Bus Industry Confederation National Conference 2012

Graeme Innes AM
Disability Discrimination Commissioner
Australian Human Rights Commission

Tuesday 30 October 2012

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

Thanks for the chance to speak with you today, and to have the opportunity for discussion. Who was Rosa Parks? She was the African-American who, in the 1960s - yes back in the last century - refused to sit at the back of the bus. She was one of the catalysts for the American civil rights movement.

Until recently, for some people with disability our problem has not been where we sit on the bus - it's been getting onto the bus. Some 15 years ago governments and the transport industry realised that - for a range of reasons - this was an unacceptable situation. And the solution found for the problem was the Accessible Public Transport Standards.

I want to talk about three things today -

• Discrimination law and Accessible Transport Standards;
• The Redline Coaches exemption refusal; and
• The Murray's coaches case.

We've lived more than 25 years with anti-discrimination laws in some States. It will be 20 years next year since the Disability Discrimination Act was passed. And at the end of year we will have had the DDA Transport Standards for 10 years. So carrying passengers with disability is not something new- it's an integral part of your industry's activities.

Next March we'll be launching a project called Twenty Years: Twenty Stories. It will celebrate progress made in the lives of people with disability since the passage of the DDA in 1992. And transport will play a major part in the short films we are making.

As you may well know, almost twenty years ago Maurice Corcoran and several other complainants - who live in Adelaide and use wheelchairs - made DDA complaints when the South Australian government announced that they were going to order a large number of new buses, but that they would not be low-floor accessible buses.  The complaints went to a hearing of the Commission, and Sir Ronald Wilson, the then Commission President negotiated a settlement of the matter. Under this settlement, the Government agreed that the new buses would all be accessible. These complaints led to negotiations — through the federal government — with the Commission and governments throughout Australia, which developed the Accessible Public Transport Standards. They came into force in 2002.

From 23 October 2002 all new transport premises, infrastructure and conveyances had to comply with the Standards. By 31 December 2012 all trips undertaken by a bus or coach will need to be conducted in 100% compliant vehicles for surfaces, handrails and grab rails. 55% of trips undertaken by a bus or coach will need to be conducted by 100% compliant vehicles for Ramps. But you know this stuff. Or if you don't, you should!

Dedicated school buses are currently excluded from the operation of some physical access provisions of the Standards. But they are, of course, still open to DDA complaints.

Charters which involve contracting with a group to provide a transport service are not covered by The Standards, but are of course covered by the general complaints mechanisms of the DDA.

By 2022, all vehicles must be fully DDA compliant. The five year report on the Transport Standards indicates that, on the whole, the accessibility of buses has increased. But there has been slower progress in upgrades of transport infrastructure than conveyances.

Upgrading bus stops to meet the Standards requires a significant investment by local governments, State governments and service providers. Much of this investment has not been made. Therefore, compliance of bus stops is a high risk issue for the industry and for governments.

General transport information continues to be difficult to access. This is a problem, both for people with disability and for the industry. It is very disappointing that governments are unable to come up with a consistent method of reporting. My sense is that most government providers will meet or accede the 55% mark required by 31 December this year. This is more likely in metropolitan than regional and rural areas.  Private operators are not doing as well, and some will not meet the 55% requirement.

The accessibility of coaches has not significantly improved for a large number of private long distance coach services. These organisations are at high risk of complaints being lodged, particularly after 31 December this year.

Redline Buses

Redline bought 11 inaccessible buses in 2010. The fact that they were inaccessible, and that the Standards had applied since 2002, clearly meant they were bought for use as school buses. Redline sought a temporary exemption from the DDA earlier this year to use these buses in general service. The Commission refused the exemption. The Commission had to weigh up the reasons in favour of granting the exemption, and the reasons against.

The Commission considered Redline's claim of unjustifiable hardship - that the cost of fitting a wheelchair lift is in excess of $38,000. But this was outweighed by the fact that public transport in Tasmania is relatively limited. Also, there are relatively few wheelchair accessible taxis, and no railway service. Further, Redline did not outline a plan for moving towards compliance with the Transport Standards during the period of the exemption, and sought an exemption without conditions. Redline has appealed the Commission's decision, and the matter is now in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Haraksin v Murrays Australia Ltd

This was a case brought by Ms Haraksin, who has brittle bone disease, and uses a wheelchair. She tried to book a seat with Murrays from Sydney to Canberra in 2009 to attend a work conference. The company told her none of its coaches could take her because she uses a wheelchair.

The matter was not resolved at conciliation by the Commission, and the complainant took it to the Federal Court. She asked the Court to order the bus company to modify its vehicles so that 25% of them are wheelchair-accessible. Murrays defended the action, saying the discrimination was not unlawful. It relied on a defence of "unjustifiable hardship", saying it would cost a total of $23 million to convert all of its 154 coaches.  The Court has not yet brought down its decision in this case.

So where do we go from here. Irrespective of what happens in the two cases I have outlined, most of you know where we are going. In 2012 it is unacceptable that people with disability cannot use buses and their related infrastructure, and the Accessible Public Transport Standards are the agreed road forward. There may be bumps in that road. But by the end of 2022 every Australian must be able to use every bus.