Meeting with National Disability Advisory Council
| Dr Sev Ozdowski OAM, Acting Disability Discrimination Commissioner May 21 2004 |
 |
Introduction: Importance of co-operation between NDAC and HREOC
Thank you for the opportunity to be here today.
I wrote to Ian Spicer early this year to commend him for agreeing to serve for a third term as Chair of the National Disability Advisory Council.
I think the long term commitment that Ian has given to this role should be admired.
You might have noticed that somehow governments never seem to want the same long term commitment from Human Rights Commissioners. In fact, they often seem quite happy to see us arrive at the end of a term of office ... .
Of course, new people can be important in bringing forward new ideas.
But I do think that the continuity and experience that Ian brings to his
role is very important.
When I wrote to Ian Spicer I also expressed my congratulations to all
members appointed for the Council's current term.
I said then that I would be happy to meet with Council at any convenient opportunity to exchange information and discuss possible joint work and priorities.
Can I also repeat now in person those congratulations and that message about the importance of working together.
I think it is important that we keep up these meetings on a reasonably regular basis, as I and my predecessors have done.
Of course, our responsibilities are not identical. Not everything within the ambit of Commonwealth Government disability policy and programs, which NDAC has a role in advising on, is within the ambit of the Disability Discrimination Act, which defines my main responsibilities. And of course the Disability Discrimination Act is not only about the activities of the Commonwealth Government, covering other levels of government and many aspects of the private sector.
But still, there are very large areas where our work overlaps and where continued co-operation can be productive in advancing access, opportunity and citizenship for people with disabilities in Australia.
Information exchange
We make a particular effort to provide detailed and regular information - through email and the world wide web - on the disability policy work of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, and to seek input in all aspects of that work..
I hope that you have all seen the regular updates which I publish to the web every eight weeks or so, which are essentially the same content as the reports I provide to my own colleagues within the Commission. We also maintain an email list to advise people when those and other updates are available. If you are not already on that email list there is information on our website on how to join or my staff can add you in if you prefer.
But all of us I think still also need the old fashioned human interaction of face to face discussion from time to time.
What I want to do today is give a brief run through of where the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission are at and where we may be going over this year on a few disability issues. I will not attempt a comprehensive survey of issues, because I want to leave plenty of time for discussion.
But I am happy to come back to any of the other issues we are dealing with or that you think we should be dealing with - either today or by contacting my office by phone or email.
Productivity Commission review of DDA
Last year, both the Commission and NDAC conducted events to mark ten years of operation of the Disability Discrimination Act. We reflected then on what has been achieved and what remains to be done.
As I think you all would know I published an informal review of the first ten years, "Don't judge what I can do by what you think I can't". That publication remains available on our website and also in print and other alternative formats.
Over the last year a more formal review of the DDA - with provision for extensive public input including hearings around Australia - has been conducted by the Productivity Commission.
The origins of this review were in a National Competition Policy requirement to review legislation assessed as having potential impact on competition or a major impact on business.
We made the point early on in this process that if anything the DDA should be considered pro-competitive - by seeking removal of the exclusion of Australians with disabilities from markets both as providers of skills and labour and as consumers of goods and services.
But we welcomed the opportunity for detailed independent assessment of the effectiveness of the DDA, and for discussion of possibilities for achieving the objects of the DDA more effectively.
The report of this inquiry was given to the Federal Government at the end of April. The report is not yet public and so I cannot comment on what is in it.
I understand though that it should be tabled in Parliament soon, since that is required within 25 sitting days from when it was delivered.
Some indication of the directions that the report is likely to take can be seen from the draft report issued late last year and discussions at the subsequent round of public hearings.
- The Productivity Commission assessed the DDA as having net economic and social benefits for the Australian community with benefits outweighing costs, and limited impact on competition
- The draft report assessed the DDA as having achieved substantial progress in some areas such as public transport and access to buildings but less success in other areas, in particular employment and discrimination against people with intellectual or psychiatric disabilities. This was consistent with the assessment HREOC published in March 2003 on the first ten years of the legislation.
- The draft made a range of proposals for making the legislation more effective. Without necessarily endorsing all of these proposals in detail HREOC welcomed their overall direction and supported their serious consideration by government. Important proposals included clarifying definitions and making wider provision for making disability standards.
- We also welcomed a call in the draft report for further consideration of how costs of achieving equal access and participation for people with disabilities can be effectively and equitably met.
I would expect and hope that NDAC, as the principal source of advice from people with a disability within government, will be closely involved in formulating the government response to the final report. The Commission made several detailed submissions and we will also be seeking to be closely involved as the Government develops and implements its response to the report.
Employment issues
I mentioned employment as an area where the draft Productivity Commission report and HREOC's own assessments have indicated a need for substantial further work and consideration of possible new approaches.
This need has been given particular emphasis by recent judicial decisions calling into serious question the effectiveness of the DDA in dealing with reasonable adjustment issues, particularly in the employment area.
Statements in two recent Federal Court decisions raise serious concerns that, in response to the High Court decision in an education case last year, Purvis v NSW, at least some judges may now be interpreting the DDA as not including any requirement of reasonable adjustment at all. (The two decisions - Forbes and Fetherston - are linked from the court decisions page on HREOC's disability rights.)
In effect this could mean treating the DDA as covering only a lack of formal equality - despite this being in my view clearly contrary to the intentions of the Parliament, and not being required by what the High Court actually decided in the Purvis case.
Such an approach would clearly render the Act largely ineffective in dealing with the majority of discrimination issues that have arisen in complaints and policy work over the last 11 years.
I am considering as a matter of urgency what responses are possible to these developments. As part of this I intend to begin discussions as soon as possible on employment issues with employer representatives, disability organisations and government. I would welcome ideas today both on processes for developing appropriate responses and on the substance of how to move forward on equal employment opportunity for people with disabilities.
It seems certain that the Productivity Commission will make recommendations in this area, and this will provide important opportunities and direction. But the Productivity Commission report and any government response to it will also have to deal with many other issues deal with by the DDA. I think we need to explore all possible processes and ideas to get a particular focus on employment issues rather than waiting for or relying exclusively on a response to the overall review of the DDA.
Commonwealth Disability Strategy
One of the areas of particular interest to NDAC where the Productivity Commission did not have much information in its draft report was on elimination of discrimination within the Commonwealth Government's own operations through the Commonwealth Disability Strategy.
Together with NDAC and a range of relevant Commonwealth Departments HREOC has been included in the Steering Committee to oversee evaluation of the current Strategy.
I think it is fair to say that there was a strong sense within the Steering Committee that parts of the Commonwealth had not embraced the Strategy vigorously and that the evaluation would show significant weaknesses in its implementation.
I have become more and more concerned by evidence that employment of people with disabilities as a proportion of the Australian Public Service is continuing to fall. This is occurring not only overall - which might be explained by reduced numbers of entry level positions - but at all levels - when we might have expected and hope that improved representation particularly at more senior levels would be flowing from
- reasonable adjustment and non-discrimination policies now in place for many years;
- developments in technology which should have made it easier to remove many disability related barriers for people with sensory or physical disabilities in particular; and
- advancing educational opportunities for people with disabilities in
recent years.
Obviously the government is not as large an employer as it once was. But public sector employment clearly still has, or should have, a critical role in setting an example on how to achieve the objectives of equality of opportunity which are enshrined in the DDA.
One proposal we made at the meeting of the CDS evaluation steering committee in March was to make changes to the project outline to ensure the issue of employment of people with disabilities within the Commonwealth was more clearly identified as a focus for the evaluation of the outcomes of the CDS.
At the same time, I am considering what other measures HREOC can take to promote wider discussion of and action on unsatisfactory outcomes in the employment area and specifically within the Commonwealth public sector. Again, I would welcome your comments in this respect, both today and as HREOC's work in this area develops.
Other issues for discussion
As I said, there is not time for me to detail now all of our other areas of work. The content of my most recent report to my own Commission, presented on Tuesday this week, is now available as the Disability Rights Update for May. Apart from the areas I have already discussed, the areas of work reported there include
- further work towards an international Convention on human rights and disability;
- consultations on the proposed disability standard on access to premises;
- developments on television captioning;
- the report of a Senate committee considering proposed amendments to the DDA regarding drug addiction;
- continued work on access to tertiary education course materials; sterilisation issues; insurance; and telecommunications.
I would be happy to talk about these and any other areas of interest and possible co-operation now, and to receive any further feedback you might have in future. Again, thank you for the opportunity to meet today.
