London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill

My Lords, my first pleasant duty from these Benches is to congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Valentine, on a good start. The only thing about a good start is that you have got to keep it up. I have been one the younger Members of this House for nearly 20 years. You can enjoy being that for a while here. I am glad we are discussing this Bill. It was a hark back to teenage years when it was announced on the TV and I found myself jumping up and down—and thinking that this was rather an undignified way to behave. It was a wonderful moment. We have an opportunity to go on and create something which will leave a wonderful imprint on the mind and the imagination of people for a long period in the future. Yet one of the reasons that we won it is rather more mundane: it gave us the chance to focus on and regenerate a part of our major capital city that would probably not have happened otherwise. One of the major groups involved includes those who provide the recruitment bases for athletes for the Paralympic Games. It is important that it is the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. The noble Lord, Lord Davies, has been warmed up to this in the experience of the last DDA Bill and the hours of fun we had on that. I hope that he will take in that we must concentrate on getting the disability access, the planning and the structure right. We will do that by getting the expertise in early, making sure that we are not having to chase around afterwards adapting buildings, structures and transport links after they are half-completed. What is in place in the structure and recruitment of the expertise to get that done? The thing about disability access and structure is that there is no one disability. It is something of a truism and I have said it far too often in this Chamber, but everyone thinks of a wheelchair. Then people have a little struggle and think, ““Oh, what about the blind and people with visual impairment?””. Then they work back over a great deal of time bumping into problems, saying, ““That group as well? Oh, yes””. In the realisation of this and the opportunity of the commission we had an advisory panel to tell people about the different types of disability, how they can act, what is needed and what seems to bring them in. I hope that the Government will be able to tell us and show us in fairly short order where the structures are for getting those bits right and from where the expertise is going to come. If they do, they stand an incredibly improved chance of ensuring that they will not be chasing their tail and making corrections later on. People may think that this is not a big part of the project, but the Olympic village, for example, will presumably be the same village for the Paralympics. That will be a huge amount of accessible housing in the middle of London that can be used afterwards for anyone. It will be housing which, if we get this right, will already be available for the vast majority of people with disabilities to use—independent living projects. I suggest that that is a massive bonus. We will have improved access on all the transport links. That is a massive bonus. We also know from experience that that does not just help the disabled. It must be getting on for 15 years ago that I first pointed out that a ramp does not just help someone in a wheelchair; it helps a mother with a pram—that was the first example that I used. Now, everyone who has a suitcase seems to have one on wheels; it will help anyway with a heavy suitcase. I could carry on. That will help everyone. The noble Lord, Lord Davies, and I remember the issues well. Let us consider signing on trains and announcement systems. We have had hours of fun on that before. Do not tell me that having announcements made clearly and signs put up clearly will not help tourists. That will help everyone but that makes it possible for other sections of society to use. From where are the Government recruiting the expertise to allow that to happen? If the Minister can give me an answer today, or at least give me assurances that he will give them to me before we table amendments for Committee, I assure him that I shall not bother him further—or, at least, that I shall bother him less than I otherwise would. Let us face it, my attitude towards the Games is that they are a wonderful thing. If the Government are getting it right, let us go on with it and back them. I do not want to waste my time or anyone else’s fighting battles that will be won. If we get the assurances, I shall not table more amendments just to go through the motions and the ritual dance. The noble Lord, Lord Pendry, put it clearly: this has enjoyed a degree of cross-party co-operation from which many other fields would benefit, but from which we often chicken out at the last minute. This could be an area on which we agree. Disability legislation is another field where a degree of cross-party consensus can be achieved, with or without the ritual dance. I finish by saying: tell us where the information, the structure and the planning is. Tell us who you have contacted and what is the consultation and then we can leave it alone. If you cannot, we must return to it.