From: Brent.Phillips@sport.vic.gov.au Sent: Friday, 4 December 2009 10:40 AM To: disabdis Subject: Application for exemption under DDA section 55: Cinema captioning and audio description Importance: High Michael Small and the HREOC Commissioners, We wish to make it known that we vehemently oppose the application by Hoyts, Village, Greater Union and Reading (the Big Four) Cinemas for a temporary exemption under Section 55 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 from complaints in relation to the provision of captions and audio descriptions in cinemas operated by the applicants. This is 2009, not the 1980s. There is no clear reason why the Big Four cannot substantially increase the number of captioned movies in cinemas across the nation. It has been nine and a half years since the first trials of captioned cinemas in Australia, which were successful and resulted in the establishment of regular captioned movies. We honestly thought that this led to bigger and better things but over the decade we have not seen much improvements. In 2000, we have seen brick-sized mobile phones evolve into iPhones, large PCs evolve into lightweight paper-thin laptops, but we are still don't have the luxury of watching any move at any time in any cinema. The current situation is barely satisfactory. We currently have to choose between a Wednesday morning, Friday evening or Sunday afternoon movie at the Jam Factory, and the same movie is captioned at a time across those sessions. Imagine all free to air TV channels being switched off, and only one channel showing a 90 minute show three times a week. Imagine the uproar from the public - this is exactly what is happening with captioned movies in Australia. The Big Four's plan to increase the number of cinemas in Melbourne is barely enough - other submissions have clearly presented statistics and data to illustrate the point that 35 screens by 2012 is appalling and does not define "progress". If you asked anyone at the beginning of this decade if they'd be happy with 35 screens in 12 years time, the answer would be a resounding NO. The current constraints are as follows: * we do not have a choice of movies to watch - not all deaf and hard of hearing people like the same genre, and therefore this impacts on patronage at cinemas (citing 'poor patronage' can never be a justifiable excuse) * the (extremely) limited choice of session times - it is unrealistic to expect deaf and hard of hearing Australians to pack out the three sessions per week - we all have jobs, families, friends, sports - we deserve the basic right of choosing which movie to watch at a time we like at our local cinema. We have lost count of how many times we wanted to watch a movie on a lovely Saturday afternoon, or a rainy Tuesday night, but stopped ourselves - "that's right, there's no captioned movies on". We have often had to resort to watching hired DVDs (don't get us started on captioned DVDs). Often, at work, we feel ashamed that we could not watch the latest blockbuster movies. All of our work colleagues talk about the new movies they've been to, while we feel very left out because we simply cannot watch them - we either have to wait for a few weeks before a captioned version is released, and we may not even be able to go to one of the three sessions. Otherwise, we wait a few months for the DVD version. The situation is unbelievable and almost laughable. The fact that the Big Four need another 30 months to protect themselves from complaints is incredulous. They have had a decade to roll out captioned movies across the nation. They have had 120 months to budget for accessible movies. And they have the nerve to suggest reducing the time allowed for submissions! Commissioners of the HREOC, we implore you to consider the quality of lives of deaf and hard of hearing Australians and the fact that after a decade, we still cannot go and watch a movie at a time and place of our choosing. Reject the Big Four's application outright. Brent & Melinda Phillips