The Rebuttal

Politicians have really thick skins. They have to. They are subject to all sorts of criticism. Not only that they are often  symbols of fun. Caricatures of them are drawn that over emphasise parts of their bodies. Hence John Howard is often drawn as a short man with rubber lips and hugely bushy eyebrows. These caricatures are shown at will in the media. Insults are hurled at politicians left right and centre. Alexander Downer, the former stocking wearing leader of the opposition, once described current Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as a, “..cynical, immodest, mealy-mouthed, duplicitous, a boy in a bubble, a foreign policy imposter and unfit to lead the nation. ”  Ex Prime Minister Paul Keating was the master of the insult – He described ex Liberal leader John Hewson as, “…a shiver without a spine.” The vile ex leader of the Labor Party and aspiring Prime Minister that thankfully never was, Mark Latham, famously called the Liberal front bench, ” .. a conga line of suck-holes.”

When politicians are not insulting themselves they are being insulted by the media  or the public. The unfortunate George Bush is a particular  target of fun. He does not help himself by uttering gems of wisdom like , ” … Is it ok if I call you buddy – that means friends.” Popular American talk show host, Jay Leno, had this to say about Bush,    “..George Bush has the lowest heartbeat ever recorded by someone in the White House. Well, second lowest. Dick Cheney got his down to zero a couple of times.” Political satirist, Michael Moore, was no less scathing. Take this example,  “I personally hold Blair more responsible for this war than I do George Bush. The reason is, Blair knows better, Blair is not an idiot. What is he doing hanging around this guy?” OUCH!

Bush is portrayed as the ultimate buffoon. There are pictures all over the Internet showing him in a number of amusing situations.  He was once pictured reading a book upside down to a group of children. Who could ever forget the classic picture of him looking through binoculars with the lens caps still on. Whether the picture is genuine or not is of no consequence we are left in no doubt as to the opinion of Bush’s intelligence.

I write this because it has come to my attention that certain people have tried on a number of occasions to censor The Rebuttal. I personally know of approaches to people, who have then approached me and asked me to tone things down. Said one person to me recently – “.. Do you have to make it so obvious who you’re talking about?” We are a precious lot in the Deafness sector it seems. If something strikes us as being untoward we have to keep it to ourselves and not rock the boat. Criticize leaders in he Deafness sector? – GOD FORBID!

The Rebuttal was established primarily because it was felt that that certain people in the Deafness sector did not listen or take complaints seriously. It was felt that complaints and criticism of direction or policy were often fobbed off and kept behind closed doors.  Writing about these issues in a Public Forum like The Rebuttal is a legitimate way of bringing attention to the issues. Important concerns such as provision of services, appropriate use of funds, portrayal of deafness in fund-raising or the lack of leadership opportunities afforded to deaf people in the sector were all issues of importance that are generally kept firmly behind closed doors. The Rebuttal wanted to bring these issues to the surface, create debate and more importantly provide a voice to people that had been largely ignored and patronised.

It is not an easy thing to do.  Dean, one of our editors, often says that we cop other peoples bullets. He has a point because leaders in the Deafness sector actually feed us information about things that they are not happy about hoping that we will write about them.  We  have been fed minutes of meetings pointing out untoward issues. We have been fed emails showing what certain people are saying. We try to encourage these leaders, deaf and hearing, to write about their concerns themselves. For one reason or other they nearly always decline. WHY IS THIS SO? What do they have to fear?

For one thing they fear being sued. We know that certain people have threatened legal action for things that have been written by The Rebuttal and others. Gagging by way of threats like this is more common than one might think. Deaf Australia once had a popular discussion page where people often wrote of their concerns. Sometimes humour and satire were used on these discussion pages. A series of biting poems centering around the actions of one of the Deaf sector leaders eventually saw the page closed and made for members only. Why this happened we will never really know, suffice to say that free speech is not something that is encouraged.

Yesterday, Saturday February 13th 2010,  saw the Deaf community protesting , nationwide, about the lack of captioned cinema in Australia. This campaign was in direct opposition to the views of many of our Deafness sector organisations and leaders. The catalyst to this campaign was the Cinema Industry’s application for exemption to complaints under the DDA. Our Deafness sector peak bodies representing us on the issue wanted to support the application. They felt that some progress towards captioning in the Cinema was better than none at all.

But the Deaf community did not agree. They felt the Cinema Industry’s proposal was an insult that failed to recognise their rights and their marketing power. As they spoke out there were efforts to shut them down. Emails were sent to certain people asking them to butt out. The Rebuttal received an email that showed one of the bosses of these organisations felt the Deaf community’s opposition to the Cinema Industry’s application was directly because, “.. they don’t like me or us” ( I kid you not)  These organisations are supposed to be OUR voice, yet when we all spoke out they attempted to shut us up. THIS IS WRONG!

Thankfully the campaign did not falter and it led to yesterdays protests outside Cinemas across Australia. It is noteworthy that the campaign eventually received the backing of our representative organisations. They had to backdown in the face of the overwhelming tide of opinion. This is why people MUST speak out.

Speaking out is sometimes all that we can do. The Rebuttal is sometimes guilty of sensationalism. This is because we want to draw attention to issues. We sometimes use humor, sometimes emotion and often satire. We do this to trigger a response. BUT there needs to be more voices, strong voices, that are willing to stand up when they feel that our representative organisations are wrong. The Cinema Campaign is an excellent example of this. More importantly these voices need to be raised without fear of reprisals and threats of legal action. We ask of our Deafness sector organisations – DO YOU HEAR US?!

Not long ago, we celebrated Australia Day. Sure Australia has its problems but generally speaking, we do live in a lucky country, free from civil war and a functioning democracy. Our attitude of giving people a fair go is legendary. Unfortunately this is not always put into practice and we are seeing an example of this now with the cinema chains deferring and avoiding the issue of providing access to Deaf/hearing-impaired and Blind/vision impaired Australians. It is not unfair to say they are being very unAustralian with their derogrative and contemptous attitudes towards us.

The United Nation Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities even lists “For everyone to be included, we need to change existing rules, attitudes and even buildings.” They outline a simple philosophy of non-discrimination, allowing for full inclusion and respect for disabilities and acceptiong people with disabilities as part of our diverse world. Yet, despite this, the cinema chains refuse to acknowledge our basic rights and celebrate our diversity.

It is UNAUSTRALIAN! It is UNFAIR!

Our organisations have worked hard. Deaf Australia’s President mentioned it had been a long, hard and often unforgiving slog. To have been offered such an insulting offer of just 0.3% of movies as “access” must have been akin to a slap in the face. Now is the time to show we are united as a community and show our deaf organisations they are not alone.

Email the e-postcards to the Ministers listed. Bombard them. Remind them of the United Nations Convention. Remind them that Australia signed this convention on 17th

July 2008. They are bound by this to allow us to have full inclusion in society. Send them your stories. Tell them about the kilometres you have to drive to see a movie. Tell them how you have to interpret a movie for your son or daughter. Tell them how you can’t enjoy a luxury night at the Gold Class cinema. Tell them about what you ARE TOLD YOU CANNOT HAVE! And ask why?

Attached with this edition will be the postcard. Send it. Forward it to your friends, family and work colleagues and ask them to send it too.

Check out http://www.artsaccess.com.au and find out the protest locations for Saturday February 13th at 11am. Remember they will be held in all capital cities except Canberra and Darwin.

Don’t be passive. Do not settle for three screenings of one movie per week at a fixed location when others have up to 15 movies or more they can pick from any day, any time, anywhere. You are the change that can make it happen.

From little things like us, big things can grow.

Related Links:

Community Protest Locations Announced

Action on Cinema Access

Dear diary,

Today we went to the doctors for my general check up, we waited for the interpreter to come in to the waiting room.

When she arrived her and daddy started to have a chat with the interpreter, apparently it was funny cause they both started laughing quite loudly in the waiting room, how embarrassing that everyone had to hear my daddys snort.

I like it when the interpreters come because they are usually friendly and they often make good conversation.

When the doctor called us in daddy and the interpreter walked in with me, they comforted me and said everthings gonna be all right.

When I came in the doctor said hello to me and my daddy, he then greeted the interpreter as my mummy. The interpreter explained that she was not my mummy but an interpreter.

The doctor said sorry and soon focused his attention to me. When he checked me he said that I had a minor chest infection and that he would prescribe me to some medicine. When he talked about my check up he was always talking to the interpreter, not to my dad.

When he finished he printed a  prescription and gave it to my dad while explaining the instructions too the interpreter.

When we got out of the practice we went to get the medicine and then we went to buy some lollies for the meeting tommorow night at the deaf social club, which mummys looking forward to.

19/1/10

Dear diary,

Today we went to the park, we went with mummy and daddy, I was really excited about going there, the slide and the swings are really really good fun.

When we got there dad accidently hit his door on a BMW leaving a small dent in the door. The rich man who owned the BMW came and started yelling at daddy using bad language and rude gestures. Daddy had to explain that he was deaf and that he couldn’t hear, but the bad man didn’t care and he said that daddy had to pay for the dent.

Daddy said “what? – I can’t hear you.”

So the man repeated his statement, but dad said the same thing as before. So he repeated the question but dad stated “look i cant understand you,  I’ll go to the shops and buy a pen and paper, okay?”

So we got in the car but didn’t go to the shops but to a different parking spot. Daddy called the man a jerk and that the man needs to get a life. Then we went to the play ground and I went on the swing and slide. I also met a girl who kept on asking if I liked cats and I said yes, but she kept on asking me, so I called her an idiot in sign language, mum unfortunatly saw me.

On our way home we stopped for ice-cream and the man who owned the BMW drove by and called my dad a scumbag, I thought it would be best not to tell him.

In terms of disability legislation and attitudes Australia television and film media is a fossil. In fact should a fossil come to life it most likely would provide better access than our media institutions. Deaf and vision impaired Australians number a sizable proportion of Australia’s population. Readers of The Rebuttal will know that we believe deaf and vison impaired Australians are a huge and profitable market, ripe for making profit. Yet our media industries, be they DVD distributors, Cinemas, Free to air TV or Pay TV still will not provide access that respects our needs as humans or as a market.

They continue to cry poor. They continue to offer the absolute minimum and our Government, for all its hyperbole about creating  an inclusive society, will not legislate to make them comply. The much awaited Media Access Report, that deaf and vision impaired Australians had such high hopes for, turned out to be nothing more than another discussion paper that outlined the issues and needs – HELLLLOOOOOOO – we already know – Talk is cheap, do something about it.

Over in America, the land that was once fond of bombing people it did not like, but now has a more humanitarian President, they continue to show us the way in terms of disability access, particularly media access .  A cinema chain in America has been sued because it did  not provide access for deaf and vision impaired customers. In America, of course, you get instructions on the back of your Rice Bubbles Box about how you can sue and become an instant millionaire. Cynicism aside we can only dream that our legislators will develop similar attitudes to the judges that are trying the case. One of them had this to say,

” …You are going to lose eventually. I don’t know if you are going to lose this case or not, but you are going to lose this battle in the end. You can get out in front of it and be the good guys, or you can be dragged kicking and screaming and look like jerks. I don’t understand why you are choosing to fight this battle.”

That came from the judge himself.  Can you imagine our toothless Human Rights Commission coming out and saying something like that? For crying out loud they had over 400 submissions in response to the recent application for exemption to disability complaints lodged by the cinema industry here in Australia. Probably in excess of 95% of the submissions told the Australian Human Rights Commission to throw out the application. This came from individuals and organisations alike. What did the Australian Human Rights Commission do in light of this overwhelming voice ? A voice that gave them the power to simply say to the Cinema industry “Go jump” – they asked the Cinema industry to respond to some of the comments .. hence delaying any type of decision even further.  To the AHRC I say .. get a BACKBONE!

I love the American judge on this case. Not only did he tell the cinema chain in question that they were behaving STUPIDLY he actually told them they were STUPID.  He didn’t need to use the word stupid it was blindingly clear. He had more to say,

“Theatres cost huge amounts of money. A movie theatre is no longer a barn with a sheet at one end and a bunch of chairs. You have all sorts of sophisticated technology, 3D viewing and so on. This seems like a drop in the bucket.”

God, don’t you just love the bloke. He really gets it and says it as it is and whats more he doesn’t care about the sensibilities of the cinema people. He just points out the reality. It’s a far cry from some of our advocacy organisations that chose to support the Cinema Industries application for exemption. Most of them started of their letters of support for the exemption with a statement that went something like this – ” We think its wrong that the cinema industry are  offering so little. BUT because they are offering a little more we have decided to support them in the hope that they will keep the faith …”  Maybe not those same words but that’s what they meant.

Indeed our peak media advocacy group Media Access Australia even went as far as to congratulate the cinema industry. Slap your head and say very loudly with me …. WTF .. which of course means Wheres The Fairy-floss – which is exactly what Media Access Australia offered up in response .. FAIRY-FLOSS!!

All I can say is – get that judge to Australia and PRONTO!

Source: http://ow.ly/XE2O  (Iroically this will lead you to a page from Media Access Australia … Jekly and Hyde had nothing on them!)

I am very fortunate to work where I do. I work at the University of  Ballarat who are an organisation that not only believe in access but who actually provide it too. Whatever I need they will consider and if I say that it is necessary they will provide. Interpreters, captioning, technology – you name it they will ensure that all my access needs are met. It is interesting because they are not an organisation that is involved with disability as their core business BUT operate as if it actually is. They practice what they preach and I am the lucky beneficiary of their willingness to invest in my needs.

This is a far cry from some of our Deafness Sector organisations. I was horrified on the weekend to hear from a colleague that the Deafness sector organisation that he worked for would not provide for all his needs.  As the story goes the organisation that he works for was willing to purchase a special Smart Phone so that he was able to carry out his business at the same level as his hearing peers. Purchasing the technology was done through the Federal Governments Workplace Modifications Scheme so in a sense it cost the organisation NOTHING!

Now a Smart Phone is a gadget that is more than a phone. It includes iphones and Blackberry phones in its family. These phones are a godsend for the deaf as they enable the deaf who rely on text based conversation to be mobile. Emails can be accessed virtually anywhere and  the National Relay Service can be used to make phone calls. Instant messenger such as MSN and Yahoo can also be accessed to keep in contact with colleagues and clients alike. And of course they have the trusty old SMS.  No longer do the deaf have to rely on others. Smart Phone technology allows them to operate equally with their hearing peers. Communication by the phone is no longer an issue.

Now I got my Smart Phone at work from the WorkPlace Modifications Scheme too. The proviso to get it was that my work had to agree to cover the cost of the plan that I needed to provide reasonable access to enable various functions such as the  Internet, instant messenger and email. Good Internet mobile phone plans can be obtained if one shops around. For my work it was not an issue. I was told to find the plan I needed and all else would be covered.  Of course my work has nothing to do with deafness but they show an awareness that would  make any so called Deafness sector organisation proud.

Now my friend, who works for a Deafness sector organisation, was encouraged to get the Smart Phone through WorkPlace Modifications Scheme. The Smart Phone was dutifully acquired. Great stuff! Except the Deafness sector organisation refused to connect the Internet package to the phone. The reasoning being that if they did so for him, they would have to do it for all their staff and they could not afford too. Now readers will you please join me  in banging your head against the wall in frustration.

I find myself at this point of this article rubbing my eyes and holding my head in frustration. Again one of our Deafness sector organisation bosses, one who has spent a proverbial lifetime in the field, can not or will not embrace or understand the concept of equity. Equity is that wonderful policy that aims to make the playing field fair so that all can compete. Sometimes to make things fair you have to invest in the required support. It is not about providing everyone with the same sort of support but it is about ensuring that everyone can do the tasks that they need to do. This means, particularly for the deaf professional, that a phone with the Internet is  needed simply to enable independence and to utilise the skills  of the deaf professional to the maximum.

Unfortunately, still, after decades in the field, people in the Deafness sector, the bosses, usually hearing, who should know better – DONT GET IT! Yet my boss who has nothing to do with deafness DOES!!  I would like to blame ignorance but this particular Deafness sector boss has no such excuse. In fact he makes the ignorant seem enlightened. So incensed was I when I heard my friends story that I encouraged my friend to make a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission because, in my view, my mate being denied full access to communication is clear cut discrimination. Just picture it – a deaf person taking a Deafness sector organisation to  the Australian Human Rights Commission for discrimination. The embarrassment to the organisation would be immense!

 My friend declined this avenue. He said that if he did so the backlash from his boss would not be worth it. He said it would just make his job really difficult. I pointed out that the Disability Discrimination Act also protected people with disabilities from such victimisation. My friend said that he was just fed up with having to complain all the time. The stress and the worry, he said, would just not be worth it. And so everything ends there.

I don’t blame my friend. Why should he have to complain. Why cant the law just offer him protection! It doesn’t so his boss, once again, gets away with it. And he will continue to get away with it until someone holds him accountable! But who will be brave enough to put it all on the line and take on the undoubted stress and hardship that will occur from taking the issue further. It is a national disgrace that society continues to walk all over deaf and disatvantaged Australians in this way

And so begins 2010. With another tale of woe. What will we do? Sit on it or fight it? We at The Rebuttal hope the energy that was shown at the end of 2009 for the Cinema captioning campaign spills over to other areas … The late Don Chipp of the defunct Australian Democrats once famously said .. “Keep the Bastards Honest” Well we  don’t want just honesty we want accountability … We say KEEP THE BASTARDS ACCOUNTABLE in 2010!!

I came home one day in 1995 to see my father crouched over the coffee table. On the table he had some documents. His hands were clasped under his chin. To my concern I noticed his eyes were slightly hazy. He is not an emotional man so this was a worry for me. I stole a glance at the documents on the table. They were the deeds to the house. That morning he and my mother had paid the last instalment on the house. They now owned their house. And here lies the story.

Our family arrived in Australia from England in 1966 on an assisted passage. For a time we were based in Wollongong at the migrant hostel there. Apparently the flies drove my mother to distraction so we moved to South Australia after my father had secured work as a Welder at Holden’s in Elizabeth. We were based, for a time, at the migrant hostel on Grand Junction Road and then a small flat bordering a park in Para Hills. Being only two years old at the time my memories are vague. I recall walking to Woolworths with my mother to food shop or swinging or sliding in the park as she did the washing. She would check on me as she hung out the washing by looking over the fence. At some stage they bought a house – I have no recall of this.

My father and mother both had to work to make ends meet. My mother worked first at the TAB office and then at Wiggins Teape as a clerk. My father worked shift work at Holdens. Eventually after 12 years he tired of the shift work and set up a business as a window cleaner. He charged $3 per house. Both my parents worked in these menial jobs for over 30 years. Ironically they both ended up working at the Adelaide Casino as Environmental Officers – A fancy name for cleaners. My father retired there and my mother ended her career as a clerk with Australia Post.

They are a classic migrant story. They never earned big money but they made ends meet. My sister and I never went without. We went on holidays, once even back to England in 1975. How they managed it I do not know. But they did. In 1995 as my father crouched over the coffee table gazing over the deeds for the house that he and my mother now owned he would have been looking back to that day we all boarded the plane for Australia for a better life. He would have been remembering the good times and the bad times. Most of all he would have been proud. Proud because the papers on the table were the sum of all his and my mothers hard work, is it any wonder his eyes were hazy!

It is a truism that our parents mould us. I look back at the person that I am and I reaslise that I am who I am today mostly due to my parents. My parent’s took nor gave any crap. Life was tough, you got down to the nitty-gritty and got on with it. They gave me no sympathy for being deaf. They did not molly-coddle me or protect me, their philosophy is and was – get on with it and do what you have to do.

When I wagged school for 14 days in a row they did not use my deafness as an excuse. I was 14 at the time. I was struggling with my deafness, in denial, refusing to wear hearing aids – hell I would feed my hearing aid to the dog so he would chew up the ear moulds. Not surprisingly my school work suffered. It was tough for everyone but my parents kept me grounded. Bad behaviour was bad behaviour and that was that.

I realise now that they actually understood more than I give them credit for. Shortly after this episode I confessed to my parents that I was really struggling. I told them I thought I should go to a school for the Deaf. This was probably my first step to acceptance of my deafness, maybe even theirs too. I was so naive at the time I thought I was going to a home where I would have to live with all the other deaf kids. I had visions of the movie The Miracle Worker about Helen Keller. Old buildings full of rats. Big cast iron gates where all the kids were locked in. A place where you only went home for holidays.  Looking back I was in need of a lot of help.

And my parents helped by keeping me grounded. They just dealt with the issues that arose and did what needed to be done. They enrolled me in the local school that had a unit for deaf kids and pretty much normalised my life as much as possible. They have no time for the arty farty, no time for fancy counsellors – Just get on with it and do what you need to do without fuss.

Of course they stressed and they worried about me. But they tried not to show it openly. I am sure that when I was not around they talked and shared their worries with each other and their friends. But to me they just made me get on with it. No excuses for poor school results – and there were some – not because of my deafness but because I hated being a student – I did the bare minimum. But they were cluey enough to know that when my school work wasn’t up to scratch it was because of my ATTITUDE and not because I was deaf. I am thankful that they were intuitive enough to know the difference because they have passed this intuition on to me.

I think the greatest thing they gave me was balance. They knew that my deafness was an issue but they didn’t want to make it my whole life. When my deafness needed to be addressed they addressed it. When my behaviour was bad they focused on the behaviour. They did not seek excuses, they just did what they needed to do. They either found me a school that would help or they disciplined me because my attitude sucked. They never once told me that there was anything I couldn’t do. They just told me to get on with it.

And I think that’s what I do. I think that’s my attitude. I am an advocate. I advocate for disability rights. As an advocate I don’t look for excuses. If someone needs technology to get access, well give it to them. If a person needs interpreters to access education, well do it. We need captions for the cinema – well do it. I, like many, am not interested in petty excuses. We all know, for example, the cinema industry can afford to do a lot more than they are doing now, so they should just do it. My parents could see the difference between an issue and an attitude. I like to think I can too.

As a parent I have a child with a disability. He must attend hospital weekly for an infusion of an enzyme that helps, at least in part, to correct his condition. My wife and I accept no crap from him either. He can get stiff joints from his condition. To help himself he has to do exercises. If he doesn’t because he cant be bothered we address his attitude rather than look for excuses. He has to have a needle inserted in his arm every week. It can be painful. We have encouraged him to go to the room on his own and get it done. Our reasoning is that it is something he has to do for the rest of his life so why not start accepting it now. And he does. We are proud of him. It’s hard to sit in the waiting area as he goes off on his own .. but he is just doing what he has to do.  He comes back, needle in arm picks up the Wii controller and gets on with it!

I wish the world was more like my parents. Just did what needed to be done and got on with it!

Hello everyone, We at Deaf Australia understand that many people are unhappy about the cinemas application for an exemption from complaints while they work on increasing the number of cinemas from 12 to 35. We are very frustrated with the cinemas too. We have been working for many years to get the cinemas to improve things. Not just the number of cinemas but other things like the types of films, the number of times a film is screened, better advertising etc. Our submission to the AHRC about the exemption application is at http://www.humanrights.gov.au/disability_rights/exemptions/cinemas/subs.htm Our submission explains that after all the years of work we have done to try to get the cinemas to do more, we believe the cinemas just won’t do anything unless they are given a temporary exemption that locks them into doing something. It says that if the AHRC gives the cinemas an exemption, we want them to also give them very strict conditions to force the cinemas to fix thing other things as well, not just the number of cinemas with captions. More than 200 people have told AHRC they object to the exemption application. Some of them are members of Deaf Australia. Most are not members. We understand that many of our members support what we are trying to do. Some members have helped us with our work in the past by sending in formal complaints to AHRC against their local cinema. In the last few years we encouraged our members to put in formal complaints to AHRC against their local cinema, and we represented members and helped them negotiate their complaints. A few were successful. Most of the time the cinemas just refused to do anything. This meant the only option our members had was to go to the Federal Court. We understand why members haven’t wanted to do that. If you really want to make a difference and support the work that Deaf Australia, Media Access Australia and Deafness Forum are trying to do for all Deaf and hard of hearing people (not just our members, everyone benefits from our work) then the best way to do that is to send in a formal complaint against your local cinema. And do it now. Deaf Australia is currently representing 2 new complaints that people have sent in against their local cinemas. 200 formal complaints against 200 local cinemas that the cinemas have to answer and negotiate will have a much bigger impact than a public march. To make a formal complaint against your cinema, you can use the complaint form on the AHRC website at http://www.humanrights.gov.au/complaints_information/download/complaint_form.pdf Or write a letter to newcomplaints@humanrights.gov.au Your complaint must give the name and address of your local cinema, your name and address, and state that the cinema does not show captioned films and so you believe your are being discriminated against. Do it now – this week – before the AHRC makes a decision on the cinemas exemption application. This is what will help us achieve what we are trying to achieve. Thanks. And have a happy Christmas everyone.

Karen Lloyd Deaf Australia Executive Officer

Hey all .. we still think that the exemption should be oppossed but there are two sides to every argument. We agree with Deaf Australia … COMPLAIN NOW!!!!! Lodge your complaint here:

http://www.hreoc.gov.au/complaints_information/online_form/index.html

Craig has asked us to publish this. We have done so unedited .. Thanks to Craig for allowing us to publish his opposition to the exemption.

I am appalled at the report that outlined the services. On the one hand I am being told to support the exemption application because it is the best that they can come up with and while I can appreciate that Deaf Australia Inc has debated on this issue and come to realise that they must support the exemption application inorder to make roads into positive future.

As a Deaf person, we were told that in 2005 and it is now 2009 on the brink of 2010. We have 0.3 percent access to movies that are captioned.

When I look at UK and America – it astounds me to see that the proportion of captions shows and movies are way in excess that I would have to go there to see it to believe it because we have had it so bad here in Australia.

To support the exemption application are (with thanks to Kate Locke for putting it into plain English for us who are trying to understand the full documentation and was able to spell it out for us) which Australian Human Rights Commission has failed to do so in the first place).

Reasons why we need to support this exemption application:

1. The exemption will increase the number of screens in cinemas operated by the applicants capable of delivering captions to 35 over the next 2½ years

2. The exemption will provide audio description capability in all those 35 screens, including a retro-fit of the current 12 cinemas offering captioning.

3. The exemption will cause the cinemas to commit to a review of the current program in consultation with representatives from key stakeholders starting 9 months before the end of the Temporary Exemption period

4. The exemption will ensure accessible information on captioned and audio described film schedules.

5. It has taken 2 years of negotiations between MAA, DFA, DA, and cinemas to get to this point.

6. The Commission also have no way of making the industry respond in a timely manner – note how long this one has taken.

7. If this one is rejected, we get nothing in the interim, and start negotiations all over again. There is nothing to make cinemas improve access. There is no law or legislation, except the DDA. No government intervention. If they decline, people have to take them to court.

8. If AHRC reject this exemption application, there will be NO increase on current number of cinemas. The Commission does not have the power to bump up the numbers in the exemption.

9. If we reject this application, then we will go back to process of individuals having to make complaints and going through conciliation and hoping someone takes it to federal court which is not very common (so far not at all) and is difficult for Deaf groups to support these individual complaints.

10. The only way to make a rejection of this application successful is to have someone complain after its been rejected and take the complaint all the way to the Federal Court. There is currently no one willing to do that.

11. If we accept, then we can still complain about other main stream cinemas and independent cinemas – just not the 5 listed in the exemption.

12. The blindness sector is very worried about the exemption being rejected because it means they are left with nothing too (which is what they currently have).

Reasons why we need to reject this exemption application:

1. It seems to be a very pitiful, small move forward.

2. It prevents individuals from making a complaint about the cinemas for the next 2 years.

3. It could be perceived as ‘giving in’ to the cinemas, giving them time to ‘slack off’ when they could be doing more.

4. There have been around 100 submission to AHRC opposing the exemption. (DF has received 5 emails from its members opposing the exemption).

5. No real commitment to social inclusion in the proposal.

I am opposing the exemption application on the grounds that the business and the movie industries is making a mega profit and they demonstrate that they are not able to listen to the general public and the needs of the community.

We are the voice of the community. The organisations representing our best interest are not able to support what we want because they are being effectively silenced by these big organisations.

Given that in comparison to overseas such as America and England, this exemption is pitiful and is a very small movement for the future. Its not a solid plan for betterment, its about making the least investment for a huge monetary outcome which discriminates against the wider community and people with disability. It spells out that we are not infact important enough investment for the future.

The movies in place do not support majority of Deaf people, they show it on a Friday night, Sunday at 3 pm and then on Wed at 10 am. What normal people can go without their usual Friday night Deaf Club and Sunday at 3 pm is a long way to go to see a movie on a Sunday and then followed by 11 am on a Wed where majority of Deaf people are working.

These are usually in short term and usually shown approximately 1 month after first showing it.

This is a pathetic movement and it says that we are not valued as individuals and it allows them to dictate what is good for them and not take into consideration our needs and our consumer rights to have access to appropriate timing and captioning of movies in the cinema.

This is not good enough in the face of finances, how much money is made the profits that are made. Usually after a movie is shown in the cinema, most of us wait till the movie is released in DVD to purchase it and watch it a number of times to really understand. Watching a movie is a pleasurable experience for most of the general population, but for us, we need to read the captions and see a bit of the movie and the next movie we watch the movie itself and watch a bit of captions to be able to enjoy the cinematic show, then the third time is where we actually can marry the caption and the movie itself. We are into dual processing but the initial stages are separate because of our cognitive ability is only able to take one or the other… so yes it is pitiful that we must wait for approx 2.5 years and not have complaints against what is happening. They have had plenty of time to do this and investigate this more thoroughly.

I am closing my argument that this is not good enough and sending this before the 5 pm deadline that was not advertised clearly. Only just found out today.

Yours sincerely

Craig Maynard