PhoneAbility

12. Summary and close

MIKE MARTIN - Chairman PhoneAbility

The aim of this meeting was to raise the issue of Broadband use by people with disabilities and older people. PhoneAbility saw this as a starting point. It is not the end of anything; far from it. We were very fortunate that the DTI also were interested in this. As Stephen Speed said at the beginning, they had very little knowledge about this area. It is perhaps a reflection that there is so little knowledge in, shall we say, the wider circles, when there is actually a lot of knowledge about.

We have tried to bring in a service provider aspect, and we are very grateful to BT for doing this with Keith Lawton and Chris Aver. It is regrettable that it is almost impossible to get in touch with any of the 199 other service providers to bring them on board.

What we have heard from Meg Galley is that there is also the human side to this. When I started looking at this, I did not want it to become a technical discussion of technology, and there is a danger that you start drifting into all these acronyms and standards, and all the rest of it. It is very clear that there are some very basic and well known principles, for instance, in the ergonomics field. If you apply these before you actually start any service - which is not possible in all services - then you get a lot further. The concept of "design for all" is something which really is, as Meg said, "design for most", and it should be applied right from the beginning.

Scott Milne raised the very specific issues of the problems there can be getting into the main broadband systems, when they have obviously put money into these things, so heaven knows what happens when you try to get into some of the lesser ones. Perhaps there are a few more PhDs to be had from looking into the others. There is very much the human side. There are the practical issues that need to be addressed, and there is a lot of information about how websites should be designed.

Then we saw from Jan-Ingvar Lindstrom what was happening in Sweden, which has a great reputation for innovating and implementing, maybe at a cost both in terms of personal taxation and other things, which is always a problem. Jan-Ingvar demonstrated a range of very practical things being done, and he also said you have to separate this idea of research from evaluation. In terms of academia, I know it is very difficult if you want to put a project forward. People can snipe at you and say, "It`s not really research," but then where are the independent bodies to do this research/evaluation? Again, as Jan-Ingvar said, this may be research, but of a slightly different nature. Some of the academics - and I put you in there, Scott - should take this on board and push up to the higher authorities that this is very respectable, worthwhile work.

Then we had these very specific applications of broadband, which demonstrated that we are already in a timescale where a lot of things were tried out 20 years ago or more but the technology was not there. Now the technology is there, obviously it has great potential but it has to be implemented. The question has been raised, who is going to pay for it and how is it going to be implemented? That is a very big question which has all sorts of implications.

Pete Gardiner demonstrated quite clearly that there are lots of advantages, and I think you had very few disadvantages in terms of the use of broadband. It really is a fine example of how a technology which is properly used can actually enhance somebody's life, or make their life easier anyhow. That is something which we should take on board.

I was very interested to hear from John Worsfold of the DAISY system, which clearly has lots of applications. The point is that broadband, as I have understood it, makes these things much more feasible. It is a technology which could be available to everybody across a wide range of applications. We have some clear applications which are going on today. It is interesting that the human side has been emphasised during the discussions. Guidelines and evaluations for user groups, and cost, are major factors.

There was also the question of support for users. I think all users need support. Quite frankly, in my own situation, I use a very local service provider because I can actually get on the phone to them, or I can go and see them. They will even, on occasions, come and see me. I need them, and I get completely stuck without a human interface - and one which I do not have to go through 20 sets of instructions on a menu to actually get a human voice! This is extremely important.

Above all, the point that has come up is about cost-benefit analysis. There is so much talk, quite rightly, about cost, but there are the benefits and the value of the systems. We have to emphasise those things. I personally feel we have started this discussion, and I hope you have all enjoyed the meeting and felt it has been of some value. I certainly would like to thank everybody for coming. I would also like to thank all the speakers, because I think they have contributed greatly to the proceedings and made it quite possible.

I would like to reiterate my thanks to Stephen Speed and his DTI colleagues for making available this room, and also particularly to Mary McKevitt (DTI) for all the help she has given me in setting up the administration side of it. Also thanks to Tony Shipley for taking the arduous task of chairing all day long.

I would also like to offer a particular thanks to Fiona Miller (BT), for all the support she has given me in pointing me in the right direction to all the contacts on the table here. Without her, I would have been in great difficulty.

Delegates

Surname	Forename	Organisations
Aver	Chris	BT
Azhur	Azeem	Ofcom Consumer Panel
Barrett	Dave	BT
Barrett	Julie	Research Group for Inclusive Environments
Bird	Judith	BT
Brooker	Alan	BT
Budden	Steve	BT
Clark	Jen	RNIB
Colton	Amanda
Colven	David	Ace Centre Advisory Trust
Cuddihy	Seamus	AbilityNet
Davies	Gareth	National League of the Blind & Disabled/Vision 2020 UK
Dong	Hua	University of Cambridge
Druce	Stephen	Ace Centre Advisory Trust
Earlam	Chris	BT
Ellis	Maggie	West Square Associates
Farrell	Karl	Association of Visually Impaired Office Staff
Gallagher	Jenny	BT
Galley	Magdalen	Ergonomics Society
Gardiner	Pete	Spinal Injuries Association
Gill	John	PhoneAbility
Gough	Jean
Gray	Henry	BT
Gregory	Wendy	COI Communications
Hardy	Vanessa	BT
Haselwimmer	Stefan	Phoneanything
Henderson	Katie	Ataxia UK
Hopkins	Sean	Metanet
Hopkins	Andy	Metanet
Jacobs	Caroline	Riceability
Jones	Gretel	Age Concern England
Kyle	Jim	Bristol University
Lamb	John	Ability Magazine
Law	Matthew	Ataxia UK
Lawton	Keith	BT
Lindstrom	Jan-Ingvar	Technical Consultant
Lloyd	Stephen	Institute for Ageing and Health
Lord Renwick		EURIM
Maguire	Martin	ESRI, Loughborough University
Martin	Mike	PhoneAbility
Miller	Fiona	BT
Morris	Wayne	BT
Morris	Eric	Hearing Concern
Myers	David	PhoneAbility
Myers	Ruth	TAG
Newson	Linda	RNIB
Oliver	Adam	BT
Philips	Frank	OFCOM
Pozo	Vivienne	PhoneAbility
Roe	Patrick	LEMA-EPFL
Shamash	Ted	Help the Aged
Shipley	Tony	PhoneAbility
Swan	Gerard	CCD
Trotter	Ross	Ofcom Advisory Committee on Older & Disabled People
Twitchin	Bob	Ofcom Consumer Panel
Tyler	Steve	RNIB
Whitlam	Mike	Ofcom
Whitney	Gill	Collaborative International Research Centre in Universal Access
Wigham	Mari	BBC
Wright	Fay	Institute of Gerontology

Back to Contents

Previous Page