Further to comments made by disabled leaders and disabled persons organisations about enhanced powers given to the Chair of the #DisabilityRC and the resulting distortion/disempowerment of other Commissioners, we add: 1/ @MarkDreyfusQCMP@SenCarolBrown
The original #DisabilityRC terms of reference were in 4 April 2019 Letters Patent & set out inquiry scope, 6 Comm'r & one to be Chair “AND We appoint you, the Honourable Ronald Sackville AO QC, to be the Chair of the Commission". Standard Letters Patent 2/ disability.royalcommission.gov.au/about/Pages/Te…
Important to note that of those 6 Commissioners appointed by the Morrison Government, only 2 were disabled - Dr Rhonda Galbally AO and Alastair McEwin AM former Disability Discrimination Commissioner - and trusted are trusted and respected disability community leaders 3/
This was immediately concerning as many in the disability community had wanted a disabled person to Chair and least a majority of the Commissioners to be disabled and trusted - and the importance of trust is precisely at the core of the issues with this #DisabilityRC 4/
The Morrison Government - which had agreed to the #DisabilityRC reluctantly at the 11th hour as an election loomed and under pressure by Labor and the Greens - proceed to establish an inquiry that, from the outset and by design, was perceived as sidelining disabled people 5/
Major concerns also arose about real & perceived conflicts of interest in the case of 2 Commissioners, one being John Ryan, a former NSW LNP politician and religious right ally of Scott Morrison who oversaw controversial disability programs in the NSW government 6/
The "Conflicts Statement" referenced Royal Commissions Act & stated that "There are well established mechanisms to enable Royal Commissions to handle perceptions of conflicts of interest or apprehensions of bias." In other words, existing powers sufficed to deal with concerns. 7/
On 13 September 2019, in the absence of consultation with the disability representative groups, the terms of reference were amended via Letters Patent to give the #DisabilityRC Chair significantly enhanced substantive powers, including over the disabled Commissioners. 8/
The Sept 2019 enhancement of Chair's power did not reference "conflicts of interest" and the statement from the #DisabilityRC 1 month prior had clarified no further powers were needed - so what or who prompted this unusual step? Were the other Commissioners consulted about it? 9/
The 13 September 2019 amendment to Letters Patent added the following to the Terms of Reference: 10/
The Chair was expressly "authorised to give binding directions to, assign duties or functions to, or restrict the duties or functions of, other appointed Commr's." What is the impact of this change on the capacity of other Commr's to effectively carry out #DisabilityRC ToR? 11/
Approximately 1 month later, in October 2019 @SenatorJordon broke the news Sr Counsel Assisting Michael Fordham SC & Chris Ronalds AO SC had resigned from #DisabilityRC. It is unclear whether changes to ToR were behind these high profile resignations 12/
The Morrison Government has never explained these significant changes to #DisabilityRC Letters Patent. We are not aware of such enhanced powers being granted in the Aged Care or Child Abuse RCs. 13/
Their purpose has never been explained and we know they were not necessary to address the concerns that had arisen about conflicts of interest - indeed the enhanced powers do not refer, & are not limited, to dealing with conflicts - they are expressly broadly. 14/
What is the implication of this significantly enhanced role and status of the Chair, formally and informally? Does in diminish the capacity and influence of the 2 disabled Commissioners in the conduct of this #DisabilityRC? 15/
A wide range of significant concerns have emerged about the way this #DisabilityRC is being conducted, most importantly, disabled people fought for it for 20+ yrs and do not feel heard, do not trust in what is occurring. The new government must urgently turn its mind to this 16/
The new government and the Attorney General need to hear from the disability community and its representative organisations about their questions and concerns about the #DisabilityRC and how they should be addressed. 17/
The disability community is entitled to a proper robust inquiry, led by a disabled Chair, not a paternalistic endeavour where they are mere subject matter. They are entitled to process with the principle of "Nothing About Us Without Us" at its heart & embedded in its design 18/
We hope that the Attorney General will look closely at these matters and consult with the disability community as a matter of urgency. 19/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#DisabilityRC has released the legal opinion it sought from eminent Int’l Human Rights Law Emeritus Prof @acbyrnes_andrew re Art 24 #CRPD. It concluded Aus is obliged to (1) build an inclusive general education system AND (2) abolish segregation for student with disability 1/
In his expert opinion for #DisabilityRC, Prof Byrnes also confirmed that the interpretation of Article 24 of the #CRPD set out in General Comment No. 4 is “the one that would be reached by the proper application of the accepted rules of treaty interpretation” (p.1). 2/
Professor Byrnes @acbyrnes_andrew specifically considered – and REJECTED - the (previous) Australian Government’s interpretation of Article 24 #CRPD & int’l law obligations (set out in its submission to #DisabilityRC) that it can continue to allow segregated special schools: 3/
Hi @billshortenmp your comment on #Insiders about more funding for segregated "special" schools fails to recognise disabled people's fight towards phasing out segregation on the basis of disability. Please see DPOs #EndSegregation Position Paper: dpoa.org.au/endsegregation/ 1/
It is vital @billshortenmp as #NDIS Minister that you recognise and respect the aspirations of disabled people as expressed by their representative and advocacy organisation and in light with their rights under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities. 2/
Those rights including phasing out all forms of segregation on the basis of disability - a discriminatory practice under international human rights law that this binding on the Australian Government and which should guide all government policy @billshortenmp 3/
In closing Maria Scharnke provides the #DisabilityRC her key message:
“Disability is not something that should need to be accommodated for. This sounds ridiculous, but hear me out…
It should be accepted as part of the natural spectrum of human diversity.
There should be no need whatsoever to go above & beyond to ensure children with disability have access to an education. Because, there shouldn't be a system, a world, a country or department that perpetuates systematic inequities, inequalities & discrimination.
There should be no need to have to go out of one’s way.
No matter how much effort one puts in to ensure a PWD has their right to an education being met (or to anything at all being met) this should not be seen as great achievement, or as going above & beyond.
Cmr Mason: "There’s been sig. work for last 10yrs on Closing the Gap. Education is always a fundamental area of change. We are in an era of evidence based practice. In your experience, what’s the likelihood of us being able to draw on consistent data across States/ Territories?"
Prof. Graham: "We don’t have the data we need to do it properly. It is my fervent hope that this #DisabilityRC can make this [access to data] happen.
Interesting observation by Prof.Graham "When I was looking at Closing the Gap I saw 'attendance' is a goal, yet it’s not one we’ve made any progress on in last 10yrs. Meanwhile 'Exclusion/Suspension' is not mentioned, nor is reducing exclusion/suspension a goal. #DisabilityRC
While we have great respect for Prof McCallum and his legacy and appreciate this is research paper is an ambitious task of incredibly broad scope, we are surprised by assertions made about Article 24 #CRPD#DisabilityRC@DRC_AU
Prof McCallum’s #DisabilityRC paper seeks to provide an overview of complex subject matter requiring deep knowledge of all articles of #CRPD & treaty body jurisprudence that has clarified and elaborated on their meaning in the 15 years since the 2006 adoption of the CRPD @DRC_AU
This statement on p.119 is, in our view, incorrect. It is inconsistent with General Comments No.4 & No. 6, Australian CRPD review Concluding Observations in 2013 & 2019, evidence by @UN experts at #DisabilityRC and another @DRC_AU research paper by @RosemaryKayess@therese_sands