Subject:	Exemption from the Disability Discrimination Act by Village Roadshow, 
Greater Union, Hoyts and Reading Cinemas 

Dear Sir / Madam 

I (Phil Harper) and my wife (Carla Anderson) are contacting you regarding the submission by Village Roadshow, 
Greater Union, Hoyts and Reading Cinemas to seek exemption from the Disability Discrimination Act for the next 3 
years from expanding the provision of captioned movies available at their cinemas.


This will mean that we as deaf people and other Australians who are Deaf, hard of hearing, legally blind and vision 
impaired, including older Australians, will lose our right to complain to the Human Rights Commission about the lack 
of provision of captioning and audio description services at ANY of the 125 cinemas (1182 screens) owned by these 
four exhibitors.
Currently, we have to travel 45kms to attend a cinema that provides open captioned movies, yet there is a popularly 
attended cinema owned by Village  only 10 minutes away from our home which provides no access – we should 
have the right to complain that this cinema (Karingal Victoria) is not providing access to us and the many deaf and 
hard of hearing people in our local or nearby communities (Frankston / Cranbourne / Mornington Peninsula).
I ask that you look closely at the statistics provided by Arts Access Victoria which provides a succinct argument 
against the exemption being accepted by the HRC:
?	Jointly, these exhibitors have 1,182 screens across Australia.
?	They show approximately 30 movies per screen every week.
?	That’s a total of 41,370 screenings per week (1182 screens x 5 sessions per day x 7 days)
?	Of these, only 105 will be captioned and audio described. This is equal to less than 0.3% of all movies 
screened per week.
These statistics clearly demonstrate there is no financial or operational hardship that these cinemas will suffer if 
they are not granted the exemption.
The Rudd government’s National Arts and Disability Strategy includes the emphasis of enhancing all Australian’s 
access to film and television including through the provision of captions and other accessible means.
The HRC has been a strong advocate for people with disabilities to ensure ‘access for all’ and this request demands 
that it is not the time to bow to an industry that is only providing barely minimal access standards and who want to 
further sustain that minimal access provision.
I ask you not to accept their request for an exemption.
Thank you
Phil Harper / Carla Anderson

Langwarrin. Victoria. 3910