Presentation to the NSW Subcommittee of the Australian Braille Authority
Bruce Maguire
Policy Officer, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
11 April 2002
Have you ever stopped to think about all the things that we take for granted? When you're wandering through the breakfast cereal isle at the supermarket, for example, do you ever wonder whether Uncle Toby really was? If so, was he related to Sara Lee? Were Nana's apple pies originally made by Granny Smith? It's not so much that familiarity breeds contempt as that it lulls us into a state of mind where we no longer feel the need to question or even test our assumptions and presumptions. This also happens often when we work in a particular area, and assume that the truths and insights that are self-evident to us are equally so to others. Take braille, for instance: all of us here are involved with it in a fairly significant way, whether as readers, transcribers, or teachers. Some of us use braille in our employment and study, as well as for recreation. Braille is as much a way of life as it is a literacy tool. In the general community, braille is a potent - if not always positive - symbol of blindness, probably as much as the white cane or the guide dog. In short, braille has, in the course of its 175-year history, become sufficiently accepted into mainstream society and culture that most dictionaries now spell it with a lowercase b.
Do we, then, take braille for granted? Maybe that's why we don't often question an assumption that many of us have about braille. The assumption that I'm referring to is that: despite the long history of braille, and despite its demonstrated value for blind people, we should not expect to see much of it around. To put it another way: braille is for subcommittees, fanatics, and a diminishing number of libraries, but is can't be an integral part of the built environment. In my presentation this afternoon, I want to challenge that assumption, by showing how technology and the law is providing, and can provide, access to information through braille.
First, a little background about the Commission. The Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (affectionately known as HREOC) was established in 1986, replacing the former Human Rights Commission that had been established in 1981. The Commission has a number of functions clustered around the administration of Commonwealth and international legislation dealing with human rights.
Firstly, HREOC has responsibility in relation to seven international
instruments
ratified by Australia. These instruments are
1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
2. International Labour Organisation Discrimination (Employment) Convention
ILO 111
3. Convention on the Rights of the Child
4. Declaration of the Rights of the Child
5. Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons
6. Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons, and
7. Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination
Based on Religion or Belief.
Secondly, the Commission administers a number of pieces of Commonwealth
legislation:
1. The Disability Discrimination Act 1992
2. The Racial Discrimination Act 1975
3. the Sex Discrimination Act 1984
In addition, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice
Commissioner has specific functions under the HREOC Act and under the
Native Title
Act, 1993. These functions relate to the monitoring of the enjoyment or
otherwise by Indigenous people of their rights under the law.
Each major function of the commission is supported by a policy unit.
The Human Rights Unit promotes the objectives of the various human rights
instruments; the Racial Discrimination Unit promotes the objectives of
the Racial Discrimination Act; the Sex Discrimination Unit promotes the
objectives of the Sex Discrimination Act; and the Disability Rights Unit
promotes the objectives of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). These
objectives are:
* eliminate discrimination against people with disabilities
* promote community acceptance of the principle that people with disabilities
have the same fundamental rights as all members of the community, and
" ensure as far as practicable that people with disabilities have
the same rights to equality before the law as other people in the community.
I want to spend some time talking about the DDA, both because it is an important tool for those of us who are seeking to eliminate disability discrimination, and also because it is widely misunderstood and under-utilised.
The DDA came into force in 1993, and followed a long period of consultation and discussions, beginning in 1981 which was declared by the UN to be the International Year of Disabled People (originally, it was "persons" but it was changed to "people").
The Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) makes it unlawful to discriminate against a person on the grounds of a disability. The objects of the DDA include eliminating, as far as possible, discrimination against people with disabilities and promoting recognition and acceptance within the community that people with disabilities have the same fundamental rights as the rest of the community.
The DDA uses a broad definition of "disability" that includes:
" Physical
" Intellectual
" Psychiatric
" Sensory
" Neurological, and
" Learning disabilities, as well as
" Physical disfigurement, and
" The presence in the body of disease-causing organisms.
The law is administered by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) and sets out specific areas in which it is unlawful to discriminate. These areas include accommodation, employment, access to premises, and the provision of goods, services and facilities. The definition of 'services' in the DDA includes financial and information services provided, for example, through Webster, telephones, ATM and EFTPOS sites. An organisation that provides such services is liable for complaint if those services are not accessible to people with disabilities.
The DDA recognises, however, that in certain circumstances, providing equitable access for people with disabilities could cause 'unjustifiable hardship' for an individual or organisation providing goods or services.
Where a person with a disability believes they have been discriminated against they can complain to the Commission who will investigate the complaint and, where appropriate, attempt to conciliate a solution between the two parties. Where conciliation is not possible the complainant may take their complaint to the Federal Court or Federal Magistrates Service who have the authority to determine whether unlawful discrimination has occurred and what constitutes 'unjustifiable hardship'.
The Commission also has a role in assisting organisations understand their responsibilities and supporting initiatives aimed at promoting compliance through best practice. While these Industry Standards have no force in law the Commission has supported their development in the hope that they will provide a level of access consistent with the requirements of the DDA.
At the heart of the DDA is a complaints mechanism: people with disabilities who feel they have been discriminated can lodge a compliant with HREOC, and it will be investigated. While some disability groups have embraced this process, but it does seem to me that the blind community and those who work with blind people have yet to fully appreciate the purpose of the DDA and how it can be used to reduce individual and systemic discrimination. There have, for example, been very few complaints made about discrimination in the provision of information, yet blind people are only able to access a fraction of what sighted people can access: books, pamphlets, bank statements, water rates, electricity bills, building signage, signs at railway station - the list is almost endless. By and large, blind people accept a level of discrimination that would not be tolerated by other disability groups or the community generally.
On reason for this passivity, it seems to me, is that there is confusion between complaining and whingeing. I have heard people way things like "you shouldn't complain about not being able to access things - that's the way the world is, and if you complain, you're just a troublemaker". This attitude shows a lack of understanding of the DDA: the law assumes that people will use it to make complaints. Quite often I get phone calls from peop0le who ask questions like "does the DDA make a building owner install a wheelchair ramp", or "does the DDA mean that electricity companies have to give me my bill in braille?" The answer is a definite "no": the DDA doesn't "make" anyone do anything: whether an action is discrimination can only be determined by applying the principles underlying the DDA, and that can only ultimately be done by the Federal court. The DDA does make it unlawful to discriminate against people on the grounds of disability, and most individuals, companies and organisations would prefer not to act unlawfully, so the DDA does have an inbuilt persuasive force. But, the bottom line is that if people don't complain if they feel that they are being discriminated against, then the DDA will be largely ineffectual. Perhaps "complaint" is the wrong word: maybe we should use some other word, such as "advocate" or "document"; but for the moment, people who feel that they are being discriminated against on the ground of disability need to see a complaint as a positive rather than as a negative action.
I want especially to encourage those of you who are teachers to realise that you have an important role to play in making blind students aware of the DDA and how they can use it effectively; an advocacy state of mind doesn't just happen: people need to be taught how to advocate, how to present issues effectively, and, most importantly, they need to be shown that disability rights are legitimate rights for they should not feel ashamed to demand.
But whether we are educators, braille producers, parents or braille users, we all have many daily opportunities to promote the objects of the DDA, that is, to work for the elimination of disability discrimination. In many case, it is not even necessary to lodge a DDA complaint: the threat of a complaint is often sufficient, and in some cases, just pointing out that you believe an action is discriminatory will result in remedial actions being taken. For example, on several occasions I have pointed out to publishers that if they impose unreasonable restrictions on how a braille version of one of their titles can be distributed, or if they refuse to supply the text in electronic format to speed up the production of an alternative-format version, then they are discriminating against people who are blind and thus contravening the DDA. I invite them to reconsider, and the result has almost always been positive.
Although the DDA operates primarily through a complaints-based process, there are a number of other important ways in which the DDA can be used to bring about systemic change:
1. Standards and Guidelines:
The DDA allows for the development of what are known as DDA standards, in certain specific areas, these areas being accommodation, education, employment, the administration of Commonwealth laws and programmes, transport and, most recently, access to premises. DDA standards provide much more specific information about what needs to be done to comply with the DDA in a particular area. Once a DDA standard has been promulgated, then contravening the standard amounts to a breach of the DDA itself; but, on the other hand, if an organisation is complying with a DDA standard, then they are deemed to be complying with the DDA in the area in question, and so a complaint cannot be successful. It is therefore important that DDA standards be developed with full consultation and consideration, and so far the process has been very slow - too slow, some would say. At the moment, it is likely that the DDA transport will come into force late this year; work is currently underway in the development of a DDA standard covering access to premises, and as a first step, the Building Code of Australia has recently been amended to extend the range of provisions covering accessibility features in building, including braille and tactile signs. The Commission's view is that the development of DDA standards offers a significant and effective opportunity for the elimination of discrimination through systemic change.
In its role of supporting the objects of the DDA, the Commission is able
to undertake a range of inquiries into particular areas where disability
discrimination may or has been alleged to occur. Some inquiries are started
because of a request from the Commonwealth Attorney-general for the Commission
to look into a particular issue; other inquiries are initiated by the
Commission itself as a way of clarifying issues or gaining additional
information; the third type of inquiry is initiated in response to a particular
complaint.
Inquiries have resulted in some important progress being made in a number of areas:
E-comerce forum and banking industry standards: The Attorney-general asked the Commission in August 1999 to investigate the effects on people with disabilities and older Australians of the rapid development and use of new digital technologies in E-commerce and the provision of government services. The subsequent inquiry resulted in the publication in March 2000 of the Commission's report, which contained a number of recommendations, including the upgrading of electronic banking services, improved access to electronic materials for students with disabilities, and work aimed at resolving copyrights issues affecting people with print disabilities.
Following the release of the report, the Commission worked with the Australian Bankers' Association to establish the Accessible E-commerce Forum, including representatives from HREOC, the Australian Bankers' Association, Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department, Blind Citizens Australia, the Physical Disability Council of Australia, Council on the Ageing, and a number of other organisations and groups.
An important outcome of the Forum has been the development of banking industry standards covering ATMs, Eftpos, telephone banking, and Internet banking. The draft standards were released for public comment in November last year, and the final version will be released next Monday.
I want to stress the value of comments that are received from individuals during such periods of public consultation. The draft standards were available in braille, and the final version will also be available in braille, Very few braille users commented on the standards, even though they were available at no cost. I would encourage braille users to get a copy of the final version of the standards when they are released next week, and to read them. Each of the 4 standards some mention of braille. However, the standards represent a voluntary, best-practice approach to the achievement of the objects of the DDA, and one way that industry can be encouraged to adopt them is for people to read the standards and then contact their bank asking when they will be adopted.
I want to turn now to two specific areas that have particular relevance
for braille users: copyright, and the availability of tertiary study materials.
I have participated in many discussions, workshops, subcommittees, and submissions dealing with the way copyright law impacts on people with print disabilities. One thing that all these activities have had in common over the past 12 years or so is that just about everyone comes away more confused than they were before, and not much has happened. That is, hopefully, about to change. There have been some changes to the Australian Copyright Act that make it easier for organisations assisting people with print disabilities to produce material in alternative formats without the need to get permission from copyright holders, but the development of electronic distribution mechanisms such as the Internet have introduced a new set of fairly complex issues.
Last month I had a meeting with the Copyright Agency Limited, which is the body entrusted with the administration of the Copyright Act. We agreed that we need to work together, and with the mainstream book publishing industry in Australia, to resolve these issues. So, HREOC is hoping to establish a publishing forum that will include representatives from the Australian Publishers Association, CAL, Blind Citizens Australia, Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL), and other interested groups. One thing we are hoping to achieve is a voluntary code of practice that will allow individuals who scan books to share those scanned books with other people who have a print disability. More long-term, we are hoping to work towards the establishment of a national repository of publishers' electronic texts, which is similar in concept to the work that is being done in the US.
The Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) has figures that show that across Australia there are 4000 university students who have a vision impairment. Most of these are probably not braille users, but the need for braille is definitely increasing. There has been an increase in the number of complaints made under the DDA concerning failure of universities to provide material in braille and other accessible formats. At the same time, the National Information and Library Service has, quite reasonably, said that it cannot continue with the massive subsidies that it has given to universities for braille production.
So HREOC decided earlier this year to convene a one-day forum to assist the sector develop strategies for improving access to tertiary study materials for students with print disabilities. We are aiming the forum at senior university staff and other relevant groups. At the moment I am writing a discussion paper that will outline the issues and suggest some possible solutions. The forum will be held on Wednesday May 29 at the University of Technology. I wonder to emphasise that the forum is by invitation only, and is not public. This is not because it is secret, but because we want to keep the numbers to a reasonable size so that we can achieve some real outcomes.
I have been having extensive discussions with universities, students and parents of students, in preparation for the forum, and I would like to pass on to you one theme that is becoming very obvious: many blind students start university without the necessary technology skills that they need. If a blind student can't use a screen-reader to access computer applications such as Word and email programs, and if they can use a scanner to scan a study guide or a book, and if they can't use the Internet to look up a library catalogue or download a file, then they are going to find it very difficult to cope with the demands of university study. Again, teachers have a crucial role to play here: the time to learn these skills is at school, not during the first week of university and, in any case, universities are generally speaking not equipped to teach people how to use adaptive technology. Technological literacy is not a luxury these days for anyone, and for blind students it is an absolute necessity.
Now I want to return to the question that I posed at the beginning of my presentation: why is braille so rarely seen (and felt) in the wild? Drawing the threads together, I think I can give at least a partial answer: firstly, promotion of disability rights is a comparatively recent phenomenon, and many braille users are still not comfortable either with the premise that it is OK to demand rights, or with the idea of using the DDA to lodge complaints alleging disability discrimination. Secondly, advocacy skills require time, effort, and good teaching to develop. Thirdly, to be successful advocates in the contemporary world, one needs good technology skills so that one can gain the maximum access to the vast amounts of information that are available.
The challenge that we face as braille advocates is not an easy one, but it is an exciting one, and there is much that we can achieve. I and other staff in the disability rights unit at HREOC are always happy to discuss ideas that you may have for using the law and technology to promote braille and, in so doing, help to eliminate discrimination against people on the grounds of their disability.
I'm happy to try and answer any questions, or to give you any more information
about the topics that I've discussed this afternoon.
