Presentation to State and Local Government CEO's

 

Perth , WA

Graeme Innes AM

2 April 2009

I acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet.

INTRODUCTION

It's a great pleasure for me to be back in Perth , and particularly here at the Association For The Blind. During the eighties and nineties I lived in Perth for around ten years. I met and married my wife here, and still have strong family links. We still own property here and, if I have my way, we'll retire back here. Despite the fact that I have lived over East now for 16 years, I still barrack for the Eagles and the Western Warriors, and pronounce the suburb Coogee rather than Coogee.

However, you've got to show pretty strong commitment to convince West Australians that you are really one of them. Some friends held a drinks function for us when we moved to Sydney in 1993 and - after a few scotches I admit - one of my best friends said to me, "oh well, it was only ten years, we knew you wouldn't last."

My joint NSW WA heritage has an advantage for all of you, though, if you want to take my message back to your organisations. If the culture is one which appreciates prophets from afar, then I'm from NSW. However, if it is a little more parochial, then I'm a prodigal son returned.

DISABILITY

As you know, the issues I have been asked to talk about today relate to disability. Bill Shorten, Parliamentary Secretary for Disability Services in the Federal Government described the challenges facing Australians with disability at his Press Club lunch address yesterday as the "last frontier of practical civil rights in this country." I agree with him.

Let's first have a think about disability, how prevalent it is, and the situation in which Australians with disability live. Because Bill Shorten's message yesterday was the same as mine today- governments and the broader Munity face an urgent challenge to transform the situation of Australians with disability from one of poverty, disadvantage and exclusion to one of equal wealth, equality and welcome. By the way, Bill Shorten's address was televised on ABC 1. I'm sure there is some way for you to have a look at it either in ABC replays or on the internet. I recommend it as compelling viewing.

So, let's examine disability, and its prevalence in our community. Because some of these statistics might surprise you. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics in May 2004, o ne-in-five Australians report a disability. Almost 4 million people reported a disability, with the rate similar for males and females. The rate increased with age, reaching 81% for those aged 85 years and over.

So disability (whether temporary or longer term) is a normal part of life. Statistics vary a little, coming from different surveys and methods of collection. But they indicate around 1 in every 5 Australians, or over 3 million people, experience a mental disorder of some kind; 14% of the community, or around 2.6 million Australians, have a physical disability of some kind; over 1 million Australians have a significant hearing impairment, with around 30,000 Australians totally deaf; around 300,000 Australians have a substantial vision impairment with around 20,000 totally blind; and around 2% of the population, or 400,000 Australians, have an intellectual impairment. So its no surprise that making adjustments to accommodate disability is a normal part of life- in education, employment, access to buildings, access to community services etc.

One million Australians experience profound or severe disability- that's the population of Adelaide . 2.5 million Australians are caring for people with disability- that's the population of Adelaide plus Perth .

Where a person with a disability lives in a household, that household is living on less than half the median income of Australian households. And the cost of disability is estimated to account for 30% of the household income.

There is a strong correlation between socio-economic status and severe disability in capital cities, according to a report released this week by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. The report, The geography of disability and economic disadvantage in Australian capital cities, focused on people aged under 65, thereby excluding much of the disability related to ageing. Report author, Dr Louise O'Rance, said that the figures clearly showed that disability among people aged under 65 was more common in communities where residents had fewer economic resources. "For example, 3.1 % of people living in the most disadvantaged fifth of local areas had severe disability, compared to 1.3 % of those who lived in the most advantaged fifth of local areas.' Some city-specific examples included:

•  Sydney , where 2% of residents had severe disability, ranging from 0.7% in Mosman to 4% in Inner Parramatta.

•  Melbourne , where 2.1% of residents had severe disability, ranging from 0.7% in Southbank-Docklands to 3.9% in Hume-Broadmeadows.

•  Brisbane , where 2.3% of residents had severe disability, including, for example, 0.6% in the Inner City compared with 5.8% in Redland-Balance.

•  Adelaide , where 2.7% of residents had severe disability, ranging from 1.1% in Adelaide Hills-Central, to 6% in Playford-Elizabeth.

People with disability often have lower average incomes than people without disability, and their disability can impose extra costs on individuals and their families.'

'On the other hand, risk factors for many chronic diseases are higher among socio-economically disadvantaged people, and people working in lower status jobs can face greater occupational hazards (such as serious workplace injury) that in turn contribute to higher rates of disability', Dr O'Rance said.

People with a disability are less likely to have completed a higher educational qualification than those without a disability. One-in-five people aged 15-64 in private households who reported no disability had a bachelor degree or higher, compared to one-in-eight people - 13% - with a disability.

Other findings include:

•  Many people with disabilities were not in the labour force, with participation decreasing markedly with greater levels of disability. Labour force participation rate were between 15% and 50%. The rate for people without a disability was 81%.

•  People with disabilities experienced a higher unemployment rate - 9 % - than those without a disability (5%).

•  People with a disability who were employed, were more likely to work in a part-time job - 37% - than those who were employed and did not have a disability (29%).

So, by any measure, people with a disability are disadvantaged.

SUSTAINABILITY

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 seems clear to me that a sustainable community is one that does not compromise the future of our children or ourselves, by constructing buildings and services that are accessible only to those who do not have a disability. And a sustainable community is one that does not compromise the future of our children and ourselves by perpetuating the myths in our community about people with disability, and by continuing to not welcome us into the broader community. It is not just the 20% of people currently identified as having a disability that will benefit from a more accessible community. We are all well aware of the significant effect that an ageing population will have on our community over the next 20 to 50 years. To put it simply, in the context of our changing demography, a community that is not accessible, and that does not welcome people with a disability, is not sustainable.

So, can I assume that you are persuaded as to the importance of ensuring that all members of our community are welcomed, and assisted to participate in it? I hope the answer is yes. If not, then this prophet from the East better get on his camel - or perhaps his guide dog - and go home.

DISABILITY CONVENTION

So let me talk about three tools which may assist with that participation. Firstly, the Convention on the rights of people with disabilities.

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an international human rights instrument. It is intended to protect the rights and dignity of people with disabilities. Parties to the Convention are required to promote, protect, and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by people with disabilities, and ensure that they enjoy full equality under the law.

The text was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 December 2006, and opened for signature on 30 March 2007. It came into force on 3 May 2008. 50 countries are parties to the convention, while a further 93 have signed, but have not yet ratified.

The Convention is monitored by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This committee of experts, elected last November, includes an Australian- Professor Ron McCallum.

Article 1 defines the purpose of the convention:

to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.

Articles 2 and 3 provide definitions and general principles.

Articles 4 - 32 define the rights of people with disabilities, and the obligations of countries towards them. Many of these mirror rights affirmed in other UN conventions, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, or the Convention Against Torture, but with specific obligations ensuring that they can be fully realised by people with disabilities.

Articles 33 - 39 govern reporting and monitoring of the convention.

Articles 40 - 50 govern ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Convention. Article 49 also requires that the Convention be available in accessible formats.

Guiding Principles of the Convention

There are eight guiding principles that underlie the Convention:

1. Respect for inherent dignity, individual autonomy, including the freedom to make one's own choices, and independence of persons

2. Non-discrimination

3. Full and effective participation and inclusion in society

4. Respect for difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities as part of human diversity and humanity

5. Equality of opportunity

6. Accessibility

7. Equality between men and women

8. Respect for the evolving capacities of children with disabilities, and respect for the right of children with disabilities to preserve their identities

Definition of Disability:

The convention defines disability as including

those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

"What the Convention endeavours to do," said Don MacKay, Chairman of the committee that negotiated the treaty, "is to elaborate in detail the rights of persons with disabilities, and set out a code of implementation".

Convention Rights

Countries that join in the Convention engage themselves to develop and carry out policies, laws, and administrative measures, for securing the rights recognized in the Convention, and abolish laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination (Article 4).

As a change of perceptions is essential to improve the situation of people with disabilities, ratifying countries are to combat stereotypes and prejudices, and promote awareness of the capabilities of people with disabilities (Article 8).

Countries are to guarantee that people with disabilities enjoy their inherent right to life, on an equal basis with others (Article 10), ensure the equal rights and advancement of women and girls with disabilities (Article 6), and protect children with disabilities (Article 7).

Children with disabilities shall have equal rights, shall not be separated from their parents against their will, except when the authorities determine that this is in the child's best interests, and in no case shall be separated from their parents on the basis of a disability of either the child or the parents (Article 23).

Countries are to recognize that all people are equal before the law, to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability, and guarantee equal legal protection (Article 5).

Countries are to ensure the equal right to own and inherit property, to control financial affairs, and to have equal access to bank loans, credit and mortgages (Article 12). They are to ensure access to justice on an equal basis with others (Article 13), and make sure that people with disabilities enjoy the right to liberty and security, and are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily (Article 14).

Countries must protect the physical and mental integrity of people with disabilities, just as for everyone else (Article 17), guarantee freedom from torture, and from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and prohibit medical or scientific experiments without the consent of the person concerned (Article 15).

Laws and administrative measures must guarantee freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse. In case of abuse, States shall promote the recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration of the victim, and investigate the abuse (Article 16).

People with disabilities are not to be subjected to arbitrary or illegal interference with their privacy, family, home, correspondence or communication. The privacy of their personal, health and rehabilitation information is to be protected like that of others (Article 22).

On the fundamental issue of accessibility (Article 9), the Convention requires countries to identify and eliminate obstacles and barriers, and ensure that people with disabilities can access their environment, transportation, public facilities and services, and information and communications technologies.

People with disabilities must be able to live independently, to be included in the community, to choose where and with whom to live, and to have access to in-home, residential and community support services (Article 19). Personal mobility and independence are to be fostered by facilitating affordable personal mobility, training in mobility skills and access to mobility aids, devices, assistive technologies and live assistance (Article 20).

Countries recognize the right to an adequate standard of living and social protection; this includes public housing, services and assistance for disability-related needs, as well as assistance with disability-related expenses in case of poverty (Article 28).

Countries are to promote access to information, by providing information intended for the general public in accessible formats and technologies, by facilitating the use of Braille, sign language and other forms of communication, and by encouraging the media and Internet providers to make on-line information available in accessible formats (Article 21).

Discrimination relating to marriage, family and personal relations shall be eliminated. People with disabilities shall have the equal opportunity to experience parenthood, to marry and to found a family, to decide on the number and spacing of children, to have access to reproductive and family planning education and means, and to enjoy equal rights and responsibilities regarding guardianship, wardship, trusteeship and adoption of children (Article 23).

States are to ensure equal access to primary and secondary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning. Education is to employ the appropriate materials, techniques and forms of communication. Pupils with support needs are to receive support measures, and pupils who are blind, deaf and deaf-blind are to receive their education in the most appropriate modes of communication, from teachers who are fluent in sign language and Braille. Education of people with disabilities must foster their participation in society, their sense of dignity and self worth, and the development of their personality, abilities and creativity (Article 24).

People with disabilities have the right to the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability. They are to receive the same range, quality and standard of free or affordable health services as provided other persons, receive those health services needed because of their disabilities, and not to be discriminated against in the provision of health insurance (Article 25).

To enable people with disabilities to attain maximum independence and ability, countries are to provide comprehensive habilitation and rehabilitation services in the areas of health, employment and education (Article 26).

Persons with disabilities have equal rights to work and gain a living. Countries are to prohibit discrimination in job-related matters, promote self-employment, entrepreneurship and starting one's own business, employ people with disabilities in the public sector, promote their employment in the private sector, and ensure that they are provided with reasonable accommodation at work (Article 27).

Countries are to ensure equal participation in political and public life, including the right to vote, to stand for elections and to hold office (Article 29).

Countries are to promote participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport by ensuring provision of television programmes, films, theatre and cultural material in accessible formats, by making theatres, museums, cinemas and libraries accessible, and by guaranteeing that people with disabilities have the opportunity to develop and utilize their creative potential, not only for their own benefit, but also for the enrichment of society. Countries are to ensure their participation in mainstream and disability-specific sports (Article 30).

Countries are to provide development assistance in efforts by developing countries to put into practice the Convention (Article 32).

To ensure implementation and monitoring of the Convention, countries are to designate a focal point in the government, and create a national mechanism to promote and monitor implementation (Article 33).

An 18-article Optional Protocol on Communications allows individuals and groups to petition the Expert Committee once all national recourse procedures have been exhausted.

The Convention marks a "paradigm shift" in attitudes and approaches to people with disabilities. It takes to a new height the movement from viewing people with disabilities as "objects" of charity, medical treatment and social protection towards viewing people with disabilities as "subjects" with rights, who are capable of claiming those rights, and making decisions for their lives based on their free and informed consent, as well as being active members of society.

So, how is this document relevant to State and Local government- after all its a few tiers of Government away. Yes, it has been ratified by Australia , but not yet adopted into national law. Much of it is supported by existing Federal and State discrimination law, but many of the rights set out are to be progressively realised. It's a road-map towards a change in culture, the sort of change in culture talked about by Bill Shorten in his presentation yesterday, introducing in broad terms the Commonwealth Governments National Disability Strategy.

ACCESS TO PREMISES STANDARDS

Let's turn now to the topic of standards on access to premises.

Before providing you with an update on the proposed Disability Standard in the area of access to premises, I would just like to remind you of the current problems associated with building access, and the proposed mechanism for overcoming these problems.

The fundamental problem is, as you know, that despite 16 years of the DDA, most in the design, construction and development industries have failed to adequately address their responsibilities to ensure equitable access to, and use of, buildings.

Part of that problem can be put down to the fact that the DDA does not provide sufficient clarity on what must be done to avoid discrimination, and part to the fact that there is apparent duplication and inconsistency in requirements between building and discrimination law.

The strategy to address this problem, proposed by the previous Federal Government and supported by the current Government, is to develop DDA Premises Standards, which will more clearly define levels of access required by the DDA.

Overcoming regulatory duplication and inconsistency is to be achieved by changing the access provisions in the current Building Code of Australia, so that they precisely mirror the requirements of the Premises Standards.

By doing this, we will be providing the best possible surety that compliance with the BCA results in compliance with the DDA, on those matters covered by the Premises Standards.

Apart from the benefits to people with a disability; older Australians; families with children and prams; and delivery people will enjoy as a result of higher levels of access, the building industry as a whole will benefit from the surety compliance with the one set of requirements will give.

It seemed like a good idea at the time, and it remains a good idea. Its almost painful, however, to reflect on how long it has taken us to get here.

The good news is, as most of you will know, that we are currently in the middle of a Parliamentary committee inquiry into the draft Premises Standards.

The Federal Government tabled a draft last December, and immediately referred the draft to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, to conduct the inquiry, and provide an opportunity for interested parties to have a final say on the proposal.

It is 9 long years since discussion on a Premises Standards began, and almost 5 years since an earlier draft was made available in 2004 for public comment.

In that time, thousands of buildings have been built or renovated and, while some developers have acted responsibly, to try and improve access, most of those buildings do not provide a level of access to allow for independent equitable use by people with a range of disabilities.

Now, at last, we can have some confidence that we are in the home stretch.

The Parliamentary Inquiry has received over 100 submissions, and conducted a number of Public Hearings, where evidence has been provided from all the major interest groups, including the disability sector, State, Territory and Local Government, the property and building sectors, and organisations representing industries such as tourism.

The Committee plans to report back to Parliament by early June, and we hope the Government will act quickly to begin the formal regulation process that will lead to the adoption of the Premises Standards.

That process will take some time, due to Parliamentary requirements. I would not expect it to be completed until late this year or early next.

Following adoption of the Premises Standards, however, we will still have to formalise changes to the BCA, to ensure consistency. That will also take some time, as every State and Territory will have to change its building laws.

My own best estimate is that implementation of the Premises Standards, and changed BCA requirements, will not occur until early 2011. This will disappoint many, but considering the time we have waited, and the significance of the proposals, it will be worth the extra wait.

In the period between knowing what the final Premises Standards will contain, and their implementation date, I will be working with the design, construction and certification industry, to ensure a rigorous education and information program is initiated, so that the standards are applied, and compliance monitored.

MAJOR CHANGES

So what are some of the major changes that are proposed within the draft Premises Standards.

•  There will be requirements for accessible facilities in accommodation such as Bed and Breakfast or cabins or Caravan or holiday parks, where there are 4 or more rooms/cabins

•  There will be increased requirements for accessible units in hotel and motels

•  There will be requirements for access into swimming pools where the perimeter of the pool is greater than 40 metres.

•  There will be increases in the provision of accessible entrances, and doorways to buildings

•  There will be increases in circulation space requirements in most places, such as in lifts, accessible toilets and at doorways. There will also be requirements for passing and turning spaces on passageways in many situations.

•  There will be improvements in the number and distribution of accessible spaces in cinema and theatres

•  There will be very significant increases in the number and location of unisex accessible toilets, and the introduction of 'ambulant accessible cubicles in standard toilets.

•  There will be increases in the areas covered by hearing augmentation systems, in rooms with a built in PA system

•  There will be some improvements in signage in relation to accessible facilities.

There are, of course, many areas where further improvements can be made. For example, the Commission in its submission has called for improvements in relation to Bed and Breakfast type accommodation, the reintroduction of access to the common areas of apartment blocks, improved access features for people with a vision impairment in stairways, better provisions in relation to swimming pool access, and improved independent operability of low rise lifts.

However, our view, like that of most of the submissions, is that this project needs to be finished, and if that means some issues are deferred until the first review of the Premises Standards, then so be it.

One last chance

While it is very late in the day, there is still time to make a contribution to the current inquiry, and those of you who feel passionate about this issue might want to have a look at the parliamentary committee website. There is a link from the Disability Rights part of the Commissions website at www.humanrights.gov.au

Along with the DDA Public Transport Standards, the Premises Standards will result in the greatest infrastructure change to improve accessibility for people with a disability that Australia has seen.

It is not perfect, there are issues that need to be better addressed, but the potential to improve the independent accessibility of our built environment for all Australians is something that will be worth celebrating.

Web Accessibility: It's Virtually Here

There's an old saying that "it never rains but it pours". Certainly that's true of Sydney at the moment. And my colleagues who are involved with website accessibility also have that saying uppermost in their minds. "Pour" (p-o-u-r) is an acronym for the four general principles that form the foundation to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. These four principles are Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. If you're not a web developer, you don't need to understand the intricacies of these principles. But whether you're a web developer, a manager of Council publications, or a disability advocate, you do need to develop a passion for web accessibility.

The internet started to become popular about the same time as the DDA became law. Even in 1993, I doubt that many of us could have predicated just how quickly, and how profoundly, the Internet would revolutionise the way we communicate, the way we live, and even the way we think.

But even today, I still hear comments like, "we don't need to make our websites accessible to people with disabilities", or "we're web developers, and we want free rein to do whatever we want: no-one's going to tell us we have to design things in a certain way so that they're accessible". Many of these same people are very willing to acknowledge the need for public premises to be accessible, but somehow they don't cross the bridge that links the public space with the virtual space. Well, they need to look at that bridge, and get over it.

Cyber-space is just another space, and websites are the equivalent of buildings and premises. Just as people with disability have the right to have equal, independent and dignified access to our government offices, shopping centres and schools, so we also have the right to have equal, independent and dignified access to the websites that are built for use by the public. This is why the UN Convention not only refers to bricks-and-mortar buildings, but also to the Internet. And there's as much need for access standards for websites as there is for premises.

The good news is that standards for web accessibility have been developed at the international level, which means that a lot of the hard work has already been done. In 1999, the Worldwide Web Consortium (W3C) published Version 1.0 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. These Guidelines have become an international benchmark for web accessibility, and are referenced in Commonwealth government guidelines, some State and Territory web accessibility policies, and by the Commission in our Web Accessibility Advisory Note.

In December 2008, the W3C released Version 2.0 of the accessibility guidelines, and, as I mentioned earlier, they are based on the four Pour principles. Version 2.0 has been almost 8 years in the making, and it has taken account of the many developments in web site technologies that have taken place since Version 1.0 was published back in 1999. As you might expect, there are many differences between the two versions, some of them fairly minor, but some of them quite significant.

We believe that Version 2.0 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines will establish a new benchmark for web accessibility, and so we have begun a process that will eventually lead to our being able to provide comprehensive recommendations for their implementation in Australia . We initially thought that we'd be able to do this by March 31, but it soon became clear that it would take quite a bit longer to work through all the implementation issues, some of them quite complex, and to engage in the kind of broad-based consultation process that we customarily do, before we make recommendations on access issues.

We want to engage with all levels of government, to make sure we are aware of all the implications that the new guidelines might have for them. We also want to engage with the broader web community, including web developers, web accessibility consultants, and disability advocates with an interest in web accessibility. While we are undertaking this consultation, and developing detailed recommendations, we recommend that people continue to use Version 1,0 as the accessibility standard.

The great thing about the web is that, by following accessibility guidelines, you can have websites that are visually appealing, but which also look good to someone with low vision who is using a screen enlargement program, sound good to someone who is blind and who is using a synthetic voice to read it, and feel good to someone who is deaf blind and who is using Braille to navigate the web. The web is one area where universal access is a realistic objective. Remember that in almost all cases, websites are only a means to an end: people use them to get information, interact with government departments, buy theatre tickets, do their grocery shopping, and develop social networks. In other words, they use websites for much the same reasons that they use buildings and premises. Access to the web is not an add-on extra, it's as much a right as access to premises, access to public transport, access to education, and all the other rights that are asserted in the UN Convention.

CONCLUSION:

To paraphrase that well known Chinese proverb, we live in interesting times. Our Prime Minister is currently at an international summit in London on the global financial crisis, putting forward the view - which appears to have some traction - of capitalism with a heart. Some people have said to me that the GFC will put back the disability agenda. But I take the more optimistic view.

No longer will markets be unregulated or minimally regulated. The capitalism and greed pendulum reached the end of its swing late last year- Governments around the world are going to tighten the regulatory screws, and expect profit not to be the only motive. This can only be a good thing for people with disability, as the social inclusion index rises. I'm making a buy recommendation on disability.

It's fair to say that Bill Shorten's National Press Club address yesterday also lit a fire under disability issues. What he said was well known to most Australians with disability, but it's really important to have those sorts of things said at the national political level. And I think the Government does have agendas to address that last frontier of practical civil rights.

But agendas as broad as the disability agenda, and issues as broad as those included in the disability convention, are not advanced by national government alone.

Interestingly, at the same time we are meeting today, a meeting is taking place in Melbourne of State and Federal government representatives interested in advancing the disability agenda, and in making the National Disability Strategy truly national. State and local government will need to play its role.

Much of the question about whether people with disability play an equal role in our community, and are welcomed as its members, lies in your hands.

Thanks for the chance to speak with you today.