I now move to the short debate. If you're leaving the Chamber, can you do so quickly, please? So, we now move to the short debate and I call on Suzy Davies to speak on the topic she has chosen. Suzy.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for responding to this today. I’ve tabled this particular debate as a step in what I hope will be a successful campaign. It’s a chance for Members to begin considering whether what I’m about to talk about would be a useful, practical and reasonable step towards equality in their constituencies and regions, and it’s a chance for you, Cabinet Secretary, to expand upon the Government’s initial observation that:

'In principle, this idea seems to have some merit and we would be interested to see how the practicalities of such a scheme would work'.

In November, the Bridgend Coalition of Disabled People opened an e-petition via the Assembly website, which in due course will of course be considered by the Petitions Committee. I hope that this debate and your reply, Cabinet Secretary, will be of use to the committee in those considerations, and I urge all those Members who I hope are watching this from their offices to tell your constituents about this as it will be open for signatures until March. It’s already got over 1,700 signed-up supporters, but I’d really love it if we could get enough so that we can have a full Plenary debate on it.

The Bridgend Coalition of Disabled People is a very active and well-regarded campaigning organisation in my region, with some executive members also sitting in other national bodies representing people with disabilities. You will probably already know some of them from their engagement work with Assembly Members and of course Government. 

The coalition is calling for the Welsh Government to bring in an access certificate, showing numbers from zero to five, along the lines of the food hygiene certificate. All buildings used by the public—such as shops, food outlets, sports clubs, pubs and offices, as well as public transport services—should be assessed on how wheelchair accessible they are, as well as how easy it is for someone with a sensory impairment or learning disability to use.

I think this fits very well with the debate we had a little bit earlier today on some of those scores. Its members would also like premises to be given a number, which they could then display to show how disabled friendly their premises are. They argue that those who achieve high ratings could possibly persuade others nearby to improve access and get a higher rating themselves. They cite the obvious comparison here, which is the food hygiene certificate, as a success, saying that since the mandatory introduction of the food hygiene certificate, food standards have vastly improved and premises with a high number use the certificate with pride. Coalition members believe that businesses will make a big effort to improve access and services for the disabled community if a similar certificate were introduced for access, leading to hugely improved services for disabled shoppers and those who want to go for a drink, a meal or to use public transport—the facilities that most of us take for granted. It's a win-win situation: better services mean more customers.

The petitioners have given an indication of what information the scores should be able to convey.  I have some ideas to add to that, which I’ll come to in a few moments, but they suggest that to achieve a 5 rating, a premises will not just need to be wheelchair accessible, but be fully inclusive for those with visual and hearing impairments, and staff understanding of those with learning impairments. Having a restaurant with Braille menus or staff able to use sign language can make a huge difference and give someone a far easier and less stressful experience when doing everyday things that most will take for granted.

Another idea they put forward, as well as having a 5 to 0 rating, is to have extra symbols beneath to show whether a premises has full wheelchair access, an accessible toilet, information in Braille, staff who can use sign language and whether the premises is—to quote the petition—'autism friendly'.

I don’t really want to get caught up in the specifics at this stage. It would be just too easy to dismiss both the petition and the idea because of vague terms like 'autism friendly' or 'disabled friendly'. I know that it would be impossible to anticipate, for example, the individual response and, therefore, the access need of every single person with an autistic spectrum condition. Myself, I’d say that the minimum requirement to get a score on that would be that key members of staff would have had awareness training, but that’s what consultation is for and we are not exactly short of individuals and bodies to consult here in Wales.

Some of them have already offered their support for the coalition’s proposals. The National Autistic Society Cymru, for example, have said:

‘For hidden disabilities such as autism, access to goods and services can often be about making changes to the physical environment but having an awareness of different conditions is also key. NAS Cymru would welcome disability awareness training, including autism, for staff who interact with the public so that autistic people don’t feel socially isolated and unable to access shops and services.’

Guide Dogs Cymru, in their report, 'Access to food premises for guide dog owners and other blind and partially sighted people', lays bare the problems experienced by some of Wales’s 100,000 people with sight loss. Taxis, restaurants, newsagents and convenience stores, cafes and high-street shops are the five most frequent places to refuse access to guide-dog owners, although, conversely, restaurants and high-street shops also have the best service when it is offered. I think that demonstrates that the missing ingredient for some businesses is thinking about accessibility in the first place.

Guide Dogs Cymru says:

'For blind and partially sighted people, the petition would help in two ways. Firstly, it would raise awareness of the importance of access to buildings. Accessible buildings increase the opportunity for blind and partially sighted people, and all people who are disabled, to live independently in the community. Poor access to a building is a major factor in deciding whether it is possible to use a leisure centre, library, restaurant or doctor’s surgery without help. Secondly, by raising awareness of the importance of access to buildings, there is a good chance that improved knowledge of this topic on the part of service providers would lead to reductions in the number of access refusals.'

Before I go on to the practicalities, I just want to mention those three other ideas that I've got that I think can be accommodated in this. First of all is a scoring or information system to demonstrate dementia awareness within a business. If we’re serious about dementia-friendly communities, let’s include this. Secondly, communication difficulties—we heard yesterday from David Melding that Afasic Cymru will be closing its offices in Wales, but that doesn’t mean that this is a closed matter. Thirdly—well, probably no surprise here—emergency life-saving skills and defibrillators. Members may remember their support for my legislative proposals to help create a nation of lifesavers in the last year of the current Assembly. Among those were proposals to increase the public availability of defibrillators and to increase the take-up of emergency life-saving skills by staff who work in publicly accessible buildings, so that members of the public could benefit from their expertise, not just the workforce in that building. 

Now, for those practicalities. The first point to make is that there are sporadic examples of this idea in practice already, thanks to organisations like NAS Cymru and the Alzheimer's Society. Brecon is a dementia-friendly town, Milford Haven is an autism-friendly town, both titles being predicated primarily on awareness training. Some of our major stores and theatres have introduced quiet or relaxed shopping periods and performances to help people and their carers, as well as staff, feel more comfortable sharing these everyday experiences and they'll have signs or certificates to show that as well. 

Mark Isherwood told me, a few days ago, about Communicating With Confidence, which is a small charity in north-east Wales, which raises awareness of the communication difficulties of people of all ages and walks of life as a result of stroke, Parkinson’s, MND and brain injuries. They want a national communication symbol to add alongside those familiar badges for hearing, visual and physical impairment, and already use signs and stickers locally to promote awareness.

And as for defibrillators, well, I’m sure you all have seen the lightning mark appearing in more public places now, but it is hardly universal coverage. We are still in a position where the key information on where your nearest defibrillator is can only be discovered by phoning the ambulance service, using up valuable time. The head of the British Heart Foundation this week declared his support for extending the principles in this petition, saying,

'Ensuring the public know where they can access a defibrillator or help from a CPR trained individual is vital to saving lives.' 

What this shows, I think, Cabinet Secretary, is that all of us, not just people with disabilities, respond to recognisable symbols where those symbols are consistent and widespread. While I imagine we’re talking consultation again on what any new symbols might look like, the cost of adding a few more symbols to the existing sticker collection, websites or written material is hardly likely to be exorbitant.

Who should be responsible for training? Well, it's clear to me that training should be carried out by people who know what they’re doing, including people with disabilities themselves, absolutely on co-productive principles. I don’t think it’s beyond the sector to be responsible for the strategy and planning either, but this is an open question as far as I’m concerned. I can foresee, for example, that this is likely to affect taxi licensing, which is a local authority responsibility, but that doesn’t mean that the cash-strapped local council should assume responsibility for the entire scheme. Local authorities play a key role in the food hygiene system and various parts of the public sector could, or even should, be partners in this. 

As ever, the questions that will trouble everyone will be cost and cost effectiveness. Again, I am completely open on this, but in this era of participatory budgets—they're coming to the fore now—this is a scheme that is discreet, easy to explain and easy to understand. So, why not offer it up as an idea? The principle of pooled budgets and more inter-sectoral collaboration is also the direction in which we’re heading, so there’s less reason now, I think, to say that this must be financed by the central health budget or a local authority budget. There is no reason in principle why the wealthier end of the disabled charity sector can’t contribute to a common budget. Explore all ideas and don’t let the old financial models close down the development of great new ideas. 

And then, finally, just with regard to cost-effectiveness, the first thing to point out with this is that this is not a replacement for Disability Discrimination Act 2005 compliance. It’s not about enforcement or even the applications of rights. It's primarily about information, but even then it's part of something bigger. I think interest in this scheme is further evidence that society is becoming more accepting, whether consciously or not, of the social model of disability, that disability is a feature of how society is organised, rather than an impairment that just has to be lived with.

There is no obligation in this system for business owners to do anything with their premises. The scores on the doors are just that: public information. If they result in soft persuasion for businesses to improve their services, which I think they probably would, then I wouldn’t be advocating that those businesses should be charged for re-assessment, as happens in the case of food hygiene certificates. The improvement itself is a step towards that reorganisation of society.

I see this scheme being of great value to people without disabilities. When signs become part of the landscape, to the extent that you don’t really notice them perhaps, then they have achieved something. It’s like when you cross the Severn bridge and it slowly dawns on you that the road signs aren’t bilingual anymore. You may not be a Welsh speaker, but your unconscious, unseeing expectation is momentarily challenged, because something that’s usually there oddly isn’t, and that's what I can see happening here: all of us becoming so over-familiar with the expectation of universal accessibility that it jars a little every time we see a poor score. 

This is why I support this idea over apps or other sources of direct information to people with disabilities, useful as they are. Because it’s not just about services for people with disabilities; it is a nudge towards this positive societal change. It's about normalising the expectation of access to all, about it being surprising if buildings are closed off to groups of people with a particular disability, and about this being an everyday consideration for everyone, from the town planner to the architect, from the HR department to the union rep. I think that’s quite a lot of value for money from a few stickers, Cabinet Secretary, and I hope that you will pursue this idea with vigour. Thank you.

Thank you. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate. Vaughan Gething.

Yes. Thank you, Presiding—. [Interruption.] Oh, I'll do this, and I'll not clack around. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you to the Member for introducing the debate with such a constructive speech. To be fair, this is a consistent approach from Suzy Davies on both of these issues—disability rights and the broader issues around defibrillators. I am aware of the petition that you referred to at the start of your contribution about grading the accessibility of services for disabled people and it's no surprise that it's gained some traction and I look forward to the consideration the Petitions Committee will give to it.

We, of course, want to see all people having equal access to shops, restaurants and other public places. That is something that most of us do take for granted. So, in principle, the idea does have some merit, and I welcome suggestions about practicalities and how such a scheme could work. I think it would be best to keep things as simple as possible so that it's easy to replicate and understand. It may be challenging for a basic numbering system to take account of the wide range of different access issues that would need to be considered, and I recognise what you said about some of the differing challenges of differing forms of disability. But I think it is a proposal to be welcomed and to be thought through, to be properly explored to see how all premises could be as fully accessible as possible.

Of course, there is a challenge, thinking about our current legislative framework from the original Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and now those provisions forming part of the Equality Act 2010. There are provisions made in particular for smaller shops and businesses in older buildings where it may not be possible to make all of the adjustments we would otherwise expect other businesses and premises to make. But, for most, it should be possible to at least make some changes to make their business more welcoming for disabled people. That inclusive approach, with a positive attitude by staff, would benefit all customers, including people with hidden and visible impairments, people with prams, pushchairs, older citizens, and, frankly, people with no disability at all. There is a broader challenge about customer service in a range of the places that we regularly patronise with our custom or, in fact, choose not to because of a customer service experience. That is something that every business should take some time and attention to look at again.

Of course, the environment and services should be designed to be as accessible as possible for all people to the greatest possible extent. And there's something here—and I was pleased to hear the Member recognise this—about the provisions in the Equality Act, but something that does go beyond that and back to the point about customer service that you made in your own contribution, because that isn't simply about complying with legislation, it is about something much more and, actually, for a number of people, about much greater value, where they really feel valued and welcomed when they go in to access or use a service.

We do need to promote an honest and open discussion—there's a phrase I've heard before, but, an open and honest discussion between disability groups, individuals, the business sector, public service providers and the third sector to understand what we think is required and what we think is possible, whether that’s through a 'scores on the doors' system or by other means, to consider what the options are and what's the best chance of doing something to practically improve accessibility and awareness of it as well. And I was pleased to hear the number of points that you made in your contribution.

You also, of course, referred to defibrillators, a subject that you've mentioned in the past and I'm sure that you'll mention again in the future, whether in a short debate or in questions, moving forward. You'll know that we do have a shared commitment to improving the survival rate for those people who suffer a cardiac arrest in the community. So, the swift use of a defibrillator in tandem with effective CPR and calling 999 as soon as possible offers people the strongest chance of survival. I'm sure I'm not the only person in this room who's undertaken some of that training themselves. My staff have undertaken that training and refresher training as well. It's something that each of us can do to do something practical about that to try and lessen some of the fear, because a point that is regularly made is that, if someone has had a cardiac arrest, you can't hurt them by intervening, because, if you don't intervene, they're not going to be there. There's something here about demystifying. And, actually, for every person who has undertaken training to use a defibrillator, I have been impressed by the fact that it is, 'Oh, it really does tell you what to do'. So, there's something here about taking away some of the concern you understand that people who haven't undertaken that training and had that experience would have. 

So, there is a greater awareness needed of defibrillators, how to use them, where they're located, and supporting the increased availability of them within our communities, and having them available on the Welsh ambulance service's defibrillator mapping system. I do fully support making life-saving equipment, such as defibrillators, more accessible and having appropriate signage to highlight their locations, and, again, consistency in doing so as well. Of course, these are available not only from commercial organisations, but a range of third sector groups like St John Ambulance, the British Heart Foundation, and a range of other smaller—you know, Welsh Hearts and other charities here in Wales as well.

I'm interested in both the management and the feasibility of having such a system, but I'm open to receiving further information on how we could see such a system working. It's about the practical ability to take forward an entirely reasonable idea. You'll be aware that, last June, I launched the out-of-hospital cardiac arrest plan for Wales—another one of our snappy titles in the world of health and government in general. We're in the early stages of trying to implement that plan and deliver real improvements. And so there's a sub-group of the heart conditions implementation group, and they're overseeing progress against objectives in that plan. So, the return of spontaneous circulation is already being implemented—the pathway is being implemented by the Welsh ambulance service and health boards.

Last month, the Welsh Government helped to arrange an implementation workshop, which I was able to attend for part of as well, to try and generate debate on how we deliver the first three rings in the chain of survival: early recognition, early CPR and early defibrillation. Attendees came from a range of cardiac charities, along with representatives from emergency services, and they listened to speakers talking about implementation in Wales and what we're already doing, as well as learning lessons from Scotland and also international visitors from Seattle as well. The workshop generated some passionate and informed debate. There's something here about how we corral the whole sector together to have that debate together and then agree on some national choices. We want to use the energy and the feedback to further implement and improve the plan that we have, using outcomes from the workshop and drawing on that experience from Scotland as well. I am genuinely happy to learn from other parts of the system within the UK that are the most comparable for us here, of course. Work has commenced to develop a detailed implementation plan to support that collaborative approach to increase the access to CPR training and the use of defibrillators.

In addition, we're also establishing a communications group to take forward awareness-raising aspects. They'll look at the issues of awareness of exposure to defibrillators in our communities— again, that point I made earlier about demystifying the use of them. There has been a welcome and significant increase in the number of publicly-available defibrillators that the ambulance service knows about in the last three years. There's a number of campaigns that have helped to do that: Restart a Heart Day, Shoctober, Defibuary are just some of them. Of course, the last two campaigns that I mentioned have led to nearly 13,000 schoolchildren being taught CPR and defibrillator awareness in October last year. I was happy to meet a range of those people in a number of different settings around Wales as part of it.

I'd actually launched the Be a Defib Hero campaign in February 2015, when I was the then Deputy Minister for health, and life was perhaps not simpler but easier in one respect, at least. But since then we've had an additional 396 defibrillators to have been logged and mapped onto the Welsh ambulance service dispatch system. There are currently 3,254 defibrillators in total on the system, and they do allow call handlers to direct callers to the nearest one and the availability in the event of a cardiac arrest. We've already had stories, as a result of that system, of not just more defibrillators being there but actually of lives being saved because those publicly-available defibrillators have been used. And, of course, ambulance staff and volunteers have been working in their local communities on defibrillator acquisition, placement and CPR, resuscitation, training.

Again, in my own constituency, I attended an event in the old Eastern High School, a former pupil whose own life had been saved by the health service, and she's giving lots back, both in undertaking—she's a physiotherapist and a personal trainer who is undertaking work on pulmonary rehab. She's also raised money, and she's providing a defibrillator for her old school, which is going to be placed in the new school that's just been opened. There should, then, be something available both in the publicly-accessible part of the school that'll be available out of hours, as well as within the other side of the school that is going to be more restricted to in-hours as well. That's a good example of what we know is already taking place in a number of communities around the country.

So, there will need to be time to see the progress that we make with our out-of hospital cardiac arrest plan and to build on the momentum that we do have with stakeholders, charitable organisations, the public sector and, indeed, a range of businesses that are happy to have their defibrillators mapped on that public system. I hope that Members will engage with and promote the Welsh ambulance service's new Defibuary campaign, obviously starting tomorrow, on 1 February, which is easier to say, and the campaign is about raising awareness of early defibrillation and to encourage everyone to find out where their nearest defibrillators are and then to share that on social media.

We do recognise that every one second counts when someone goes into cardiac arrest, so I think all of us will have a shared mission about how we help raise awareness of the importance of early CPR and defibrillation, and, of course, we'll continue to talk about that in this place and to see whether we've made the progress we want to and whether there are other measures that we could take, including—and I know the Member's preference—having a legislative ability to do some of this as well.

Thank you very much, and that brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.

The meeting ended at 18:56.