Wheelchair and Community Equipment Strategy

Baroness Brinton Excerpts

Thursday 11th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Brinton (LD)]

My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, on securing this important debate. I too congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Gerada, on her excellent maiden speech. From these Benches, we look forward to her many future contributions.

I too am a member of the All-Party Group for Access to Disability Equipment, which published a forensically detailed report in October on the systematic barriers that prevent millions of disabled children and adults across the UK from accessing the medical and community equipment, including wheelchairs, that they need to live safely and independently and that are holding back the sector from supplying the equipment that is needed.

The noble Lord, Lord Shinkwin, helpfully set out a wider social picture, because community equipment is the backbone of social care. It is key to removing barriers for disabled people.

Fourteen years ago, I was referred to my local wheelchair services. They told me that, as I could walk slowly with a stick from my sitting room to my kitchen, I did not qualify for an electric chair. But the very reason that my physio had recommended me was that I was doing around 10,000 to 12,000 steps a day in travelling to, from and around your Lordships’ House; the damage that was doing to my already damaged joints was significant. I had to buy my own chair. Even this week, I have heard people say that they face the same inconsistent decisions, based not on actual needs but on rules to keep costs down, because that is what it is all about. That is why the Wheelchair Alliance was right to say that services should be patient focused first.

The APG report found that 63% of carers and 55% of users said that services are getting worse. Over half of equipment users reported that they do not have access to the medical equipment they require for their long-term needs. As the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra, said, there are widespread reports of users being let down by the current system, so it was also good to hear from the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, that the system has worked for him and his wife. My family’s experience in requiring emergency equipment for end-of-life care was absolutely wonderful, but I note that the Kent end-of-life service bypassed the usual wheelchair and equipment service to get things done. There are lessons to be learned from that.

My noble friend Lord Rennard’s contribution was so important: we need to hear from the equipment sector and to understand its problems too. One key issue in the medical equipment supply sector is that contracting of services from the sector by local authorities is not strategic. As the APG report shows, most local authorities became very dependent on one supplier that was cheaper than all the others. When it went bust earlier this year, the sector, the commissioners in local authorities and, above all, wheelchair and equipment users found that they were left high and dry. I am pleased to report that the sector has come together with local authorities to try to remedy this, but that is a strategic fault.

The Government need a national strategy that is different from a voluntary framework, as the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, outlined, and that serves the needs of disabled people and their families, while offering value for money to commissioners and the public purse. What we have at the moment is the exact opposite. Would the Minister agree to meet with the All-Party Group for Access to Disability Equipment to discuss these issues?