Address in Reply
26/02/2015
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: I also take the floor to contribute to the Address in Reply. Certainly, there have been some hard acts to follow today. First there was the Hon. Mr McLachlan with his references to everything from Charles Dickens to the road to Damascus, and the quote where he said, ‘I would not want to see the Legislative Council emasculated.’ I hope I am not misquoting him. I know what he meant by this, in that he was referring to a more archaic meaning of the word emasculated, meaning he would not want to see the council be weakened in its powers.
EQUALITY
However, I will take the opportunity to say that I for one would welcome a greater gender balance in this place and in politics more broadly. I can see the Hon. Ms Gago as minister for women fist pumping across the chamber. We also had the contribution of the Hon. Rob Lucas, which was a very important and moving tribute to his family. I have been liaising with my staff and with Hansard as he was giving that contribution. I want to thank him for reminding us all of the importance of remembering where we come from, so ‘domo arigato’, which is my very poor attempt at Japanese for ‘thank you very much’.
I would like to thank the Governor for his first speech at the opening of this session of parliament on 10 February. I would also like to congratulate him for his appointment more broadly to his new role, and extend those congratulations and welcome to his wife Phuong Lan and their family as well. I note that not only were they born overseas, as others have noted, but they came here by boat as refugees. I have had the privilege of hearing His Excellency give a very moving account of that experience and how he thinks that experience will inform him in his new role as Governor.
His life’s experiences and those of others, and what we have learnt from those, will hopefully be an excellent fit for the role and inform some empathy for the life circumstances of others who he will meet in his role, and that should never be underestimated. Today in my address in reply I will cover a number of points in response to broad issues canvassed by the Governor in his speech. I would first like to briefly touch on, as others have before me, the idea of making South Australia a leader in the fight against discrimination based on ethnicity, faith, gender and sexuality.
Dignity for Disability certainly welcomes this, and I hope our parliamentary record shows that comes as no surprise. We also hope that leaders will have some awareness in addressing racism against Aboriginal South Australians and the daily discrimination that is often faced by people with disabilities.
I would not mind seeing a start on this by executive directors of every state government department having KPIs on how many people with disabilities are employed within their departments. I would also note that I have been continually disappointed by the government’s shirking of its responsibility in terms of disability rights, particularly with the incoming National Disability Insurance Scheme. We welcome the rollout of the scheme. There is no denying that more resources and funding in the disability sector are greatly needed, but the simple fact of the matter is that the National Disability Insurance Scheme will only cater to the very specific needs of a few of the four million of us who currently live with a disability in Australia.
The scheme is not set up to do things like: making public transport accessible; making sure that students with disabilities have the same educational opportunities as those which are offered to our non-disabled peers; fighting discrimination in the workplace based on disability, etc. So, we have a long way to go, and I hope that the new Governor will be very collaborative with local governments and with other agencies to ensure that the state government is fully meeting its responsibilities head‑on in terms of fighting those barriers.
NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION
I would also like to speak briefly on the nuclear royal commission. In appointing a commissioner for the royal commission, it has been disappointing that the government has sought someone to lead the debate who previously stated a strong opinion on the need for SA to embrace nuclear power. In 2000, there was a people’s movement called The People’s Conference 2000 to discuss the pros and cons of nuclear-waste storage in our state.
Rather than begin with a slanted process, the organisers sought to have speakers present from a range of views, and Dignity for Disability, as I am sure would many others, would like to see the commissioner actively seek a range of evidence and implore them to visit the current low-level nuclear waste storage facility near Woomera to take an inventory of how successful the current arrangements there are. I certainly do not want to be seen stating a particular view one way or the other, but I do think we need to be mindful that they take into account the broad spectrum of opinions that will be available here.
So, Dignity for Disability would also like to see the commission take evidence about South Australia’s geological instability and the likelihood of an earthquake, perhaps, in the remote areas of this state. There is certainly some evidence to suggest—and some not to suggest—but I again hasten the point that what I am trying to say is we need to take equal stock of all of the views on the varying sides of this debate.
CITY OF ADELAIDE
The issue of city vibrancy—and this is a term that I for one am rather sick of hearing—is again on the agenda. I am not sick of the aim, I am just sick of that particular turn of phrase. Dignity for Disability certainly agrees, but not on the terms necessarily which the government promotes. Yes, the Festival and Fringe and other events are continuing to improve their access to shows with things like Auslan interpretation and hearing loops and ramps, but the fact remains that many buildings and events that this state uses for these festivals—and also things like Splash Adelaide and the pop-up events—remain very inaccessible.
Even getting a ticket to a show online if you are, like myself, someone who needs to book wheelchair accessible seating, for too many events is still not possible. Even going to the bathroom, once you are at an event, can require far too much effort.
It is essential that the government tender funding to provide accessibility for all, for any event, venue or festival. This is certainly not what initially occurred with the $600 million spent on the Adelaide Oval redevelopment, and look at the challenges that this has created. Retrofitting is generally not the answer. Factoring it into all plans as a matter of fact rather than a problem we have to deal with once it arises is surely best practice.
Accessibility is not just about ramps and toilets in any old place but about where they are placed, and whether you can enjoy a concert with your friends rather than finding yourself stuck in the special designated wheelchair platform of a venue, stadium or room. Communication accessibility is also an important consideration in terms of creating a vibrant Adelaide. Is Auslan interpretation and captioning available and capacity to leave if you find yourself in sensory overload, or is perhaps an area available for people to use to deal with their sensory overload and come back? Is a hearing loop available? Is audio description for people with vision impairment available?
I have to say I was very pleased to hear that, in the opening Fringe parade, this year was the first year when people who were blind or had a vision impairment were able to attend the parade ahead of time and do a touch tour where they could touch the floats and have them described to them to get a sense of what was going on visually. I think that is certainly something that I would like to see more of.
The proposed increase in city population is in many respects a welcome one, but having an expanded program of activities so we do not just experience the mad March and then become the sleepy state or the nanny state for the rest of the year is vital. It is all very well and good to have people living there 365 days a year but, if they do not have much to do for the rest of the 11 months, we are not meeting our full potential. There certainly seems to be capacity to expand the program and perhaps spread it out beyond March and, indeed, encourage the live music scene as well.
ENVIRONMENT AND TECHNOLOGY
On the issue of carbon neutrality and cycling, Dignity for Disability would be happy to see a carbon neutral city, but there is serious planning needed for us to reach this goal. It is great that the government want to improve access to cycling, but we would suggest they start by actually having a cycling strategy. The last one expired quite a few years ago. We also have a tiny infrastructure spend on cycling and this must be addressed if people, especially women, if the surveys conducted by the YWCA are anything to go by, are to feel safe cycling and getting about our city.
If we cannot manage the live streaming of our own parliament or operate an efficient online information system on government websites, then I recommend staying indoors if we do get driverless cars in this state at this point in time. I for one, with my spatial awareness and my lack of sense of direction being what it is, welcome the idea of a driverless car. It would make it much easier for me, but I declare that that is a bias, and again labour the point that we are perhaps not ready for that yet.
We also welcome the changes necessary to the Motor Vehicles Act that will be necessary to enable driverless cars, but acknowledge that this is not the only change that needs to happen to that particular piece of legislation or in that particular area. I again flag that we will be moving legislation to deal with the repeated illegal misuse of accessible car parks without a permit. We think that that is a wider part of making people with disabilities feel welcome and respected in our city.
I also labour the point that making the city accessible to cyclists also more often than not has the flow-on effect of making it accessible to many people with disabilities, and that needs to be a primary consideration as well. It is probably worth noting that the recent and current fires at Jeffries soil premises at Buckland Park are being ably managed by the CFS, and I ask: what plans there are to expand the role of the MFS to the more populous areas of the expanded urban growth boundary?
HOUSING SA
On the proposal to renew all public Housing Trust stock which was build prior to 1968 by the year 2020, this is certainly something that we welcome. Again, too many buildings, including homes, remain inaccessible to people with disabilities, so we certainly hope to see the government joining us in promoting movements like universal design, passive solar, and 8-star energy ratings. We certainly welcome them to join us on that.
HEALTH
As I was saying yesterday in this place, I think we can all agree that there is a need for healthcare reform. We cannot have our healthcare system continue to grow exponentially in the way that it is, particularly when we are not, again, as I said yesterday, getting the return for investment that we need. We all want a better, more efficient healthcare system, but to get healthier people we also need the government to have a healthier contribution and a healthier attitude toward consultation.
The lack of clarity around particular practicalities of the reforms proposed under Transforming Health remain a serious concern for many in the community, amongst patients and healthcare professionals alike. Dignity for Disability also believes that having healthier people includes considering mental health in a serious, consultative and holistic way. What happened to the mental health council proposal that we heard of, and why is there so little about mental health in the current Transforming Health documents?
AGEING
When our thoughts turn to services for elderly people, I feel somewhat duty bound to say that the dementia epidemic is beginning, and needs a strong and sustained response from our health service. It is imperative that staff throughout the health sector at all levels have the education as well as the resources to understand and to cater for dementia in a dignified and respectful manner, as well as a holistic one. This is no longer going to be a matter just for aged-care facilities, and I applaud the positive work being done by Alzheimer’s Australia in their Fight Dementia campaign.
According to Access Economics, dementia is the single greatest cause of disability in our older population; that is to say, in people aged 65 years and over. South Australia faces a shortage of more than 13,100 paid and unpaid family carers for people living with dementia by 2029. That is in just 14 years, so we certainly need to act upon this now.
EDUCATION
Dignity for Disability is aware that the issue of international education is a critical export for the South Australian economy and to make this a place that parents want to send their young adult children to for tertiary education we must continue to work making our society tolerant, affordable and welcoming. Public transport, infrastructure and liveable cities is an important part of this as well, but I again make the point that while I welcome work on making the city welcoming to international students we also have to look at how poorly mainstream education is currently catering to students with disabilities and how much this is squandering their academic and professional futures.
TOURISM
On the subject of marketing for South Australian tourism, Dignity for Disability welcomes the Internode wireless network within the city of Adelaide, but we question why it took so long to get one. We note that in some respects we are still streaks ahead of other capital cities in this regard. We need to promote SA as a go-to destination for people with disabilities, in terms of accessible cities, and promote their tourism dollar. I think this is a part of the debate that often gets left behind, that people with disabilities are taxpayers just like anyone else and we want to be able to get into the shops, to visit McLaren Vale, to visit the Rundle Mall, to visit all of the other attractions that South Australia promotes and spend the money that we have.
ACCESSIBILITY
Another point that is often left out is that even if you are in receipt of a pension or a welfare payment you are still a taxpayer and have the right to access the community and all of the things that offers and to give back to the economy. We need to understand and implement the highest standards of accessibility in order to achieve this. Accessible cellar doors, for example, is one thing that I would love to see; accessible wine tours, again perhaps I acknowledge my own self-interest in that; accessible beaches; accessible festivals and major events. We could start with an inventory on what is currently accessible and what is not and develop from there, again consulting with the people who know what the needs are.
FOREIGN INVESTMENT
On the issue of attracting foreign investment, in terms of new industries and business, I think that is something that needs to be thought about very carefully, particularly with the closure of Holden and other companies. We need to look very carefully at how South Australia can focus on niche markets and do those well, such as (perhaps) the growing need for technology to assist people with disabilities and, to some extent, the ageing population as well. In terms of having a new body to attract new jobs, I would be interested to know how this body will work on the appalling participation rate and employment rate that currently exists for people with disabilities. I hope that will be a primary consideration.
TAXATION
On the issue of the state taxation system reform, I note the Treasurer’s discussion paper and will respond to that more fully but I would like to note just a couple of points. Will this reform include what I believe is Business SA’s only wish that goes ungranted thus far, and that is the issue of payroll tax concessions? This is income that the state needs and uses for the benefit of taxpayers. It is time that those in industry buckled up as part of the community and stopped bullying the government of the day to take up a range of inappropriate policy measures that benefit a few rather than most.
We need a more robust and mature debate about payroll tax alone. Germany has a highly regulated economy together with high wages and they seem to be surviving and holding the entire European economic zone together. There are other moves that I think we need to look at, such as how we incentivise employers to employ people with disabilities or whether incentivising is the way to go at all. I welcome feedback on that but I certainly hope that this will be a consideration as part of that debate.
STATE TIME ZONE
On the issue of time zones, my speech notes here actually say ‘sigh’, and with good reason. Once again it is on the agenda because we are told that business wants it. I have to say that it is on the agenda at a very convenient time, a time when we have a crisis in the education department that is in the media nearly every day. It just seems to be a noncontentious thing that the government can perhaps get a win on; however, I digress.
I again hasten to say that I hope both sides of the debate will be equally listened to on this issue. I think it is important to remember that farmers on the West Coast are businesses too, and I am pretty sure that this debate has been going on since before I was born. If we are going to consider the time zone, surely we will look at going back half an hour to represent our true geographical location, surely not forward half an hour in some farcical attempt to be like the Eastern States. We are not the Eastern States and we have enough to offer as it is. Again, I will wait to see the outcome of that debate. I just say once again that I hope both sides will be listened to with equal weight.
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
On the issue of freedom of expression, someone once said, ‘Lasting changes are only possible if people engage in our democracy.’ While Dignity for Disability will be reintroducing our electoral reform bill very soon to ensure that all people, particularly people with disabilities, have a more equal chance at engaging in democracy, we would love to see more people with disabilities participating in our electoral system, both as voters—which is not always possible currently, particularly for people with intellectual disability who are not given the support that they might require to fill out the ballot paper and necessary paperwork due to a presumed incapacity, and that is a great concern to us—as well as candidates. We hope to address some of the barriers that exist currently through that bill, which we will reintroduce.
ELECTIONS, CAMPAIGN FUNDING, AND PARLIAMENTARY REFORM
On the issue of corporate campaign contributions, we are pleased to see that the government has already started this program of reform in some way. Small, grassroots, people-powered political parties like Dignity for Disability do not have the luxury of a big brother national party to bolster our coffers, and we do not have the luxury of a big spend on an election campaign to gain a higher percentage of the vote to ensure that our now not inconsiderable candidate deposits are returned.
In short, this is a very expensive process, this business we call democracy, and it is unfair that legitimate smaller parties are discriminated against in the rush to reform the so-called preference harvesting that resulted in some senators interstate being elected on very small primary votes. If governments are serious about making a level playing field and wanting elections to be about policies and not about who has the most money to spend on ads and putting up posters of themselves, then they will join Dignity for Disability’s call to ban corflute electoral advertising. It should be about who you are and what are your policies, not what your face looks like and whether you have the money to spend on big shiny posters of your candidates.
Corflutes in particular clearly disadvantage people with disabilities, not only in terms of the visual aspect but also in terms of the restrictions on how high a corflute must be from the ground. It can be quite discriminatory to some people with disabilities. So, it is clearly time to do away with this visual blight and environmental waste, and we will certainly again be moving forward with our work in that area.
On the issue of reforming the deadlock process between the two houses, there are very few cases of deadlock between these two houses. In fact, there are so few that I feel that it is hardly worth mentioning. It is in fact a testament to our democracy that we do very occasionally have to thrash out some matter or other in the deadlock process.
It is, in my experience, not a very long and protracted affair. If I may allude to Charles Dickens in Bleak House, as opposed to Oliver Twist, there is no Jarndyce and Jarndyce and no Lady Dedlock here. Nay, if we wish to strengthen our democracy, perhaps there are parties present who should look at their own bleak house and increase the representation of women in office bearing positions as candidates. I think that would be an improvement to look at, perhaps before we get down to the real nitty-gritty here.
CITIZEN JURIES AND PARTICIPATION
On the issue of citizens juries: yes, they are great, but are we ensuring that the jury has a representation of people with disabilities, their family carers and other often disenfranchised groups on these juries? I certainly hope so. On the issue of full participation and equal access to universal education, does this again include ensuring that all university campuses are not only smoke free but have access requirements in place for students and lecturers with disabilities? Dignity for Disability is pleased to hear that a review of the Department of Education and Child Development will occur. We hope that this will examine a culture of workplace bullying that my office has heard about from too many sources to think that it involves merely isolated cases.
For children with disabilities, will staff be relocated to work with school leaders more locally? At present, many families supporting children with disabilities are locked out of the education system either due to a lack of disability access and supports, or because the school cannot accommodate things that are often called ‘challenging behaviours’.
JUSTICE
On the issue of justice, we are pleased to finally have the Disability Justice Plan being rolled out, and we welcome the holistic reform of the criminal justice system overall. As an alternative to custodial sentences, how about supervised home assistance for people with gardening and home maintenance, for example?
LGBTIQ
On the issue of discrimination of people from LGBTIQ communities, in the year 2015, being unable, or feeling unsafe or unwelcome, to participate in your community, based on the issue of your gender, sexuality, or indeed, as I said earlier, disability, is no longer satisfactory. We would like to see these recommendations from the commonwealth inquiry about gender and gender diversity implemented.
As with passports now, where a person can specify that they do not adhere to a specific gender on their passport documentation, I certainly believe that this should be rolled out to all government documentation as well, to ensure that people feel welcome and respected. Again, I do not think it should be any skin off the nose of a government department to put an extra box in there that a person can tick, and I do not think there should be any skin off our nose if a person wants to be addressed in a particular way when they receive correspondence from the government or, indeed, society at large.
STATUS OF WOMEN
Lastly I would like to touch on the issue of women, gender-based discrimination and in particular domestic violence. I certainly echo the concerns that have been raised in this chamber on that and would again like to note that women with disabilities are more likely to be victims of domestic violence, and there are many reasons for this. We need to look at this holistically. Is a woman with a disability being denied choice about who her supports are, who provides her with support pertaining to her disability? Does that create a social isolation that can then make her more likely to experience abuse?
We need to look at the supports that are available to women with disabilities in terms of shelters for people experiencing domestic violence. Are those shelters accessible to someone with disability, and is that going to be a barrier to someone leaving an abusive relationship? Public transport might sound obscure, but if this is inaccessible, and the person with disability does not have access to a car, that could again be a barrier to leaving an abusive situation.
So we welcome some of the progress that has occurred in this area in the last few years but we certainly continue to put pressure on the government to look at this holistically and hope that we will keep in mind the needs of women with disability as a particularly—in this context, it is a word I am quite hesitant to use—vulnerable group, and look at how we can do away with some of those vulnerabilities by making a society more accessible to people with disabilities. With those not-so-brief words, I commend the speech to the chamber and look forward to working with all members to make sure that our state is truly welcoming, vibrant and accessible.
