Opting out is not an option

The government has a good track record on disability rights, says Andy Rickell. But to show its commitment to equality, it must sign up fully to the new UN convention

The former minister for disabled people, Anne McGuire (who was replaced last month), hoped the UK government would ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) by December.

This should be applauded as a further step towards disabled people’s human rights here and internationally, not least because the UK government played such a positive role in drafting the convention.

The current government has made the most commitment, in words and deeds, of any UK government so far in respect of disabled people’s rights. Every disabled person should be lobbying their politicians of all colours so that all future governments are even more committed.

So given the current government’s public commitment, it perplexed many campaigners, including myself, that the government was proposing to ratify the convention (that is, agree to abide by it), but only on certain conditions, technically called reservations.

Some of the reasons for this detailed consideration are to be applauded.

Traditionally, UK governments take their responsibilities under UN conventions very seriously, so they read the small print, recognise where there are differences between UN conventions and current UK laws and government policy, and think hard about what they will do about the differences. This is good.

However, earlier this year, the government said that it was thinking about not signing up fully to a long list of issues in the UNCRPD. This list included issues it has not signed up to in any previous UN treaties, such as those that would have removed the UK’s right to make its own immigration policy, but also issues in the new convention that relate to current UK disability policy – for instance, the rights to choose where you live, to go to your local mainstream school, to make decisions for yourself, to avoid compulsory medical treatment, and to be employed in the military.

All these rights are crucial aspects of achieving equality, and there should be no wriggling out of them by any government which says it is committed to disabled people’s equality.

The government is correct in recognising that current UK disability policy denies disabled people equality. The fact that the government’s Life Chances report proposes equality being achieved by 2025 is an honest recognition that we have some way to go. But that is no reason to be backward in signing up to the full convention.

The UNCRPD is deliberately worded to allow countries to work progressively towards equality. Not to sign up fully implies that there is no absolute commitment to full equality.

Over the past few months, campaigners and disabled expert advisers have worked with civil servants to address their concerns, to encourage a more positive sign-up by the government to the full convention.

The biggest sticking point is the right in the UNCRPD to attend your local mainstream school with support. This is fascinating, because disablism fundamentally arises from non-disabled people’s ignorance of disabled people, for which inclusive education is the funda­mental solution. Why is the government sticking on this? Because the politicians think there are votes at stake. Even the disabled children’s charities agree with the disability rights campaigners. Writing immediately to Jack Straw or Ed Balls, the ministers responsible, would be a good idea.

Why expose future generations of disabled people to the disablism we suffered?

• Andy Rickell is a disability rights campaigner