National Local Roads and Transport Congress

Speech by Graeme Innes AM

Newcastle 10 July

I begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we're meeting today.

I want to talk today about the role of local government in responding to the mobility and access needs of people with a disability, as required by Federal, State and Territory discrimination laws.

My main focus will be on transport related matters, but I do want to briefly mention some resources the Commission is about to release that will be of interest to local government, particularly those people who deal with development applications and building certification.

However, to begin I want to place this discussion in the broader context of a local governments mandate to encourage and promote an inclusive and sustainable community.

The Sustainable Communities Network, based at Edith Cowan University , describes a sustainable community as one that has an explicit systemic approach to the integration of ecological, social, cultural and economic features to meet the needs of the present, without compromising the needs of the future.

When I think about the needs of people with disabilities in our community, it's clear to me that a sustainable community is one that does not compromise the future of our children or ourselves by planning communities, constructing buildings, approving developments, or delivering services, that are accessible only to those who do not have a disability.

As I'm sure you all appreciate, it's not just the 20% of people with a disability that will benefit from a more accessible and sustainable community.

We are all well aware of the significant effect that an ageing population will have over the next 20 to 50 years. The facts are sobering. By 2050, more than 26% of the population will be over 65, and approximately 8% will be over 85. In some local government areas popular with retirees these figures will be significantly bigger.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, in its report Life Expectancy and Disability in Australia , found that as people live longer they are living a greater part of their life with a disability - on average people would expect to live with a disability for almost 20 years.

One of the consequences of these changes is that our need for more accessible communities increases, as does our need for accessible and relevant transport systems and infrastructures linking communities with services.

I'll come back to the broader role of local government in connecting people to services later, but first want to look at some of the international expectations in relation to accessible transport, and the domestic responsibilities for technical compliance already in place.

The Centre for Sustainable Transportation in Canada has developed a definition of sustainable transport. It includes a requirement that it “allows the basic access and development needs of individuals, companies and societies to be met safely, and in a manner consistent with human and ecosystem health, and promotes equality within and between successive generations”.

This is one of the principles supported by this Congress over the years it has been meeting. Transport systems meeting that definition must provide for access for people with a range of disabilities.

Internationally, the right to access transport services has been clearly recognised in the recently developed UN Convention on the rights of persons with a disability, under article 9 which states that:

To enable persons with disabilities to live independently, and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas.

While the Convention is yet to be ratified by Australia , we were one of the first countries to sign it on 30 March this year.

Domestically, Australia is already well placed to comply with that article, as a result of State, Territory and Federal discrimination laws, and in particular the adoption of the Disability Standard for Accessible Public Transport. This Standard came into force in December 2002.

The Standard establishes minimum accessibility requirements to be met by providers and operators of public transport conveyances, infrastructure and premises. It sets out requirements for issues such as access paths, manoeuvring areas, ramps and boarding devices, allocated spaces, handrails, doorways, controls, symbols and signs, bus stops, the payment of fares and the provision of information.

It's unlawful not to comply with the Standard, but they include a timetable for compliance which allows for a planned introduction of new conveyances and infrastructure and, where necessary, retro-fitting of existing facilities. If the Standards are not complied with, a person may make a complaint of contravention of the Standards.

As you will be aware, local government has some direct responsibilities under the Standard, including where the local government itself provides a public transport service, and where the local government has responsibility for infrastructure, such as bus stops.

Let me look now at local government as a transport service provider.

Where local government actually provides public transport services the Standards clearly state that any new conveyances purchased after 2002 had to comply with the technical specifications for access. Existing conveyances are required to be replaced or retrofitted progressively over a 20 year period with 25% being required to be accessible by December 2007.

While most large transport service providers have been working towards this compliance timetable January 2008 will be the first opportunity to test broad compliance as that is when complaints could be accepted if 25% of conveyances are not compliant.

Local Government and infrastructure

The Accessible Public Transport Standards apply to the providers of any structure or facility that is used by passengers in conjunction with travelling on a public transport service.

Bus stops are a critical part of the infrastructure of a public transport service. If they are not designed and maintained in a way that allows a person with a disability to access them and then access a bus or coach the transport system as a whole is not accessible.

In most areas the Local Government is responsible for the provision of bus stops and as with conveyances the Standard includes a number of compliance timeframes.

New bus stops and associated infrastructure such as shelters, where provided, must comply with the Standard, as should existing bus stops that undergo substantial refurbishment or alteration. In addition 25% of existing bus stops must comply with the Standard by December 2007.

Unfortunately a recent survey undertaken in one State suggested that very few councils were fully aware of their responsibilities in this area, and even fewer had taken steps to address their responsibilities through budgetary planning. Again it will be interesting to see what January 2008 brings in terms of complaints.

Some of you may have heard about a recent case involving the Shire of Hervey Bay, where a community advocacy group lodged complaints against the Council, claiming it had not implemented the Standard in relation to a number of new and refurbished bus stops. The case was dismissed on what might be called technical grounds. While I would not want to comment on the reasons for the dismissal, I must say that had the case been heard on the substantive issues, I would find it hard to see how a court would not conclude that the Standard had been breached.

The Queensland State Government is undertaking a project on priority planning and design of accessible bus stops in regional areas. I look forward to that report being released, as I am hopeful it will assist other bodies in their planning.

There are of course many issues that need to be addressed in making a bus stop accessible and while the Standard provides technical details for the component parts the considerable topographical and climatic differences around Australia make it inevitable that there has to be an element of interpretation and invention in applying the Standard.

I have issued an opinion on the application of the Standard to bus stops which is on our website under Public Transport and then buses. http://www.humanrights.gov.au/disability_rights/transport/busstops.htm

While I do not want to repeat that advice I would like to emphasise my view that in order to comply with the requirement of a continuous accessible path of travel a person with a disability must be able to:

1. Get to and away from the bus stop - while the Standards do not extend beyond the bus stop, they do require - in my view - a seamless transition from the bus stop to the surrounding footpath where one exists;

2. Have sufficient circulation space to get onto and off an accessible bus;

3. Safely use a boarding device deployed by an accessible bus; and

4. Get to and from any infrastructure associated with the bus stop and used by passengers in conjunction with travelling on a public transport service, such as a bus shelter.

The point I make here is that while the Transport Standard may be limited to elements within the transport service delivery system that system connects to the broader built environment. If the transport infrastructure does not connect seamlessly with the broader footpath network the transport system will continue to be inaccessible to many people with a disability no matter how many accessible buses are on line.

This is where Local Government can play a vital role in working with transport service providers and transport users to plan for priority work to ensure seamless paths of travel from transport connection points to shops, hospitals, recreation facilities, parks and public spaces.

As someone said to me the other day if you cannot get from your front door to a bus stop, it really does not matter how wonderfully technically compliant the bus stop is.

A partnership between service providers and users would allow local government to take a lead role in moving beyond mere compliance with the technical requirements of the Standard to planning more comprehensively for a sustainable public transport system.

Finally, I want to talk about The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

No, this presentation has not morphed into a film review, and I'm not about to start whistling that well-known tune. I'm going to give a plug for a new resource the Commission is releasing in the next week or so.

Over the past decade we have dealt with thousands of inquiries from people with disabilities, designers, builders and certifiers about how to make sure buildings are accessible at a level consistent with responsibilities under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA).

As most of you will know, while the Commission has issued advisory notes and guidelines on good practice, the DDA does not include technical specifications that can be referred to for compliance.

In order to give greater clarity to what is required, the Commission and many industry, community and government bodies have been working with the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) to develop a DDA Disability Standard on Access to Premises (Premises Standard).

When completed, this Premises Standard, and corresponding changes to the Building Code of Australia (BCA), will provide designers, builders and certifiers with design specifications deemed to meet both DDA and BCA requirements.

In the meantime new buildings are being built and existing buildings renovated. Unfortunately, the experience of the Commission would suggest that in far too many cases the requirements for access of even the current BCA and its referenced Australian Standards are not being met.

This is simply not acceptable. Failure to put in fire control systems to specification or failures to ensure footings are appropriate for buildings are not tolerated. Yet we seem to tolerate handrails in accessible toilets being put in upside down, missing signage that is required by the BCA and ineffectively located Tactile Ground Surface Indicators.

In an attempt to draw attention to these failings we have produced a resource called The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly provides examples of common mistakes made in applying the BCA and its referenced Australian Standards which could be used by designers, builders, certifiers and access experts as an education and information tool.

The purpose of this resource is to explain why precise application of the BCA and its referenced Australian Standards is necessary by describing how people with disability benefit from good design and construction.

It does not try to replicate all the access provisions of the BCA or Australian Standards in words and pictures, and it does not seek to define access requirements under the DDA. It simply draws attention to the fact that the technical specifications are there for a reason, and failure to apply them has serious consequences.

The resource will be available free on CD and will be on our website in about one week's time.

Conclusion

I've been a local Councillor, and I understand how directly local government services are relevant to residents; and I've experienced the process of being told - again and again and again - by residents, just how relevant they are. But you know- there right. So my message to you, when planning transport and related services, is to put yourself in the shoes of your residents, those who use wheelchairs, white canes, or have other disabilities. The numbers of those residents are growing, and they could include you or your family members, if they don't already. And an inclusive community is a sustainable community.

Thanks for the chance to speak with you today.