The debate was tabled by Cheryl Gillan, the MP who brought forward the Bill that became the Autism Act in 2009. Mrs Gillan used the opportunity to highlight areas of success since the Act was passed but emphasised that support for adults with autism is still patchy across England and much more needs to be done to address this.
Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Autism, Robert Buckland MP, spoke about the need for better awareness of autism in communities, and emphasised that local businesses, leisure companies and public service providers had a duty to ensure that that people with autism are not isolated, but treated as full and active members of their local communities. Nine other MPs also spoke up in the debate, some directly quoting from emails NAS supporters had sent them as part of the Push for Action campaign.
Push for Action has put forward a variety of proposals to strengthen the revised strategy that were raised in the debate; these included:
- the introduction of an innovation fund, to support the development of new local services
- an autism awareness programme, to help local groups and volunteers build a community that is more welcoming for people with autism
- improvements in training across all public services, but particularly for GPs, community care assessors, and front line staff in the welfare and criminal justice systems
- a more transparent way for progress of the strategy to be mapped, and for local people to hold their council to account
Responding on behalf of the Government, Care and Support Minister Norman Lamb paid tribute to the NAS for its 'inspired leadership' in ensuring that the strategy translates into greater difference for people's lives. He said that the Department of Health are considering the range of proposals set out by The NAS, and agreed to meet with the MPs and the NAS to discuss these and the strategy in more detail.
A transcript of the debate can be found here:http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/176/ and it can also be viewed on Parliament TV here http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14926
Sussex social services seems to answer yes to all its criteria. What a lot of topics. My funding was withheld experience two years. Our cards is not funded or assessed, so I have to use my own funding for her support for my needs. I will mum see a case worker without a lawyer or representative because the department head has life directly to me and failed to act on the instructions of her senior as promised. I am afraid to say my funding offer reassessment because they lie and have lost and redacted my files, to cover the refusal to give account of two years of failed funding. I would like to move but am afraid to ask and that I might go to an area where they stop my education. I am a really good student with such promise I have been invited to do a PhD For Seven Years. So glad an stuck. My violent neighbour has not been prosecuted by the police even though he has attacked me. I think that Sussex is full of false presentation whether it comes to the authorities, who all give just false impression 0but lie to provide as clients. We are vulnerable not stupid. At0 they take advantage and use up as a slush fund. For their own easy choices and hide behind their laws and rules as well as their false promises and play at catch me if you can. I did and they just lied, ignored me and then said they stopped listening and played dumb. My case worker says she cannot talk about it and is still waiting for her boss to reply over two years on. I will out talk to them every again and need a lawyer but do not know how to do that. I do not want to loose my education money., Mrs Fiona Melinn
ReplyDeleteFor Sussex read SURREY. I HEAR SUSSEX HAS A COOL SETUP. predicted text error. It is Surrey that has failed me SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL IS AN ORGANISATION OF RISK. This is driven by poor and failing management of indifference and deception.
Delete