RRTRBILITV
D I ARY 1ARTABILITY' -A DIARY
This is an attempt to put down chronologically the events surrounding the doomed Artability Conference which had been due to take place in Manchester 22-24th, September, 1986.
Glossary.
Coalit ion = Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People; an organisation of disabled people whose management committee and workers are all disabled.
DPSG = Disabled Peoples Steering Group; this is a sub committee of Manchester City Council's Equal Opportunities Committee. Its Members are all delegates of disabled controlled organisations in Manchester, and as a body it makes policy on disability issues which are then carried out by the Equal Opportunites (disabled) workers in the council's Equal Opportunities Unit.
BCODP = British Council of Organisations of Disabled People; both the Coalition and the DPSG are members of this national organisation which brings together all those organisations controlled by disabled people.
Artability » as well as the title of the conference this was also the name of the planning sub-committee of the Carnegie Council. The Council had been set up by the Carnegie Trust following the 'Attenborough Report' on Arts and Disabled People, published after a committee of enquiry, in 1985.
Numbers in brackets will refer to numbered documents.
(1) 18 Oct 1985; Artability Committee meets at Palace Theatre, Manchester. I don't whether this was the first meeting of this committee. Of the 7 members listed, as far as I know none were disabled. An outline of the proposed dates and timetable for the conference was attached to the agenda, so obviously some work had gone into it already. Note that Manchester Council's representative was to be Chair of Social Services Committee, not a disabled representat ive. (2) 13 Nov 1985: 2nd meeting at the Palace of the Artability Committee. This meeting decided on the title 'Artability', and included a disabled person (Chris Davis from the Spastics Society). Knowledge of the accessibility of possible venues seems to be totally absent, and was left to 3 able bodied members of the committee to sort out. (3) 15 Dec 1985; Letter sent by Simon Goodenough, Chair of the Artability Committee, to Mary Elstow, one of the Equal Opportunities (Disabled) workers in the Equal Opportunities Unit. In line with Carnegie's policy of inviting individuals, the invitation to join the Committee is via personal recommendation and Mary's supposed 'special interest'. It is clear that by now the whole outline of the conference has already been decided and the committee is 'mainly concerned with administrative matters'. Tragically Mary died in a road accident a few days later. - 2 -
(4) 14 Jan 1986: Artability Committee meeting at the Palace. Minutes make it clear that the programme was by and large in its final format. Some of the workshops intend to invite disabled people as leaders. A comment here from an internal memo of a London based group is relevant here:- 'A colleague of mine at for example was roped in to jointly run the seminar long after an able bodied woman with no particular qualifications had been invited to do it'.
Note also that a limit was to be set on the number of wheelchair users going to the Gala Day and the conference as a whole.
(5) 5 Mar 1986: Artability Committee meeting at the Palace. Councillor Kath Robinson (Chair of Social Services, Manchester City Council) appears for the first time,(on what basis?). Note 'Health Through Arts' forum, suggested use of Eddie Shah for publicity, display at Town Hall (Kath Robinson must be aware of its inaccessibility). (6) 14 April 1986: Letter from Anne Pearson of Carnegie to Councillor Robinson, Chair of Social Services. Again, usual tactics of personal contacts to get things done. Also, letter (1st May) from one of the Equal Opportunities workers to Anne Pearson saying the issue would be raised at the May DPSG meeting. (7) 29 April 1986: Town Clerks Memo informing various departments of Whitworth Art Gallery 'do' for 'Arts and People with Disabilities' Who approved this and why did it not go to the DPSG? (8) 13 May 1986: Agenda and minutes of Artability Committee meeting (a)(b) at the Palace Theatre. For the first time an Equal Opportunities worker (one of the admin workers, not disabled), and a member of the Coalition attended as observers. It is important to stress this as neither group had taken any decision on their attitude to Artability, though their suspicions had been raised by comments from London based disabled controlled groups informally. Notice the obsession on trying to get as many 'celebrities' to attend as possible. Concern expressed about getting HRH Prince Charles to attend. First mention of 'incendiary speeches' from plants in the audience. Maximum of 30-40 wheelchairs at Palace (see access report, item 18). Funding from City Council now agreed for Whitworth 'do' ( who decided?) and free hire of Wythenshawe Forum. Idea of 'Arts for Health' competition mooted by North West Regional Health Authority. (9) 14 May 1986: DPSG meeting, doubts about the conference were forcibly expressed. It was a close run thing whether to boycott the conference there and then, but eventually decided for Chair to meet with Artability and recommend further action - certainly not to join the Artability Committee as a representative. (10) 17 May 1986: BCODP meeting in London; Artability discussed at this meeting. Manchester's Coalition delegates were convinced that a decision was reached to 'Boycott and picket this conference' (later disputed by the Chair). (11) 6 June 1986: Coalition meeting; this meeting agreed to oppose the Artabiiity conference, based on the BCODP report and the report back from the member who attended the May 13th Artability meet ing. - 3 -
(12) 18 June 1986: letter from chair's of Coalition and DPSG to BCODP making it clear that in no way were either organisation supporting or involved in the Artability Committee. (**) 20 June 1986: Meeting between 4 members of the Artability Committee and 4 from the Coalition and DPSG. I think this was originally to have been another meeting of the Artability Committee at the Palace, but at our request it was transferred to the Coalition offices. This was really the crunch meeting where two very different points of view clashed head on for the first time. Artability have produced minutes of this meeting but as these are disputed and need to be checked in line with our tape re cording of the meeting, they are not attached. At the meeting the arguments against the way the conference was being organised were put forward and Artability put their views forward. What did become clear was that the gala night at the Palace was in danger of being cancelled, not because of the access problems, but because not enough celebrities had agreed to come. No agreement was reached by the end of the meeting. (**) 24 June 1986: Rachel Hirst, Chair of BCODP attended the Carnegie Council meeting as an observer. From her verbal report on this meeting she was obviously given a rough ride and said that it was up to the Manchester groups and BCODP to make their own decisions about Artability. (**) 25 June 1986: Phone call to me at work from Geoffrey Lord, Sec. to the Carnegie Trust. This lasted for over 1/2 hour, and was fairly typical of a series of calls received by myself and Ken Lumb (Chair of the Coalition) over this period. I made notes of this call by the end of which I feltpummeIled since he made it clear that if there was any controversy in Manchester then "Trusts, Companies and Foundations will back away" and it would " affect a big fund for increasing access to theatres etc. from the Government". Also a £50m Department of Education Support Grant would be threatened. To think that a few of us handing out leaflets on a wet September evening could have such an effect! What was also clear from this phone call was that the whole basis of the way Carnegie operates was in terms of 'by invitation' membership of committees, with the emphasis on eminent persons. For example, he mooted the ideas of a post-Artability committee to be headed by Brian Rix who was soon to retire from Mencap. (13) 30 June 1986: Letter sent by Geoffrey Lord to both the Coalition and the DPSG. In this he offers to not use the Palace - not because of its bad access, but as a bargaining counter for us to withdraw our opposition. There was also a carrot of some free tickets for the big do! (14) I July 1986: Letter from Chris Davis, the only disabled member of the Artability Committee, arguing that we should support it. The counter arguments to this are summarised in Item (16). (15) 2 July 1986: DPSG meeting; after a long discussion about Artability, a motion was passed unanimously condemning the way the conference had been organised and calling on the City Council to withdraw its support for the conference. - 4 -
(16) 4 July 1986: Coalition meeting; a similar motion against Artability was passed. This motion is included in the excerpt from the article appearing in the next Coalition newsletter. (17) 12 July 1986: BCODP Council meeting, held in Manchester. Again another long discussion about Artability, and a motion opposing it was passed with all delegates in favour except one abstent ion. (18) 16 July 1986: Equal Opportunities Committee, Manchester City Council; This committee fully supported the DPSG as can be seen from the motion, and also added condemnation of the pressure that had been put on disabled people to withdraw their opposition. This was thanks to the support of a councillor, Sheila Robertson who was a negular attender of the DPSG and aware of all the issues involved. Unfortunately she was unable to attend the full council meeting a few days later. At this full City Council meeting a heated discussion took place in which Kath Robinson persuaded the Council to reject the Equal Opportunities motion. (19) 17 July 1986: Letter from Fairplay to Ken Lumb agreeing with the criticisms of Artabiiity, but suggesting that BCODP try to "renegotiate the agenda" of the conference. This was received after the announcement of the cancellation of the Artability conference. Ken Lumb has subsequetnly replied saying that the Coalition is quite willing to meet to discuss ways forward after we pick up the pieces of recent events. (20) 18 July 1986: Carnegie announce they are cancelling the Artability conference and try to lay the blame on the Coalition and BCODP. They claimed falsely, that we threatened 'unsprcified action' - the only fairly certain thing would have been a picket of any inaccessibl venues, but they had already agreed not to use the Palace. They had also claimed that we were unwilling to meet them. Considering the actual meeting we had and subsequent phone calls this is absurd. In fact we are still willing to talk to them. Of the many phone calls we have received subsequently, one suggestion that certainly could be followed up is to hold a seminar in Manchester during the time that Artability would have been held, to discuss some of the issues contained in the whole episode. (21) 22 July 1986: BCODP press release welcoming the cancellation of Artability. (**) 5 Aug 1986: DPSG meeting; it was agreed at this meeting to organise a national seminar in Manchester to discuss the Artability debacle and ways forward, preferably in the period of the Artability conference, but later if this proved impossible to organise in such a short t ime. (22) Palace Theatre Access Survey; report of the City Architect concerning access in the Palace Theatre for the forthcoming Artability conference done on 11 July 1986.
Bernard Leach 5 Aug. 1986 0
To all renters of the Conference 1986 Planning Sub-OcmiiLttee
Alan Courtney Simon Goodenough Gordon Infield Daphne Kennard Peter Senior Denis Coe John Evans
AGENDA FOR MEETING AT PALACE THEATRE OFFICES, BRIDGEWATER BOOSE,_ (2nd floor)', WSTHORTH STREET, MANCHESTER FRIDAY 18 OCTOBER 1985 11.30am
1 Ccnmittee members - further suggestions
2 Outlining the aims of the Conference a) To review the impact of the Committee of Inquiry - progress made since publication of Report and future development b) To provide a stage for individual artists, arts organisations to display their work and to exchange ideas 3 Content of Conference (see suggestions as outlined on attached sheet)
a) Topics for discussion
b) Timetable c) Perfoirmers/practitioners d) Special events (evening entertainment) 4 Publicity and other events in the 1986 Calendar 5 Delegates, speakers, and special guests 6 Budget, subsidies, sponsorship
7 Venue/Aa:cni-odation/Administration
8 Provision for disabled delegates
9 Any Other Business
10 Dates of future meetings Suggested timetable of Conference - for discussion on 18 Cctober
Monday 22 September
11 am Registration 11.30 Keynote speeches First welcome by Sir Richard Attenborough Followed by explanatory talk about the structure of the Conference
12.30 - 2.15 LUNCH
2.15 - 3.30 TOPIC 1 (Each topic to be a series of speakers interspersed with practical demonstrations and discussions)
3.30 - 4.00 TEA
4.00 - 5.15 TOPIC 2 5.15 - 6.30 4? workshops Each workshop should be linked with one of the topics EVENING Perhaps reception at Hospital?
TUESDAY 23 SEPTEMBER
----- • 9.00 - 10.00 Report back from workshops
10.00 - 11.00 TOPIC 3
11.00 - 11.30 COFFEE
11.30 - 1.00 TOPIC 4
1.00 - 2.15 LUNCH
2.15 - 3.30 TOPIC 5
3.30 - 4.00 TEA
4.00 - 5.15 TOPIC 6
5.15 - 6.15 Mere workshops
EVENING An event Theatre? WEDNESDAY 24 SEPTEMBER
9.00 - 10.00 Report back from workshops
10 - 11.00 TOPIC 7
11.00 - 11.30 COFFEE
11.30 - 1.00 TOPIC 8
1.00 - 2.00 LUNCH 2.00 - 3.45 Open Session, Discussion feedback
3.45 - 4.15 TEA
4.15 - 5.00 Closing speech
EVENING Dinner
SUGGESTED TOPICS 1 Examples of Good Practice 2 Participation and Employment
3 Arts Therapies
4 Access
5 Legislation
6 Television and radio
7 Technological Developments
8 Transport Q CONFERENCE SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING FRIDAY 18 OCTOBER 1985
Present
Simon Goodenough (Chairman) Gordon Infield (Secretary) Bob Scott Elizabeth East Peter Senior Alan Courtney Anne Pearson
Apologies
Denis Coe John Evans Rod Fisher Daphne Kennard
Suggested Members Duncan Watson ~ - Lawyer, Chair of RNTB Kath Robinson - Manchester City Council Jo Chris Davies - Member of Fairplay, Campaign for EqualLty in -v- y" the Arts Minutes AIMS Those present discussed the aims of the Conference and its overall shape. It was agreed that the Conference would aim at three things: a) to review critically the impact of the Attenborough Report and the achievements of the Carnegie Council b) to provide an opportunity for celebration and analysis of the work of disabled people in the arts and the work of artists with disabled people and to enable those in the field to exchange ideas c) to look to the future; chart the way ahead in terms of access, participation, equal opportunities, etc.
DELEGATES There was lengthy discussion about who we hope will attend the Conference. Given the nature of the Report, they should come frcm a wide range of individuals, able-bodied and disabled from voluntary and statutory bodies, from government departments and local authorities, from arts and from disability organisations. We could be fairly sure of attracting "the converted" ie, the representatives of disability organisations, disabled artists and those who work with them, but we recognised that we have an obligation to spread the net wider than that. We should also attract the policy makers; senior civil servants, local authority leisure and recreation officers, representatives of regional health authorities, fire officers, industry and funders, etc. (It was estimated that 60-70 delegates approx might be disabled) The meeting concluded that the latter category might not easily be enticed to a 3-day conference.
PROGRAMME Bob Scott therefore proposed a one-day event, incorporated within 3 days. This should be held in the Palace Theatre which could hold 2,000 people. (Apprax 900 stalls, 600 circle and 500 gallery). This would be on any of the three days depending on the availability of Sir Richard. It could be a set piece production of keynote speeches by Sir Richard? Sir Kenneth?, the Minister for the Arts and the Minister for the Disabled. Interspersed with their short speeches should be dance, drama, music by notable disabled artists/groups. There should also be stage-managed speeches form the floor. The Prince of Wales should be asked to open this one-day event and it is possible that international guest speakers will be invited.
We hope that there will be a large take-up for such a day, attracting many administrators who would not otherwise attend. A flat rate for the day could help to subsidise the 3-day conference. We all agreed the importance of clearly linking the themes of this big day with those of the sessions and workshops of the other 2 working days which would take place at Owens Park with a maximum attendance of 300.
The topics were revised as follows:
1 Arts Therapies
Access (to include Transport)
Training and Education
Participation
Employment
Dealing with Bureaucracies (Each topic to include OJ^ aspects of legislation where appropriate) A further topic which might be a workshop was 'Disablement and the media'.
Each topic could be chaired and put together by a named individual who would decide the format and choose other speakers. The main task of our next meeting will be to decide how these topics can be shared out over two remaining days. DISPLAYS
It was agreed that groups such as SHAPE, Interlink, Health Service, Mencap, Gateway, etc, should be asked to put on displays.
APPROXIMATE REGISTRATION COSTS
Full day conference only - £20
Three day conference (Mon Lunch - Thurs breakfast)
Accom and food only £65.55 """ incl Formal £81.69 Dinner at Owens Park
Standing Costs £20 p/person
Total without dinner £92 with dinner £105
Speakers would not be paid an honorarium but would receive travel and accommodation expenses.
SITE VISIT TO OWENS PARK HALL OF RESIDENCE AND MEETING WITH MR KEATING
Alan Courtney Elizabeth East Simon Goodenough Gordon Infield Anne Pearson
Generally the accommodation was good.
Sleeping arrangements I adequate for able-bodied and disabled people
Dining facilities
Tree Court Dining Room - seats up to 180 Main Dining Room - without extension seats up to 200 extended into foyer seats up to 300
Cafeteria style catering is suggested with table service for tne ^disabled. ^Lunch could be in two venues if necessary. ^6? high class bedrooms for VIPs at no extra cost, ^ J
Seminar rooms (Little Court Dining Room) /
One large seminar room seating approx 300 Small Conference rooms (Common rooms and TV rooms)
Four small rooms to seat approx 50 - all accessible to the disabled, and all with exits not through adjoining rooms.
Registration
In the foyer
Displays A few could be displayed in the area close to the seminar room or in one or two of the seminar rooms.
Assembly Hall Large seminar room on first floor. Seats up to 600, but not suitable for disabled as access is via stairs.
QUALIFICATIONS 1 At the moment no induction loop, but Owens Park can provide them 2 Not a recommended venue for an evening dinner 3 Special coaches would be needed to get people into centre of town (10 minutes)
EVENING ARRANGEMENTS These were discussed and the following ideas suggested. We have three evenings to fill: a) Our evening dinner was seen as an important element for one evening (not at Ctoens Park)
b) a civic reception c) a reception in a public or perhaps better, in the Whitworth Art Gallery d) an night out on the town. It was felt important that there should be some built-in arts activities to give some people more to do that just eat and drink. We may possibly combine some of thse events or we may want to expand one or two.
NEXT MEETING Wednesday 13 November at the Palace Theatre, Manchester (See agenda). CARNEGIE COUNCIL ^rfSSS^S Arts and Disabled People Prinet£JSS«fSS London NW1 4RS Administrator: Anne Pearson Telephone: 01-386 0383 CONFERENCE 1986 SUB-COMMITTEE
Date: Wednesday 13 November
Venue; Palace Theatre Offices, Whitworth Street, Manchester
Time: 11,30 am Till we have finished mid afternoon?
AGENDA
1 Apologies
2 Minutes
3 Matters Arising
4 Financial Matters: Alan Courtney to report
5 Conference Programme: a) the one day event b) the other 2 days
6 Evening events
7 Local contacts
8 Owens Park accomodation
9 Elizabeth's Office facilities
10 Any Other Business
LUNCH WILL AGAIN BE KINDLY PROVIDED BY THE PALACE THEATRE
AT A COST OF £2.50.
Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson Vice Chairman: Robert Scott Secretary: Geoffrey Lord Patron: Sir Richard Attenborough in association with the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, Dunfermline, Fife. ®
CONFERENCE SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING
DATE 11 am WEDNESDAY 13 NOVEMBER 1985
VENUE PALACE THEATRE MANCHESTER
PRESENT Siiron Goodenough (Chairman) Bob Scott Peter Senior Anne Pearson Alan Courtney Gordon Infield Elizabeth East Chris Davies with Philip Harris Alan Howard
CONFERENCE PROGRAMME AND COSTS Alan Courtney presented the provisional conference programme and costings Delegates will stay at Owens Park Hall of Residence. A Civic Reception will take place at a venue yet to be selected - possibly the Town Hall. There will also be an evening event at a local hospital. Peter Senior, Elizabeth and Anne will visit possible venues and decide early in the New Year.
There was some discussion about the need to take into account in devising menus the kinds of foods suitable for some disabled people.
Estimated cost £80 - basic (for 4 nights) + £15 (?) for dinner
For the one day conference the price would be £15 per head.
Chris Davies said that Owens Park Hall of Residence should be checked by a local member of the Spastics Society to make sure of it's accessibility.
VIDEO FILM It was agreed that video filming the Conference would be a very useful exercise and the edited f ilm could be used for promotional/educational purposes subsequently. ®
EVENING EVENTS
There was lively but inconclusive discussion about the nature and location of the evening events. Peter Senior and Elizabeth East will pursue local contacts and report at next meeting. The feeling of the meeting was that a Conference dinner was not required but receptions, at which musical and dramatic presentations could take place, would be better. Access was a major problem. There were lots of exciting places to visit, eg, the Cornerhouse, but they would not be big enough for upwards of 30 wheelchair users. The Town Hall is just about accessible. Elizabeth will follow up the practicality of using the Great Hall there.
TITLE AND CONTENT OF CONFERENCE
The title 'ARTABILITY '86' was suggested by Philip Harris and was greeted with enthusiasm by everyone. A sub-title would be "Exploring the future for the Arts and people with disabilities". The breakdown of subject matter and the precise format of topics/ workshops was not so satisfactorily concluded. It is a complex problem and will probably have to be decided at a small meeting called for the purpose of thrashing it out. For the moment we needed only to establish the topic subjects. They were revised as follows:
. / 1 The Arts as Therapy
2 Access and Facilities Vy "-^v-*0 3 Training (including Education)
^ \ 4 Participation in the arts and the media .^ I J > 5 Employment
6 Influencing 'Decision-Makers'
Simon Goodenough will write to the suggested chairpersons and ask them if they will take on the task of co-ordinating the topic.
CONFERENCE OFFICE
Anne will continue to act as unofficial co-ordinator of the Conference until 6 January when Elizabeth East will take over. She will be based in the Carnegie Council office at Nuffield Lodge. (Same number as Anne). SPONSORSHIP The necessity of acquiring generous sponsorship was recognised. Bob Scott strongly reccmmanded that we approach the Granada Foundation. The Secretary is Christopher Kerr, Granada TV, Quey Street, Manchester 3. Jeremy Issacs of Channel 4 was suggested; various other individuals and organisations were mooted including Robert Maxwell. Sponsorship and other financial matters would be discussed at a special meeting at Nuffield lodge to be held on 16 December. Any ideas about funding should be sent to Anne Pearson in time for that meeting. The next full meeting of the Conference Sub-Ccnrnittee will be held on Tuesday IT January again in Manchester. Agendas will be sent out in the New Year. I •fl ••
J.-
Mary Elstow, Equal Opportunitiea Dept.. tromt Glebe House, Manchester Town Hall, Crediton, Albert Square, Devon 2X1? 2af MANCHESTER 15th Dec. 1985
Dear Mary Elstow, Your name has come to me through FetAr»
beforeIn fact,ourAnnenextandmeeting,I will asbe wellin Manchesteras the [^{Jon a^oa^rl3tn»Sapiaiibrnth theth« dayh_w I look forward very much to meeting you. Yours sincerely,
Simon Goodenough Q CARNEGIE COUNCIL (c^SJJJg Arts and Disabled People """Regents Park London NW14RS Administrator: Anne Pearson _ , . ., eo, _,„, Telephone: 01-586 0383
CONFERENCE 1986 SUB-OCMMTTTEE
Date; Tuesday 14 January Venue; Palace Theatre Offices, Whitworth Street, Manchester
Time; 11.30 am
AGENDA
1 Report on title - Artability '86 2 Gala Day - Sir Richard Attenborough et al 3 Costs and Subsidies and Fundraising 4 The Two Evenings 22nd and 23rd September - links with City Council 5 Any other displays, exhibitions and video
6 The Topics
7 The Programme
8 Timetable of mailings
9 Invitees
10 Any Other Business
Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson Vice Chairman: RobertScott Secretary: Geoffrey Lord Patron: Sir Richard Attenborough
in association with the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, Dunfermline, Fife. &. CCMFERENCE SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING - AOTABUJTY
DATE Ham TUESDAY 14 JANUARY 1986 VENUE PALACE THEATRE MNXHBSTER PRESENT Simon Goodenough (Chairman) ' Bob Scott Peter Senior Anne Pearson Alan Courtney Gordon Infield Elizabeth East Chris Davies with Jennifer Ireland Alan Howard Rod Fisher John Evans Apologies: Daphne Kennard, Denis Coe fl» neettng was sai to learn of the i^0^*^ t^oept
to the Dept for another representative.
CONFERENCE TITLE r^oaA «-hafr the title ARPABILITY should be acclp^d^ithlheAfter further discussionssubtitle 'Theit waswayagreedahead thatfor the5°®Arts]?tieJr™^and people with„,,*, disabilities' Alan Howard showed the revised logo, which was uriani-ously accepted. It waTag^ tnaTSere should not be a3-coloured version. Alan Howard was asked to prepare notepaper heading, press release paper and finished artwork by January 22nd. ^^^5""SB chairman confirmedS^nlerence,that SirandRichardcould thereforeAttenboroughbe FJJ-fhad agreed««»to *£fr?„SYte !^t£fuql- Richard willSott^SlapproachLnformHRH thePrincelordCharlesLieutenant.and if he is It was agreed that the Ministers for the Arts and for the Disabled «hn»id_T_nvi^toattend the conference, with the suggestion ttet
for the Arts at a meeting on January 22nd. It was agreed that the Gala Day should start at 2pn { lasting about x_^hrJ\ to aive those delegates booked into Owens Park time ^ register
Syl^ibition which may be held at the Cornerhouse. It was agreed to limit the number of wheelchair users attending the Gala Day, in addition to those who are attending the whole conference. 6 After lengthy discussions the Gala Day fee was agreed at £10.
Bob Scott will have further discussions with members of the Catmittee on January 22nd over possible performers.
MAILING (distribution target 10,000)
1) End of February First mailing 4 page A4 folded with separate booking form and and reply paid envelope. Copy required by 31 January. 100 words frcm each topic organiser describing their session.
2) End of April .,• - - , —Second mailing 8 page A5 prospectus with booking form and reply paid envelope. Copy required by 31 March. Names of all speakers, performers etc. where known. Mailing lists were being compiled. The Arts Council will include the leaflets in their mailing of 5,000 to subsidised theatres, Art Centres, and local authorities. It was suggested that the DHSS should be asked to supply lists of Regional Health Authorities and Social Service Depts. The Carnegie Council will provide a list of advertising outlets in appropriate magazines for disabled groups. It was agreed that it was important to involve local disability groups and to keep them informed of the conference.
TOPICSA~suggestion was put forward by Rod Fisher that the role of the arts providers was not clearly indicated in any of the topic titles, and that it warranted a title of its own - it had been hoped that this would have been covered in Participation in the Arts. It was decided therefor to take out CHANGING PUBLIC ATTITUDES and to make a new title THE ROLE OF THE ARTS PROVIDERS, including employment, and for the media to be covered by the topic INFLUENCING DECISION MAKERS. The titles and suggested organisers were agreed:
ARTS AS THERAPY JOHN W^ ACCESS AND FACILITIES JOHN D0BINS0N PARTICIPATION IN THE ARTS PETER SENIOR
INFLUENCING DECISION MAKERS SEONA REID (incl. the media)
TRAINING AND EDUCATION DENIS COE THE ROLE OF THE ARTS PROVIDERS NICKI GAVRDN (incl. employment) RECEPTIONS ,wn-mn- Cath Robinson, Elizabeth East SurcnFoTIowingOxxlencugha meetingand AnnewithPearson0w*^t^SJeVisited g-J^JSvenues:large, dirty and wythenshaw Forum - although at tirse £sn«s excellent rQ2Smperscnal, it ^J^.^_^^eSption In the foyer for wheelchairs, and J^/"^J^J a show in the Hall. ^^^.1.rt^^SMKBsr^da? Owens Park. OTTHENSHAWE HALL _ Not visited as its capacity was 130 max
no disabled lavatory, but it might be POMUJ}^»™ adapted by September - alternatively a portaloo might be used.
small. rglS?-dLSS'.^S?» steps I, a»11 Uft, ta*^ five minutes per person. » _. ^reed that Councillor ^^t^ery^the^'rcr Council would «»«-»"9^ *^^f^Athe W- to see if thetht Civicca£anyReception,provisionallyand tobookedasK ixcouldsne v*juj.vjalter the"t-i~- date of their.^j conference.
FyHIBITIONSElizabethANDEastDISPLAYS,and Anne Pearson had had a meetingn^tina withwixn na*eHazel Royi SoSdS provided and header boards incorporating the logo. It was also noted that an exhibition could be put in the foyer of the Town Hall, prior to and during the conference. CORNERHOUSEBotTSoottARThadGALLERYmentioned to *»££»» *£*££Director of^ethe Cornerhouse,artists with ____ffiSfeSS£r--wssa. should liaise with John Evans. VIDEO Chris Davies and Jennifer Ireland were still enthusiastic about videoing the topic days. One or two members of the Committee were in agreement, and it was suggested that Chris should prepare a note with costings, possible audiences, feasibility, etc. The video would last about one hour, or 50 mins excl. adverts with a view to having it screened on TV.
FUND RAISING It was noted that Geoffrey Lord was preparing draft letters to possible fund raisers. Simon Goodenough had approached Granada, who had expressed interest. The Arts Council may also assist, in particular with helping cover the expenses of the performing groups.
FEES FOR PERFORMERS It was suggested at this stage, that the groups performing on the Regional Health Authority evening should be paid a fee and expenses. Performers on the Gala Day should be paid expenses only.
DELEGATES FEES Lunchtime Monday teatime Wednesday (incl. accomodation) £65 £40 receivers of benefits
Lunchtime Monday teatime Wednesday (excl. accomodation) £40 £20 receivers of benefits
Gala Day only (no lunch) £10
Date of next meeting 5th March at 11am in the Circle Bar of the Palace Theatre, Manchester ®
THE WAYAHEAD FOR THE ARTS &PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES •MANCHESTER 22-24 SEPT 1986
Conference Co-ordinator: Elizabeth East Nuffield Lodge Conference Administrator: Alan Courtney Regent's Park London NW1 4RS Tel: 01-586 0383
Conference Committee Chairman: Simon Goodenough Under the auspices of the Carnegie Council for Arts and Disabled People Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson, Vice Chairman: Robert Scott, Secretary: Geoffrey Lord, Patron: Sir Richard Attenborough TexT & B
THE PALACE THEATRE AND OWEN'S PARK HALL OF RESIDENCE, DNIVERSITT OF llANCHESTER
llANCHESTER, 22nd-24th SEPTEMBER 1986
Arranged by the Carnegie Council for the Arts and Disabled People ARTABILITY takes a positive approach to people and the arts: - it provides an opportunity for artists and crafts people experiencing a disability to demonstrate their work - it brings together many people with key roles in the provision of facilities and in the shaping of attitudes to consider examples of, and arguments for, the practice of the arts and crafts in their widest sense
ARTABILITY stimulates discussion of the way forward. It debates what the following professionals can do and how they might do it:
- arts providers, to improve arts opportunities - health authorities, to complement health care - leisure and recreation, social services - to develop training and community services - medical profession, to recognise the worth of the arts in treatment - educationalists, to enhance provision for all pupils - therapists, to relate their use of the arts to the general context - arts administrators, to improve access and facilities - fire and safety officers, to remove misguided restrictions - funders, to create better resources - central government policy makers, to legislate for positive change - the media, to be representative of all people in society
ARTABILITY is concerned with recognising in each other what we can do, rather than judging each other by what we cannot do. It is about social as well as artistic values. It is concerned practically with a fundamental change in attitudes.
ARTABILITY is a major event in the work of the Carnegie Council for the Arts and Disabled People. The Council was set up last year to help fulfil the recommendations of the Attenborough Report. PROVISIONAL PROGRAMME & MONDAY 22nd 8BPTBMBER
AM REGISTRATION at Owen's Park for those delegates attending all three days
PM ARTABILITY - PRESENT AND FUTURE
The Palace Theatre, Oxford Street, Manchester
The Attenborough Report charted the way forward. This afternoon we review progress, air anzieties, enjoy the work of talented artists and listen to keynote speakers. Our Patron, Sir Richard Attenborough will attend and we have invited the Minister for the Arts and the Director of the Arts Council for Great Britain.
Performances by artistes or artistic groups Include:- Frankie Armstrong (Folksinger) Ian Dury (subject to availability) (Performer and songwriter) Tony Gerrard (Britain's No. 1 sit-down comedian) Graeae Theatre Company (Britain's only professional theatre company of performers with disabilities) Special Jam Band (a group who perform a range of music from classical to pop including their own compositions)
THIS SIGNIFICANT AFTERNOON OF SPEECHES AND PERFORMANCES IS ESPECIALLY AIMED AT POLICY MAKERS IN CENTRAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SOCIAL SERVICES, LEISURE AND RECREATION, EDUCATION; FUNDERS - VOLUNTARY AND STATUTORY; ARTS ADMINISTRATORS, ARTISTS AND ARCHITECTS; HEALTH AUTHORITIES, THE MEDICAL PROFESSION AND THERAPISTS; FIRE AND SAFETY OFFICERS; THE MEDIA AND OTHERS WHOSE WORK AFFECTS THE PARTICIPATION OF DISABLED PEOPLE IN THE ARTS.
Bvening - for delegates registered for all three days of the conference Buffet supper with musical accompaniment at the Whitworth Art Gallery hosted by Manchester City Council (provisional). TUESDAY 23rd 8EPTEMBEB Owen's Park Hall of Residence, University of Manchester (Each topic session will last approx ljhrs. Swopshops and Visual Arts and Crafts, Dra»a, Dance and Music Workshops will run concurrently) TodIcP ArrlngeSsessionby--THERodPftl.RFisher,OP ARTSInformationPB0VIDBR8Officer, The Arts Council of Great Britain Arts providers are increasingly being encouraged to demonstrate a commitment to meeting the needs of people with disabilities and so to redress years of neglect. The Arts Council Code of Practice is an important development in this process. In this session, speakers from a cross-section of organisations in the performing arts and visual arts will describe initiatives/projects they have undertaken to improve opportunities for people with disabilities to have access to the arts experience. These will include the arrangement of sign interpreted performances, the organization of 'touch exhibitions and the provision of workshops and outreach work. Topic session - PARTICIPATION IH THE ARTS Arranged by - Peter Senior, Director, Manchester Hospitals Arts Project The arts are for everyone. Over the ages they have been the field for some of the finest achievements of the human spirit. It is within everyone's capacity to reinterpret their own experience, to share the experience of others by involvement in the world of art, extending the area of human understanding. Sustained artistic endeavour with others can lead to a sense of community - hidden talents may be developed giving a heightened sense of identity and worth. There is pleasure in participation and observation of the arts. In this session participants will share their own experiences and ideas. Topic session - ACCESS AND FACILITIES Arranged by John Dobinson, Director, Access Committee for England This session will attempt to explore the fundamental importance of physical access and suitable facilities in ensuring that people with physical or sensory disabilities are able to participate fully in the arts, either as performers, or as part of an audience. The central thrust of the session will be to argue that disabled people are not special people with special problems, but are ordinary people who happen to be disabled. The consequences of this philosophy for policy will be thoroughly examined. Difficulties of physical access will be faced together with the further restrictions that are often imposed in the name of safety. Bvenlng - HEALTH THROUGH THE ARTS © The Forum, Wythenshawe Civic Centre
Hosted by the Manchester Hospitals Arts Project, the North West Regional Health Authority Department of Prevention Services and Manchester City Council Social Services. An evening of display and demonstrations of the performing arts to show how the arts are being used in Manchester to complement health care and health promotion.
WEDNESDAY 24th 8BPTBMBBR
Owen's Park Hall of Residence, University of Manchester
Topic session - EDUCATION AND TRAINING Arranged by - Denis Coe, Arts Development Officer, Cleveland Arts The practical issues involved in improving the level of arts provision for people with disabilities in schools and colleges will be examined. There will be an opportunity to discuss how far educational establishments have either the facilities or the trained staff to help children and young people with disabilities to enjoy the arts and to achieve a measure of self development through the Arts. It will also consider the further education and training opportunities for young people who wish to follow a career in the Arts. Examples of good practice will be given during the session.
Topic session - THB ART8 AS THERAPY Arranged by - John Evans, Head, Division of Arts and Psychology, Hertfordshire College of Art and Design. The question of the general therapeutic value of the arts and the more specific use of art within a formal therapeutic context is one that continually needs clarification. This session will address the issues raised by this question, considering the need to establish clear professional boundaries and good open relations between artists and arts therapists. This is particularly necessary when the context of health care is becoming more diffuse through the development of community care. These issues will be further elaborated through a choice of demonstration workshops run by leading art, music, drama and dance therapists. TOPlYrrang°ed b/™"^"llffff°« ArtsUne and jfcsjssisrs'-isi's r/tsune permissiveThe realitylegislationfrom the disabledand good person'sintentionspointare ofclearlyview isnotbad: enough. di«bilit;llfeDi8TSeeprocesse:?ne.ps"reventS^iSi^^^^^^them ^om presenting aunited front and thus achieving change by political means. pubUcAt -tmSSes.the heart ofT-ethearts,matterbroadlylies thedefinedquestionand oftheentrenchedmedia are in SSrivaUe. positions to influence and change public opinion. This session examines the issues raised here and it is hoped provide some provocative answers.
Final keynote session - WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERB? PEB80NNEL Contoronce co__iittee Chairman © Simon Goodenough Carnegie Council Nuffield Lodge Regent's Park London NW1 4RS (Tel. 01 586 0383)
Conference Co-ordinator (Programme) Miss Elizabeth East Carnegie Council Nuffield Lodge Regent's Park London NW1 4RS (Tel. 01 586 0383)
Conference Organiser (Accommodation and bookings) Alan Courtney 33 Lansdowne Road Worcester (Tel. 0905 22653)
ACCOMMODATION
COST
BOOKING
The Carnegie Council was established by the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust to develop the recommendations of the Committee of Inquiry into the Arts and Disabled People chaired by Sir Richard Attenborough, who is now Patron of the Council.
Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson; Vice Chairman: Robert Scott; Secretary: Geoffrey Lord; Administrator: Anne Pearson DIRECT MAILING (approx 12.000) \»»> f February 1st mailing - 4 page A4 with booking form and return envelope April 2nd mailing (follow-up) 8 page A5 with booking form and return envelope Regional Health Authorities - England, Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland Directors of Social Services - England, Scotland, Wales Fire Officers - England, Wales, Scotland Participants in Regional Meetings to launch Report Journal list from Disabled Living Foundation Members of the Inter-Museum Public Relations Group Press and Media Contacts Local Authorities - Chief Executives, Directors of Leisure Regional Arts Associations Disabled Organisations SHAPE Services in the UK Arts Therapy Organisations Campaign for Press and Broadcasting freedom Disabled Living Foundation - Music & Hearing Impaired list Committee of Inquiry Access Officers in Local Authorities Directors of Education (LEAs) England and Wales Art Colleges - Music, Art, Drama Departments of Education at Universities and Polytechnics NUT NATFHE Directors of National Museums, England, Scotland and Wales Area Museums Councils Specialist Groups of Museums Committee of GEM (Group for Education in Museums)
Mailing list of Arts Council of Great Britain (5,000)
Newsletter of Centre on Environment for the Handicapped (1,500) - (April only)
Disabled Living Foundation (3,800) - (1st mailing literature, sent out in April/May)
Assn of Professional Music Therapists (200)
British Assn for Dramatherapists (200)
Assn for Dance Movement Therapy (200)
Newsletter of Music News (DLF) (1,000 April/May)
ADVERTISEMENTS January
Disabled Journals (130) Museum PR Staff Positif Shape North West Music Therapy Groups Regional Arts Assns Museum Assn MPG Bulletin Library Association
March
CEH Journal BRIBP OUTLINE OP TOPIC 8B88I0N8 g)JJ THE ARTS A8 THERAPY Arranged by John Evans John is suggesting a chairman with a panel of 2 or 3 speakers. The session will start with a 45 minute presentation using visual material to define the area of therapy, its function and benefits The delegates will then be divided into 4 workshops- Arts, Music, Drama and Dance therapy to be led by representatives of the relevant professional therapy organisations.
Equipment Video and/or projector
EDUCATION AND TRAINING Arranged by Denis Coe
Denis will use a panel of up to 4 speakers with a talk for approximately 1 hour followed by question time and a video. The discussion will include:- a) Special schools - this could be led by a teacher such as David Woolley who works in conjunction with ordinary schools and might demonstrate the work of Summerhouse Special School in Stockton, or Howard Reece from Portsmouth College of Art and Design b) Teaching training - further education and higher education, possibly involving two or three students c) Arts and special needs advisory services in local authorities - examples of co-operation
Equipment Video performance
INFLUENCING DECISION MAKERS arranged by Nicky Gavron and Rudi Breakwell-Bos Nicky has asked Rudi Breakwell-Bos. the new Director of Artsline to chair this session. Rudi's background is Psychology and he is a film maker who has worked for Channel 4. He uses a wheelchiar. Using a panel of perhaps 3 influential media and advertising people (yet to be invited) they hope to stimulate a lively discussion on the way disabled people are perceived by the general public and how prejudices and misguided pre-conceptions are reinforced by media coverage.
There will be extensive use of slide tape presentations, video and an exhibition of posters to illustrate the theme of the session. Discussion will also include the subject legislation and the session will call for a specific course of action to bring about change for the better in this field.
Equipment video, slides ACCB88 AND FACILITIES arranged by John Dobinson John is planning his sessions as follows:- There will be a panel of 5 people which will probably include Arthur Goldthorpe, the Chairman of the English Access Committee and Stephen Thorpe a freelance architect who specialises in designing for disabled people including the sensorily impaired. There should be blind and deaf representatives. Jill Allen, also of the English Access Committee might be the visually handicapped panel speaker. John intends to introduce this session with a talk by him on Access in general. This will include a 12 minute video called 'On the Level' a film produced by the DOE with the aim of promoting a built environment more accessible to disabled people. It would be followed by Stephen Thorpe who would talk on the provision of access facilities. There will be a section about regulations on access with particular reference to arts buildings. The Code of Guidance to the revised cinematograph regulations will be discussed. This should be presented by an arts manager with a disability. The final part of the session will be a general discussion with the Chairman (Arthur Goldthorpe) inviting questions from the floor. Equipment Slide and video 'On the Level* can be a 35mm film or video
Leaflets
THB ROLB OF ART8 PROVIDERS arranged by Rod Fisher
Rod plans to start off with the performing arts. A group whose performances have been successfully geared towards the needs of disabled people will present their work - possibly Southend Palace Theatre or Felicity Harvest's Theatre Workshops. For the visual arts he intends to focus on museums and galleries and the rise of touch exhibitions. This subject could be dealt with by James Ford-Smith, a visually handicapped curator who has put on a touch exhibitin in Belfast and Margrethe de Neergaarde, visually handicapped curator at the London Museum who has made a special study of museums and disabled people.
His third section concerns Education and will concentrate on drama groups, eg, Young People's Theatre Groups, the Unicorn Theatre Group, Theatre in Education or the Greenwich Young People's Theatre. Finally a venue manager of for example a large multi-purpose arts centre will speak about a range of access facilities, education initiatives and other provision needs of their particular venue to meet the needs of people with different disabilities. Suggestions include David Fischill from the Liverpool Everyman Theatre, or Phil Jones from Jacksons Lane Community Centre. The session would be chaired by an arts manager with a disability.
Equipment Video 8 UGG E 8 TED TIMETABLE
TOUR TO TOPIC WORKSHOPS ______Hoeplt-ls Art Project (Main Hall) (Rooms A,B,C) (Room D) DAY 2 (3 per session?) (max in minibus -)
9.00-10.45 TBB BOLE OP ARTS PROVIDERS
10.45-11.15 COFFEE
11.15-1.00 PAB-ICIPATION IN TBB ARTS 1) ? 11.15 Dept 11.15 Ret 1.00
1.00-2.15 LUNCH
2.15-4.00 ACCESS AND FACILITIES 2) ? 2.15 Dept 11.15 Ret 4.00
4.00 TEA 4.15
DAY 3 9.00-10.45 ECCCATION AND TRAINING 3) ?
10.45-11.15 COFFEE
11.15-1.15 THE ABXS AS THERAPY 4) Dance, Drama, 11.15 Dept 11.15 Music, Arts Ret 1.00
1.15-2.15 LUNCH
2.15-3.30 INFLUENCING DECISION MAKERS 5) ? 2.15 Dept 11.15 Ret 4.00
3.30-4.00 TEA C .•••' 4.00^30 WHERE DO WE GO FROM HEBE? ©
CONFERENCE SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING - ARTABILITY
DATE 11am Wednesday 5th March 1986
VENUE PALACE THEATRE MANCHESTER
PRESENT Simon Goodenough (Chairman) Councillor Kath Robinson Peter Senior Alan Courtney Gordon Infield Elizabeth East Chris Davies accompanied by David Slater Apologies: Bob Scott, Anne Pearson, Alan Howard, Rod Fisher, John Evans, Daphne Kennard, Denis Coe and Geoffrey Lord
ION PALACB THEATRE AFTERNOON Further suggestions of performers were put forward. CD Double Exposure - Chris Davies will send Bob Scott a video Nina Falaise - It was felt that she might not be suitable as a solo performer, but might be asked to do a workshop or have a video available. SG Geoffrey Tate - SG to approach BS Esmond Knight - BS to approach
EE/BS It was agreed that Bob Scott should ask Nicky Hightner, Assistant Director of the Royal Exchange in Manchester, if he would be director for the afternoon. Chris Davies would be pleased to give any advice. It was suggested that a video might be on display in the foyer of the Theatre before the performance. ±Q AC to check induction loop at Palace Theatre
2. SPECIAL SUNDAY CONCERT EE/BS Bob Scott has been in contact with Manchester Festival about staging a special concert of all the Monday afternoon artists on the Sunday evening, the last night of the Festival. This would give the artists an additional opportunity to expand their talents and would involve the Festival in the Artability conference. Provided there was no extra cost to the conference, it was agreed to ask Bob to pursue this. It was assumed that all publicity, i.e. posters etc. would be provided by Manchester Festival, but they should be asked to contact Alan Howard in the first instance. The question of free tickets was raised, but it was agreed to see what were the prices for other concerts at the festival generally. A*-* iv/w _. 3. WHITWORTH ART GALLERY (5^ The Chairman reported that Professor Dodwell had agreed tV allow the Monday evening reception to be held at the Whitvortb Art Gallery. Provisional timing for the reception was EE 7.00-9.30pm with the Gallery closing at 10.00pm. It was hoped that some classical music could be played during the reception. An official letter would now be sent to Manchester City Council asking if they would host the evening.
It was noted that if hosted by MCC the Civic Head, Leader of the Council and Chairman should be invited to attend.
FORUM - 'HEALTH THROUGH THE ARTS'
Hike Godwin had now made provisional arrangements with the Forum. The evening would start at about 7pm with a reception, PS/MG followed by a buffet supper and entertainment, finishing at about 10.00pm. Entertainment would be by people who work in the Health Service and arts therapists. Displays would be in the concourse.
EE would write officially to the Forum cancelling the provisional booking for Monday and confirming Tuesday. The MG/EE invoice for costs is to be sent by Mike Godwin to Councillor Tom Egan to ask if they could be waived. It was agreed that we would not approach any drug company, as this might jeopardize Health Authority funding.
Chris Davies suggested that some names of stars either to CD/EE take part or compere the evening should be obtained from Stars Organisation for Spastics. CD to send EE name of contact at SOS. Other suggestions were Sir Harry Secombe and Erik Sykes.
AC AC to check induction loop at Forum
ADVANCE PUBLICITY
It was agreed that Bob Scott should be asked if his Press Bl Officer would assist with the publicity especially with local contacts.
SG SG would write to Raphael Gonley to keep North West Arts -i^ informed of progress. It was important to put advertisements in one or two local magazines, such as MANCHESTER MAGAZINE, ARTS MAGAZINE, and perhaps ask Eddie Shah to give a write-up in the Manchester edition of TODAY.
KR/AC Councillor Robinson agreed to send a list of local organisations to be notified. AC will send Councillor Robinson and Peter Senior a list of all the Manchester addressees.
AC AC to send 50 copies of preliminary programme to all Committee members and 100 copies to Peter Senior 7. LOGO
EE The Committee were delighted with the logo and notepaper (s) design and wished to write and congratulate Alan Howard. EE to write to Alan Howard asking for a rough quote to prepare the following: EE/AH a) Display header boards at Owens Park (30) b) Directional signs round Owen's Park (12) c) 2 banners for use at Palace Theatre, Owens Park, Wbltworth Art Gallery and the Forum with conference title d) 2 banners for use at Palace Theatre, Owens Park, Whitworth Art Gallery and the Forum with slogan EE Carrier bags (Incorporating advertising), T shirts etc.
EE 8. It was noted that the Institute for Health Services Management Annual Conference in Buxton in June might be an opportunity for distributing conference leaflet. EE to contact their organiser
9. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
AP As there had been no response from Equal Opportunities to our request for a member for the committee, Councillor Robinson and Peter Senior asked the office to write to them again to suggest that a member of the Disabled Steering Group might be put forward as a liaison with local groups to make sure that all were informed.
SG 10. SG will write to to the Carnegie Council with suggestions should there a surplus of funds.
11. WORKSHOPS Day 1 2 at 2.15-4.00 4 at 4.15-5.30 Day 2 2 at 9.00-10.45 4 at 11.15-1.15 2 at 2.15-3.30
EE EE to circulate list of possible workshops to committe members for comments, additions, deletions etc.
12. FLOWERS
AC AC to arrange for flowers to be supplied by the Parks Dept at Owens Park.
13. TOWN HALL DI8PLAY AP The display being prepared by the Carnegie Council for use at Westminster Palace will be on show in the Town Hall before and during the conference.
14. EXPBB8B8 FOR HBLPBB8
To avoid confusion, EE was asked to write to all organisers EE indicating that helpers if necessary would be given free registration, accommodation and travel expenses - maximum of 4 per session. Offer of expenses to be sent out by CC.
15. NEXT MEBTING has been arranged for Tuesday 13th May at 11am at the Palace Theatre. Manchest.pr © ar THEWAYAHEADroRTHEARTS&PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES- MANCHESTER 22-24 SEPT1986
Conference Co-ordinator: Elizabeth East Nuffield Lodge Conference Administrator: Alan Courtney Regent's Park 14 April 1986 London NW1 4RS Tel: 01 -586 0383
Councillor K Robinson Chair Social Services Manchester City Council Town Hall Albert Square MANCHESTER
Dear Councillor Robinson Congratulations on jour recent election as Chair of Manchester City Council. Thank you so much for the work you are doing on our behalf in Manchester in promoting the Conference ARTABILITY. Elizabeth East tells me that things are coming together very well. One matter vrtiich .is concerning ma however, is the lack of local disabled official representation on the Conference Sub-Ccmmittee. I am writing to you about this because I know that you too believe it to be very important and also because you may be able to advise ms on who to contact about this at this stage. In spite of repeated efforts, I have not been able to elicit a response frcm the Equal Opportunities Department. I enclose copies of all my unanswered letters. Am I perhaps writing to the wrong department, or is there some other reason for the lack of response? I look forward to hearing frcm you.
Best wishes
ANNE PEARSON Administrator CARNEGIE COUNCIL
ENCS
. Conference Committee Chairman: Simon Goodenough Under the auspices of the Carnegie Council for Arts and Disabled People Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson, Vice Chairman: Robert Scott, Secretary: Geoffrey Lord, Patron: Sir Richard Attenborough City of Manchester
Social Services Department P 0 Box 536 Town Hall Extension Manchester M60 2AF Telephone 061-23>^- SCOC Miss I Walton Telex: 667149 (Corp Manchester) Director of Social Services
Your reference This matter is being dealt with by Our reference KTR/AD/4a/W Councillor Robinson Date 15th April, 1986. 061-234 3887 (own number)
Dear Terry,
Please can you let me know if any action has been taken in relation to the Disabled Steering Group representative so that I can reply to the attached correspondence.
Yours sincerely,
Chair - Social Services Committee
Terry Day, EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES UNIT.
-\ \ \- ^7 f$V.'»tf>S& Qs)
Councillor Robinson Terry Day Equal Opportunities Unit
P/TD 3252 2 May 1986
ARTABILITY CONFERENCE
I enclose a copy of a letter which I have Just sent to Anne Pearson, which I hope will resolve the situation, and should answer your query.
Mary's death and Sue's sickness have been major difficulties. The lack of acknowledgement remains, however, inexcusable and I will see we lighten up on procedures for dealing with mail.
Eno Q-
.;304Tl)PPO925/ls '.la Anne Pearson Administrator P/TD/SN Carnegie Council 1st Hay, 1936 Nuffield Lodge Ke-ent's Park Sue dapolitano London NW1 4RS 3258
Oanr lis Pearson tUfABILITY COWf-:;R-UCrJ
Tour letter of 14th April to Couucillor Robinson, rejarlins the laci. of local disabled representation 0:1 the Conference Sub-Co__ittii
The reason for thi3 diacoiirteay lias been the criaia staffing level of tua Disabled People's Section of the Unit - with only ouu .ro rtcer available for uuch of the period since Ueccubar, 1935 (out of a poujiJle 3). ,,'iiiie not la auy way wishing to iuply that no acknowledgement of letters is acceptable, T a.a jure you will appreciate the difficulties faced by the one reoiainin;j worker, in addition to having to cope with the eaotional stress caused oy ilacy Elatow's death.
Your request to the Disabled People's Stearlng Group will be put to their next meeting and I will inform you of the outcome. In the meantime, if you would like to forward minutes of meetings and detallv of progress so far, I will ensure that the relevant officers are kept up-to- date.
Once again, please accept my apologies for the delay in dealing with your request.
Yours sincerely •- T" A-/ /-' MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL / INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM FROM TO Q The Town Clerk
See Distribution List Bel ow
YOUR REF. OUR REF. TEL. EXTN. NO. DATE A/BDK 3044 29 April 1986
ARTABILITY 1986 x__t__?The above is a -hichconferenceis io°ki-*"which will*• be-j^^t^i^held in this Citv fmm oo <•„ o„ __ The City Council is giving a civic reception at the Whitworth Art Gall*™ on the evening of Monday, 22 September, next, for the approximately 400 __2__... T^T,?TCtedTown Hall becauseVof itsPreSent'better disabledThiS Venueaccess.has been^reed rather ?han the I shall let you have further details as they become available.
(&W \C\("jJbJ kl.e
J'o/^-t
Distribution
Chair of the Council's Secretary Acting Public* Relations Officer Town Clerk's Secretary (/Deputy Town Clerk's Secretary Leader's Secretary Members * Secretariat Assistant Ceremonies Officer
For information
Director of Social Services
s^ To all members of the Conference 1986 Planning Sub-Committee Simon Goodenough (Chairman) Bob Scott Councillor Robinson Peter Senior Anne Pearson Alan Courtney Gordon Infield Elizabeth East Chris Davies Alan Howard Rod Fisher John Evans Daphne Kennard Denis Coe Geoffrey Lord Julia Finlay - Edinburgh Representative - Equal Opportunities, Manchester Representative - Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People
AGENDA FOR MEETING AT THE CIRCLE BAR, PALACE THEATRE, MANCHESTER ON TUESDAY MAY 13th at 11am.
1. Welcome to Julia Finlay from Edinburgh, a representative from Equal Opportunities and a representative from the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People
2. PROGRESS REPORTS Palace Theatre afternoon - Bob Scott to report 7 groups and individuals have been invited to take part in the afternoon. A decision is still awaited from Buckingham Palace as to whether Princes Charles will be able to attend. The Committee has been in touch with Manchester Festival about a possible concert of the artistes on Sunday September 21st (Bob Scott to report).
Whitworth Art Gallery Manchester City Council has kindly agreed to host the evening at the Gallery. Catering will be through Manchester University. Should music still be considered as part of the evening? It will be very expensive to move a piano into the Gallery, and it is not proving easy to find a group with a disabled player, which does not require a piano. .
Wythenshawe Eveningl(Peter Senior to report) It would be nice to have a celebrity for the evening to act as compere. Sir Harry Secombe is unfortunately unable to attend. An approach has been made to Eric Sykes, and other possibilities might be Leslie Crowther, Terry Scott, Roy Kinnear.
I
a „ 2.
3. Workshops, Displays (Attachment A) 12 individuals and organisations have been approached to organise workshops. These will last lj hrs and will be held in the common rooms which have an audience capacity of about 30-40. Some workshops will have to run concurrently with the sessions. „ V ,1
22 organisations have asked to mount displays. These will be on boards in the foyer, common rooms, and main hall. We are still looking for more displays boards, if anyone knows of a source.
4. Subsidies (Attachment B) •Qi^f^ Special concessionary rates are being offered to .,;/''V/sN participants who will not be in full time employment in (Cv'r, i. -September. Is this however still too high for unemployed V>i •• •4^^ people and should a special fund be set up? It would be V-V'V' c'•' \ • ]" n impossible, to subsidize an individual for attending as it would v.'- '>•'' •> t\ \$ N'involve all kinds of means testing. However, it could be ;j^\'• i- -\.0'J offered to voluntary organisations who are not in receipt of ,' } •.. " grant aid.
\C- Gala Day - In order to fill the Palace Theatre, should we consider advertising locally through organisations offering free or reduced tickets? This could be done in July/August by which time we should know the number of paying customers.
A £2,000 grant has been received from Marks and Spencers
5. Video There are two possibilities for the use of video a) Making a video film of the two days of the conference b) Providing videos to be included in the Gala afternoon Chris Davis to report ,-r '-->--•?_: 2, i » < ,> v soy? -• >A-"•*--• s
6. Art Exhibition -jr, .5 % <; i,'-;s v- John Evans has now heard from the Corner House who cannot a v^° .offer any of the formal exhibition space for our proposed tfJs/y\jJ^- e-hibition by disabled artists. Sue Grayson Ford, the \-CfiJ' t,exhibition organiser, has suggested the Education Office for a w, 6C N^tjemporary display of material to coincide with the conference, \30^ \ ur^ ^Ut lt is tnou8ht that this might make the exhibition look (A ryPP U».i£?cond Dest- Should we abandon this idea? H vrfS^, 7' Final Session - 'Where do we go from here?' a»^ V(T It will be important to find a suitable chairman for this 0° JL session -someone who will need to be aware of the policies \S» X developed throughout the conference and able to lead the pA * discussion 'what happens now?' - Any suggestions? 3.
he following have been invited
Ministers: Mr Richard Luce, Minister for the Arts (unable to attend) Mr Tony Newton, Minister for the Disabled (no reply)
Arts Council: William Rees-Mogg) Luke Rittner )unable to attend Brian Rix ) Anthony Everitt Mon/Tues only Suggested replacements: Elizabeth Thomas - Arts Council Trustee Robert Woo^f - Vice chairman, Drama Committee
Government Departments (verbally invited) Bob Dunn - Under Parliamentary Secretary for Education Ian Lang - Under Parliamentary Secretary for Employment
Anne will send a follow-up letter to all Ministers approached through the Attenborough Report
9. Bannners, directional 'signs, display board headers The cost of printing display header boards with the logo is about £100 with the name of the organisation being extra. It is suggested that we only print the organisation name to save costs.
The cost of a banner 3'xl2' is about £55. Again it is •> suggested that we have only two banners, one with the XJ? ARTABILITY logo and wording, and the other with the wording •vJ"\ff agreed at the previous meeting ^A} Celebration of Ability1./>y*\&/ These two banners could be on display at the Palace Theatre and^t1' then moved to the Main Hall at Owens.Park for Day 2 and 3.
Directional signs - these will be provided by Owens Park
10.2nd Mailing Is this necessary or should we aim at the Gala afternoon? Alan Courtney to give a progress report on bookings and an estimate of cost for a 2nd conference mailing and a mailing for the Gala afternoon only.
11 Future Meetings
YO1*1
VVS- ^M n: CARNEGIE COUNCIL ^.St Arts and Disabled People '"^i! 19 May 1986 London NW1 4RS Administra^oj^ng^ MEETING - ARTABILITY Telephone: 01-586 0383
I enclose the notes of the meeting held last Tuesday 13 May and the outline notes of Item 16» Any suggestions please to Peter Senior at: MANCHESTER HOSPITALS ARTS PROJECT, THE ARTS CENTRE, ST MARY'S HOSPITAL, HATHERSAGE ROAD, MANCHESTER, M13 OJH Tel 061 276 6350.
With Compliments CONFERENCE SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING - ARTABILITY TIME 11 am Tuesday 13th May 1986 m VENUE PALACE THEATRE, MANCHESTER
PRESENT . Simon Goodenough (Chairman) Bob Scott Councillor Robinson Peter Senior Anne Pearson Alan Courtney Gordon Infield Elizabeth East Chris Davies accompanied by David Slater Alan Howard Daphne Kennard Linda Waugh (Equal Opportunities, Manchester) Judith Holman (Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People)
ACTION
1. PALACE THEATRE AFTERNOON Nick Hytner has been asked to be Director for the afternoon, but cannot yet confirm his acceptance. Still no decision from HRH Prince Charles. All performers have confirmed acceptance (Ian Dury still provisional). An additional act might be the Unicorn Theatre Co. Bob Scott Bob Scott to speak to the company.
Speakers: It was felt important that HRH should attend. Sir Richard Attenborough has been asked to invite him on our behalf and we hope he will be successful.
Interspersed with the 4 keynote speeches from Sir Richard Attenborough, HRH (?), the Minister for the Disabled and the Arts Council it is hoped to have about 6 incendiary speeches from the floor covering a wide variety of subjects. Suggested speakers are Nabil Shaban, David Blunkett, Everyone Daphne Payne. Any further suggestions to AP.
Wheelchairs Only a limited number of wheelchairs can be accommodated Bob Scott in the Palace Theatre - the maximum approx. 30-40. Bob Scott to check with the fire officers. In any publicity for the Day this must be carefully worded, explaining the limitation. Priority for wheelchair space must be given to delegates attending all three days of the conference.
Guide Dogs Guide dogs are allowed into the Theatre
Loop hearing system Available in the Theatre 2. ACTION CONCERT. SUNDAY EVENING (W Manchester Festival have agreed to include the concert in their programme. ARTABILITY should send to the Festival a EE/BS/SG letter confirming the concert and within the next fortnight copy of 100 words, artists and prices etc. for inclusion in the main programme. All the groups have agreed to take part (Ian Pury provisional) with the exception of Graeae (but they will be performing Monday afternoon at the 'Gala')
Posters/leaflet Details will be needed within the next 2 months
Cost The Palace Theatre will underwrite the concert, hopefully with a grant from the City Council. Any profit could go to Artability.
2. IBITWORTH AET GALLERY Manchester City Council have kindly agreed to host the evening, and have made arrangements with the University Caterers to provide a finger buffet with wine and soft drinks. A finger buffet is however not substantial enough EE and EE will talk to the caterers with a view to a subsidy of say £1-2 per head for extra food.
Following a visit to the Gallery by EE and Daphne Kennard it was agreed to have music in the North Gallery. EE EE to invite Kate Elmitt and John Railton piano duo to perform and to investigate the cost of hiring a piano - possibly through the University Music Department.
Invitation Cards Town Hall/EE/ approx. 400 to be printed. AC Signs A number of signs will be necessary, such as 'Quiet, AH/EE/AC Please'.
1YTHBNSHAWE
The Chair of Leisure Services Committee has kindly agreed to waive the charge for the hire of the Forum. An evening of fun and entertainment plus up to 50 static displays.
Proposed programme 7pm Drinks in the foyer 7.30pm Buffet nightclub-style in the main Hall with the emphasis on health food. Musical accompaniment (lhr) 9.30-10.30pm Cabaret (3-6 events)
Celebrity It is hoped to invite a celebrity to the evening. Eric Sykes has been approached. Another possiblity is Mike Harding (Patron, NW Shape) ACTION m 4. SECOND MAILING It is hoped that a second mailing for the conference will not be necessary. However , a special mailing for EE/AC the Gala Day in late June is important. Mailing lists should be checked and individual letters from Sir Kenneth(?) sent to Directors/Chairmen of organisations and local authorities inviting them to attend or to send a representative. We will try to obtain the GLC mailing list used for the Local Authorities and Disability Conference last February.
5. WORKSHOPS
EE/PS If there is no response from the Polka Children's Theatre Co. there are several local puppet groups who could be asked.
6. VIDEO
An estimate of cost for videoing all three days is £5,045. This money cannot be taken from the conference funds, and Chris Davies agreed to see if money could be CD found from other sources such as Concord. It is still important to clarify how the video could be distributed once made and edited, and to ensure that any filming would not disturb the sessions. Permission would also need to be obtained from all the performers.
7. SUBSIDIES
An additional subsidy could be available on request from AC individuals, provided they attach themselves to a disabled organisation. These extra subsidies would not be advertised. Full conference from £40 to £30 Three days (non residential) from £25 to £20 Daily (non residential) from £10 to £7.50
8. ART EXHIBITION AT THE CORNERHOUSE
Agreed to abandon this idea as suitable space was not available and preparation time too short.
9. DISPLAYS AT OWENS PARK
These should be open to the general public and local AC disability organisations. AC to check with Owens Park that they have no objection.
10. DISPLAY AT THE TOWN HALL
AP/EE This should be in the Town Hall for two weeks preceding GI the conference. GI will transport the display to Owens Park KR during the weekend. KR agreed to make the necessary booking arrangments with the Town Hall. 4. ACTION
11. VIPs @
AP a) Mr Tony Newton - to be contacted again?
AP b) Rod Fisher to be asked for names to replace Art? Council reps who cannot attend
EE c) John Oliver of Gateway to be asked for list of local MPs
AP/EE d) Is there another MP to replace Mr Luce?
AP/EE e) Invite: Alf Morris Lord Rhodes of Saddleworth (President of NW Shape)
12. BANNBRS
It was noted that any banner across the street would need EE to be quite sizeable. EE to ask the Palace Theatre about hanging banners inside or outside the Theatre, and the City Council about banners across the street.
13. FINAL SESSION
Important to find a good Chairman and/reporter. Suggestions: Kevin Mulhearn Rosalie Wilkins Dr John Roberts Bob Scott Peter Cox Dr Ken Robinson
Preference should be given to a speaker with a Everyone disability. Further suggestions to be sent to AP or EE
The final session should be longer - 4.00-5.15pm to make time available for plans for future action.
14. SMALLER MEETINGS
Smaller meetings will be held during the next few months, with a final Sub-committee meeting in early August. Notes of meetings will be circulated to the sub-committee. Chris Davies asked to be kept informed of the Gala Day.
15. PRESS
It would be helpful to have a local press officer. A EE number of organisations could be approached for help - Town Hall, N.W. Arts, Regional Health Authority, Palace Theatre, local COI.
PS 16. LAUNCH OF COMPETITION BY RBGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITY The RHA are keen to launch a competition at the conference. PS to circulate some outline notes to the sub-committee. ARTABILITY - CONFERENCE 1986 $>
Dr. John Roberta {North Western Regional Health Authority) has suggested that as part of the health authority's contribution to the Conference he would like to promote and sponsor financially (possibly £5,000) for a competition and/or Festival in 1987 with the theme 'ARTS FOR HEALTH'. If more money was needed he would look for additional sponsorship.
The range of visual and performing arts and crafts as listed in the Attenborough Report i.e. dance, drama, film, puppetry, music, mime, move ment, story-telling, drawing, painting, sculpture, pottery, photography, literature, should he suggests be reflected in this Festival.
His idea is that such a competition for the best examples in each art and craft form would be the basis for a Festival, which should be "piloted" in the North West, and if successful might become a national event possibly with the support* of the Health Education Council.
Dr. Roberts believes .that the practical details concerned with mount ing, organizing and presenting such an event can be overcome, but is anxious to receive comments through roe about the principles for such an event which are:-
1. Should the Competition/Festival be open to professionals or amateurs ?
2. Is it possible to involve both in some way ?
3. Should it be limited to disabled artists or should it be for all ?
A. Could it involve schools ?
5. Could it be for arts students ? 6. Is it possible to prepare a brief for such an event ready for launching/announcing it at the Artability Conference in September ? 7. Assuming that it would need a Competition/Festival organizer to be employed, do you know anyone who might be interested ?
I would very much welcome your thoughts on these ideas within the next three weeks or the money will not be available for such an event. \tsCr ruin«G- (q)
SPASTICS SOCIETY
It was reported that a request had been received from ALPHA, the North West Advisory Group of the Spastics Society on Cerebral Palsy, to be represented on the Steering Group.
David Whitehead was welcomed as the representative.
RECREATIONAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES WORKING PARTY
A report from Ron Goulden was circulated. He asked the Steering Group for suggestions on how to solve the problems which faced deaf people who wish to book facilities.
It was agreed that the Recreational Services Department be requested to arrange ki meeting with the deaf community to seek their views.
•3» J^V-V. I0 ARTABILITY CONFERENCE
Details of the Conference were circulated.
It was reported that the conference organising committee had requested the Steering Group to be represented at their meetings. An officer had attended their meeting the previous day, from which it appeared that the conference was to be aimed at able bodied professionals involved in the arts, with minimal involvement of disabled people.
It was felt that in the conference programme the view was heavily emphasised that art was therapeutic to disabled people, but presumably not to the able bodied, and that It helps people to feel "happy" when institutionalised.
Concern was also expressed about the fact that the conference has already been planned in great detail without significant input from disabled people, and that the Palace Theatre was not a suitable venue because of poor accessibility and lack of parking facilities for the disabled.
After considerable discussion it was agreed that the Chair, Deputy or an officer should attend the next organisational meeting and report back on the proposals 1 for the Conference, and that the organising committee be requested to attend the next meeting of the Steering Group to talk about the Conference.
The importance of working closely with the Greater Manchester Coalition was stressed.
CONVERSION OP TAXIS FOR WHEELCHAIR-ROUND PASSENGERS
A report of the Director of Environmental Health was circulated. It was reported that a visit wan to take place to inspect the modified ver.slon of the taxi, and that thi> Steering Group had been requested to be represented.
It was agreed that Ken Lumb, Paul Mlttler and an officer be nominated.
GRANT APPLICATION - UNION OF THE PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED AGAINST SEGREGATION / A report of the Town Clerk was circulated. / It was agreed that the Equal Opportunities Committee be.recommended/ to approve V- the application for starter and publicity grants, totalling £400.
GREATER MANCHESTER COALITION OF DISABLED PEOPLE/ MANCHESTER DISABILITY FORUM - OPEN DAY / Details of the Open Day, to be held on 21st September, 1986, were circulated.
It was agreed that the Steering Group's support be given to the event.
HOUSING AND DISABILITY WORKSHOP
A report of the Town Clerk was circulated.
Ken Lumb commented that the Greater Manchester Housing and Disability Group had been looking at this issue for several years, but had not been consulted about the workshop. There had been problems with access to the workshop venue, so the Group had been represented ,by an able bodied person only. It was not, however, made clear that the workshop would result in policy changes being made without further consultations,/and the content of the workshop also gave cause for concern. It was agree'/=- / '\ (a) that/the Joint Consultative Committee be requested, in future, to refer any reports regarding disabled people to this Steering Group before they are referred to the Committees for implementation, so that the views of disabled people are gained first; (b)/ that the Joint Consultative Committee and Service Committees be requested to defer consideration of the report pending full consultation with disabled people; / (c) that the Town Clerk be requested to investigate the possibility of the / Steering Group being represented on the Joint Consultative Committee; and ® BCODP MEETING - LONDON 17th, MAY, 1986.
GMCDP was represented by Kevin Hyett and Neville Strowger. Main points that will concern the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People (GMCDP) and may need Council decision.
1. The Derbyshire CIL representative raised the issue of lack of BCODP in the regions after much discussion, and in order to move things on, the GMCDP representatives offered to host the next BCODP Council meeting in Manchester, providing BCODP's involvemenc in the regions is placed on the agenda. This was warmly welcomed, the date being 12th, July, 1986. (Saturday).
2. The date for the BCODP AGM is 20th, September, 1986, and will be organised by the London groups (venue not necessarily in London).
3. Concern was raised by many delegates from London regarding the rtability conference to be held at Owen's Park in Manchester during September, 1986. It was agreed to mandate all member groups to boycott and picket this conference. GMCDP were asked would they co-ordinate the demo as the conference is unfortunately being held in their area. AGREED.
4. Several nations have put in a bid to host the next Disabled People's International (D.P.I.) World Congress. BCODP are putting in a bid for the Congress to be held at Birmingham N.E.C. Member groups that met Henry Enns were requested to canvas on behalf of BCODP.
5. Discussion took place regarding individual membership of BCODP and associate membership for groups like Disabled Living Foundation (DLF). After much discussion it was agreed that delegates should canvas the opinion of their groups ready for the next meeting. If reaction is favourable, constitutional amendments will be proposed at the AGM.
N.B. It must be noted that no refreshment of any kind was offered at this meeting.
(signed) A very dry.
Nev and Kev. _ 6 _ Cor*)/-1-noa/ ^nut« dp Funding & posts continued b) Development Worker - This position has not yet been filled. It was felt that the advertisement should possibly be put into major disability journals this time.
c) Admin, job description - A copy of this had been circulated, Ken asked the meeting if anyone had any questions about this or were not happy with any of the items in it. None were put forward. A contract of employment would be worked on for Thelma.
6) Artability Conference.
There were doubts about the venues for this conference. Judith had been to the last meeting and felt that all the decisions had already been made before that meeting. It was felt that the conference was directed at local authorities not disabled. Equal Opportunities and the Coalition to work together on this. The Coalitions representative at the last BCODP meeting in London said that some of the groups in London are against involvement with Artability, in fact as the conference is being held in our area it was suggested that the Coalition co-ordinate the protest, this was referred to in part 3 of the report of the BCODP meeting circulated previous to tonights meeting. It was felt that the Coalition and Equal Opportunities Unit were being used by having their representatives names on the list of people attending the 'Artability' meetings. Judith said she felt that it should not happen at all or it should be picketed. The meeting agreed that the Coalition should find out about the opposition in London and enter into discussions with BCODP, co-ordinate response with other disability groups in line with BCODP. Someone would be needed to co-ordinate the protest. From the Coalition it would be Kevin, Judith, Ian and Ken and from the D.P. Steering Group, Bernard.
7) Report - BCODP meeting 17th. May, 1986. A copy of this report had been circulated. In section I it was mentioned that the Coalition reps, had offered to host the next BCODP meeting on 12th, July, 1986 in Manchester. A suitable venue would be found and BCODP notified as soon as possible so that they in turn could notify all members. Refreshments would be arranged. Kevin, Neville and Thelma to work on this. Referring to part 5 of the report, the meeting felt that there should be no associate membership for groups e.g. Disabled Living Services - non-disabled controlled groups. This would be the Coalition decision given at the next meeting, the motion being made by Lorraine and seconded by Bernard.
8) A.G.M. - Open Day Venue? A suggestion had been made that possibly the AGM could be held on the same day as the Open Day first thing in the morning. Members at the meeting were asked to think about this idea.
cont inued GflKDP
Greater Manchester Anson Road Manchester M14 5BY Coalition of Disabled People Tel 061 224 2722
18th , June, 1986.
Rachel Hurst, Chairperson, BCODP , Yeoman House , 76, St. James's Lane, LONDON, N10 3DF.
Dear Rachel Hurst, We were contacted this week by Anne Pearson of the Carnegie Council about an emergency meeting in Manchester on Friday 20th June to discuss problems arising with the organ isation of the 'Artability' weekend in September. During the course of these conversations she read out a letter she had sent to you as Chairperson of BCODP. We were particularly disturbed at the inference made in the letter that the GMCDP and the Manchester Equal Opportunities Unit, Disabled Peoples Section, were support ing the Artability conference and events. As far as GMCDP are concerned we would like to make it absolutely clear that we are not involved in the Artability Committee, nor do we want to be associated with any decisions taken by the committee. We sent observers to their Artability meeting on the 13th. May who made their status quite clear. The GMCDP observer further informed the committee that she could not commit GMCDP to any involvement until she had reported back. At the GMCDP meeting at which we received this re port we also had a report about Artability from our representative on BCODP. After considering both these reports in some depth, we decided to actively oppose the conference and events, in line with the decision taken at the BCODP meeting. The Equal Opportunities Disabled Peoples Sttering Group will be meeting next week to consider its response. We thought you should be aware of these strong feelings about 'Artability' which exist in Greater Manchester(and which we believe have been echoed in the London area). No doubt there will be further discussion about Artability at the July meeting of BCODP in Manchester and we look forward to meeting you there. Yours sincerely,
-_.->«£•.• *t /s (mwcwvi Ljeetif!
Chairperson, Chairperson, n;-ihi..i p • CMC DP
CARNEGIE COUNCIL ,_»rfSS_K Arts and Disabled People *^£££t£3l London NW1 4RS Administrator: Anne Pearson Telephone: 01-586 0383
30 June 1986
The Carnegie Council learned with regret of the intention of the Greater Manchester Coalition of disabled people to boycott the Artability Conference. This will deny many people the opportunity to participate in important discussion on this topic and will have unfortunate longer-term consequences which could mitigate against the involvement of people with disabilities in arts activities. The Council understands and respects the aims of the Greater Manchester Coalition; and especially its objection to the choice of the Palace Theatre for the public event. The Council wished to use the Theatre as an example of the need for change and to create the opportunity for improvement in accessibility. It was also providing the opportunity iter a number of artists with disabilities to perform in an important theatrical venue on two occasions', which was unlikely to have occurred otherwise. Recognising the difficulties in acceptance of this venue by mentoers of the Coalition and others; the Council is willing to change the venue even though the opening event of the Conference will then have less significance. Such a change would need to be on the understanding that the Greater Hanchester Coalition and related groups withdraw their opposition to the Conference. To encourage your representatives to participate in the events and discussions; the Council will invite six guests from the Greater Manchester Coalition and three frcm the British Council free to the Artability Conference. Following the Conference; the Carnegie Council will be very pleased to Uiscuss with Officers of the British Council of Organisations of Disabled People about the future of this work.
GEOFFREY LORD Secretary
Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson Vice Chairman: Robert Scott Secretary: Geoffrey Lord Patron: Sir Richard Attenborough ,.(.',- j\)L\98& ®
Flat 4, St. Francis Flats, Ms. L. Gradwell, Bridgeway Street, GMCODP, London. 11 Anson Rd., NW1 1QT. Manchester. M14 5BY.
1st. July 1986.
Dear Ms. Gradwell,
After telephone conversations with Ken Lumb and Bernard Leech, I am writing to advocate reasons why Artability, despite its faults, should go ahead. I hope that this will be made available to other members of the Coalition so that they may have the opportunity to know all the arguments involved.
I have been involved with the Planning Group for the Artability event since the beginning of the year. My first meeting was only the second of the Group, and no major decisions had been taken previously. The reason for asking me to be a member was not immediately apparent, but has since been explained to me. The Carnegie Trust only involves anyone in its activities purely on their expertise in the area being discussed. In the two years prior to the publishing of The Attenborough Report and in the subsequent period of The Carnegie Council, the area being discussed was the arts and disability, not just disability. Therefore, I was invited because of my television experience and my involvement with Fair Play: Campaign for Equal Opportunities in the Arts for People with disabilities, and not simply because I have cerebral palsy. This is not to say that my disability was not a criterion, but on its own it would not have been sufficient for my inclusion in the Planning Group. In my opinion, this is perfectly fair since the area being discussed was of a specialist nature. To do otherwise would have risked people talking on subjects about which they had no knowledge, or taking up valuable time bringing up general topics irrelevant to the business being undertaken. My first reaction when I attended these meetings was dismay that I was apparently the only person with a disability in the Group. Appearances, though, can be misleading. Invitations had been sent out to other people with disabilities. The first disabled person who had been a member of the Group tragically died, but even before this happened others had been invited. For different reasons these invitations were either turned down or left unanswered. However, the ratio of disabled people to able-bodied people was never deliberately minimised. If efforts to rectify an imbalance are unsuccessful because of a lack of response, this should not rebound on those who are actually trying to put things right. &
If my information is correct, Coalition members are not familiar with the work of The Carnegie Council, and yet an understanding of this is vital to realising how Artability acquired the structure it now has. The Carnegie Trust financed and organised a two year enquiry into the arts and disabled people. The findings of this enquiry were published in the book known as The Attenborough Report. The Report is not perfect and it does not examine the wider political context in which any aspects of disability should be placed, but within the narrow remit which governed the enquiry it is the most comprehensive and potentially most far reaching document on the subject. To ensure that its recommendations were not lost, the Trust set up The Carnegie Council. The Council's sole job is to monitor and promote the recommendations of The Attenborough Report. Since the Council has a limited life, which will end in December of this year, the event now known as Artability was seen as the culmination of this work. The conference, in common with the rest of the Council's work, is solely based on The Attenborough Report's recommendations. The members of the Council are not permitted to look any further than these boundaries and the Planning Group was always clear about this limitation on their own work. As it happens, I am not particularly interested in some aspects of the area covered by Carnegie eg. arts therapy. Nevertheless, for some people with disabilities therapy by some form of art is important and valuable. I also happen to think that some wider political aspects (eg. anti-discrimination legislation) are germaine in obtaining equal opportunities for disabled people in the arts. And this is not part of Artability or The Carnegie Council's remit. Nevertheless, personal likes and dislikes are of little significance if the sum total of what is being attempted by Artability is worth doing. Artability is in two parts. I hope I have explained the rationale governing the subjects being discussed at Owen's Park. The reasoning behind the Palace Theatre day was aligned to the overall objective of assessing the progress of The Attenborough Report recommendations, but nevertheless was slightly different. It was intended primarily as a celebration of the abilities of artists with disabilities. Rather than confining the event to talking shops which can become abstract, arid and boring. The Palace day was intended to provide positive, undeniable proof that given the right opportunities artists with disabilities had talents which must be tapped. The question which has to be asked is: "To whom is this argument addressed?"
We as people with disabilities surely need no convincing of this fact whatsoever. But then disabled people are not in positions of authority which can provide opportunities in the arts. We are not in charge of theatres etc. We are not fire officers or local authority licensing personnel. These are the people who need to be convinced. Artability was never about preaching to the (^converted, more about CONVERTING. Therefore, the target audience >for the Palace was, in the majority, able-bodied people. «:r»0OO»r-»O"O>H»M « H- POO © 3" M CO O O © H- Mi o> a> C rr S cr 3 mi < rr Mi c ~J O 3 rr rr 0 0*3 rrrnflH-QOOH] 0 n x 0) 0 o»a>r««H»—;h- 'O 3 CO C H- H- 0 3 fl a 1 0 rr rr rr rr © 0» rr r| H- 01 H- Ql rr Qt H- rr O U. tl O B H- It J • ••< CD*< H> O c © 0) © t-1 © rr h- © 0 3 Qi O M © rt • *D 3" h- Qi to rr 3 hi 0 3- 1-1 3 rr*< © 0 © a> at 3 c © -on 3 3 O € Qi 3- X CO a ho • rr TD Qj Qi Q> 0 3 H- X O H- © O 0 3 TJ h- rr © h- rr »< • «• O" C rr«Q O K to M O 0) rt Qt Oi © © rr «0 © • cr c © ?!* rr © rr CflCCO 3MIH-03" h- rt rr h- iQ -h-Cdh- rro*0 < rr < H« X* to 3 ~J 3 « «o 1- O 0> O TJ H* O* CO © 0 3- 0 © »a CD CO to 0 CO © •< 3 Ot 3" rr rr 50 h- © Oi SHOiTH-OCVStr 0) H- tj rr rr H- © © Mi 3 T) © OB^ rr H* O O H- r| rr O < to CO "O O iQ rt rr O O Ot 3 0) < 3 O < "< H- 10 H- - CO a c 3 © 3* • < 0 •< H" 0 C *• © Qi r3 a © CO Qi 3* h- 0 © H- H- © H- O H- rr rt 3 O O CO © O « 3 rr 3 © 3 0> 3 © © *0 € O © *0 rr Qi O 3*^ rt © H- 01 3 Ml 3 O O" Qi 3 \Q 3 rr h- rr rt w © 3 ttHMi 01 00007 • Oi Z. QiiQ 00 M H- O O • H» ftHC © rr h- Mi rr rr C 3 Hi Oi 3 O to O © © H"< < H-rrttfC- oro W- 0» © rr crc Mi © rr C Ml © rr 3"< 3 H- 0> < 3 CO © »< rr n h-iq rr Mi rt •< h- © rr 3 rr "o n'H 3 r/rtc a O © rr O 3" H H - 3" © - •OrtH 3* O 0> £ rr • Mi O O rr © rr CD Qj c Mi 0 3 Qi 3* < © O QirfD O 0 3" 3 © CO rt € to rr Mi © rr at 3 O Oi 3 1 Oi Ot O u> © e- 3 3" O CO O Qi'O © O 3 H- £ 3-10 Qi h- rr 3 S rr K H- Qi © 3- 3 3 > r3 O M 3" M 3 © rr co iQ hi rt OT3 CO O © © n © rt O H- rt H- h- H a H O 3
Able-bodied people do have good intentions occasionally. The particular individuals who run The Carnegie Council and Artabilty have managed to create an event which is unique and massive in its scale. It has its faults and it can (and should) be criticised. But criticism is one thing. Destruction is anotherl Unless a similar project can be undertaken by organisations run by disabled people, to remove Artability without putting anything in its place would be very, very wrong.
Finally, can I just state my motives for writing this? Approximately two weeks ago, I arranged to see Anne Pearson, the Carnegie Council Administrator, to see how things were progressing in the arrangements for the conference. When she told me of the crisis that had arisen between the Coalition and the Council over Artability, I volunteered to attempt to contribute my point of view.
If possible, I would be willing to come and contribute in person at the debate.
Yours sincerely,
'XoJju^ Sy
Chris Davies. BRIEF NOTES OF A MOTION PASSED BY THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES DISABLED PEOPLES
STEERING GROUP ON WED. 2nd. JULY.
RE.'ARTABILITY ' CONFERENCE.
1) The Disabled Peoples Steering Group opposes this conference on the grounds of:- a) Lack of involvement of disabled people from the start. b) Use of inaccessible venues. c) The philosophy of the conference 1) The Medical/Therapeutic model used 2) Orientated towards policy makers rather than disabled people.
2) The Disabled Peoples Steering Group calls upon the City Council to withdraw its support for the Artability Conference until such time as it meets the Disabled peoples Steering Group criteria for acceptability. ® _4rta a/**/ Disabled event bows to pressure
A conference entitled -Artability - the way ahead for the arts and people with disabilities" was due to be held in Manchester from 22nd to 24th September 1986. The event was organised by the Carnegie Council, a body set up to monitor and promote the recommendations of the Attenborough Report on the arts and disabled people. Over the last few months the conference became the centre of a qrowing controversy, as an increasing number of groups controlled by disabled people voiced their dismay at the way Artability was being organised. Other non-disabled groups condemned the conference, and Manchester City Council withdrew it's support for the event, also deploring the tactics employed by the organisers to persuade disabled groups to withdraw their opposition. With pressure growing from all sides, the Carnegie Council recently cancelled the conference, totally ignoring the option of postponing "Artability- pending proper consultation with local and national disability groups. So what issues were involved? Why did the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People object so strongly to certain aspects of the conference? What follows is a statement prepared shortly before the Carnegie Council's decision to cancel. It details the main areas of contention. f0 art - 3 - ©:- At a meeting of the Coalition General that the Palace is "possibly the best Council on Friday 4th July, the theatre in the land" and that it's followingmotion was passed unanimously: use would provide "the opportunity for a number of artists with disabilities G.M.C.D.P. opposes this conference to perform in an important theatrical on the grounds of: venue on two occasions, which was a) lack of involvement of disabled unlikely to have occurred otherwise". people from the outset; These are quite sweeping statements, wide open to contradiction, and b) use of inaccessible venues; we would argue that the fact that c) the philosophy of the conference, individual performances would be i.e. the medical and therapeutic forcibly trimmed (4 minutes per model used; artist has been mentioned) would hardly give performers much of d) orientation towards policy-makers a chance to make an impact. at the expense of disabled people. The second "reason" for using the Further, the .Coalition deplores the Palace, "as an example of the need tactics and pressures employed for change and to create the opportunity by the Carnegie Council in their for improvement in accessibility", efforts to persuade G.M.C.D.P. to is almost laughable. Access to withdraw its opposition. the Palace was described in a recent survey as "appalling". The ramped Are these criticisms valid, or side entrance presents a real physical is the Coalition indulging in an danger to anyone in a wheelchair, and execise of loischievous spoiling, to the 2 helpers who would be needed as has been implied? Let's examine to, overcome this obstacle. The the points more carefully. Carnegie Council anticipates that 1. Lack of involvement of disabled there will be some 30 wheelchair people. users at the event - Coalition members would prefer not to be used as It must be conceded that the Carnegie human guinea-pigs in order to prove Council did seek the involvement of organsations of disabled people an obvious point. at the outset. Mary Elstow was to Another access survey on Owen's Park have joined the conference planning describes the access as "poor, committee as a representative of as opposed to appalling". The disabled Manchester City Council's Equal toilets are situated a good 50 yards Opportunities Unit (Disabled People's from the bedrooms.. Section). However, Mary's tragic death 3. The philosophy of the conference. in a road accident at Christmas 1985, and the subsequent breakdown in The conference literature makes conniunications, meant that no-one several referenc_- to health and took Mary's place until May 1986, therapy, almost to the point of by which time the whole format had repetition. Of the 8 workshop topics, been devised and conference literature one is entitled "Health through prepared. The Coalition disagreed the 'arts" and another "The Arts as strongly with various aspects of the Therapy". This seems inappropriate format and philosophy of the event, in an age when many disabled people but by then all the important decisions are rejecting the medical mould had been made. in which they have been cast for so long by society. Worse still, 2. Use of inaccessible venues. no reference is made to the concept The Carnegie Council has proferred of arts as a vehicle for social a variety of reasons for using the ccnment and political persuasion, Palace Theatre as a venue for the issues of far greater relevence opening day of "Artability". to disabled people in Britain today. The most consistent arqument has been 4. Orientation towards policy-makers - 4 - (39 at the expense of disabled people. by the withdrawal of the Graeae Theatre Company, the only professional Several aspects of conference planning group of disabled actors and actresses point towards this. in Britain, frcm the conference. Firstly the use of the Palace Theatre. The Palace management offered the The "tactics and pressures" referred to have been subtle and persuasive, theatre free of charge for what they obviously saw as a prestigious and have been brought to bear on event. The Carnegie Council was quick all opponents of "Artability''. to accept, seeing the Palace as a The Carnegie Council has offered to prestigious venue for their conference. change the Palace venue to a more This preoccupation with "prestige" accessible theatre, and has offered appears to have taken precedence six free conference places to the over any consideration for the Coalition and three free places 30 or so disabled people who will to B.C.O.D.P. on condition that we have to endure grossly inadequate totally withdraw our opposition. facilities at the Palace. We have had to reply that the choice of the Palace theatre as a venue was The Owen's Park accommodation appears only one aspect of our objections. to have been selected for no other The Council have given no indication reason than its close proximity to the conference areas. No consideration that they would be prepared to has been given to the poor facilities address the more fundamental issues involved. for disabled people. The most difficult pressure to But perhaps the most belling resist, however, has come from the indication of all stems from proposals threat of cancellation and the which have only just emerged. Recent financial implications contained correspondence reveals that, at the therein. The Carnegie Council has Palace session, "through the stated repeatedly that "mill inns contributions of stage-managed of pounds" could be lost to iiqoroving interruptions from individual people; the point will be made and repeated across to the arts for disabled about how unjust it is that arts people. venues are inaccessible". In other Do we really want tobe held responsible words, 30 unsuspecting wheelchair for such an occurrence? Can't we just users will play the part of unsuspecting once forget our principles and stooges in a drama devised and canpramise "for the greater good"? performed by able-bodied conspirators. Perhaps the point will be made more The simple answer is "no". But forcibly by the refusal of disabled the process by which that decision people to have anything to do with was reached was far from simple and involved a great deal of soul- such an event. searching amongst individual members Of course the policy-makers are the of our organisation. After all, people who need to be influenced. it must be admitted that organisations This should not be achieved at of disabled people would find it the expense of disabled people. impossible to muster sufficient The final remark in the Coalition resources to stage a comparable notion refers to events which have event. taken place since the announcement Firstly we would hope that the of our objections to "Artability". Carnegie Council would consider a Our stance is far frcm being an postponement in order to consult isolated one. The British Council of properly with people who know the Organisations of Disabled People area and who are familiar with the and other London-based groups share issues in most urgent need of our objections, and we were encouraged discussion. - 5 T Despite their fantasy, Secondly, we don't see why our protest should mean the loss or innocence, and longevity, millions of pounds to the arts nursery rhymes offer a tawdry and disabled people. One botched initial view of this world. conference isn't going to overturn A study of one hundred of our attitudes overnight, and if the most popular rhymes reveals . will exists to provide money to a male-dominated, able-bodied, inprove access to the arts for , monocultural fairyland filled disahled people, our protest will with sexism, anger, violence, enhance rather than damage any environmental and nutritional fund-raising efforts. A demonstration ignorance and insensitivity of the very real anger felt by to the human condition. The disabled people at their exclusion expectations are clear: girls from full participation will have may be flower-tenders, far more impact than the presence frightened ^ curd-eaters, of a few token disabled people, seamstresses, and imprisoned grateful at having gained dubious pumpkin-shell residents, while boys can be kings, masters, access to ONE single event. candlestick-jumpers, scholars In conclusion, disabled people have and wife keepers. Boys dash of f a wealth of experience of events on adventures; girls nurture organised by professionals on our children, staying pretty and . behalf. Such events seldom come up unruffled. Girls can cry, with the right answers simply because boys cannot." they ask the wrong questions an Both the author and illustrator the wrong way. of the book are disabled. •Artahility" is just one more example This probably explains the of this sorry phenomenon. thoughtful way disability has >••• been introduced into the illustrations. They are beautifully painted with lots of people pursuing normal Father- everydav activities. Disabled people have been introduced in the illustrations Gander in unsensational and very subtle ways as part of community •Father Gander Hursery Rhymes - life. Buildings are ramped - traditional rhymes updated even tree houses have ramps. for the 1980*s" tries to amend the well-known nursery rhymes Forty rhymes are.included; some so they offer a more impartial changed in minor ways> some view of the world to children. more extensively. Whilst some This book is a breath of fresh of the changes in the text are air in childrens literature a bit laboured, the book is for a number of reasons. nevertheless a welcome resource, To quote from the introduction: particularly for the illus "Nursery rhymes are among the trations. Definitely a first encounters with must for your Christinas literature, cultural expect- shopping list. -ations and verbal stimuli that young children have. "Father Gander Nursery Rhymes As such, they have an important - traditional nursery rhymes and perhaps indelible impact updated for the 1980's": upon the early formation published at £5.95 by Extey of perceptions of felt, Publications Limited, 16 Chalk environment and relatxonships. Hill, Watford, Herts. - 6 - Report on BCODP Meeting. 12/7/86 for the DPSG 0 The council meeting was held for the first time outside of London, in Manchester. It was well attended with about 20 delegates present. Food and drink were provided at the meeting. Here is a summary of the major issues discussed:- 1. DPSG has still not paid its affiliation fee, this needs to be followed up. 2. The BCODP's bid to hold the next Disabled People's International in the UK (in Birmingham) is going ahead and has the support of Henry EMS the DPI's chair. The DPI is now officially recognised by the United Nations as the authentic voice of disabled people and so should be used by £he BCODP to stop organisations like RADAR and the DHSS from claiming that they represent disabled people. 3.Paul Mittler was nominated as BCODP's representative on the National Advisory Council on the Employment of Disabled People (MSC body). 4. Action on Disability and Development (ADD) - does work in 3rd World countries, its board and employees are 50% disabled people. ADD are offering to fund a development worker for BCODP. A strong bid was made from Manchester representatives that any new worker should be based in the North. 5. BCODP's AGM will be held on Sep 20th, probably in London. 6.Regionalisation; it was felt that BCODP needed to get more involved in the regions if interest was to be kept alive. It was suggested that if a long- term base for the BCODP was needed then London was a bad place for it to be considering its geographical bias, and the difficulty of transport and parking. It was suggested Birmingham might be the most appropriate. 7. British Assoc, of Social Workers : a joint meeting with BCODP which last year had met opposition from Manchester, is now proposed to be held in the Midlands on Oct 31st. 8. Artability: a long discussion was held on this issue. Eventually the following motion was passed with no votes against and one abstention:- "The BCODP whilst welcoming the positive proposals outlined in the Attenborough Report,and the recent decision by the Carnegie Council not to use an inaccessible theatre, still opposes the Artability conference on the grounds of:- a)Failure to fulfill the recommendations of the Attenborough report. b)Lack of involvement of disabled people c)The philosophy of the conference,ie: the medical/therapeutic model used, and the emphasis solely on policy makers at the expense of disabled people. The Bcodp deplores the tactics employed by the Carnegie Council in order to presuurise member organisations to withdraw their opposition Bernard Leach, July 1986 TOWN CLE^C•<•? 0=WF~> 1~K~ TOWN HALL. MANCHESTER M60 2LA . R. M. W. TAYLOR LLB SOLICITOR TOWN CLERK AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE Cityof Manchester AGENDA DISABLED PEOPLE'S STEERING GROUP Tuesday, 5th August, 1986 DATE TIME 7.30 pm PLACE No.5 Committee Room, Level 3, Town Hall Extension Item No. 1. Minutes Minutes of the meeting held on 2nd July, 1986, (copy enclosed). 2. Matters Arising 3. Premises for Greater Manchester coalition and MDP Letter from MDF (enclosed). 4. Churches Work Scheme Letter from CWS (enclosed). 5. Manchester Show To consider the following mot ion:- That the Steering Group recommends that the Leisure services Committee look at sources for the funding and purchase of a minimum of 6 powered wheelchairs for use by disabled people at the Manchester Show, and for future use in the City. Availability of these chairs should be widely publicised. 6. BCODP/Artability (a) Report on BCODP meeting held on 12th July, 1986. (b) To note that the Equal Opportunities Committee, on the 16th July, 1986, expressed its concern about the Artability Conference to be held in Manchester in September because of Public Inspection ol Documents and Attendance at Meetings a) Background documents toitems and reports on the Agenda may be inspected and copied before orafter the Meeting through the Information Centreat the Town Hall. Certain information maynotbeopentoinspection for thereasonsstatedinthedocument list included in each report. b) Reports tor items listed under Part Aof the agenda are likely to beconsidered in public and are available tothe public. Acopy may be obtained from the InformationCentre or at the meeting free of charge. c) Reports tor Items listed under Part Bof the agenda are likely to beconsidered in private after the exclusion of the press and public for the reasons staled against each item. d) Further information anddetails about rights toinformation arealso available attheInformation Centre. the lack of involvement of disabled people in organising the conference, the inaccessibility of the venues and the medical/therapeutic philosophy of the professionals involved; that the officers be requested to investigate what commitment the City council has given to assist with the conference, and that appropriate committees be requested to note the committee's concern, and that the attempts which have been made to threaten disabled people in Manchester with the withdrawal of funds if they do not support the conference be condemned. (c) BCODP Press Release. 7. Redeployment of Newly Sick or Disabled Employees joint report of the Town Clerk and Director of Personnel. 8. LGIU Management Meeting To consider the following motion:- That the Steering Group is appalled at the complete lack of information on disabled peoples' issues provided by the Local Government information Unit and the Steering Group calls upon the council's delegate to the LGIU to demand that the unit collects such information, in consultation with the BCODP as a matter of urgency. 9. Request for support from Manchester Disability Forum Letter and grant application (enclosed). 10. visit to London Boroughs of Camden and Lambeth (a) to note that the Equal Opportunities Committee, on the 16th July, 1986, approved a pilot visit to the London Boroughs of Camden and Lambeth by two members of their committee, two members of the Disabled people's steering Group and appropriate officers, and that the visit be classed as an approved duty. (b) To nominate two members of the Steering Group. 11. workers' Report Report of the Town Clerk. 12. work Programme To consider the following motions:- (a) That the Steering Group recommends that the Council adopts a policy whereby all new vehicles used for public transportation by the Council, and all groups funded by the Council have platform lifts to provide full accessibility. & FAIR PLAY |______^____BK__HH______Campaign For Equal Opportunities InThe Arts For People With Disabilities. Julya17th 19861 r Please Reply To: FAIRPLAY, at its A.G.M. has discussed the criticisms made by the British Council of Organisations of Disabled People (BCODP) and the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People (GMCDP) of the proposed Artabllity conference in Manchester. Ve totally accept the pinclple that a conference concerning the interests of people with disabilities should Involve people with disabilities in a major organisational role. nevertheless, as artists with disabilities, we are highly conscious that there is very little discussion of the factors that limit us from pursuing our chosen profession, or of the contribution that the arts can make to fighting the opppression of people with disabilities. Ve feel that, whatever its limitations, a conference such as this one has considerable potential benefits for us, and we would like to see it go ahead if possible. Ve suggest therefore, that we should host a meeting between the BCODP, the GMCDP and the Carnegie Council, to renegotiate the agenda for the conference and attempt to find a mutually acceptable programme. Ve are aware that the major areas of controversy (particularly in relation to such issues as the distinction between Art and Art therapy) but feel that they should be discussed, and that this conference could provide a useful forum for such discussion. Yours faithfullyqfi_fltft UtoeJU^ • Maggie Voolley Chair Ken Lumb Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People 11 Anson Rd Manchester M14 5BY ccs Geoffrey Cord Carnegie Council Rachel Hurst BCODP CARNEGIE COUNCIL ,__.,!_?___! Arts and Disabled Peopler princeDAlbert."?*Regent s Park London NW1 4RS Administrator Anne Pearson Telephone: 01-586 0383 18 July 1986 Dear Delegate We are writing to tell you that the Carnegie Council has decided with great regret to cancel the ARTABILITY Conference. We do this with much sadness and after careful consideration. Nearly all of the 300 places had already been taken up and we were encouraged by the many expressions of enthusiastic support. Disabled people were deeply involved in the preparation of the Attenborough Report, as they are in the work of the Council and in all aspects of the Artability Conference. All the performers whom we invited have a disability, and many of the speakers and workshop organisers are also disabled. Building on this, we had hoped that the Conference could be the springboard for mare artists and others with disabilities to cone forward to continue the work of the Council in promoting the recommendations of the Attenborough Coimittee. The Conference was intended for disabled and able-bodied people to meet together and for Officers in central and local government, in health authorities and in voluntary organisations to learn of progress in this area of work. . Plans had progressed well with substantial costs already incurred when the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People and later the British Council of Organisations of Disabled People, of which they are a member, n decided to oppose the Conference. The local body threatened to take . further unspecified action in connection with the boycott which was clearly -, designed to embarrass the Carnegie Council. Attempts to discuss the •'/ differences between us have regrettably, not been accepted by these two . organisations. It was only after much consideration of all the facts and with great reluctance that we decided against entering into public controversy and risking serious embarrassment to delegates and guests. We also believe that it would have been wrong to postpone the decision any further. We wish to apologise to all intended delegates and guests as well as the many who have given assistance for the disappointment and inconvenience which this decision will cause. We shall new concentrate en the Council s other urgent tasks of influencing policy in line with the recaraiendations of the Attenborough Committee of Inquiry. We are also keen to continue discussion with all national organisations interested in promoting the cause of the arts with disabled people. Yours sincerely GEOFFREY LORD Secretary Chairman: Sir Kenneth Robinson Vice Chairman: Robert Scott , Secretary: Geoffrey Lord Patron: Sir Richard Attenborough in association with the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, Dunfermline, Fife. / top BritishCouncil of Organisationsof Disabled People PRESS RELEASE 22 JULY 1986: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FROM THE BRITISH COUNC_3___j_ ORGANISATIONS OF DISABLED PEOPLE (BCODP"), RE: The ARTABILITY Conference on the Arts and Disability. The BCODP welcomes the announcement from The Carnegie Council that, in the face of criticism from disabled people, it has decided to abandon plans for its Artability conference. Whilst we recognise the positive contribution The Carnegie Council has made in the area of the arts and disability, we have nevertheless concluded that the Artability conference would not have furthered the interests of disabled people. The reason for this being that the conference was organised, contrary to the claims of The Carnegie Council, without adequate consultation with or representation from organisations controlled by disabled people. The Carnegie Council did not prioritise liaison with disabled people because they did not consider that organisations controlled by disabled people have an interest in or influence upon the arts. We find this totally unacceptable and would point out that a women's arts festival would have no credibility if organised by men, nor a black arts conference if organised by white people. Other serious concerns around the conference were the physical inaccessibility of the chosen venues; the high cost of attendance; the short time allotted to disabled performers; the contentious inclusion of art as therapy and rehabilitation; and the heavy emphasis within the programme on professionals deciding the way forward for us in the arts. The BCODP has been supporting initiatives which promote the involvement of disabled people in the arts. We also welcome initiatives which encourage collaboration between disabled people and professionals, and which lead to an increase in our control over our own affairs. We look forward to working in future with those who have been involved with the Artability conference. Contact: Anne Rae 01 441 0996 Bernard Leach 061 881 1845 Ends. kr w hliH Report of the City Architect concerning access in the Palace Theatre Oxford Rd. for the forthcoming Artability conference. The report falls into two quite seperate sections - a.Access to the auditorium and relevant facilities. b.Access to the stage, dressing rooms, and relevant facilities. a. There is no level access to any part of the auditorium. CIRCLE- This is the easiest part of the auditorium to reach. This entails negotiating a portable wooden ramp with no borders on either side, nor any handrails. This ramp is very steep and has a gradient of approximately 1 in 5. Such a gradient we consider to be of no use to an individual using a manually propelled wheelchair. There is then a lift to the circle area. The operating buttons are far too high, but the lift is roomy. The circle has space for only four wheelchair users and access to the other seats is difficult because of the steep terraced seating. There is a unisex toilet designated as for use by disabled people. This provision is woefully inadequate, with many fittings too high and only a free standing frame placed over the toilet to give support. STALLS- Because only four spaces are available to wheelchair users in the circle, it is proposed to use the stalls for seating wheelchair users. This is because two rows of seats can be taken out to accommodate broadcasting equipment should a production ever be televised from the Palace. This would facilitate 30-35 wheelchair users all in one row right across the middle of the stalls. Even so, access to the stalls is appalling. This can only be achieved by negotiating a flight of 13 stairs!! The proposal is to install a chair-lift for all wheelchair users. Our estimation is that i_f the arrival of wheelchair users could be co-ordinated, and .if there were no technical hitches, and .if everything ran smoothly, then it v/ould take two hours to get wheelchair users into the building and two hours to leave. There are no accessible toilets in the stalls. 35 wheelchair users would be the maximum number allowed in to the Palace, as the Palace management were not in agreement that they should allow transfers from wheelchairs to seats as there was no available storage space for vacant wheelchairs. There was not a loop system to aid the hearing impaired. There was no use of braille or tactile surfaces to aid people with visual impairments. *"> . ^-SAy b. The only entrance to this area is by the stage door with its flight of seven steps and extremely narrow doorway. Access to all other areas is by lift. All lift control buttons are too high and do not have raised or braille numbers. DRESSINGS ROOMS.- All the entrance ways to all the dressing rooms are extremely difficult to manage. 3 converging doors in a single vestibule. All fittings were too high particularly the clothes rails. Each dressing room has adjoining bathroom and shower but none of them were designed to meet the needs of disabled people. CANTEEN- This would be adequate for use by disabled people but the main difficulty would be the high counter. STAGE- Access to the stage is by the lift which can stop at stage level. From the lift an extremely badly lit and unevenly surfaced corridor has to be used to gain access to the stage. There is also the extra hazard of equipment being strewn around this area. CONCLUSION:- The Palace Theatre is a totally unsuitable venue for an event such as "Artability". Whoever sanctioned its use in its present condition has shown a complete ignorance of the access needs of disabled people For the City Architect 11th July 1986.