Tag: commissioner

Kicking an own-goal for Team Australia

Mitch Fifield is one of the best ministers in the Abbot government- you would have to be to have piloted the National Disability Insurance Scheme unscathed through the tsunami of the recent federal budget. But he has been badly advised if he blames the situation of employees with disabilities in sheltered workshops or Australian Disability Enterprises on the Australian Human Rights Commission.

Let me tell you the real story.

This government, and the previous two, have continually dragged their feet on this issue. In the late 90s, when the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool was being developed, representatives of the Commission told the government that the tool was probably discriminatory. As Deputy Disability Commissioner (1999 to 2005) and Commissioner (2005-2014) I regularly reminded them. They chose to take no action.

Mean while, about half of Australia’s ADE’s have operated, and continue to operate, using other wage assessment tools which were not discriminatory. Most of those come out with assessments which result in employees being paid higher wages than those assessed using the BSWAT.

When the Federal Court found the BSWAT to be discriminatory in 2012 I encouraged the government to support ADE’s to begin transitioning to other wage assessment tools. Instead of doing that, they sought leave from the High Court to overturn the Federal Court decision.

When the High Court did not grant leave I suggested that they apply to the Human Rights Commission for an exemption from the DDA while the transitioning took place. They took almost twelve months to lodge that application.

Minister Fifield said last week that the Commission denied the exemption application. That is not correct. The Commission granted the application, but for a period of twelve months rather than three years.

In granting a twelve month exemption, the Commission balanced the threatening of jobs against the very low wages received, and weighed the time government and ADE’s had already had to act on this matter. The Commission was not persuaded that more than twelve months would be necessary. The government had indicated in its submissions that the transition process had commenced. Other non-discriminatory assessment tools exist. The Commission wanted to ensure that the conduct which had been found to be discriminatory continued for the shortest time realistically possible.

The assertion that “there was very little consultation with the people who would be affected by the decision before it was handed down” is not true. As Commissioner, I made sure that I met with parties on all sides of the exemption process- government, National Disability Services representing the ADE’s, and organisations representing employees with disabilities. I also visited a number of ADE’s themselves, and spoke to many employees with disabilities.

In the last few years the government did economic modelling on ADE’s. This showed that some of them were not economically viable, and would be unsustainable whether the BSWAT was discriminatory or not.

It is true that ADE employees are in receipt of the Disability Support Pension- an amount of less than $20’000 a year. This does not make an hourly rate of $1, $2000 a year on top of the DSP, irrelevant. I support the concept of the “dignity of work”, but it needs to be matched by the “dignity of a fair wage”.

To suggest that without ADE’s many people would just “stay home” is an over-simplification. As the National Disability Insurance Scheme which Minister Fifield did such a great job of protecting rolls out, people with disabilities will gain far more choice and control, and be enabled to participate in a wider range of community activities.

The way to give people with disabilities “the best chance possible for a fulfilling life through employment” is for government to have a jobs plan. They could begin, as I have also said since the late 90s, by improving the percentage of people with disabilities employed in the Commonwealth Public Service. This figure has dropped from 7,5 % to 2,9 % in that time, when there are 15% of people with disabilities of working age. by not developing a jobs plan to accompany its welfare plan, the government risks kicking a spectacular own-goal for Team Australia in the hard-fought game of economic success.

The Human Rights Commission was strongly criticised by both the government and ADE’s on one side, and employee advocates on the other side, for granting a twelve-month rather than a three-year, exemption. Rather than idealism, or misplaced eutopianism, I would describe that as a realistic path towards appropriate change, along which the government and ADE’s still appear reluctant to walk.

First published in The Australian. This is the unedited version.

National Press Club speech

National Press Club address
Graeme Innes AM
Disability Discrimination Commissioner
Canberra, 2 July 2014

I acknowledge the traditional owners of this land. I do so not as a formulaic beginning, but as a sincere recognition of the place which the land holds in the lives and culture of our first Australians. I saw much of the disadvantage Aboriginal people experience during my time as Race Discrimination Commissioner, and fail to understand why – at a time when we are seeking to recognise them in our constitution – we would be changing laws to reduce their protection from the serious challenges of racial vilification.

I also acknowledge the Auslan interpreters around Australia who have signed most of my speeches for the last thirty years or so. I apologise to all of them, particularly Mandy, one of my favourites, for always promising to speak more slowly, but rarely delivering on that promise. She hasn’t carried out her threat to hit me yet, but its often been close.

I was blessed to grow up in a middle-class family, with christian ethics and values. I’m very pleased that my sister and brother are here today, and I know that my mum is watching. I gained from them the benefit of not being treated as different due to my disability, the recognition that disadvantage was real in our wealthy Australian society, and the strong will to challenge that disadvantage. That is why, when I began as Disability Commissioner and Human Rights Commissioner almost nine years ago leading the inquiry which led to the same sex same entitlements report was a no-brainer- why should we treat people differently simply because of who they loved.

At fourteen I knew I wanted to be a lawyer, because I understood that the law could reduce that disadvantage. I achieved that goal at twenty-two, and immediately experienced the reality of disadvantage. In a twelve month period I failed at thirty job interviews, mostly because employers could not understand how a blind person could work as a lawyer. Sadly, not much has changed.

Maureen, from whom I have been privileged to receive the gift of marriage for the past twenty-five years, is also here. She is my best mate, my greatest support, and my most constructive critic. Whilst not always sharing my politics, she has shared my ethics and values, and her encouragement and support have fuelled my will to succeed. She and my children have put up with my annoying ways, dad jokes, and frequent disappearances to pursue my career.

My children, Leon and Rachel, have constantly grounded me, and their view of me as a sometimes irritating and embarrassing dad has shown me their love, and made me a better Commissioner. These are the foundations on which my life and work journeys have been built.

I have never accepted the concept of “lifters” and “Leaners”, a Ming dynasty phrase which has lately gained currency. It’s such a facile concept. And we all move from one role to the other, dozens of times a day.

When I walk down the street with Maureen- and which ever street that is I couldn’t be happier- I’m a leaner. I’m gaining guidance from her by holding her arm. But when that guidance stops, and at the end of a long hard day for her, I put my arm around her in a supportive cuddle, I become a lifter.

I prefer a more positive, and less judgemental society, where everyone’s contribution is accepted and valued. I want entrances where everyone- not just people who use steps- can come in. I communicate with Auslan, so everyone – not just hearing people – can understand. This makes a more inclusive, and more sustainable society.

But many in society force people with disabilities to live within that leaner-lifter rubric. And we would be lifters, if there were not barriers in society which cause us to be leaners. I have challenged that rubric all my life, and will do so in this address.

Others demonise people with disabilities – or Disability Support Pension recipients – as slackers, shirkers and rorters. I also reject that, and will return to it later, with a solution in the form of a “jobs plan”..

So join me now on the past nine years of my life journey- yes, I’ve been a Commissioner for most of this century, and if you count the deputy role as well for all of it. Since Phillip Ruddock’s phone call to appoint me to this role, while I was buying the family fish and chips in December 2005. I vividly remember throwing my eight year old daughter high in the air, as I celebrated getting the best job I have ever had. Luckily, I caught her on the way down.

As I usually do, we’ll travel the path of assessing policy change through the stories of Australians with disabilities- Elliot, Judy and Amy. And sprinkled throughout will be references to such human rights icons as Cyndi Lauper, Dr Seus, and the Captain Matchbox Whoopee Band. I bet that’s the first time they’ve cracked a mention from the Press Club stage.

First Elliot. Elliot is a thirty-something tax accountant. He has worked for the same firm for eight years. He uses a wheelchair.

Let’s look at two days in Elliot’s life- in 2005 as he starts this job, and in 2014.

In 2005 Elliot lived with his parents, in a wheelchair friendly home in the suburbs. He wanted to live independently, but it was impossible to find a suitably accessible apartment, let alone one in his price range, near transport. He doesn’t drive, and buses in his area were among the more than 75 % not yet accessible.

Each morning, Elliot travelled in his wheelchair to the station. Stairs made the ticket office inaccessible, but he bought an annual pass, and entered the platform via an accessible gate. That works going in, but not coming home- coming home steps barred him from being on the right side of the tracks.

Lack of kerb cuts frequently prevented him from accessing a footpath or shop, and extended his journey to the office from 300m to 500m. He has to settle for bad coffee, as the good stuff, though close enough to smell, is up a step.

His employer made minor office adjustments, widening a corridor, and installing a height adjustable desk. A small ramp was needed for Elliot to wheel into the building, but the owner said it would look out of character. There were no mandatory requirements to provide access to buildings, unless a complaint was lodged under the Disability Discrimination Act. Elliot lodged his complaint, and a successful conciliation by the Human Rights Commission ensured access through the front door.

On this day in 2005, Elliot left the office early to fly to Melbourne to attend an evening seminar. Usually Elliot booked flights early, since most airlines only allow two wheelchair users per flight. But dates were changed the week before, so Elliot caught an earlier flight. This meant hanging around Melbourne for two hours before the seminar. Or maybe not, depending on whether his pre-booked accessible taxi turned up –
Like most places in Australia, demand for accessible taxis far outstripped supply.

The picture is clear. In 2005 Elliot, a well-educated, successful accountant, struggled to overcome basic accommodation and access barriers. Being a lifter was not impossible, but it was hard.

How about employment? Did Elliot face the challenges I did? Initially, he found it hard. Work force participation by people with disabilities in 1998, the year after his graduation, was 53,2 %, compared to 80,1 % for people without disabilities, ranking Australia third last among OECD countries. Eventually, he accepted a job with a firm run by a friend of his father’s, although his pay was 17 % less than the other five accountants, due to his inexperience, or so he was told…

Five years later, he landed his current position. We stay longer in jobs, take less sick leave, and claim less workers comp, but still we are under-employed.

In the mid 1990s 5,8 % of the Commonwealth government workforce were people with disabilities, but by 2005 that had fallen to 3,8 %.

Let’s fast forward to the present. The debate over the National Disability Insurance Scheme has moved disability more into mainstream conversation. Elliot now lives independently, in livable design housing, thanks to the Livable Housing Australia initiative. There isn’t much of it yet, but more than there was. And greater government and industry support needs to occur fast, if the aims of the NDIS are to be achieved. A voluntary model was agreed as a Rudd government initiative, but most of industry and government are still on their way to the party. As the current Deputy Chair, I plan to ensure that they arrive, and figuratively BYO.

Community support is starting to become available through the NDIS. I congratulate the Abbot government on continuation of the rollout in full and on time. It is providing people with disability with choice and control, and the capacity to move from leaners to lifters. And it must continue to roll out, if community participation is to become a reality. There have been some glitches around the edges, but the surveys of people with disabilities now on the scheme overwhelmingly indicate high satisfaction.

Building and footpath access have certainly improved. The Access To Premises Standards commenced in 2011, revised to meet the objectives of the DDA. Any new building, or existing building undergoing significant renovation, must comply. So Elliot now gets that great skinny latte, and has a shorter journey to work.

When he visits his parents, both sides of the railway station are now accessible. The Accessible Transport Standards, passed in 2002, are arguably the largest infrastructure change, and the biggest spend, in Australia’s history. And, as Cyndi Lauper says “Money changes everything.”

Accessible buses are well ahead of the timetables in the Transport Standards, although expensive rail and tram infrastructure is not keeping up across the country.

After dragging a recalcitrant Sydney Trains to the Federal Court, I now get told where I am on the train, and despite our worst fears, Maureen and I did not have to sell our house to pay the $800’000 Sydney Trains spent to defend its discriminatory stand. Why they didn’t just spend it on fixing the announcements remains one of life’s mysteries.

But the transport picture is not all rosy. Airlines, apart from Qantas, still practise wheelchair apartheid, with the two wheelchair policy. Whilst he may have starred on harmonica in such well-known classics as “My canary has circles under his eyes” by the Captain Match-box Whoopee Band, yes you remember them! Jim Conway learned recently that if you can’t move yourself from your wheelchair to your seat you can’t fly with Jetstar. Market forces have failed to deliver for people with disabilities in the budget airline industry. And despite loud calls for equal treatment by the disability sector and myself, government have failed to act. Regulation, similar to that in Europe, Canada and the US, is necessary to give us access to the skies.

In most States, apart from Queensland, you might wait 2-3 hours for a wheelchair accessible taxi, and people are regularly rejected from taxi travel because they use a guide or assistance dog, or have cream on their face due to their skin condition. We want to be lifters, but we have to lean, and wait til the taxi turns up, or the airline lets us onboard.

And whilst Elliot has a job, most of us do not, and 45% of us live in poverty, last among OECD countries. Government, far from leading the way in an area desperate for positive change, has only 2,9 % of its workforce as people with disabilities, when we make up 15% of the working age population. And while the recent budget makes welfare harder to get for us, re-assessing some disability support pensioners, there is no plan to get us off welfare and into work. Changes proposed just last weekend will place people with episodic disabilities on a different – probably lower – allowance, but there is still no effective jobs plan. Again, we are blocked from being lifters.

We need a jobs plan. We need to learn from the Westpacs, ANZ, Telstra and others, all the members of Australian Network on Disability – the employer representative body.

The Department of Health and Ageing – bucking the trend – are at 10 %, so it can be done. Westpac are at 13 %, so it can be done. We need to listen to employers, and meet there needs. We need to make it safer to venture off the DSP and into work. We need to offer every politician an extra staff member if they employ a person with a disability- as is done in the US. We need to give willing employers some KPI’s and some funding, and twelve months to see if they can meet their planned targets.

Because, apart from the benefits these actions would bring to people with disabilities, if only one-third of that disability-jobs gap moved off welfare and into work, the NDIS would run at a profit within a decade.

Many private employers are willing to commit to these processes. I have worked with many of them during my time in this role. But they need to learn from their peers, and be resourced to get on with it, not be surrounded by government red tape. Limiting rules and bureaucratic disincentives are, to paraphrase Missy Higgins, a danger government are addicted to. The various services contracted to find jobs for people with disabilities are not giving us value for money.

Let’s go back to 2005 with Judy – a fifty-something woman of no-fixed address. She spends some nights with her partner, but when the abuse and violence get too much she sleeps rough, or couch surfs. Judy has an intellectual disability. Like many with intellectual disabilities, she also experiences depression.

Judy is one of the 45 % of Australians with disabilities living in poverty. She would like a job, but like 19 % of people with intellectual disabilities, she cannot secure one.

Violence against women like Judy is hard to quantify in 2005. The ABS doesn’t disaggregate statistics on violence, women and disability. But we know that 90 % of women with intellectual disability experience sexual assault at some time during their lives. We know that if Judy reports the violence, the justice system will deal with it inadequately. And we know that a higher than average proportion of the population with intellectual or psycho-social disability have prison as their accommodation option.

Judy loves pretty greeting cards, and helps herself to her favourite ones from local shops. She is frequently in trouble with the police, and charged with summary offences. The Magistrate is told of her intellectual disability, yet it is rarely given consideration. She has never been offered a support person in court.

Judy doesn’t comprehend the court process, and acquiesces just to get it over with. She is encouraged to plead guilty when she is overtly unfit to do so.

Judy’s lack of access to appropriate court support programmes are a barrier to justice. They are a social cost to her, and an economic cost to the community.

So how is Judy faring in 2014? Sadly, no better. We have a long way to go to address levels of violence, particularly against women with disabilities, and to ensure all people with disabilities are treated equally before the law. And this applies particularly to Aboriginal people, and people who are culturally or linguistically diverse. That’s why the Commission’s report, which I launched this year, called upon every jurisdiction to implement a disability justice strategy.

My last story is of Amy, a diligent year 11 student in 2014, just like my daughter. She loves English and history, and stands up for what she believes in. As a member of the Deaf community, Amy uses Auslan for her learning.

Amy takes Auslan for granted, and finds it odd that another young student, Jacob Clarke, had to take his ACT school to Court in 2004 to be provided with an Auslan interpreter. So Amy appreciates that many before her have fought for their, and her, rights.

One of them was Sekou Kanneh. A year or two younger than Amy, in 2012 he took his complaint to the Commission for conciliation to level his playing field, or his running track. He’s a champion sprinter, who broke the Queensland record for his age group last year. He, too, is deaf, and just wanted a flashing light when the others got the starting gun. His actions won him, and others like Amy, an equal chance.

Amy enjoys movies with her friends. Thanks to the discrimination complaint of John Byrne, and negotiations with industry which I led, the latest movies are captioned on 230 cinema screens around Australia, so Amy sees the dialogue her friends hear.

This is also true for captions on television, which have increased significantly in the last eight years due to positive use of the Commission’s exemption process. But although I, as a blind person, get audio description in the same cinemas, I am still waiting for it to be more than a short trial on the ABC.

Amy, of course, is a digital native. Her Smartphone, like mine, is never far away. I’m probably live-tweeting this speech right now. You think I’m joking, don’t you?

Apps remove significant barriers for Amy and I. In 2012 Media Access Australia, a not-for-profit social enterprise, launched Access IQ, advocating for media that is accessible for people with disabilities. The site helps those launching video content to include captioning, or to make the content accessible to blind users. SOCOG may have prevented Bruce Maguire from enjoying the full olympic experience in 2000, but the 2012 London games were accessible for all.

So let’s consider the broader picture of significant reforms to the disability rights framework. Transport Standards passed in 2002, while I was Deputy Commissioner.
Access to Premises Standards finally passed in 2009, after significant delays in the Howard era.
Australia ratified the Disability Convention in 2008, which COAG then used as a foundation to a National Disability Strategy in 2011. For a time, our own Professor Ron McCallum AO – senior Australian of the year and a definite disability lifter, chaired the convention expert committee, although sadly we did not put forward another nomination when his term ended recently.
Just last week, Australia signed the Marrakesh copyright treaty, which will help to end the world-wide book famine experienced by people with print disabilities.
The NDIS commenced a year ago yesterday- and we are now paying 0,5 % more Medicare levy to help resource it- the most popular tax in Australia’s history, with support by 78 % of us, but not by Bernie Brooks and his friends. It will represent a seismic shift in choice and control for 500’000 Australians with disabilities.

Thanks to those changes, and a number of DDA cases brought by disability legends, some recorded in the Commission’s Twenty Years, Twenty Stories five-minute film series, of which I am very proud, it’s a different landscape.

So what might the future look like for Elliot, Judy, Amy, Graeme, and many others like us.

Disability is a normal part of the diversity of the human experience, and the life of our community. But it’s not viewed that way. Fuelled by sensationalist journalism such as that of the Daily Telegraph, running front pages comparing slackers AKA Disability Support Pensioners to slouch hats AKA Ausie soldiers, calling us shirkers and rorters, we are demonised and diminished. The pictures of so-called slackers were actually south american backpackers on holiday, and of the 45’000 “slouch hats” who returned to Australia, 20 % experience mental illness. The Tele gets it wrong on so many counts, and trashes the disability brand, but people with disabilities are the ones who pay the price and wear the damage. The Tele pushes us back into the leaners corner, despite our best efforts to leave it.

We see retail chains who think its ok to sell t-shirts with “retarde” across the front, when “nigger” or “slut” would not pass muster. Such language diminishes us, and we are viewed as either victims or heroes, when we should be viewed as agents of our own destiny. The soft bigotry of low expectations limits what we can achieve. Stella Young, who until two days ago was the editor of the ABC’s disability portal Rampup – closed down due to lack of funding by the Abbot government and the ABC – gets it right when she talks of “inspiration porn”. Watch her on TED Talks – now there’s another lifter.

That’s why one of my post-Commission activities will be to chair the board of the newly-established Attitude Foundation, following the New Zealand example of using television, film and the internet to change attitudes about people with disabilities. We need to find $200’000 by September to cover the cost of the first programming on the ABC.

Another indirect consequence of the NDIS, as well as providing us with much more choice and control, is the uniting and strengthening of the disability sector. Once divided and somewhat ineffective, the NDIS campaign has shown the benefits of a united stand, and now “the force is strong in that one”. And it will need to be, to combat the challenges ahead- to contest the “lifters and leaners” paradigm, to continue to challenge the negative and limiting view of disability, to ensure that the NDIS delivers real change, to continue to use the DDA to challenge systemic discrimination, and to lobby for a jobs plan for people with disabilities. The sector can do this, but it will need to ensure that more young leaders are nurtured, that technology, the internet and social media are harnessed, and that the faster political and media cycle are used to our advantage.

Sector participation will also be critical because the role played by the Human Rights Commission is diminished. This is not because I am leaving, but because the resourcing for the Commission has been on a downward slide, in real terms, since the mid 90s, and the capacity to produce continued positive results through the passion and commitment of Commissioners and staff is not sustainable. The Commission will do its best with the hand it is dealt, but that is becoming a weaker and weaker hand. When I began as Deputy Commissioner in 1999, there were four policy staff dedicated to disability issues, and a significant programme budget. The passion and commitment in that team, and what we achieved together, was outstanding. The down-grading of the Disability Discrimination Commissioner’s position, about which my views are well known, will mean that there is only one person in the policy section with significant disability expertise, and she is moving to another role. This reduction in the disability area reflects Commission-wide experience. Another voice to advocate for our move from leaners to lifters has been diminished.

I love this job. It’s the best job I’ve ever had. And, to paraphrase Roy and HG, too much work as a Commissioner is never enough. I still have the passion and the stomach to advocate for the rights of people with disabilities. And I will continue to do so in other roles. What I don’t have is the stomach to advocate for the rights of bigots. So perhaps its time for me to move on.

The position of people with disabilities has improved significantly in Australia in the last few decades. There is still, to quote then NSW Premier Maurice Iema “more to do, but heading in the right direction.”

On the up-side, there has been significant progress in making transport and buildings more accessible. On the down-side, as a community we are failing at finding jobs and delivering equal justice for people with disabilities. As I leave this role, I urge government, the community and the disability sector to commit to more jobs, more equal justice, and a community attitude which celebrates and enhances the contribution of people with disabilities.

Quality of life for Australians with disabilities will continue to improve, and one day we will have another full-time Disability Discrimination Commissioner with lived experience of disability. In the mean time, I’ll follow the dictum of that great human rights advocate Dr Seus, “don’t cry that it’s over. Smile that it happened.”

Thanks for the chance to speak with you today.

Will Uber Play Our Tuba

When you are about to finish in a job, you can’t help thinking of the things you would have done if you were staying.

I’ve been doing that, and wondering about what will happen to these issues. My job as Australia’s Disability Discrimination Commissioner is down-graded after 4 July. Instead of a very full-time role where I have lived experience of disability, and a knowledge of the disability sector, the role will be filled part-time by an existing Commissioner with knowledge of their own sector.

One of these issues is the changing face of our public transport system, particularly taxi transport.

If you have any involvement with the disability sector, you would have to be aware of the problems people with disabilities face using taxis-

* There are not enough accessible taxis on the road, thus making waiting times significantly longer;

* Those accessible taxis on the road are often diverted to other jobs;

* Taxi drivers sometimes refuse to carry passengers who travel with assistance animals.

The list goes on.

But there is an emerging issue, and its impact on people with disabilities could make these problems seem like the first few chords compared with the whole symphony experience.

Increasingly, we are ordering taxis using apps on our smartphones. An improvement you might say, making the process more efficient. But will the efficiency exclude passengers with disabilities? Will they be playing our song?

It’s all very well if the apps supplement the current system-
Silver Service in Sydney is an example, where Taxis Combined enhances its service with an app. It’s all very well if another provider- Ingogo or Gocatch for instance – use existing taxis, but more efficiently or cheaply funnel the business through their app. You get a taxi faster, you don’t have to wait to talk to a human, and you can watch the little dot on your screen as it approaches.

But what about companies such as Uber. Overseas, and beginning in Australia, Uber are offering a range of services, the cheapest of which involves curating a group of private car owners who will provide a “taxi” service for a fee, and putting them in touch with customers. Great, you might say, my taxi service just became cheaper and more available. But for people with disabilities, will it be violins rather than the whole orchestra?

Let’s ask some questions.

* Are passengers insured when travelling on a hire basis in a private vehicle?

* Will these services pick up people who use wheelchairs or mobility equipment?

*Will these services carry people who use assistance animals?

Overseas experience suggests that the answers to all of these questions is no.

But if such services take off, we may see a real decline in authorised taxi services, which will be driven out of business by competition at cheaper rates.

Is anyone yelling budget airlines, and what they have done to passengers with disabilities? Because I am.

The only solution I can come up with, and its not the “silver bullet”, is that – as the providers of services – both the app operator and the private car owner should be liable to the lodging of complaints under the Disability Discrimination Act. I’m not aware of any complaints having been lodged yet, but if you have had this problem you’d better start preparing them. Because if you don’t, these services will be upon us, and it will be a hard tide to turn back.

Even harder without a full-time Commissioner with lived experience of disability. Once again, we’ll be locked out of the orchestral performance.

Graeme Innes will, until 4 July, be Australia’s Disability Discrimination Commissioner.

A Commissioner For Left-Handers

Dear Adam Creighton,

I have seen you on ABC’s The Drum on television. I know that you are economics correspondent for the Australian, have worked for the Reserve Bank and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, and that you studied at Oxford.

I am writing to you about your recent comments regarding whether we need a Disability Discrimination Commissioner. You said “lots of people are discriminated against. Why don’t we have a gay rights commissioner, or a left-handed commissioner, or a short persons commissioner, or a commissioner for people who aren’t good-looking.”

As a person with a disability I am hurt and saddened by your comment. Hurt because you trivialised the significant issues impacting on the day-toDay lives of Australians with disabilities, and the work a Disability Discrimination Commissioner does to address them. Saddened because your comment demonstrates your total lack of awareness of the magnitude of these issues.

I’d like to meet you, and introduce you to some of my friends. Let me tell you about us.

I qualified as a lawyer, and then failed at around 30 job interviews because employers could not understand how a blind person could do such a job. My first job was as a clerical assistant in the public service. That was some time ago, but not much has changed.

Let me introduce you to Josh. He is an excellent app developer, with several successful apps. But he can’t get a job because his autism limits his communication skills, so he is no good at job interviews. I work with government and private employers to change this situation.

The recent budget makes my work harder, because Josh will have his Disability Support Pension re-assessed, and may loose it. But he will still struggle to find a job. The government budget contains a welfare plan, but not a jobs plan for people like Josh.

Then there’s Marlon. He spent ten years in Geraldton prison without being convicted of a crime. He was found “unfit to plead” as a result of his cognitive disability, and the West Australian government regards prisons as appropriate accommodation options for such people. I campaign to change these laws.

I work with Arthur, who has an intellectual disability, but has found a part-time job stacking shelves in a supermarket. He earns enough not to be on the Disability Support Pension. He has a recurring health complaint, which requires regular doctors visits, pathology and other tests. The $7 a time he will have to pay for these visits means he will struggle to pay his rent.

There’s Julia who wanted to catch a bus from Sydney to Canberra, but could not because the buses did not carry people using wheelchairs. I work on laws to change that.

There’s Stephanie, supporting her teenage son through high school. But the budget changes to education mean that the extra funding he needs to be successful in a regular school will not go ahead. I work with government to increase that support.

Then there’s Stella. She’s a journalist, comedian and great communicator who gives people with a disability a powerful voice by editing the ABC Rampup site. It was defunded by the government in the budget, and the ABC cannot pick up the funding. Stella may be left-handed, but she also uses a wheelchair.

There is Pat, in her seventies, and still supporting her two adult sons who have mental illness. The National Disability Insurance Scheme, which the government is continuing to roll out on time and in full, will ease some of that load. But I still need to educate police, so that they encourage her sons to go to hospital when they need to, rather than using brute force.

So that’s what a Disability Discrimination Commissioner does. 37 % of discrimination complaints relate to disability, 45% of people with disabilities live in poverty, we are 30 % under-employed compared to the general population, far more of us are accommodated in institutions or prisons, we experience higher levels of domestic violence, and the government systems to support us are broken and broke.

Gritty Australian cricket captain Alan Border, a left-hander I note, played some very tough innings. But I don’t think he ever faced an innings as tough as the one Australians with disabilities face every day. My job, as Disability Discrimination Commissioner, is to make that innings a little easier.

Mr Creighton, to quote from my friend Rachel Ball at the Human Rights Law Centre, “it is easy to stand atop a mountain of privilege, and tell those at the bottom of the mountain that privilege is irrelevant.”

Graeme Innes

Disability Discrimination Commissioner

(This article was first published in the Sydney Morning Herald)

A day in the life

I was not surprised when I read in the Australian government budget papers this week that one Commissioner position at the Australian Human Rights Commission would be cut. The papers indicated that the measure would take effect from July this year, when one position became vacant. My term at the Commission ends on 4 July, so it is not difficult to conclude that the reference is to the position of Disability Discrimination Commissioner.

I was not surprised, but I was angry and profoundly sad. Because Australia clearly needs a full-time Disability Discrimination Commissioner, and it must be a person with a disability. We would not appoint a white person to the role of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner. Nor should we appoint a person who does not have lived experience of disability, and an understanding of the disability sector, to this position.

Some people have asked me why we need a Disability Discrimination Commissioner. The statistics speak for themselves. 37 % of complaints lodged with the Commission – more than one third – relate to disability, and this figure has been constant since the passage of the Disability Discrimination Act. 45% of us live in poverty. We experience 30 % lower employment participation than the general population. Completion of Year 12 high school is at 50% for the general population, and 25 % for people with disabilities. A higher proportion of us are in prisons. We experience a higher level of domestic violence. By any measure we are significantly disadvantaged.

Let me tell you of just one day in the life of a Disability Discrimination Commissioner. It’s yesterday, and I woke in Darwin.

iPhone ever on hand, I checked Twitter for budget reaction and other news. As I took my guide dog for a walk, and grabbed coffee and a quick breakfast, I read more news articles. I read of the young people with disabilities, including some in my family, who will continue to be disadvantaged in education, and not be able to remain in regular schools, because the extra funding for kids with disabilities in the Gonski proposals had been cut.

Tears came to my eyes at the memory of the many stories I have heard from kids with disabilities bullied in school playgrounds, and the distraught parents I regularly talk to. What could I say to the parents of kids with disabilities with whom I am meeting this Sunday on the Sunshine Coast? Suck it up – there’s no more money? Of course not – I’ll strategise with them, and try to empower them to find a way.

My first meeting was with people from the National Aboriginal Justice Centre. They told me of the high proportion of Aboriginal people with disabilities in the prison system. They talked of people in prison like Rosie and Malcolm, who had not been convicted of a crime – they had been found “unfit to plead”, and prison was regarded as an acceptable accommodation option. We talked about justice diversion, and how people with disabilities would be better off supported by disability services in their communities. Corrections budgets would also be better off, as this would be a cheaper option.

I left seeing little hope of change, but admiring the passion and commitment to carry on in their work. I was able to provide some hope by noting the on-time and in-full rollout of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in the budget.

I then met with the NT Public Service Employment Commissioner. Unlike the Federal Government, who have a welfare plan in their budget, Craig has a jobs plan. He is committed to increasing the number of people with disabilities employed in the NT public service. In the federal system it is a shameful 2.9 %, and probably similar in the Territory. But he was happy to strategise about how this might change- using plans and targets, strong senior leadership, a link through Australian Network on Disability to other committed employers, and the establishment of peer support networks. I was encouraged- he has the will to create change.

I then spoke at the lunch with which the NT Law Society celebrate law week. I told many stories of how people with disabilities cannot access the criminal justice system- stories set out in the Equal Before The Law report. My speech, and this report, are both on the Commission website at http://www.humanrights.gov.au I encouraged the Territory to follow the example of South Australia, and develop a Disability Justice Strategy.

Following some quick TV interviews where I spoke of the need for a full-time Disability Discrimination Commissioner who has a disability, I met with the Chief Minister and Minister for Disability Services. I talked to them of the need for a diversity of services in the justice system, more jobs for people with disabilities, and the benefits to be gained from the rollout of the NDIS.

I then hurried back to my hotel, to catch up on the many emails, texts and tweets. I continued the planning for the delegation of young people with disabilities being sent to the meeting of countries who have ratified the Disability Convention in New York in June. I have not talked to a more excited bunch in a long time. It is a great way to develop leadership capacity in the disability sector.

I planned for my meetings next week with representatives of government to discuss the review of the Transport Standards. There has been progress getting people with disabilities “on the bus”, but recent experiences show us we still have a long way to go. Sam – who cannot bend his leg – was recently forced to stand for most of a Perth-Brisbane flight because staff would not let him have an appropriate seat. An international airline was prepared to carry Peter but not his wheelchair. And a Darwin taxi would not pick me up because I travel with a guide dog.

I communicated with Josh who has autism, very concerned about re-assessment of his Disability Support Pension, but no real jobs plan to move him off welfare. Jess was very pleased about the rollout of the NDIS, but worried that co-payments in the medical system for her ongoing health issues would eat away at her small income. I talked with Eliza, concerned about how the sector would now have a more muted voice, because the ABC Rampup site would not be funded by the government, and the ABC could not pick up the funding. And I heard from Sharon, who shared my views about the need for a full-time Disability Discrimination Commissioner, who has a disability, and who wonders what will happen to people like her when my term ends.

I also talked with people from government, about developing a jobs plan, and supporting employers to find jobs for people with disabilities through use of targets and financial incentives. I pointed out – as I have for several years – the waste and ineffectiveness of the current system.

And I talked to large and small private employers, and tried to encourage them to find jobs for people with disabilities. I strategised with Jocelyn at one major employer about setting targets, and planning how to achieve them. I thanked John for the fact that 50 % of his workforce of 20 people are people with disabilities. And I congratulated Dominique for ensuring that her online business had an accessible website.

I did this because my job is not just about throwing rocks. It’s about working co-operatively, with government and private sectors, as well as people with disabilities, to remove the barriers constituted by those rocks. When we have an accessible path of travel, people with disabilities will fully participate in, and contribute to, our community; and the Australian community will reap the benefit of that diversity and extra strength. Without a full-time Disability Discrimination Commissioner, who has a disability, the path will be that much rockier for that much longer.