Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities - Closing Statement

Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 10th Session, Australia

Commissioner Innes, Closing Statement 4th September 2013

Thank you Madam Chair and Committee Members.

As noted earlier, Australia is a developed country, with a strong economy, and continued commitment to human rights.  It is therefore absolutely appropriate that this Expert Committee should have high expectations in regard to Australia's compliance with the Disability Convention.

Australia has made significant progress towards compliance with its Convention obligations.  However, there is much still to do.  I will highlight some areas which the Expert Committee may wish to consider.

Here are some overall indicators.  The four million Australians with disability are among the most disadvantaged groups in Australian society. Almost half live in or near poverty- 45% according to OECD figures.  We are 27th out of 27 on that OECD measure.  Median gross weekly income is about half that of people without disability.  This marginalisation impacts particularly on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and concerted effort is needed to address this.

Labour force participation rates remain significantly lower than for people without disability, around 30 %.  Unemployment rates are significantly higher for people with disability.  We are 21 out of 29 on the OECD measure.

Also, For many people with disability, the participation costs are much greater.

These issues flow into participation in education and training.  Secondary school completion rates for people with disability are about half those for people without disability.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme will have a significant impact when it is fully functioning in 2019.  It is a much-needed and excellent reform.  But it alone will not solve these problems.

The other part of the problem is jobs.  And improvement must start with government.  Governments can not continue to try to sell to the private sector the benefits of employing people with disability, and not do it themselves.  I have described the drop in the employment levels in the public service in the last fifteen years – from 6.5 per cent to 2.9 per cent – as shameful.  I, and civil society I am sure, will be encouraging the Government elected on Saturday to use internal programmes, targets and tax incentives to change this situation.

People with intellectual, cognitive and psychosocial disability are significantly over-represented in our prison systems, and some remain in gaol for long periods of time without being convicted of crimes.  This is particularly true of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.  Further, some victims of crime who are people with disability do not receive justice, as their matters do not go to trial.  The lack of disability awareness training, and of available special measures, are some of the reasons for these barriers.  The Commission is carrying out an investigation in this area, and will propose some principles for best practise in our justice systems by the end of this year.

In Australia, people with disability experience significantly higher levels of violence, exploitation, abuse and neglect.  Women with disability face increased risk.  Those in institutional settings are at greater risk or fare worse than others.  There is no national data on the prevalence and nature of this violence.

The Commission endorses the comments of civil society complimenting government on the commencement of initiatives in this area.  The Commission supports the civil society recommendations in this area.

The Australian Human Rights Commission shares the concern of the Committee and civil society regarding Australia's interpretative declarations on Articles 12 and 17 of the Convention.  The Commission is concerned that the presence of these declarations could negatively impact on the full enjoyment of the rights and freedoms contained in the Convention by people with disability.  The Commission will encourage the incoming government to remove these declarations.

However, the expectation of the Commission is that human rights set out in these articles may currently be enjoyed.

In this context, it is important for the Committee to recognise that there is progress in promoting supported decision-making, and moving towards the eradication of seclusion and restraint practises.  The Australian Law Reform Commission inquiry into legal barriers for people with disability will examine restrictive practices, parenthood and family law, supported and substituted decision-making, disability services and support, giving evidence and medical treatment.  The Australian Law Reform Commission is to consider international laws and legal frameworks.  As a member of that inquiry I will ensure that it turns its mind to the question of interpretative declarations.

The National Mental Health Commission has recommended that action be taken to reduce the use of involuntary practices, and work to eliminate seclusion and restraint.  The National Mental Health Commission has commenced a project on reduction and elimination of restraint and seclusion.

There is also a proposed National Framework for Reducing Restrictive Practices, and a recognition amongst policy makers of the need to move towards the ultimate eradication of restrictive practices.

The Commission supports the civil society recommendation that Australia establishes a nationally consistent legislative and administrative framework for the protection of people with disability from behaviour modification and restrictive practices that cause harm and punishment.  The Commission also supports the recommendation to include the prohibition of, and criminal sanctions for, particular behaviour modification practices.  Further, that Australia develops an evidence-based national plan that outlines actions for the development of positive behaviour support strategies that acknowledge and respect the physical and mental integrity of the person; and for the elimination of environments and treatment approaches that have been shown to exacerbate behaviour that leads to application of inappropriate levels of restriction and restraint.

The National Disability Strategy incorporates implementation plans.  They introduce periodic reporting to monitor the progress of National Disability Strategy.  However, the draft trend indicators are the same indicators that were included in the original NDS.

We have aggregated data on people with disability.  We do not have disaggregated data, on the basis of sex, gender, age, race, ethnicity, geographical location and so on.  The Commission supports civil society recommendations here.

The Australian government can develop Standards for access under the Disability Discrimination Act.  It has done so in the areas of public transport, access to premises, and education.

As a result, our public transport system is more accessible than it was a decade ago.  55 % accessibility was required by the end of 2012, and we await the results of whether that has been achieved.  But the fact that the Standards must be enforced through people with disability making complaints remains a problem.  Civil society recommendations in this area could address that problem.  The areas of airline access and accessible taxis have been particularly problematic.

The Premises Standards are only three years old, but linking them to the building code is bringing positive results.  As our building stock changes over time, we will get more benefit from these Standards.

The Education Standards have achieved positive change, but much is still left to do.

The development of all three sets of Standards took a long time, and much negotiation.  The Disability Discrimination Act would benefit from the capacity to adopt codes - developed by industry in consultation with the disability sector - which set out a basis for broader compliance.

Finally, there needs to be a systemic engagement mechanism with Disabled People's Organisations, plus adequate funding that recognises the broader scope of DPO and Disability Advocacy Organisations work since the ratification by Australia of the Convention.  Australia would also benefit from a more systemic process under Article 33.

Australia has made significant progress towards meeting its obligations under the Disability Convention.  I look forward to concluding observations from this committee which will assist the Australian Government to continue on the path towards full enjoyment of rights and freedoms for Australians with disability.

I am particularly pleased - as the representative of Australia's National Human Rights Institution - to have had the opportunity to present the Commission's independent views.  Continuation of such opportunities for NHRI's to participate in the committee's work will also facilitate progress towards compliance in other countries.

Thank you Madam Chair and Committee Members.