From:	Waters, Philip [
Sent:	Friday, 27 November 2009 4:08 PM
To:	disabdis
Subject:	Ridiculous exemption proposal for Cinema Captioning from the DDA

27 Nov 2009
Dear Commissioner Innes and Michael Small,
Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on the application for an Exemption under 
DDA section 55: Cinema Captioning and audio description.  I am a deaf cinema patron and I do 
not support this granting of this temporary exemption for the reasons that follow :
1.      DDA rights should not have to be traded in order to have access. The applicants seek 
to make a link between one proposal to make more cinemas accessible, and another proposal 
for deaf, hearing impaired (HI) and visually impaired (VI)   people to stop making DDA 
complaints for a few years about access to captioned cinema.  These are two discrete issues.  
Access is not an either/or issue whereby deaf, hearing impaired and visually impaired people 
should be expected to give up our DDA protections  in exchange for other people being  given  
access to captioned cinema.  If it was right that we were given access to cinema,  and it was, it 
should follow that these rights are maintained.  Quite distinct from this is that  deaf, HI and VI  
Australians, who don’t currently have this access, should  also be offered it with no strings 
attached.
2.      There are problems with  both quality and quantity of cinema captioning  now 
available.  I offer as an example my own experience in the early part of this year in which I 
went to the Jam Factory in South Yarra expecting to see a captioned movie on a Sunday 
afternoon. Email correspondence between the cinema and myself is appended to this 
submission.  The salient details are that the movie was shown two hours earlier than advertised 
so a number of us missed the movie.   As you will read in the email, in reply the Jam Factory 
stated that it has the right to change screening times without notice.  They said that the reason 
they changed the screening time from 4.30pm to 2.30pm was that they were contractually 
obliged to show Sunday movies before 4.00pm.  However since that email the Jam Factory has 
continued to advertise its Sunday movies at 4.15pm, thereby discrediting their own argument.  
3.      The applicants have not always acted in good faith with deaf and HI people.  
Captioned movies on Wed and Friday are advertised  as showing at inconvenient times  for 
most people.  With the Sunday movie, nobody can ever know in advance if they will get to see 
the movie they have travelled so far to attend.  While the cinema has a website it is not always 
operational for double checking the times.  It is very hard to get through to the cinema on the 
telephone.    In summary, while ostensibly people have access to captioned movies, in practice I 
do not believe these cinemas have a history of acting in good faith in relation to screening of 
these movies.   While it sounds encouraging that these cinemas are considering making more 
cinemas accessible,   I question why this request for an Exemption is being made. What does it 
matter if the DDA is in place if these cinemas are intending to act fairly ?  The only time any of 
us consider using it is when we believe we have been discriminated against. 
4.      Consultation with deaf/HI people has been inadequate.  Mr Perikieous states that the 
applicants have had “productive discussions with representatives of the deaf and hearing 
impaired communities, Media Access and the Australian Human Rights Commission .”  I belong 
to Deaf Australia, and am on the mailing list for Media Access.  Adequate consultative 
mechanisms need to be in place between these organisations and the people they are speaking 
for.  If there are consultative mechanisms in place in relation to captioning I am not aware of 
them, nor are other people I know who share my interest in this topic.   On this basis I do not 
believe that the reduced time given to lodge a submission to AHRC is fair. Indeed I believe that 
an extension should be given to allow deaf, hearing impaired and vision impaired people to be 
adequately consulted on this request for an Exemption, and to then have time to make 
submissions in formats appropriate to the different members of these groups.  
Thanks again for the chance to make a submission.
Philip Waters