Question: The DRC opened three years ago. How effective have you been in eliminating discrimination towards disabled people?

Bert Massie: I think that three years is not quite long enough to judge, but we have undertaken a great deal of work in challenging the terrible discrimination disabled people face in their everyday lives and with fairly new legislation to tackle it.

Let me give you a few examples - we have responded to nearly a quarter of a million enquiries from disabled people and businesses wanting advice and information on the Disability Discrimination Act. And we have provided one-to-one legal support to nearly six thousand disabled people who have experienced discrimination either at work or socially.

We believe that legislation is important because it can modify behaviour. We welcomed the government's action in extending the Disability Discrimination Act last year to cover education and hope this will impact on the fact that over half of disabled people have no qualifications compared to just over a quarter of non disabled people.

We are homing in on 2004 and greater employment rights for disabled people, particularly those working for small employers. This is good news, but much more needs to be done. There are, as it stands at the moment, a number of holes in the Disability Discrimination Act which must be filled urgently.

For instance, a woman undergoing chemotherapy for cancer was told by her employer to take holiday leave for treatment. She cannot challenge this under current disability legislation as she is not qualified as 'disabled'.

There are major problems for disabled people using public transport. For example, a man who uses a wheelchair found that his local bus company had accessible buses, but drivers refused to let him board. We must ensure that disabled people have the right to use public transport as they have a right to enter a shop. Another gap in the legislation to be filled.

We have called for a new Disability Bill which would introduce new rights for disabled people using transport and which would also cover many more people newly diagnosed with long standing illnesses such as Cancer and HIV.

Question: The DRC is currently reviewing the current disability rights legislation. With this in mind, what would you like to see in the Queen's Speech?

Bert Massie: We were desperately disappointed that our expectations of a Disability Bill in the last session of Parliament were unfulfilled. We met the prime minister last November to express our concern on this issue but at the moment we simply don't know if a new bill will be included this year.

A Disability Bill is a manifesto commitment and I have no doubt that the government will deliver, but timing is important.

Obviously I want it to be in this year's Queen's Speech because we will be one year closer to ending the terrible discrimination faced by disabled people.

But if it is not included this year then we will have to wait until 2004. This raises anxieties because we don't know whether the 2004/5 parliamentary session will be truncated because of the next general election. So it's not an ideal scenario but it should still be possible to get the bill through Parliament.

Question: How will the disability sector react if the government reneges on its manifesto commitment to introduce a disabilities bill this Parliament?

I don't believe the government will renege on its commitment. There are many people working within government to draft an effective bill. I also think all governments do wish to please the electorate who put them into office.

There are over 8 million disabled people in the country and most - as adults - will have a vote.

It's also helpful to remind politicians that the older you get, the more likely you are to become disabled, and we all know that the 'grey' movement is a increasing force to be reckoned with. Disability is not some marginal issue that can be pushed aside. In one way or another it does, or will affect, most people in this country. All sensible politicians know that.

Question: What are your views on the government's proposals for a Commission for Equality and Human Rights?

Bert Massie: A Commission for Equality and Human Rights in principle offers the prospect for a major advance in tackling discrimination and creating an equal society - but the devil as always will lie in the detail of the government's most recent announcement.

If it is done in the wrong way it could be not just a missed opportunity and turn the clock back decades, but it won't offer anything new for disabled people. I was therefore profoundly disappointed that the government's original consultation was so unambitious and lacking in vision. It dealt with the proposed body as though it was simply a matter of administrative convenience. It is much more important than that and has strong and deep political dimensions that must be considered.

The DRC is a leading player in the debate on this - after all, we want equality for all. And I believe the government, with its commitment to social justice, wants this as well.

Disabled people have fought for many years to gain control over our own lives. It is to the credit of the government that when the DRC was created it was stipulated that at least half the commissioners should be disabled people. The proposed CEHR must also ensure that disabled people retain executive power over disability issues and I am pleased that the government have said that the new body will cater for the distinct needs of disabled people and that the programme of disability legislative reform will continue.

But the structure of the CEHR has yet to be decided which is disappointing. I firmly believe that the new commission should have a federal structure that will be understandable to the public and industry alike. It would also build on the expertise of existing groups to be covered by the body and will ensure parity with new groups to be represented within it.

We don't underestimate the complexity of bring these new strands together though. The strict abeyance to a deadline of opening the CEHR in 2006, then, is less important than getting the structure and powers right from the start. The government should consult widely on this before putting forward the legislation. If they try and hurry it they will risk losing support and will create a less effective organisation.

Again, I was pleased that a proposal by the DRC to create a task force to look at ways the new body could work the most effectively has been taken on board by the government. But for the task force to work effectively, it must be allowed to deliberate much longer than the four months the government's announcement implied.

The government had 18 months to make a decision on structure for the new commission. And couldn't. It's a mission impossible to set the task force this same objective but with much less time.

It is disappointing that the government has been less than enthusiastic about introducing a single equality act similar to that introduced by Lord Lester in the Upper House. If the CEHR is to be effective, all the people for whom it exists should have similar rights or the case for the new commission is undermined. There is still time for the government to get this right and I hope they will do so.

If any new body can involve disabled people to the same extent as the DRC has done, ensure they control their own agenda while contributing to the wider equality agenda, and work with the government to introduce and implement the program of work on disability rights that the Department for Work and Pensions is developing, it could prove an excellent successor to the DRC. But we are currently a long way from that happy position.

I noted with interest that the government's statement implies that the CEHR will be able to promote human rights. I hope I am not being over cynical, but it seems to me that this means the new body will be able to talk about human rights but will lack the powers to enforce them. This is unacceptable.

Human rights are of critical importance to disabled people and the new body must have powers to protect disabled people and others from infringements of their human rights.

With the creation of the CEHR the government has the opportunity to create a solid legislative framework for creating a truly inclusive society in which all people can avoid the millstone of discrimination. It would be tragic if the opportunity to do so much good was wasted by denying the CEHR the powers and structures to enable it to do the job for which it will be created.

Moving the deckchairs on the Titanic was pointless. Had the captain changed course the disaster could have been avoided. There is still time for the government to change course and avoid the icebergs ahead.