SUBMISSION TO HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

FROM UNITING CHURCH IN AUSTRALIA – SYNOD OF VICTORIA

RE: EXEMPTION APPLICATION BY THE VICTORIAN PUBLIC TRANSPORT CORPORATION FROM SECTIONS 23 & 24 OF THE DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION ACT 1992

JANUARY 20, 1999

 

The Uniting Church acknowledges the integral role of transport services in the lives of all Victorian citizens to participate in a wide range of activities. It is concerned that such transport systems provide equal opportunity for all people to access them, regardless of age, financial means and disability.

The Uniting Church acknowledges the commitment of the Victorian Government in working towards the goal of 100% compliance for transport services under the Disability Discrimination Act, as outlined in its 21st Century Accessibility Plan. It is noted that the Victorian Government "believes that enforceable standards are the best way to guarantee comprehensive compliance for all transport providers, regardless of whether they are government or private operators".

In regard to the full compliance of the tramway system to be fully accessible over a 20 year period, the Uniting Church seeks to make a number of observations for consideration by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. These are as follows:

  1. That over that time period there be a total replacement of the current fleet of Z, B and A cars, rather than retro-fitting of trams with wheelchair hoists. Retro-fitting, as recommended by the Accessible Transport Consultative Council, is a poor solution for the reasons outlined in the Exemption Application. The solution of retro-fitting doors does not take into consideration the further stigmatising of people with disabilities on account of overt design features and scapegoating when timetables are disrupted. Other modes of transport, such as partial replacement of the tram system, and parallel systems, are undesirable as they are outside the intent of the DDA.
  2. People with disabilities are already considerably disadvantaged in their use of Victoria’s tramway systems. The question is posed whether they should be further disadvantaged by a 5 year delay in the implementation of this replacement schedule, on account of the Victorian Government’s ideological shift from public management to privatisation. It is asserted that people with disabilities have been denied access to the tram system by the ongoing purchase of Z, B and A cars since 1975 until 1994. Furthermore, they have lived with unjustifiable hardship during that time period, resulting in diminished travel opportunities for purposes of employment and community life. It is worth noting that in the late 80’s there was considerable public outcry about the inaccessibility of the light-rail services and the government of the time undertook to not purchase further vehicles which were inaccessible. It is imperative that there be no further delay to rectifying the situation of hardship for people with disabilities.
  3. In the Exemption Application it is argued that "uncertainty" will be created in the minds of potential bidders for the tramway system if the 5 year extension is not granted. Should this be the case, the Uniting Church wonders if consideration could be given to altering the 5 year increments of 25%, 55%, 90% and 100% replacement schedule according to the Draft Standards. In order to progressively replace the trams purchased from 1975 onwards, commencing in the 1999 - 2004 period, a lower than 25% figure in the first 5 year period, with subsequent "catch-ups" during the 20 year period, may alleviate any such financial pressures. However, the Uniting Church believes that any determination of the relativities of "uncertainty" need to be weighted towards the needs of people with disabilities, rather than potential bidders within the privatisation process. The life opportunities of people with disabilities must not be compromised any further by an inaccessible tramway service, and that people with disabilities receive a clear and positive message that their needs are not negotiable because of a shift in emphasis from public to private management.
  4. There is also concern that should such an Exemption Application be successful, it would send a wrong message to other governments within Australia who may also seek to delay the implementation of Disability Standards in transport and/or other areas of service delivery.

The Uniting Church recognises the complexity of the situation, and the ‘goodwill’ by the government to introduce low-floor trams to Melbourne’s services when the current trams reach an age of approximately 30-35 years. However, in seeking a rejection of the Exemption Application, the Uniting Church believes that the reasons for seeking the exemption are of the government’s own making, and responsibility for any financial difficulties should not be at the expense of people with disabilities having their needs and rights respected under the obligations of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

This submission is presented from the Commission for Mission of the Uniting Church in Australia, Synod of Victoria, 130 Little Collins Street, Melbourne 3000. For further inquiries contact Rev. Andy Calder on (03) 9251 52276.

 

 

 

 

John Rickard

Executive Director