Violent Crime Reduction Bill

We certainly agree with the principle of this amendment, but I am sure that the noble Baroness and the noble Lord will not be surprised to hear that we do not think that it is essential to have it on the face of the Bill. Local government, like central government, already recognises the need to ensure that information is published in a way that recognises the needs of those members of the community with disabilities. The noble Baroness is right to make the connection with the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 because, from December this year, it will amend the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to place a general duty on all public sector authorities to promote disability equality. That will, among other things, build on measures already taken by placing a general duty on public authorities to mainstream disability equality into the way in which they carry out their functions. Our guidance will of course need to take account of this and advise local authorities positively to consider the needs of all stakeholders—to use the dreaded word—when publishing any of the materials associated with the ADZ process. The noble Baroness gave some examples of different formats. We would expect that those would be exactly the sorts of formats to be used. It is vital that all of the information is communicated in such a way that all interested parties have access to the information. We are of the same mind on that. Amendment No. 95 is much the same. Providing information in an accessible format is crucial. We know that public bodies already provide accessibility sections on their websites. For example, even the Home Office’s website, like other organisations, provides options for viewing pages in different typefaces. Again, our guidance will need to take account of accessibility, particularly in the light of the new statutory duties, which we expect to have a real effect. I hope that, with those assurances, the noble Baroness will feel able to withdraw her amendment.