Pam Green: Time now to welcome to 5RPH Dignity for Disability MLC, Kelly Vincent. Hi Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Hi Pam.

Pam Green: Well first off today, access to the movies for people with disabilities – are there any issues with this?

Kelly Vincent: Certainly there are unfortunately. Of course many of your listeners would probably be aware there hasn’t for a long time been the technology like captioning and audio description to enable access to cinema for people with disabilities with either hearing or vision impairment. Unfortunately these technologies often aren’t used so many people with sensory disabilities still miss out on going to the movies and enjoying the experience fully, because the cinema providers aren’t always aware of what they need to do to activate those technologies.

Pam Green: So what is the impact on people, Kelly?

Kelly Vincent: Well for example if Deaf or hard of hearing people do go to the movies and there are no captions or the captions don’t link properly, maybe not until a quarter or half way through the movie because of technological issues, then they’re missing out on much of the plot line and basically making it pointless to attend the movies in the first place. So it results in social isolation for people not being able to be included in a normal, enjoyable activity alongside family and friends. And the same goes for people with vision impairment if audio description isn’t provided.

Pam Green: So going to the movies at the moment, just isn’t an option for many people with disabilities then, huh?

Kelly Vincent: Absolutely, sometimes it’s a matter of contacting a cinema ahead of time and arranging for the pickup of the headsets for audio description or making sure that captions will be provided, given as I said that some of the technology that is used like CaptiView is very unreliable and sometimes it’s not even provided because cinema providers aren’t aware. In fact I’ve heard stories of a Deaf person requesting a CapitView device only to be given a pair of headphones, which of course for a profoundly Deaf person isn’t all that useful. So it’s all very well and good for the technology to be there but if the cinema staff and providers aren’t aware of how to activate that technology it really doesn’t do much good.

Pam Green: So how can we get better provision of these services for people then?

Kelly Vincent: Well as you would be aware, the industry has had voluntary compliance for some time now, but to date it’s clear that this isn’t good enough because of the lack of awareness around it. So Dignity for Disability, has turned to a legislative remedy to get better quality services in place. So we’ve had a bill drafted to be introduced to parliament in the coming weeks that would require cinema operators to screen a minimum number of movies each week with open captions on the main screen, as well as audio description being provided for a minimum number of screenings as well. So there’s lots to be done and there’s lots of opportunities each week to provide audio description and captions and to reap the economic benefits in terms of allowing more people to come into the cinema and enjoy that experience that they’ve paid for. So we think this is a win-win for cinema providers and people wanting to go to the cinema as well.

Pam Green: That’s great, once again thanks so much for your time today Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks Pam.

Pam Green: Time now to welcome to 5RPH, Dignity for Disability MLC Kelly Vincent. Hi Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Hi Pam.

Pam Green: State Government has resumed for 2016. So what’s on your agenda, and what’s on the Government’s agenda?

Kelly Vincent: Well certainly Dignity for Disability is going to continue with our agenda for improving the lives of all South Australian’s and make sure that everyone gets a fair go and access to the services and support they need particularly for people with disabilities and their family carers where appropriate. We’ll also be continuing to advocate for the many hundreds on constituents who contact my office each year about challenges they are facing to do with disability services; health; transport; education; accessing the community; the justice system and so on. We’ll continue to put a fairness and disability rights lens on all legislation that comes to the parliament and mend it where we can as well as introduce our own legislation to get the best outcomes for all in our community.

Pam Green: And that monster Planning Bill has been before the Legislative Council for a few weeks now. It’s a big piece of legislation, are the changes complex and do you have any amendments?

Kelly Vincent: Well it certainly is very complex Pam. This is a once in a generation reform, that the Government were really trying to be hasty and shoving through the upper house before Christmas last year. Given that there are so many stakeholders and organisations with competing agendas and interests and lots of complex matters to worth through, it is disappointing to see it trying to be rushed through. I am pleased to report that Dignity for Disability has been successful in getting unanimous supports for some amendments to give consideration to universal design for access and equality in building and refurbishing buildings and planning here in South Australia.

Pam Green: And finally Kelly, the Merit Awards for 2015 year 12 students were handed out yesterday by the Governor at his residence. There was a new award this year, can you tell us about that?

Kelly Vincent: Sure, after a long time of lobbying the Government to change their discriminatory practice for students with an intellectual disability completing their SACE with a modified SACE certificate, we’ve had further win. Not only have we managed to get the discriminatory wording which differentiated children or students’ doing a modified SACE from the peers who are doing a non-modified SACE, but we now have an award recognising excellence in a modified curriculum for students completing their SACE. So not only are certificates no longer discriminatory thanks to Dignity for Disability’s work, I’m very pleased to say that we are also now seeing students with an intellectual disability getting an award alongside their peers and really being recognised for the hard work that they do put in on the same basis as their peers without disability. So it’s a great step forward and I congratulate the winners of that award for this year.

Pam Green: As always Kelly, thanks so much for taking the time to talk to us today.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks Pam.

Pam Green: Time now to welcome to 5RPH, Dignity for Disability MLC Kelly Vincent to question time. Hi Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Hi Pam.

Pam Green: Well I understand you took part in a consultation meeting last week about the new accessible playground at the Adelaide Zoo. Can you tell us a bit about the new playground? Are there any challenges with toilets and lifts?

Kelly Vincent: Sure, so this discussion centred around the Nature’s Playground which is the new facility at the Adelaide Zoo. It’s all about trying to get children back to playing around in nature rather than spending time on screens and computer games and all that kind of thing. So it’s a really great concept, but unfortunately there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of disability access. And as you pointed out, the main issue that brought this discussion group together was access to the lift. Because whilst they do have a lift that will take you up to the aerial walk way if you can’t use the stairs, the old aerial walk way being part of the playground. Unfortunately what’s happening is that a lot of the children are using the lift as part of the play equipment. So that’s causing a lot of technical difficulties and also safety concerns, because there is concern that the children could actually get locked in the lift if they play with it enough times to activate the safety mechanism. So we’re trying to find the least restrictive way possible to get people thinking about whether or not they actually need to use the lift and so far the best solution we’ve come up with is that we might look at installing a key pad at the lift and then having the passcode for that key pad printed on the map which everyone gets when they enter into the zoo. Therefore you don’t have to ask for a special key or anything like that, you still have permission to use it at free will but the passcode will hopefully restrict access to the children and also get people thinking about whether or not they really need to use the lift or whether they can take the stairs and leave the lift for the people who really do need to use it.

Pam Green: Right and I believe that there is also some discussion about assistance dogs being allowed in at least some parts of the zoo?

Kelly Vincent: That’s right. The board of the Adelaide Zoo is currently teaming up with Kate Thiele from Guide Dogs, who is actually one of the members of the zoo board, to discuss how the zoo can change its policies around allowing assistance dogs into the Adelaide Zoo. There are unfortunately some concerns around quarantine and also the fact that if a lion for example sees a dog…

Pam Green: Exactly!

Kelly Vincent: It might react in a way that isn’t entirely what we are going for. So they are looking at ways of relaxing that policy a little to allow assistance dogs to enter into some parts of the zoo. So because of the quarantine and other concerns it’s unlikely to be every part of the zoo which is unfortunate but given that we are speaking about some pretty serious animals here that could do a lot of damage, the situation dictates that we need to be a little bit restrictive in terms of where assistance animals can go. But as I said given that they’re currently not allowed anywhere in the zoo this is still a great step forward and allowing greater access to this great tourism aspect and community aspect for people who might use assistance dogs.

Pam Green: Absolutely and the practicalities! Who would have thoughts about those practicalities if it wasn’t for you.

Kelly Vincent: Oh, thank you very much

Pam Green: Once again, thanks so much for your time today Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Pleasure Pam.

Pam Green: Time to welcome to 5RPH, Dignity for Disability MLC Kelly Vincent. Hi Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Hi Pam.

Pam Green: Well over the weekend we saw people with disabilities now having access to the actual water’s edge at Seacliff beach. Thanks to a specially designed plastic mat, can you tell us about that?

Kelly Vincent: Sure, well this is really the first of its kind, certainly in South Australia and perhaps even in Australia country wide. This is a rubber mat which has been laid down at Seacliff to give people who are either using wheelchairs or walkers or another type of mobility aid. But this will assist not only people with disabilities but people who might be elderly and have less balance to walk in the sand or even parents with prams can now access the sand and the beach via this 100 metre long rubber mat that’s been laid down at Seacliff beach in the last two days. So it’s a really fantastic step forward for some people, this might even be the first time that they’re able to access the beach in this way and judging from the comments and likes I’ve seen on social media in the last few days, it will certainly be a tourist attraction as well. So it’s about reaping both the social and economic benefits of fully including all people in our community.

Pam Green: How did it come about? Is it a first in South Australia?

Kelly Vincent: Yes I understand that it is. I know that an organisation that I’m involved with, Motivation Australia have previously put a temporary mat down at Aldinga beach for one of their annual fundraising walks. But this is a bit different and it’s a little bit more permanent than that. I think it is a first of its kind. I am pleased to acknowledge the work of my parliamentary colleague, the local MP for the electorate of Bright, David Speirs who coordinated an online fundraising effort to raise the funds for the 100 metre long, $10,000 mat. Local service groups such as the rotary club and local council I believe also chipped in and it was great to see a combination of service providers and community members coming together to recognise why this is so important and this outcome is really wonderful.

Pam Green: So there will be more mats available now?

Kelly Vincent: Well, I’m working on it Pam. Certainly similar mats are already used on beaches interstate and overseas and of course now here at Seacliff beach, but we are yet to see the idea being taken up by other Australian councils. I’m very much looking forward to working on that and improving that. I’m in conversations and contacting several clubs and councils at the moment to find out where there might be the best place to place the next one. So I look forward to keeping you and your listeners updated on that because as I said judging from the reaction in the last few days, there’s a lot of support to see this provided in more beaches.

Pam Green: Have you checked it out yourself yet Kelly?

Kelly Vincent: Look, I haven’t yet, I haven’t yet had the chance to. But I’m very much looking forward to it. As I understand it the mat will need to be rolled out, I think on a daily basis by the volunteers at the Surf Lifesaving Club and at the moment it will only happen on weekends and public holidays until March. Then I think there will be break until November because obviously the weather and conditions at the beach is something to take into account. So obviously it’s not a perfect solution and there’s still some barriers till full inclusion, but as long as we keep campaigning to get these available more permanently and to see them provided at more beaches. So anyone who does use it or wants to use it, contact the council and let them know what days work best and perhaps that will help them to figure out the best move forward and make sure a ramp is more permanently available. I’m definitely looking forward to seeing more people use it and getting down there myself.

Pam Green: I think it’s a great idea. Once again, thanks for your time today Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks Pam.

Pam Green: Time now to welcome to 5RPH, Dignity for Disability MLC, Kelly Vincent. Hi Kelly, welcome back.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks Pam, good to be with you.

Pam Green: Well you’ve been pretty busy over the holiday period and last week you attended the opening ceremony for the Deaf Games in Adelaide. How did the event go? And did you catch up with any interstate contacts?

Kelly Vincent: Well it’s a fantastic event and fantastic to see the Australian Deaf Games hosted right here in Adelaide as well. So we get to show case South Australia from a tourism perspective as well as promoting the benefits, social and health benefits of Deaf people participating in sport. It’s a great opportunity for Deaf people to get together with other Deaf people and celebrate their primary language, sign language as well as meet people from other countries as well, given that we have countries like Fiji and Vanuatu also participating in every sport in the game, everything from athletics, to beach volleyball, cricket, darts, eight ball, golf, lawn bowls, netball and even ten pin bowling. So a wide range of sports there and great to see a celebration of sport and its role in Deaf culture and the Deaf community.

While I was at the opening ceremony I did have the opportunity to finally meet up with Drisana Levitzke-Gray, who of course was the Young Australian of the Year for 2015 after her work celebrating and promoting Auslan, Australian sign language and Deaf culture. It was great event, a great opportunity to celebrate the Deaf community and Deaf culture and promote our beautiful state of South Australia, which is something I’m very passionate about.

Pam Green: Exactly. And also recently the changes I guess to the Weatherill/Labor Government ministerial line up. I believe we know have a new Minister for Disabilities. Are there any other changes?

Kelly Vincent: Yes there is. Leesa Vlahos of course has been appointed to the disability portfolio, so we will be working more closely with her in the coming years and looking forward to that. As you know Pam, Dignity for Disability is always willing to work constructively alongside whoever we have to, to make the right changes for South Australians, all South Australians but particularly people with disabilities. We’ve also seen Peter Malinauskas, a relatively new Minister, in fact a very new Minister who was sworn into the parliament late last year. He’s become a Minister predominately in the areas of police, corrections and emergency services as well as road safety so some very big responsibilities there for a relatively new Minister. And again, I’ll be working alongside him particularly to make sure that emergency information is accessible to people with disabilities and that correctional facilities and the police force are responsive to the needs of people with disabilities as well. So there are some big changes afoot, those are just a couple of the shake ups but the ones that particularly affect Dignity for Disability’s work. We’ll certainly keep you in the loop as we continue to work constructively alongside these new Ministers too affect important change.

Pam Green: And finally, this Friday I believe your opening the Lord’s Taverners cricket series, Australia versus England. That commences this weekend, can you tell us about that?

Kelly Vincent: That’s right, the opening is happening this week. I’m very much looking forward to having the pleasure of opening the Blind Cricket Series. Blind Cricket I think is a concept that I think it’s fair to say is foreign to quite a few people, the idea of people who are blind or have a vision impairment playing the cricket. But that is exactly why events like this are so important, because they push the envelope so to speak about what people with disabilities can achieve and can participate in and shows that we can participate in any event that any other person can when we’re given the opportunity. So I’m very much looking forward to opening the Lord’s Taverners Blind Cricket Series this week on the 22^nd of January, so the day after tomorrow. It’s at Park 25 in the CBD here in Adelaide and I believe the opening ceremony will kick off at 10.30am, so anyone who would like to I’m sure is welcome to come along and experience what I’m sure will be the excitement of Blind Cricket.

Pam Green: And Vision Australia will have a bit of a presence there too actually.

Kelly Vincent: I did suspect that would be the case and look forward to catching up with you.

Pam Green: Excellent. Well once again thanks for your time and welcome back again.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks Pam, great to be back.

Pam Green: Time now to welcome to 5RPH, Dignity for Disability MLC Kelly Vincent. Hi Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Hi Pam.

Pam Green: Well one of the policy and legislative areas you continue to work on are issues around access to the justice system for people with disabilities. Can you tell us about legislative changes you’ve been involved in this year in parliament?

Kelly Vincent: Well certainly this year Dignity for Disability were very pleased to see the unanimous passage of a bill that puts into law many of the measures discussed in the disability justice plan. These include providing for communication assistance, also known as communication partners, for people who need it to give their evidence in court. This might be someone whose disability effects the way they speak or perhaps they’re not able to speak and need to communicate through another method, or they might have an intellectual disability or a cognitive impairment like a brain injury and need to use an alternative communication method because of that disability.

Also they can now have what are known as Ground Rules Hearings, these are test hearings which will set out how a case will be conducted, for example what is admissible in evidence and what type of questions can be asked of a defendant, witness or a victim, particularly if the victim has literacy or communication issues for example, which means that long winded questions might confuse them. So Ground Rules Hearings will allow for the judge to say that questions need to be communicated in a way that the witness can clearly understand.

The changes also provide for allowing the use of audio visual records for interviews as evidence in court, particularly where witnesses or victims are children of or under the age of 14 years or an adult who has a disability that affects their capacity to give evidence, particularly in cases involving sexual violence. It also lays out how those audio visual interviews are to be conducted. Importantly, the changes also allow for what is called “hear say” evidence in some cases, very restricted cases but very important nonetheless. For example, this means that a teacher, friend, parent or other caregiver may be able to disclose a change in behaviour or something that was disclosed to them by an alleged victim of a crime for example that would be able to be used as evidence in a court.

And lastly, it amends the Evidence Act to allow for an exemption for the need to give evidence in court so that witnesses won’t have to appear in the trial if they are particularly distressed for example and this strengthens the ability of the court to prevent complex and deliberately confusing cross examination that we just talked about earlier.

Pam Green: But why does this really matter, I mean are people with disabilities more likely to be victims of crimes or be involved with the police or the courts or the justice systems as offenders or even alleged offenders?

Kelly Vincent: Unfortunately, statistically yes, people with disabilities are more likely to be both victims and perpetrators of crimes. But I’d like to touch specifically on people with disabilities as victims for a moment and the statistics that demonstrate why it’s so important that we give better access to victims with disabilities or alleged victims of disabilities better access to our justice system. Children with disability in particular are at least between two and seven times more likely to suffer abuse of some kind, be it physical, or sexual violence in their lifetime compared to children without disabilities. Similarly women with disabilities are more likely to experience domestic violence and face additional challenges when trying to recognise and leave a violent situation. So there are a lot of factors that factor into this and unfortunately it results in the fact that women with intellectual disability in particular are at a far greater likelihood of experiencing sexual violence. In fact it’s suggested that as many as 90% of women with intellectual disabilities have experienced violence in their lifetime.

Pam Green: And finally today, we understand there’s some concerns around the implementation of the communication partner scheme for Dignity for Disability, Speech Pathology Australia and the Law Society. Could you outline what these concerns are?

Kelly Vincent: Sure, currently the communication partner scheme which we talked about a few minutes ago is aimed to be provided by volunteers so that communication assistance in a court will be provided by a volunteer. We certainly have concerns about this as does the Law Society and Speech Pathology Australia because, firstly there’s concerns that when people are volunteers and not being paid to provide that support they won’t necessarily be available with the same consistency as someone who’s being paid as it’s their job to appear in court on particular days. So when you’re relying on volunteers there are potential concerns around the consistency of the same person providing that support. Additionally there’s been some concerns raised with us by Speech Pathology that volunteers, even though they will undergo some training to be a part of the scheme, won’t have the high level professional training that a trained professional communication assistant in other jurisdictions have. For example in the UK under what they call their intermediary scheme, their communication assistance scheme, the assistance is provided in a court by a trained and paid professional, often someone who yes, has undergone additional training to become an intermediary. But they also have a relevant background most commonly as I understand it in speech pathology. So they already have a background in communicating with people who have complex and alternative communication needs. And we think that would provide some more certainty and more quality of the communication assistance provided in the court. So we’ll continue to work with Speech Pathology and the Law Society as well as the government to make sure we strike the right balance in getting this very important scheme right.

Pam Green: Well look Kelly that’s it for the year. Again thank you so much for your time.

Kelly Vincent: I wish you and your listeners a great break, a great Christmas and a fantastic and restful new year.

Pam Green: Dignity for Disability MLC, Kelly Vincent.

PETER GRECO: Well, it seems like a positive press release coming out from the State and Federal Ministers for Disability. Let’s speak to Kelly Vincent who is the Member for Dignity for Disability in the Legislative Council. Kelly, good to catch up with you.

KELLY VINCENT: You too, Peter. How are things?

PETER GRECO: Pretty good. Now, should we be really excited, or should we be treating this announcement about the agreement between the State and Federal Government about the NDIS in South Australia with a little bit of caution?

KELLY VINCENT: Well, I don’t think it will surprise you, Peter, if I say that I think the reaction should be a little bit of both.

PETER GRECO: Okay. (Both laugh)

KELLY VINCENT: I think this is a really positive step forward. Particularly for the children and young people who have been missing out, even though they are technically eligible, because the number of children and young people who would be eligible to participate in the South Australian trial of the scheme was originally woefully underestimated. So originally, it was estimated that around 5000 children and young people will be eligible. Actually, the figure is around 10,000. So there’s been about half the participants saying “yes, you are able to participate, you able to have a registration number you are eligible, but we can’t yet get you onto a plan or even get you a meeting to talk about what you might like to have on your plan because we don’t have the resources to do that.” So this is a great step forward for those families and young people in particular, who have been stuck, really, in limbo waiting to be able to have a meeting to get a plan to get services and supports underway. So, particularly for those 5000 children and young people and their families, this is a win. But not only will it make a difference to those people who are waiting now, it will make a difference long into the future, because with this bilateral agreement announcement, we now know how the full roll-out of the NDIS will phase in over the years in South Australia as well…

PETER GRECO: Okay. Now, I think the State and Federal Government both kicked in an extra $50 million each?

KELLY VINCENT: That’s right. So a total of $100 million.

PETER GRECO: And is that what you are referring to in terms of resources for those 5000 or so youngsters that are eligible, but haven’t actually been able to be part of the scheme.

KELLY VINCENT: That’s right, they’re absolutely covered by that 100 million figure. So from the 1st of February next year, 2016 all eligible young people aged between zero and 14 years of age state-wide will be able to get onto an NDIS plan and that includes the 5000 who were not originally included in the estimated figure. And then from the 1st January 2017 we’ll move to 15 to 17 year olds state-wide, and then from the 1st July 2017 we’ll move onto adults so 18 to 64 year olds will be eligible. So 18 to 64 years olds will start being phased in from 1st July 2017. But that roll out, the adult roll out will be done by geographical area, so the first areas will be the Barossa, Light and lower north regions, and the local government areas of Playford, Salisbury and Port Adelaide Enfield. So it’s going to be a gradual roll out based on geographical area as we move into adults aged from 18 to 64 from the 1st July 2017. But from the 1st of February next year, so in just a couple of months’ time all 0 to 14 year olds will be covered. So it’s going to be state-wide for a little while yet, it won’t be until July 2017 until we start saving in the adult part of the trial which will be based on those geographical areas as I just mentioned.

PETER GRECO: That will, I guess all come together by 2019 when anyone in South Australia who qualifies will be able to be part of the scheme.

KELLY VINCENT: That is the plan, yes.

PETER GRECO: Which I guess is nearly four years away so I guess for some people it’s still a pretty big wait. How much campaigning and lobbying have you as a Member of Parliament been doing for this? You were rightly outspoken when the number of youngsters that were actually part of the scheme was way below than what were applying for it.

KELLY VINCENT: Yes absolutely we have been vocal on the need for more resources and funding to be available to get those, in particular those 5000 children and young people on to plans because ultimately it’s not their fault that the government messed up the maths and therefore didn’t have the support available to them, and you can imagine the amount of angst and stress that’s been causing to families.

PETER GRECO: Thanks for your time Kelly.

KELLY VINCENT: Thanks Peter.

Richard Morgan: Time now to welcome to 5RPH question time, Dignity for Disability MLC Kelly Vincent. Hi Kelly.

Kelly Vincent: Hi Richard.

Richard Morgan: Kelly, about six months ago you introduced a bill to the parliament slating increased penalties to people who park illegally in accessible car parks. These parks are designated for people with disability parking permits. Can you tell us what the effect of this bill would be?

Kelly Vincent: Well the effect of the bill would be to leave the fine for illegally parking in an access park without a permit at around $350, so leave the fine as it currently is. But then introduce a demerit point offence so that if a person is caught parking illegally in an access parking space they will lose one demerit point against their license, as already occurs with a number of different parking offences. This offence for the illegal use of disability access parking permits already happens in New South Wales. So it’s only a single demerit point and if you have a full driver’s license – you have twelve demerit points you can lose before you lose your license as a result. The usual appeal mechanisms will apply, so if you forget to put up your permit and you get fined and lose a demerit point you can appeal to have that removed on the basis of that you do have a permit, you just forgot to hang it up for example.

Richard Morgan: Now, isn’t it just car parking, why is this measure important?

Kelly Vincent: Well you could say that it’s just car parking and it might seem like a simple issue and not a very important one. But it’s really interesting when you start to consider the impact that not being able to find an accessible car park, because the other ones are taken by people who don’t have a permit – the impact that has on a person’s life and their ability to interact with the community. If people can’t get a park at their shopping centre, a concert venue, cinema, library, art gallery, a medical appointment or even a café or restaurant; so they can attend safely and with ease, then that can have a big impact on their ability to access that venue for that day. And I think it’s important to remember too that access parks are not just about convenience. I think a lot of the conversation centres around convenience when it really is about safety Richard. If for example, someone like myself who is a wheelchair user can’t find an accessible park close to a venue and has to park further away and walk across a crowded, busy, and possibly even dark carpark where we might be less visible because we’re sitting down then that has obvious safety concerns. And I even remember speaking to a constituent a few weeks ago, she told me that once she couldn’t get into the side of her car because two cars had parked alongside her in a standard carpark, so she had to ask a stranger to back her car out for her so she could get her wheelchair back in the car. And again, that has obvious safety concerns, I think handing the keys of your car to a complete stranger. So this is about safety and that’s why a demerit point is the right offence as it sends that strong message that this is not just about convenience, it’s about the safety that these selfish, lawbreakers pose to other motorists.

Richard Morgan: Yeah good point. Does your office get many calls or emails about the issue?

Kelly Vincent: Good question Richard, we certainly do. It’s been quite extraordinary the response, since this issue has been raised again on Saturday on the front page of the Advertiser newspaper. And since then we’ve had many dozens of calls, letters and emails to my office and hundreds of comments on social media. The vast majority I have to say are supporting the proposal and I think the Advertiser ran a poll which showed that around 86% of voters on that pole supported the proposal for demerit points. So certainly some passionate opinions are being expressed. Many people don’t have much background or awareness of people with disabilities and our needs and seem very certain that only people with permits should park there or will often confront people. So I think this goes to show, it’s not just people with disabilities or older people who do have these permits that care, it’s also an issue that people without permits care about as well as they can see it’s about courtesy, it’s about respect, and as I said it’s about the safety of other community members.

Richard Morgan: Now, I understand that the government is going to support your initiative despite some administrative challenges. When do you think this will come into effect in South Australia?

Kelly Vincent: Well you’ve hit the nail on the head there Richard. There are some administrative challenges, I guess you can call it that, to work through. Where it was done in New South Wales it was done via legislation quite simply. But New South Wales have a slightly more centralised system for fining and offences relating to traffic than we do in South Australia. So here in South Australia it’s a little more nuanced between local government and state government. So we do need to figure out the best way to move forward with this proposal. This could still be via legislation and Dignity for Disability does still have a bill before the parliament to do that. But if it turns out that a mechanism other than legislation is best then we’ll definitely proceed with that. So at the moment we do know that we have the government’s support for this proposal which we’re very glad to have and it’s good the government can recognise this as being the important issue that it is, and the Minister for Transport, Stephen Mullighan is currently working out the best mechanism to move forward. I will definitely keep you updated as things move along, but I think alongside whatever the mechanism ends up being there will need to be a campaign as appeared similarly in the eighties and nineties like ‘check the permit not the person’ – raising awareness of things like invisible disability and the fact that not everyone who uses these permit parks uses a wheelchair. But also for people to adjust to the fact that they will receive a demerit point if they continue to park in access parks without a permit, and so there will certainly need to be a grace period if you like, where we raise awareness about this to make sure that we do challenge driver behaviour.

Richard Morgan: Kelly, thanks for talking with us tonight.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks Richard. I’m happy to keep you updated as things progress.

Richard Morgan: Dignity for Disability MLC, Kelly Vincent.

By Simon Royal

Posted Wed 9 Dec 2015, 4:58pm

Australia has created a type of apartheid in its treatment of people with a disability, the country’s first Dignity for Disability MP says.

Kelly Vincent, who was elected to South Australia’s Upper House in 2010, says the community’s treatment of people is largely dependent on whether a disability is visible or not and is present in the health and education systems.

“It is almost like a sense of apartheid,” she said.

“There’s a sense of differentiation between two people even though they may have nearly identical experiences.

“There tends to be quite a vitriolic reaction when people whose disabilities or health conditions may not be visible try to access the same services as those of us with a visible disability.”

Ms Vincent said people tend to “look for the wheelchair” when it comes to disability.

The MP has been chairing a parliamentary inquiry into the experiences of students with a disability.

The Cook family of Adelaide told the inquiry of their experience of how the health and education systems react differently to disability and illness.

The family has a unique insight, thanks to a son who had leukaemia, and daughter with a rare type of epilepsy.

James Cook said his son was 20 months old when he was diagnosed.

“As daunting as it was, it was pretty good,” he said.

“Everything was set out really well, as much of a shock as it was we actually took away some information we understood what was about to happen and what the process was about to be.

“There were doctors and social workers present.”

Mr Cook said it was a huge contrast to his daughter’s diagnosis with electrical status epilepticus during slow-wave sleep (ESESS).

His daughter’s seizures occur during sleep, affecting only her brain, and therefore not showing any visible effects.

“It’s been a bit of a different journey,” he said.

“She was just put on generic medication, she had no testing to see where the cause or what the effect was.

“They just kept changing her medication to see what would work.”

Mr Cook said the differences in how the health system responded to his children is neatly summed up by the time it took to get each child a healthcare card.

“We got a healthcare card in under a month of him being diagnosed with leukaemia.

“For my daughter, it took us about two years.

“You see epilepsy isn’t seen as a disability even though it affects their life a great deal.”

School ‘incredibly misguided’ in treatment of student

Ms Vincent said SA is the only Australian state not to recognise epilepsy as a disability.

She said changing the regulations would address many of the practical problems experienced by families like the Cooks.

“The Cook family’s experience really speaks to a discrepancy into how we respond to different conditions and different labels.”

Nowhere, Ms Vincent says, is that more evident than in the education system.

Mr Cook said they have now chosen to home-school their daughter after she experienced bullying in both public and private schools.

“We’d really like her to have that experience, to have contact with kids her own age, but it just hasn’t worked,” he said.

“At one school a few kids were throwing food at her and the schools reaction was ‘oh well, there’s not much we can do about it’.”

The final straw for the family came last year in a private school.

An over-zealous teacher put up information notices around the school, alerting staff and students to the girl’s name, her condition and her photo.

Mr Cook said the school was asked to keep their daughter’s condition private because of bullying in a previous school.

“We were gutted because it was a lot of information and it was personal information that had been put out there and that wasn’t fair on her.”

Ms Vincent believes the school should have known better.

“I would be very shocked if there was any school in the state that didn’t have a policy in place that said it’s not appropriate to share a student’s information without their consent,” she said.

“The school probably acted with a good heart, but it’s incredibly misguided.”

The MP cannot say the same of some of the other stories of failure she has heard in the inquiry.

“The committee has been hearing some very, I have to say, horrific allegations where at best students are not supported to reach their potential and at worst they are blatantly mistreated, abused and neglected,” Ms Vincent said.

Andrew Reimer: Hello Kelly. Now what was the story about demerit points and disabled parking spots?

Kelly Vincent: This is a proposal that Dignity for Disability has put forward and we have in fact introduced legislation to the Parliament to introduce demerit points for people who park in disability access parking spaces without a permit. This is an issue that my office heard a lot of complaints about and something that did affect people’s ability to access community safely and without worry in a big way. So we thought it was time to put forward a proposal to send a strong message to the community doing this using these parking spaces without a permit that this won’t be tolerated.

Andrew Reimer: I’m just wondering though, I mean the fine for parking in a disabled spot, what is it now?

Kelly Vincent: Around $349 on average I think so it’s already pretty high but unfortunately it’s clearly not sending a strong enough message and particularly in the city areas we still see a lot of misuse of these parks without a permit. In fact I think I’m right in saying that the Adelaide City Council issued over 1,000 expiation notices to do with parking and access spaces without a permit last year alone so it’s a big problem and we want to show that this won’t be tolerated. Because I think it’s important to remember Andrew that disability parking spots are not just about convenience, they’re about safety as well. If I have to park in a standard spot where I might be further away from where I’m going then I have to walk across a crowded car park, it might be dark, it could be less visible because I’m sitting down, so there are big safety concerns as well.

Andrew Reimer: I do appreciate that. On a personal note, I find it incredulous that people are so selfish out there that they would park in a spot which is designated for a person with a disability. Makes me shudder. Number two, the fact that they would get fined in excess of $300, to me that’s a lot of money and then I would have thought that was in itself a reason not to do it and a disincentive but then I just wonder whether the demerit point was just maybe going a little bit too far that’s all.

Kelly Vincent: Well clearly not unfortunately. We still have far too many people committing this selfish act of parking in a parking space without a permit but I think you’re really going to another issue that needs to be addressed there which is the policing of the misuse of these parks, because not only are people continuing to do it, but they clearly are not being caught enough. So as well as harsher penalties we’d also like to see increased policing of this actually happening. But not only that, we’d actually also like to see people with disabilities employed by local councils to do that policing and it could be people whose disabilities are visible and some people who may not be very visible, because that’s another important thing to remember. As well as that, 90% of people with disabilities have no particular visible manifestations. So we’d like to see more policing of this as a part of the solution as well so that more people actually get caught out to send that message. But I think at the end of the day if you think the penalty is too harsh just don’t do it.

Andrew Reimer: No doubt, but when it comes to the policing of who is parking and who isn’t in disabled spots I can tell you from bitter experience I spent a few months as a parking inspector down at Holdfast Bay and I can tell you the amount of abuse you get in such a role from people who are doing the wrong thing, you’d need to be pretty thick-skinned.

Kelly Vincent: You do, in a way it occurs to me that maybe people with disabilities are the best people to be doing that job because we are other people that can tell people exactly what they’re doing to us when they take these parking spaces away from us. They could be denying somebody’s ability to access that venue, maybe even for the entire day. And so I think we need to see those real life stories out there about why these parks matter and send that message to people that not only do they get caught out with increased policing but maybe if we had people with disabilities employed to do this you would learn more of a lesson about exactly why these parks matter and need to be kept free for people who have a permit.

Andrew Reimer: Yeah. Now when it comes to other issues affecting people with disabilities out there, we’ve had International Day for People with Disabilities.

Kelly Vincent: This is marked every day on the 3rd of December, unfortunately it’s not always easy to put everything into that one day, so Dignity for Disability with a couple of other organisations – Barriers to Justice and Victim Support Service included – put on Australia’s first disability pride march. I guess the aim of this pride parade was two-fold: one, to show our strength and visibility as a community and also to show the variety of disabilities that are out there and the variety of people with disabilities out there because unfortunately the messages that we get from the media and the news for example tends to be very stereotypical. We tend to go straight to the image of someone in a wheelchair for example when there are many out there that don’t fit that description but still have a disability or condition. We wanted to show that strength and visibility and pride in our experiences and our lives but also to rally for change in some of the areas that still are out there.

We had a rally at the end of the march out the front of Parliament House with a variety of different speakers, myself included. I spoke about many issues; the rate of abuse and neglect that people with disability face, and the need for more education and action around that; the need for more universal design of public buildings but also housing as well, particularly public housing, to be built to vehicle accessible throughout their lifetime, to not only meeting the code which is very minimal but actually talking about how can we make this space useable throughout the lifetime of this venue particularly as the population ages. That’s why we’re very disappointed within Dignity for Disability that the Government won’t support our amendments to the Planning and Infrastructure Legislation that the Parliament’s debating at the moment to implement measures and standards around universal design. I also talked about the fact that people with disabilities can be indefinitely detained in prison, even when found not guilty of a crime, particularly by way of mental illness or mental incompetence, even if they have been found not guilty of a crime, they can still be held in prison because there’s no appropriate supported accommodation for them in the community. We’ve come a long way, the community, but we have a long way to go.

Andrew Reimer: It sounds quite draconian, when you take what you’re saying into consideration in this day and age that that’s still going on. I really feel for people who are in that sort of situation and also the families who have to witness that as well. It’s a terrible injustice.

Kelly Vincent: Absolutely, it’s really a black mark in South Australia’s history of the state. Dignity for Disability has been very proud to make a lot of changes in the justice system around the needs of people with disabilities, particularly putting in place legislation for measures such as allowing a person who needs assistance to communicate in court to be allowed to do that, because up until now what’s happened is that people who might need to communicate in a way other than speaking have been deemed unreliable witnesses in a court so even if they want to tell the story of alleged abuse that they’ve experienced, because they’re not able to tell that story in a court without support, they’re deemed unreliable witnesses and therefore the trial doesn’t even go ahead let alone a conviction being placed. We’re very hopeful that these new measures will see more of these cases actually going to court and hopefully more convictions so that people who have perpetrated these horrific offences and these crimes of abusing people with disabilities won’t get away with it because let’s face it, up until now if you are going to abuse someone you might as well abuse someone who has less avenues to pursue justice. We think it will go a long way to plug that gap but we still have a long way to go.

Caller Father Joan: I’ve got family with a disability, I’ve got a disability myself. I had a nephew who was at St Ann’s and we all know what happened there, and has been beaten up several times walking home because they’re vulnerable, people just pick on them. It makes me absolutely mad too when people park in disabled car parks. I know some people who do it because they are the carer for maybe an ageing mother or grandmother, it’s the only car that the person goes in, so they keep the sticker in their car and then they can park in the disabled parks with a sticker and get away with it. If it’s not illegal it’s definitely immoral.

Kelly Vincent: It’s a big problem and one of the solutions that has been put to us is maybe having a photograph of the permit holder with the person whose name the permit is, on the permit. A problem with that though that we have to consider is that that would raise the cost of printing the permits.  That cost would be passed down to people wanting to have a permit. If we’re to consider how that would affect people and whether people would still be happy for that to go ahead. But I’m happy to hear any feedback on that.

Caller Father Joan: The rest of the community could cover that cost, there’s not that many people if we don’t look after the more vulnerable people in society, what kind of society are we? The other thing that really gripes me, you go to some food halls the counter is up to my shoulder and there’s no break where the cashier is. If I was in a wheelchair how could I order anything don’t we have to be a little bit accessible?

Kelly Vincent: You’re really hitting a big issue on the head there, which is often people don’t assume that people with disabilities are actually able to be out in the community and spend money at businesses and therefore they don’t make their businesses accessible, or they assume that we’ll always have someone with us to just take care of that for us. If you want my money you’ve got to work a bit harder.

Andrew Reimer: Thank you.

Kelly Vincent: Thanks, take care.