 |
| skip top menu | home | contact us | office locations |site information | site map |
Submission — 29 March 2011Submission to the Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry.Use the links below to access sections of the submission, or
1 IntroductionThe Anti-Discrimination Commission (the ADCQ) is established under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (the Queensland ADA). One of the functions of the ADCQ is to promote an understanding and acceptance, and the public discussion of human rights in Queensland. The scheme of the Queensland ADA is to prohibit discrimination, both direct and indirect, on certain grounds in certain areas of activity unless an exemption under the Queensland ADA applies, and to provide a mechanism for resolving contraventions of the Queensland ADA. There are 16 prohibited grounds of discrimination including age, race, impairment, religious belief or activity, and family responsibilities. Relevant to the Floods Commission of Inquiry, discrimination on these grounds is prohibited in the areas of goods and services, accommodation, administration of state laws and programs, and local government. The provision of accessible services is a requirement of the ADA and the need to address community diversity and vulnerability applies to each of the areas of disaster prevention, preparedness, response and recovery. In order to prevent discrimination, consideration of the needs of people with particular vulnerabilities must be given to pre, during and post emergency procedures. Such people include people with disabilities; people who speak languages other than English; people who are from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds; people who are frail due to their age or medical conditions; and those with family responsibilities for young children, in particular those who have limited financial resources. The ADCQ notes in the Queensland government response to the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission acknowledged the need to make arrangements for vulnerable people to ensure the safety of those in our community who require special assistance during an emergency. It is heartening to see that not only was the need acknowledged by the Queensland government to make arrangements for vulnerable people, it was in many instances actioned during the recent flood and cyclone events. 
2 Floods Commission of Inquiry terms of referenceThe ADCQ's submission addresses the following terms of reference: All aspects of the response to the 2010/2011 flood events, particularly measures taken to inform the community and measures to protect life and private and public property, including:
The Commission of Inquiry is also required to make recommendations which it considers appropriate, feasible and cost effective to improve:
3 ADCQ submissionsThe ADCQ makes the following submissions for the consideration of the Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry. 3.1 Resourcing, overall coordination and deployment of personnel and equipmentThe Queensland Government through a range of policies, plans and statements has recognised that the Queensland community is diverse, multicultural and also consists of people with disabilities or vulnerabilities who have additional disadvantages or requirements.[1] Such people may be ignored or missing from disaster response planning and operations.
3.1.1 Evacuation Procedures for vulnerable peopleAuthorities with the responsibility of planning for the management of disaster events should specifically address within their plans the needs of vulnerable members of the community. Wherever possible, this should include a clear plan for who has the responsibility for the evacuation of highly vulnerable people, and how that plan will be implemented. The ADCQ understands that during the recent natural disaster events many communities across Queensland performed very well in looking after and protecting the more vulnerable members of the community. By way of example, in Townsville before the cyclone, the Department of Communities arranged for Police Liaison Officers, agencies such as Spiritus (the funded body for Management of Public Intoxication Program) to locate the homeless residents of the community and take them to the evacuation centre. The evacuation was voluntary, everybody was given the option of whether they wished to evacuate, transport was provided, and the Department of Communities initiated opening up Suncorp Metway basement car park as their evacuation centre. Another extremely valuable initiative of the Cairns Regional Council has been to maintain a Resident Evacuation & Recovery Register. The following information about the register appears on the Council's website:
The ADCQ applauds Council's initiative in establishing and maintaining this register. The ADCQ understands the Townsville City Council is also in the process of establishing such a register. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that there have, on occasion, been issues which have prevented the stated objective of the register from being achieved. In the aftermath of Cyclone Yasi, two cases of residents who were on the register because of their disability and the fact that they do not have friends or family who can be relied on to assist in an emergency, and who were not assisted to evacuate in preparation for the cyclone have come to light. Both cases involve clients of a Cairns based community organisation that provides services to clients with disabilities, and information regarding them has been provided to the ADCQ in the course of our consultations with services in the preparation of this submission.
Case AA is a 59 year old man with a brain injury. He has slurred speech, memory problems and is paralysed down one side. His mobility is restricted and he moves by shuffling in a push wheelchair, but does not require any special form of motorised transport as his wheelchair can easily be transported in an ordinary car. A is able to take a few short steps sufficient to move from his wheelchair into a car. A Lives in a ground floor unit in a flood prone area that was zoned "orange". A receives services from three separate service providers, but has no friends or family in the Cairns area who would be able to provide assistance with evacuation in an emergency. He doesn't have a phone and has difficulty being understood in phone communication. On the night before Cyclone Yasi crossed the coast, at approximately midnight or the early hours of the following morning, a police officer "door-knocked" A's home and advised him that he would be evacuated at 6am. A therefore prepared himself for evacuation by 6am on the morning of the cyclone. However, no-one ever arrived to evacuate A, or to advise him of any change of plan. One of A's neighbours, realising that he had been left alone, offered to assist and drove him around Cairns in search of an evacuation centre, but unfortunately all centres were at capacity by this time and A was not admitted to an evacuation centre. A returned home and endured the cyclone alone in his unit. A reported to his advocate that he found the entire situation so distressing that he would prefer to have his name removed from the Council's register. The advocate has made enquiries with the Council to try to investigate why A was not evacuated, or why he was not advised that the planned evacuation was not to proceed, but at the time of writing this information remains unknown.
Case BB is a 38 year old Torres Strait Islander man with cerebral palsy, a mild intellectual disability and significant mobility restrictions. He uses a motorised wheelchair, which requires a hoist to be transported and which would not operate if more than 10cm floodwater were to encroach on the surface where it's placed. B can only use a push wheelchair with assistance, because he has no use of one hand. B lives in a ground floor unit in a public housing complex situated in a flood prone area. He does have a mobile telephone, but this was stolen just prior to Cyclone Yasi. He has two sisters who live some distance from him, but still in the Cairns area. Their relationship with him is not such that he could safely rely upon their assistance in an emergency. Some time prior to Cyclone Yasi, it's not know how long before, Council sent a re-registration form to B for his completion. This was part of the annual renewal process, aimed at ensuring that the register is kept up to date. B did not know what the form was for or what he should do with it. Eventually, the form came to the attention of B's advocate, who assisted B to complete the form and lodged it with Council on 18 January 2011. The form included information such as the contact phone numbers of B's next-of-kin, i.e. his two sisters, but it also included a tick in the appropriate boxes for B to declare as follows: I am elderly, infirm, and/or disabled; and After lodgement of the form, Council attempted, unsuccessfully, to contact B's sisters, so contacted B instead, to validate information on the form. Apparently the Council staff member advised B that, because he had sisters in the area, he would not be prioritised in the event of an emergency. No attempt was made to contact B's advocate who'd lodged the form, and whose contact details were on the form. The investigations of B's advocate have indicated that B did not understand what was being said by the Council staff member in the phone call, and therefore continued to believe that he would be assisted to evacuate in the event of an emergency. Unfortunately it has now become apparent that it was not clear to the council staff member who contacted B that B did not understand what he/she was saying AND that the sisters were not reliable for the purposes of emergency help. B's advocate was not present for the phone call, so information about what was said during the call has been gathered subsequently by the advocate, in an attempt to investigate why B was never evacuated prior to the Cyclone, despite living in a flood prone area and despite believing he was registered as a person requiring evacuation assistance. B spent the evening of Cyclone Yasi alone in his unit and in extreme fear. All other occupants of the public housing block where B lives evacuated the building except one other. The other person who was not evacuated also has a disability, but ADCQ is not aware of the detailed circumstances of that person.
~~~~ It may be that the person in case A didn't need to be evacuated, but his distress levels were extremely high because of what happened, including the midnight door-knock and then no-one turning up to evacuate him – the distress and stress levels were exacerbated by his disability. Even if both the people in case A and B were in areas that, in the end didn't flood, or even if they weren't ever going to flood, neither of these gentlemen were physically able to protect or treat themselves in the event of an injury from the cyclone. Neither had the capacity to fully understand information provided via television, and were not kept informed by means that they could understand of what arrangements were being made as a consequence of the registration on the Evacuation and Recovery Register.
3.1.2 Evacuation CentresThe establishment and planning of evacuation centres should wherever possible be resourced to cater for diversity and the special needs of vulnerable people who may need to use that centre. Accessible centres - Evacuation centres need to be accessible for people with disabilities. Centres may need to be used by people with mobility or other impairments. Ensuring that the facilities are accessible, including the provision of accessible toilets is essential. In addition, if necessary other accessibility issues may need to be considered. For some people with disabilities, being removed from their routine environment can be much more stressful than those without a disability. For instance, people with autism may find it very difficult to cope in a crowded, noisy evacuation environment. If possible, providing access to a relatively quite and private place is of high importance for some people with disabilities to be able to successfully manage an emergency situation. Culturally appropriate centres - Centres need to be run in a way that makes them welcoming and safe for people of various cultural backgrounds. Persons responsible for managing centres may need to be sensitive to cultural needs and recognise that some groups may have needs for extra privacy, and others may feel concerned about the levels of extra public scrutiny in evacuation centres. Ensuring that those needs are considered and addressed wherever possible will help to make all cultural groups feel safe and welcome in evacuation centres.
3.1.3 Resource planning for persons who require a carerThere needs to be adequate planning by organisations who employ professional carers, to ensure people who they are responsible for caring for are in a safe and appropriate place with adequate care during an emergency event. The ADCQ has been informed two contrasting cases that illustrate best practice and practice that is less than ideal to illustrate this point. The first case in Townsville involved a disability support agency that had considered and made plans for all their clients that had high support needs during the period of a natural disaster event. During the Cyclone Yasi event, arrangements were made for a carer to be present with each high needs client in their home throughout the duration of the cyclone. Even though this may have entailed carers working outside their usual range of hours and for a prolonged shift, preplanning had occurred so that arrangements were put into place to ensure their client's needs were catered for throughout the emergency event. In contrast, the ADCQ has been informed of a case where a person with a disability requiring a carer was dropped off at an evacuation centre and left without a carer, due to the carer's need to go and address their personal issues arising out of the emergency.
3.1.4 Food ProvisionIf food is being provided at emergency/evacuation centres or as emergency supplies to communities affected by a disaster where ever possible such provision should cater for those with special dietary requirements. Where possible halal or vegetarian foods should be available where there is a high likelihood of evacuees coming from communities where a significant number in the population comprises of practicing Muslims or Sikhs( e.g. Southern Brisbane and Ipswich); and wherever possible the provision of foods suitable for those with special dietary requirements due to medical conditions should be considered. The ADCQ has been informed that during the recent flood event in Brisbane, a well organised and resourced community group, the Brisbane Sikh Temple situated on Logan Road, Mt Gravatt (the Sikh Nishkam Society of Australia) with a large scale kitchen facility offered to provide up to several 100 vegetarian meals to evacuation centres in the Brisbane region (consisting of lentils, rice, chapattis, rice pudding, yoghurt and salad). This type of food would have met the dietary requirements of a range of groups of people including vegetarians and those requiring halal foods due to their religious practices. This offer was not taken up by authorities, possibly because the organisation did not have the requisite certification or accreditations in place for its kitchen facility.
3.2 Adequacy of equipment and communications systems3.2.1. Sign Interpreters and CaptioningThe ADCQ commends the initiative of the Queensland Government in arranging for sign language interpreters and captioning to accompany those responsible for communicating emergency information at media conferences to people across the State and community during the recent flood and cyclones events. This ensured information conveyed by television broadcasts was made accessible to those with hearing impairments. This should become standard practice through out all emergency events.
3.2.2 Information in Languages other than EnglishIn response to the recent floods the Department of Communities took the step of making of information accessible in over 20 languages to ensure that people from non-English-speaking backgrounds or CALD communities were provided with vital information during the emergency periods. This should become standard practice during large scale emergency events in Queensland. Consideration by planning authorities also needs to be given to ways and means of informing migrant workers, backpackers and other tourists from non-English speaking backgrounds who may not be familiar with emergency procedures during floods and cyclones that may be well known to local communities. Due to the likelihood that such persons may not be accessing local radio or TV broadcasts, or other news media, they may be unaware that a natural disaster situation is imminent , and that their safety may be compromised during an emergency event.
3.2.3. Assistive TechnologiesWhere emergency information is conveyed by electronic means it is incumbent on service providers and administrators of State laws and programs to provide information in a manner that is accessible to people with impairments or language barriers. Much information is made available to the public on agency websites. People with impairments such as visual (including blindness) or dexterity and mobility (which restrict the use of a mouse or a keyboard) often rely on assistive technologies to improve interaction with a computer. The Queensland Government Chief Information Office administers Information Standard 26 : Internet [4] which outlines the minimum requirements for Queensland Government agencies in the creation, implementation, and management of agency internet sites for the delivery of information and services. At a minimum, agencies must:
3.3. Recovery and Adequacy of the Community’s Response-Post Emergency matters3.3.1. Building accessible buildings and infrastructure and incorporating universal design principles in the rebuilding phase.As a consequence of the recent flood and cyclone events a great many residential homes, public and commercial buildings and infrastructure have been badly damaged or destroyed. The planning and execution phases of rebuilding of these facilities presents a great opportunity for government and the community to design and build facilities that fully inclusive of all members of the community. This can be done by complying with the requirements of the Anti Discrimination Act 1991, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, and the Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010 (Cth) [5] and by incorporating universal design principles into the design and execution of new buildings and infrastructure that replaces damaged stock. There are potentially conflicting issues with regard to guidelines for residential construction in flood-prone areas and the desire to build inclusive communities. The obviously solution is to rebuild "high and dry" and ignore the access needs of people with disability and older people. This may be required where single family dwellings (Class 1 buildings) are the only answer. The ADCQ suggests this will result in communities that exclude and discriminate against people with disability and older people. The concepts of Professor Peter Skinner, Associate Professor at the School of Architecture (University of Queensland) offer a solution to flood prone areas so that flood damage in the future is kept to a minimum, the required density of development is maintained and all people can continue to live and be part of their communities. Professor Skinner advocates for the replanning of low density flood prone areas to become multi-story development (Class 2 buildings) releasing land that is consistently flood prone for parks, bike-ways and wildlife corridors. Such developments use the flood prone floor levels for car parking and access with three or four levels of housing above. This plan maintains the required density of development and provides a much needed natural amenity to the community. As from 1 May 2011, all Class 2 buildings are required to provide non discriminatory access in common areas. The ADCQ suggests a further consideration of the provision of universal design, at least to Liveable Housing Design silver level in all private (Class 2) dwellings. The State Government for this provision would be supported by the National Dialogue for Universal Housing Design, which has an aspirational goal of all new housing providing the silver level by 2020. [6]
3.3.2 Mental Health issuesFor some members of the community including those with existing mental health issues, and for those who acquire mental health problems as a consequence of their experiences during recent emergency events, there will be an increased need for mental health supports. It is important that this need is recognised and the appropriate support is provided.
3.3.3 Continuance of New Initiatives and Programs that address disadvantage.The ADCQ recognises that after significant disaster events, in the phase of reconstruction that some commitments, new initiatives and programs to address disadvantage may be delayed, and this delay may have a direct impact on vulnerable people. The Anti-Discrimination Commission submits that commitments, policy, new initiatives and programs that were designed to remove disadvantage or barriers should not become static during the recovery phase.
Summary of Recommendations
The ADCQ thanks the Commission of Inquiry for the opportunity to make these submissions.[7] KEVIN COCKS AM
5. Footnotes1.Multicultural Queensland -making a world of difference,(http://www.multicultural.qld.gov.au/media/maq_making_world_difference_policy.pdf); Draft 10-year plan for supporting Queenslanders with a disability ( http://www.communities.qld.gov.au/disability/community-involvement/draft-10-year-plan-for-supporting-queenslanders-with-a-disability ). | |||||||||
|
|
