Rights Now

[9] It recommended anti-discrimination legislation covering employment, education, the provision of goods, facilities and services, insurance, transport, property rights, occupational pension schemes, membership of associations and clubs, and civic duties and functions.

"[7]In 1983 Jack Ashley MP used the ten-minute rule and put forward the Civil Rights (Disabled Persons) Bill which would have established a commission with legal powers of enforcement.

[8] VOADL established an advisory committee around 1989 which was chaired by Mike Oliver who supported Colin Barnes as the researcher formally linked to BCODP.

Research interviews were held at the SIA offices led by Colin Barnes, Stephen Bradshaw, Jane Campbell, and Mike Oliver.

[10] The campaign reportedly had strong links with Parliamentarians though the All-Party Disability Group and its researcher Victoria Scott, who worked for RADAR, and the Rights Now Coordinator, Adam Thomas.

A protest demo of around 200 disabled people outside Telethon 90 was organised by the Campaign to Stop Patronage[5] with Victoria Waddington and Allan Sutherland doing the press liaison.

[12] Although DAN was very focused on street campaigning against inaccessible public transport (mass transit), nevertheless its first major action was during the by-election in Christchurch, Dorset, in 1993[14] where Rob Hayward, the Conservative candidate, had previously been an MP for another area and had 'talked out' a bill for disabled people's civil rights.

A national political scandal emerged when it was revealed on 6 May 1994 that the Minister for Disabled People, Nicholas Scott MP (and father of Victoria Scott, who was a strong supporter of Rights Now, causing much press comment), had arranged for over 80 wrecking amendments to be put by five backbench MPs who were hostile to the bill, while he maintained he was "neutral" on the matter; a miss-statement which caused him to have to be replaced soon afterwards by William Hague MP as the Minister for Disabled People.

A report by the House of Commons Library on the DDA, while it was still a bill, stated, "there appears to be unanimous agreement among disability groups on the main ways in which it falls short of the sort of legislation that they desire.

An editorial article by Ian Stanton included the following concerns:"To many of us in the disabled people's movement, it is galling to hear RADAR making pronouncements upon the importance of civil rights.

... We now claim to be so close to achieving recognition of our rights; but am I alone in worrying about how easily our issues can be hi-jacked by non-representative groups, and how quickly our voices can be drowned out by those of non-disabled people?

The disabled people's movement has become formidable campaigning machine, but sometimes we can be politically naive, particularly when compared with the slick lobbying skills and access to the 'old boys network' associated with the major charities.

[21] Others took a different view, for example Bob Williams Findlay in 2015 wrote, To fully appreciate our position on the DDA it is necessary to strip away the sugar-coated presentation of this historic piece of legislation in order to reveal how the collective voice of disabled people and their many allies were silenced by acts of betrayal and brute force.

The real story isn't really about the twenty years since the passing of this piecemeal, ineffectual and oppressive Act, but rather it is about how the Civil Rights Bill and the ideas contained within it were buried both physically and politically by those who felt threatened by the potential impact it would've had on society.