Links, Events and Glossary


Back to top


Events

<typohead type="3">3 May 2006 - Low Vision Services Group -Children and Young People Conference</typohead>

The Children's Sub-group of the Low Vision Steering Group is pleased to announce a conference aimed at all professionals working with children and young people who have low vision.

The day is designed to encourage professionals from different disciplines to meet and learn together. In addition it will challenge attendees to implement better working practice (in terms of multi-disciplinary practice) in their own areas.

To assist in promoting the idea of working in partnership, we are offering attendees who find a partner for the day a reduced rate. Anyone who sends in an application form along with a colleague from another discipline will be able to attend at half price £50 (instead of £100).

Please note that we are limited to just over 120 delegates, so please contact Lorena Carrasco, Low Vision Steering Group Administrator at the RNIB for further information and/or a delegate booking form.

Organised by: Children's Sub-group of the Low Vision Steering Group
Venue: St. Anne's College, Oxford
Contact: Lorena Carrasco
Email: LVSIGAdmin@rnib.org.uk

News

<typohead type="3">Hansard report on Oral Health Questions</typohead>

1. Mr. David Amess (Southend, West) (Con): What the responsibilities of local authorities are to provide rehabilitation services for blind and partially sighted people. [56290]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Liam Byrne): Local authorities and the NHS are responsible for providing rehabilitation services for the visually impaired that are based on need. We have increased investment in both to ensure that commissioners have more money over the next two years with which to develop services.

Mr. Amess: In a written answer to me on 28 November last year the Minister said that it was the responsibility of local health and social care bodies to commission facilities according to local needs. As he will know, Guide Dogs for the Blind conducted a survey which showed that 20 per cent. of such bodies did not provide rehabilitation services because of lack of funds and lack of qualified staff. Will he please do all that he can to deal with that?

Mr. Byrne: The hon. Gentleman is the secretary of the all-party parliamentary group on eye health and visual impairment, and has done a great deal to draw attention to the issues. I think there is consensus in all parts of the House that local communities are best placed to design the shape of services, but we made clear in a recent White Paper that the director of adult social services will need to undertake a strategic assessment of local needs. Given that more than 300,000 people in the country are blind or visually impaired, we expect their needs to be given prominence in the plans.

Mr. John Baron (Billericay) (Con): Despite what the Minister says, the fact remains that, as we have heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess), some local authorities are simply not providing essential services. Given that Guide Dogs for the Blind estimates that at least 80,000 people are not receiving any dedicated rehabilitation services just because of where they live, and given that the Minister's Department has even refused to be represented on the Guide Dogs for the Blind project group which is looking into the issue, will the Government stop washing their hands of the problem, and end the postcode lottery by establishing minimum entitlements to care for all blind and partially sighted people so that they can lead more independent lives?

Mr. Byrne: We set out clearly the standards that we expect to operate in the national service framework that was published last year. It is incumbent on us to specify the right pathways of care, and we have done that, along with Guide Dogs for the Blind. It is also incumbent on us to ensure that the right level of resources is there, which is why local government is entering its ninth successive year of real-terms increases.

The Opposition cannot on the one hand say that we should abolish all targets and have some sort of clinical free-for-all, and on the other hand say that there must be some kind of central direction. They cannot have it both ways. What we must do is ensure that the framework is right and the resources are there, and that is exactly what we have done.


Back to top