| ISSN 1357-4442 | Editor: Simon Denison |
|---|
| COMMENT |
A new law could be devastating for historic buildings, writes Neil Burton
Next month, the Disability Discrimination Bill becomes law. It gives disabled people a right of access to `goods, facilities and services' of all kinds, including `any place which members of the public are permitted to enter'. This includes all churches and many major listed historic buildings and scheduled ancient monuments.
The bill places a duty on service providers `to remove or alter physical communication barriers', to amend policies, procedures and practices which prevent disabled people using a service, and to provide auxiliary aids or services. It will be open to any individual to sue any provider for discrimination, and the bill specifically states that damages may include compensation for injury to feelings.
This bill is a time bomb for the national heritage, and its impact could be devastating. It makes no mention of the constraints of listing or scheduling, and the Government has made it clear that there will be no blanket exemption for historic structures. Monuments like Wayland's Smithy, Hadrian's Wall or Restormel Castle could only be made `accessible' with lifts and tarmac surfaces; buildings like Thomas Tresham's Triangular Lodge at Rushton, or Chiswick House, or Castell Coch do not admit of an easy alternative access; nor does Britain's canal system. Most vulnerable would be the lesser listed buildings of any date which now serve public functions - council offices, guesthouses, shops and restaurants.
Anyone who has dealt with the disabled access officers employed by many councils will know they are often extraordinarily doctrinaire about the needs of the disabled, and dismissive of the special interest of historic monuments and buildings. Entrance for all must be by the front door, they insist, whatever the consequences in external ramps and handrails; internal circulation must be unrestricted, whatever it takes in terms of widening doors and inserting lifts. `Disabled' is always taken to mean wheelchair users, despite the fact that the requirements of the majority of disabled people can be met with a minimum of alteration to buildings.
Such attitudes have already caused confrontations, and since the local authority will continue to be the first port of call for those seeking advice on how to comply with the new legislation, there will be many more head-on collisions between disabled access requirements and scheduled monument and listed building control.
The pity is that the Government has already issued a perfectly sensible statement on the subject in its planning guidance note PPG15, issued last year:
`If . . . a flexible and pragmatic approach is taken, it should normally be possible to plan suitable access for disabled people without compromising a building's special interest. Alternative routes or re-organising the use of spaces may achieve the desired result without the need for damaging alterations.' (3.28)
This clause was not included in the new bill. It should have been.
What is to be done now? Once the bill becomes law, there will be a delay before the full rigour of the act is applied, to enable service providers to take account of new requirements. In the meantime, the Government will draw up regulations providing fuller guidance as to how the act should be enforced.
It is vital that we get these regulations right. All heritage bodies should make it clear to the Secretary of State for Social Security that the regulations must be explicit and sensible about access to historic structures. Moreover, the bill proposes to establish a National Disability Council which will advise the Government on everything to do with discrimination, and will determine how the act is interpreted. Heritage interests must make sure their voice is heard from the start.
Neil Burton is Secretary of the Georgian Group
Return to the British Archaeology homepage
© Council for British Archaeology, 1995