think this is a great opportunity to make web designers aware of RNIB's campaign for accessible web design", says James. "I am deafblind, but this doesn't prevent me from using the computers and the Internet or from designing my own website. I find it very frustrating when I try to use a website that has not followed the simple guidelines for 'design for all' as set out by The "Web Accessibility Initiative" (WAI) . I hope designers will begin to realise the power of the Internet for people who cannot read the screen in the conventional way, and start creating sites that we can all use."

Julie Howell has also had her outstanding campaigning work on behalf of the RNIB recognised in a new book. “Heroes.com: the names and faces behind the dot com era”, sold in aid of The ITV Year of Promise, is a collection of interviews with pioneers of the Internet age.

Phil Jenkins, RNIB Communication Officer, and a blind web user, says, "All too often when surfing the web using my talking computer I am met with silence because a site is badly designed. I often want to buy something on-line, such as music, or do my supermarket shopping from the comfort of my home. But too many sites will not work easily or at all with speech or braille output. RNIB would like to congratulate both James and Julie for their work which shows just how much the web can benefit everyone!"

The UK Yell Web Awards 2000 are the 'people's choice' of the best of the Net. Now in its fifth year, the Yell Awards continues to recognise and promote the wealth of creativity and originality within the UK Web industry (www.yell.co.uk/awards)

“Heroes.com: the names and faces behind the dot com era” by Louise Proddow of Sun Microsystems is published by Hodder and Stoughton (www.dotcomheroes.com). The book is to be sold in aid of the charity 'ITV Year of Promise' (www.itv.yearofpromise.co.uk/)

The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Web Content Authoring Guidelines are available online at www.w3.org/WAI

Further information about RNIB's Campaign for Better Web design is available online at www.rnib.org.uk/digital

News Extra

SIREN - Disabled refugee seminar - Friday 2 June 2000

Dr Kishor Patel writes:

This seminar was held at the Britannia Centre, London on Friday 2 June. Dr Kishor Patel, Manager Siren Project and RNIB Corporate Race Equality Adviser, reports:

This pan-European conference was organised by the RNIB and funded through the European Commission. This was a unique conference trying to address the special and sometimes the additional needs of disabled refugees. A very few organisations are addressing the needs of disabled refugees, and the seminar provided a forum for discussion, sharing of ideas and concerns and the opportunity to network with a wide range of individuals and organisations, including disabled refugees, service providers, politicians and researchers.

Over a hundred and twenty people attend the day and were welcomed by Dr Kishor Patel, the Manager of the SIREN Project, and RNIB Corporate Race Equality Adviser. The key address was given by Timothy Kirkhope, Member of the European Parliament for Yorkshire & The Humber. Mr Kirkhope is the Conservative Spokesman on the Justice and Home Affairs Committee in the European Parliament and former Under Secretary at the Home Office 1995-97 responsible for Immigration and Race and Community Relations.

The day was chaired by Dr Jurgen Grotz, Project co-ordinator.

Dr Keri Roberts talked about the research she is undertaking at the University of York, giving several examples of harrowing case histories of the difficulties faced by disabled refugees in accessing relevant and appropriate services. She stated: “In one day I had the chance to network with more people than in the previous six months. Thank you to RNIB.”

There were two panel discussions – one on ‘Service users and service providers’; the other on ‘Statutory bodies’.

The participants at the seminar were from a whole range of backgrounds, including disabled refugees from various parts of the world, over seventy organisations, including the Home Office and National Asylum Support Service, the Department of Health, Disability Alliance, voluntary bodies, organisations of the disabled, the Refugee Council, and smaller community based refugee organisations. The Organisation of Blind African Caribbeans (OBAC) and Ethnic Minorities Education and Resource Group for Equality (EMERGE) were well represented.

The three aims of the seminar were:

• bring people together so that they can network
• identify issue of concern to disabled refugees
• kick-start new projects by identifying new, local and regional projects

There were a host of recommendations which emanated as a result of the discussions in the two workshop groups. These are summarised below:

Access Workshop:

• Make sure that there are legal rights for disabled refugees
• Provide disability equality training rather than disability awareness training, including issues around refugees, culture and gender
• Ready access to information about what help and support is available
• Networking amongst disabled refugees. There needs to be a co-ordinating forum/one stop shop for disabled refugees
• Train advocates from the disabled refugee communities
• Disabled refugee is a “human rights” issue
• Campaign for basic rights of disabled refugees to include Daily Living Allowance, provision for care workers, housing, income support, access to information and education

Education Workshop

• A set of National Guidelines on education and the disabled refugee
• Assessments should be carried out early
• 'Joined-up' service provision
• Information made available in disabled refugee’s first language
• Development and delivery of adequate training for various professionals
• A vigorous challenge to racism in society and the press
• Multi-disciplinary approach top service provision
• Need to learn from good practice

Health Workshop:

• Raise awareness on the part of service providers and disabled refugees
• Use services as they are meant to be used
• Services need to get to disabled refugees rather than waiting for the people to come to them

Housing Workshop

• Local authorities need to be more informed about the needs of disabled refugees
• Need to take cultural issues when housing disabled refugees
• Networking between service providers

Social Care Workshop

• Need for ‘same-background’ staff members to meet the needs of disabled refugees
• Provide a culturally sensitive service
• Avoid dispersal of refugees
• Empower the voluntary sector to be advocates, with matching financial resources
• Need to identify and support disabled refugees as early as possible
• Disability and refugee organisations need to be more pro-active in identifying “care” and needs of disabled refugees
• Need to provide a holistic social care package
• Disability training should be offered to people involved in refugee camps
• Need for quality and appropriate information
• One stop shop

One of the outcomes of the day was a commitment from the Refugee Council to publish a regular newsletter as a means of imparting vital information to disabled refugees themselves and to voluntary and governmental organisations.

Dear Welfare Rights Services

Dear Welfare Rights Service

I wonder if you can help or give me some information. I was registered as a blind person five months ago. I live in a small village, and need to travel to the nearest town quite often. We have a fairly regular bus service, but I am finding the journeys expensive. I do not work, and my only income is state benefits. Do you know of any schemes to help with the cost of local bus travel?

Reply: You may find that your local council offers concessions on public transport for registered blind people. This could include issuing a bus pass, or travel tokens, which allow you to obtain free travel or reduced fares on local buses.

In some areas, you may be able to use tokens to obtain a discount on local taxi journeys. Or your council may operate a voucher system or issue you with a taxi card to obtain discounts on local taxi journeys. To find out more, contact your local council. Ask for the section which deals with assisted transport for disabled people.

You should also contact your council’s social services department, to make sure you are not missing out on other concessions or services for blind and partially sighted people. For an information pack about services from the council and other agencies, ring RNIB Welfare Rights Service on 0845 766 99 99 for the cost of a local call

Dear Welfare Rights Service

I am a pensioner with poor sight. I have heard recently that the Government is trying to help pensioners claim millions of pounds worth of unclaimed Income Support. Can you advise me how to go about claiming?

Reply: The Government wants more pensioners to claim Income Support.

A new Benefits Agency Pensioner Freephone number has been set up to help you claim Income Support over the phone. The number is 0800 028 11 11. You do not need to visit your local Benefits Agency office or complete a lengthy form. A member of staff will help you fill in a form over the phone. All you need to give them are details of your income, including the amount of any retirement or occupational pension you get, details of attendance allowance and details of any savings you have.

Not everybody will qualify for Income Support. This might be because your savings or other income are too high.

Remember however that millions of pounds worth of Income Support goes unclaimed each year by people over pension age! It is definitely worth phoning up to make sure you are claiming all you can.

If you run into any difficulties or if you want advice on any other benefit matter ring RNIB Welfare Rights Service on 0845 766 99 99 for the cost of a local call.

DDA Q & A

RNIB’s Legal Officer Catherine Casserley answers a question on the Disability Discrimination Act in our bi-monthly column

As readers of this column will probably be aware, very few goods, facilities and services cases are actually reaching the courts; those that do get to court tend not to be contested, or a settlement is agreed before the case reaches court. Below is an example of one of the few cases that has reached court.

Gurney v British Telecommunications plc

Mr Gurney, who is registered blind, decided that he wanted his telephone service to be transferred from BT to another service provider, as they would give him free internet access. He advised BT of this, and signed the relevant forms. He then received a letter from BT confirming that his service was to be transferred. He telephoned BT to find out when the service was to be transferred and, after several weeks, was told that his request had been cancelled. Eventually he was told that it had been cancelled because his new telephone service provider did not provide braille bills, and that the member of staff who cancelled his request felt that it would not be in his best interests to go ahead with the transfer! Mr Gurney wrote to BT but received no response; eventually they apologised, and his service was transferred but they would not admit any form of discrimination.

Mr Gurney issued proceedings in the County Court claiming breach of the DDA in providing service on worse terms/of a lower standard/refusing to serve. On the day of the court hearing, at which he was represented by RNIB, Mr Gurney accepted £900 in compensation from BT. They would still not admit discrimination, though, and so we had to argue that the District Judge should make a declaration that Mr Gurney had been discriminated against by BT. It was stressed that this was a matter of principle, and that this was not merely a contractual dispute – it was a matter of discrimination which should be recognised.

After hearing arguments from both RNIB and BT, the District Judge made a declaration that Mr Gurney had been discriminated against contrary to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The Judge also commented on the fact that BT had vigorously defended the proceedings and so he looked “with a jaundiced eye” on BT’s claim that the problem (the staff attitude in refusing to transfer Mr Gurney’s service) was one that had been addressed.

The judgment shows that service providers need to be careful about defending cases which have no real defence, or they may leave themselves open to declarations of discrimination. In addition, it reaffirms the important principle of having discrimination acknowledged, with compensation not being the only remedy in such a case. It will hopefully encourage other disabled people to take up cases where they have been subjected to discriminatory treatment.

If you have a question you would like answered in this column, please send it to Catherine Casserley, Legal Officer, RNIB, 224 Great Portland Street, London W1N 6AA – e-mail Ccasserley@rnib.org.uk

Leisure for all

The tremendous Tate

'Power into art' is the way that London's latest art gallery, formerly a power station, has been described. Gioya Steinke gives it the once-over.

There is probably very little new I can recount to you regarding the splendid Tate Modern, after the immense amount of publicity it has had already. However, from my own involvement with the Tate Modern.... anything that praises it I will confirm with great enthusiasm, as well as writing of my personal experience as a visually impaired visitor, who is now finding gallery going hard on the legs and a strain to the little remaining sight.

It's 'tremendous' in every way. The Turbine Hall took me over from the moment I entered it. The entrance alone is an exciting experience, going down a wide ramp into the very heart of this former power house. I half expected to find the rusty old machinery that had once filled it, having viewed it two years ago. Space, tremendous space, greeted me - yet the atmosphere was warm and friendly, due no doubt to the very helpful front-of-house staff and the gallery assistants, who have had good disability awareness training ... and it shows. (Note that there are other entrances for wheelchair users or those who may not wish to use the long sloping ramp.)

It is here, in the massive Turbine Hall, that one is drawn to the three Towers that can be climbed to the top around their circular staircases - entitled I do, I undo, and I redo. I longed to venture, but had to be content walking around each one, touching the surfaces, watching others and talking to them afterwards. All were breathless, and filled with enthusiasm at the view of the Hall and admiration for the sculptor Louise Bourgeois. Above, on the walkway, her towering spider (Maman) watches and waits. The sheer scale of her work is most impressive. It would require many visits to get around all the Galleries, so it's just as well to think about what one most like to do on a first visit.

I was able to have my son James with me, who has a fair knowledge of modern art and could assess what would interest me, read the too-small titles and labels and steer me to the stairs, lifts and escalators.

The works are 'themed' rather than in date order (for example linking Monet's Water lilies with a vast mural of a waterfall by Richard Long and other works about the environment and the natural world), and I rather enjoyed this as it linked up with much that had been seen or learned in previous years. The galleries are well-lit except for those that require dimness for video displays.

The floor surfaces are mainly uncluttered and pleasant to walk on. The snags to look out for and one expects to 'stumble' into these everywhere, especially where vision is of concern. However, I would like to add that what are snags to us are often just that to fully sighted visitors as well. Mainly it's the titles and numbers on the labels of exhibits, never big or bold enough and sometimes not even very near the item being viewed. The dangerous 'string' barriers slung between low metal posts were quite invisible to my sort of vision, and the white cane slides right under, giving no warning. I checked this with sighted elderly visitors, and they had problems also. Talking of white canes, take care of the floor gratings - though this is not really a snag, just a personal reminder as I often get mine stuck in the spaces. I feel sure all these matters will be resolved in time.

Future facilities to expect are already on their way. These will include:

a raised plan of the Gallery

some exciting touch tours with fresh angles and ideas

an audio tape for visually impaired visitors. The present audio guide (Tate Audio) sponsored by Bloomberg News, is on hire for £1 and is for general public use.

Find a seat and listen to some of it. It is superb and fascinating and helps one get Modern Art in focus. You hear the voices of various artists and critics giving their views and descriptions of many of the works. I find it requires a clear open mind to view modern art, and no matter whether one likes, loves or loathes what is on display, one 'sees' the whole structure of art and its interaction with history and time. It was good to come across old favourites and well-known pieces from visits to the Tate Britain (as the other gallery in Millbank has been re-named).

These include the big colourful Snail by Matisse, who turned to collage when his health and sight started to fail. Also the sculpture Head by Naum Gabo (beware, this is near the top of a staircase) and a beautiful piece by Barbara Hepworth, Pelagos.

The educational facilities are numerous and I hope to try them all out on my next visit - especially the Study room on level one, near the Bookshop. One can leave a deposit or credit card and take a book or such-like across to this room to study it under the latest colour CCTV. There are computers with programmes for enlarged print and speech. I really look forward to a study day, and will also re-visit the restaurant on the 7th floor. Apart from the food and good tea or coffee, it's the view - truly impressive, and if you cannot see it clearly get a sighted person to describe and name the buildings showing on the skyline.

I came across easy chairs and sofas along a walkway. These overlooked the Turbine Hall, and I was struck by the manner in which this Tate creates a true 'meeting place'. There are wheelchairs available, and portable stools. A clear print access leaflet gives details of facilities for disabled visitors and is available in audio format. Worth phoning Box Office for this before a visit, together with a floor plan.

Obviously I could not actually see as much as I would wish to, but there is help available, and certainly from the gallery assistants. However, I could sense the stark grandeur of the whole building.

I touched the huge black girders that had been slowly and ponderously lifted by enormous cranes into the Turbine Hall and I climbed the big staircase. All these were featured on TV. It has been quoted many times as being 'Power into Art', and this is just how it impressed the senses.

Enjoy it all, it's tremendous.
Box Office 020 7887 8888, fax 020 7887 8898 for information, to book a wheelchair, disabled parking space or any other enquiries. Information line: 020 7887 8008; email information@tate.org.uk

There are good toilets for disabled visitors, which are marked on the plan leaflet. (Send for a floor plan prior to a visit.)

The works by Louise Bourgeois, and some other exhibits, are on display until November.

Notice To Readers

There will be no “New Beacon” in August. Following the precedent established in previous years, this issue is dated July/August. The next issue is published in September.

Deadlines for the next issue, published on September 1, are as follows: Letters, Leisure Calendar and Notice Board - August 7; Advertisements - August 9

Content author: ann.lee@rnib.org.uk

Last updated: 20/11/2008 11:13