1

Heather Blacklock 21st Century Suffragette, living in DAS,

Victoria Australia.

Summary The VEC is responsible for the conduct of our Victorian State elections and municipal elections. As the entity trusted to count the votes and declare results, the VEC fulfils a critically important role supporting our democracy.

Not withstanding all of the above, modernisation of the VEC has fallen behind community expectations. Societal changes demand more and symbiotic relationships need to be fostered, such as the relationship between DHHS and the VEC.

This report focuses on urgent short and long-term reform issues for the VEC relative to the Disability Sector.

The VEC must extend its roll to ensure the responsibilities that DHHS have, (and other third parties) to support individuals to “bear their burden of proof,” is accountable. Out-dated and cumbersome legislation needs amending to extend these accountabilities and strengthen Compulsory Commonwealth Electoral Law.

The VEC needs to invest in better training for temporary election staff and specialized areas such as disability engagement and employ the services of specialists particularly NDIS Consumer Watch

and where required the VEO&HRC. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.)

Successive governments have not pursued reform of the VEC or recognised that DHHS is at least partly responsible for poor electoral participation.

The VEC has continued to misrepresent Commonwealth Electoral Law and disenfranchising people with disability by only qualifying particular individual. The VEC must amend its practices to ensure lawful compliance. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.)

Voters must have confidence in the election result and certain that no bias or error has influenced the outcome. Change is imperative to consolidate and build confidence, the VEC needs to ensure engagement of citizens; and accountability of all citizens who live in DHHS and CSO’s in DAS – 5,400 citizens who have been excluded from previous elections.

Potocnik Report 2017 PWD Excluded. A Failed Democracy

EMC Submission No 23Received 14 August 2017

2

The Service Provider needs to be implemented as an amendment to the Electoral Act to strengthening the mandatory component of Commonwealth Electoral Law in cases where the electors cannot “bear the burden of proof”. Another way of strengthening participation can be implemented via building a register of the electors in receipt of NDIS funded supports. The VEC can then use this register to notify electors of enrolment and voting requirements. If this initiative is not possible under the Electoral Act, then other previsions should be made to help ensure electoral participation and human rights. This NDIS register may be undertaken by the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission and should be State government funded. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) The VEC should continue to deliver workshops to the disability sector. To help rectify the damage done to the sector and to help facilitate correct process, the VEC should develop a program to specifically educate a number of disability support staff to be trained as Electoral Ambassadors, who work in DHHS DAS and CSO’s. To ensure dissemination of sound electoral process and educate DAS and CSO’s on how to record client information in Person Centred Plans (PCP) to comply with service requirements of electoral participation regarding compulsory Electoral Commonwealth Law requirements and the rights of clients in care. The VEC should work closely with DHHS and CSO’s and the VEO&HRC to train disability workers regarding electoral processes and the utilization of the individualized support approach to help ensure all residents in DHHS and CSO’s of DAS have Individualised Accessibility in preparation for the 2018 Victorian State election. Consultants are available from the NDIS Consumer Watch to help facilitate this action on (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) In the event that these recommendations are not implemented then the VEC should enrol all citizens from DAS and the CSO’s to ensure there is inclusion before exclusion. The residents who don’t vote should be sent a letter asking to explain the reasons why. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) The VEC needs to be confident in excising electoral exclusion based on “unsound mind principal,” no capacity. The Anne Mac Donald Centre has a proven assessment program which can evaluate a person’s capacity, called the Pea Body Assessment. DHHS and the VEC, for the sake of people who live in DAS and CSO’s where their capacity is questioned need to embrace and utilize the Pea Body Assessment. Background

“Sometimes it's the very people who no one imagines anything of, who do the things no one can imagine.” Christopher Morcom

My personal experience is as a disability professional and an employee of the Victorian Electoral Commission in the capacity as their Disability Education and Support Officer. In these roles, I have observed a great injustice and systemic abuse of citizens with disability residing in Disability Accommodation Services (DAS) in respect of effective denial of these citizens to participate in the democratic process.

This submission specifically identifies issues and barriers in electoral processes in the Disability Sector, particularly in Disability Accommodation Services under the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Community Service Organisations (CSO).

In 2014 despite the VEC delivering a kit to Community Residential Units (CRU’s) across Victoria with clear instructions for staff and residents on how to enrol and vote only about 1% participated. The Acting Director for Reform from DHHS to the NDIS refused to provide the addresses, which would have provided two important elements. One, accountability from House

3

Supervisors for the staff and residents and two the portal to enable a post election survey to identify the barriers faced by people living in DAS. This Project was agreed and signed off by the manager or the Communication, Education and Research Branch (CERB) of the VEC. When I returned to DAS in 2015 residents were curious. One resident, Heather, spoke up and said, “I think voting is really important, I’d like to vote!”. She didn’t vote in the 2014 Victorian State election but she told me she wanted too. Heather didn’t know why she didn’t vote in 2014 but she was keen to participate in the Federal election. Heather indicated that she wanted to vote for the other bloke, not the one who’s currently in (Tony Abbott). In 2016 on behalf of The NDIS Consumer Watch I wrote to the Australian Electoral Commission regarding Heather’s wishes. I spoke with the Assistant Australian Electoral Commissioner who asked to be put in contact with a local manager responsible for Heather’s request. I put the Commissioner in touch with one of DHHS’s Managing Directors. I had previously spoken to personally, about the Departments breach of “Duty of Care” in supporting the rights of people with disability in their care, in particular their electoral rights.

I emailed the Commissioner to follow up on Heather’s request. He wrote, “I can confirm that made contact with Ms Blacklock to provide support to her and her carers”.

On the 2nd of July 2016 the day after the launch of the NDIS nationally, Australia conducted its Federal election. I telephoned Heather’s home and asked the staff if Heather was voting today, I mentioned that had apparently been in touch with them? The staff responded by exclaiming, “it’s the first we’ve heard of it!” Heather Blacklock didn’t participate in the Federal election. Heather’s rights were ignored. The Department breached their “Duty of Care.” The Department was also responsible for Heather failing her obligation and compliance to Commonwealth Electoral Law. “(a) I recommend that the Electoral Act be amended to include third parties such as Service Providers and attribute a misdemeanour for failing to support citizens in regard to electoral processes; such as in Heather’s situation, this would also address the symbiotic relationship of the shared “burden of Proof””.

Inclusion is the main component of the 2006 Disability Act. and yet people with disability are excluded from participating. Audrey Oldfield drew attention to the relationship of the rights and practical needs of suffragettes. Those who were apposed to the suffragettes saw women as exclusion to the democratic process based on their nature. Oldfield, Audrey, (1992) Woman Suffrage in Australia: A Gift or a Struggle? Cambridge University Press, Oakleigh.

Persecution and Exclusion of People living in DAS The need based reasons for people with disability to be included in our democracy is huge with over twenty billion dollars being spent on the NDIS and disability reform annually these citizens need these supports and in this case accommodation too. The Disability Sector has previously represented Australia’s biggest economic problem. Government persecution has been appalling. Before the 2014 Victorian State election the Liberal State government attempted to lift the costs for the people living in DAS. The increase was so disproportionate that the case was brought before VCAT. The increase was quashed, however; the Liberal government responded by releasing a Bill. which specifically excluded residents in DAS from taking any issue to VCAT in the future.

Individualized Accessibility (an already existing framework) A number of years ago, I remember being astonished when I learnt that websites had an accessibility rating; but it made perfect sense. These days the electoral commissions talk about wheelchair accessible voting centres and technology that makes voting more accessible for people with disability.

4

However, the electoral commissions haven’t realized that Australia is amidst of national disability reform rollout. This reform is individually focused; individuals are assessed and attributed with their specific supports necessary for them to participate in all areas of our society, including electoral participation. This process is designed to empower individuals, develop community inclusion and result in participation. This process by nature positively discriminates for the person with disability. It is essential that electoral commissions utilize this “fundamental framework” to address and include all citizens with disability. I have identified this relationship of individualised supports and the utilizing of the Individualized Framework provided under DHHS or the NDIS and their application being used to enable an elector to participate in electoral processes as, “Individualized Accessibility”.

Acknowledging the fact that people living with disability have their own individualized supports, it is essential to develop this relationship and utilize this application for enrolling and voting. The fundamental point is that despite these individuals having individualised supports they are still not participating in electoral processes. The laws support this participation, particularly in Victoria where we have the Victorian Human Rights Charter, the 2006 Disability Act and of course Mandatory Commonwealth Electoral Law. There is really no reason why people who reside in DAS should be excluded from the electoral process. They are individually supported and staff has a “Duty of Care” to ensure the residents they support are able to comply with the mandatory requirements to enrol and vote.

Individualized Accessibility supports the Individuals’ “burden of proof” It is by the very nature of Individualised Accessibility, that this active accessibility response, done with the individual, identifies a level of competency and when using the Pea Body Assessment tool, also a level of capacity. It has not previously been identified; the reason people with disability who live in DAS do not participate in electoral processes is because they are not responsible to “bear a burden of proof” and in addition to this, they are not able to effectively advocate for the supports they require, which are available to them, to be able to enrol and vote. However, most critically, they should not have to be responsible for ensuring they are adequately supported to enrol and vote, this is legislated and funded.

Individualised Accessibility recognised and supporting the burden of proof

This is where (Refer to (a)) Commonwealth Electoral Law (the Electoral Act.) desperately requires strengthening to bridge mechanisms such as individualized disability support (Individualized Accessibility) and the symbiotic nature of the burden of proof, which is at the very least a shared responsibility between the Service Provider, in this case DHHS and CSO’s in DAS, and the individual in receipt of services and supports. There must be legislative amendments to allow the VEC or the third party, to provide data to substantiate (if required) from third parties, such as DHHS and CSO’s in DAS and/or there must be legislative amendment for DHHS and CSO’s in DAS to comply, this is to ensure the rights of people with disability but also to ensure compliance with mandatory, Commonwealth Electoral Law. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) For the residents of DAS it is essential that their individualised support extends to their participation in electoral processes, as it does; but it is not documented or electoral participation audited and this is where it fails. There must be Servicer Provider support accountability. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.)

5

(Refer to (a)) Third Party organisations such as DHHS and CSO’s in DAS need to be accountable in supporting citizens to “bear their burden of proof” and they need to deliver individualised supports and resources to enable citizens in their care to enrol and vote, this is the fundamental level that ”Individualized Accessibility” must capture. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.)

The VEC’s continued misrepresentation of mandatory Commonwealth Electoral Law, democracy and the disenfranchising of people with disability.

When I first started at the VEC I was told that their mandate, was to ensure all eligible citizens participate in the State electoral process. As mentioned in previous submissions the wording on letters and training material stated; “Talk to residents about who wants to vote in the State election and why it is important”. In the Commissioners’ letter it stated, “If a resident can meaningfully and intentionally indicate that they want to enroll and vote, either verbally or using their communication aids, then they should be provided with assistance to do so. It should read those who can vote, with the focus on the word ”CAN” and not “WANT”. In Australian Electoral Law it is not a matter of “wanting” it is compulsory, to enroll and vote. I have mentioned this again because in October 2017 during the Municipal elections the VEC continued to teach people using this wording and the wording was been exhibited on electoral signage out side voting centers and Carers Victoria under instruction from the VEC have been delivering workshops using this “Passive Aggressive Exclusion”. It doesn’t matter how this statement is re-worded, it is fundamentally wrong! It defines and excludes citizens with disability in a manner, which is not specified in the Electoral Act. This wording deliberately excludes people and dictates a level that the VEC is prepared to go to, to capture some people who are living with disability. This is a disgrace and the VEC have a responsibility to ensure that all people living in DAS are accounted for in regard to their participation in the 2018 Victorian State election. The PEMC need to point out this fundament deceit to the attention of the VEC and establish an assurance that this wording is not to be used. It does not help staff and clients; it exhibits a level of apathy and exclusion. It demonstrates the VEC is not prepared to ensure all eligible citizens who live in DAS participate in the Victorian State election, besides being completely unlawful. This is evidence is indisputable. The election in 2014 and 2016 has fundamentally and profoundly misrepresented Mandatory Commonwealth Electoral Law and excluded citizens from participating. This action is not democratic and has clearly identified these elections as void; under Commonwealth Electoral Law. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) This unlawful practice is out-dated and does not reflect the current community values that families and people with disabilities find acceptable; bureaucracy and government need to maintain pace with societal and legislative reforms and bear responsibility to the literality of their mandates. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) As a consequence, of unlawfully excluding the VEC needs to be confident in including all individuals with disability. If there is any doubt in regard to cognitive limitations specialists from Annie McDonald Centre can be used to conduct communication assessments, these assessments are internationally recognised. I feel I have to re-enforce this perspective because significant gains have been made in the last three years and these assessments are extremely credible. An ordinary Medical Practitioner or Phycology’s assessment is not suitable to determine capacity for people with little or no speech.

6

It is important to understand that the VEC should not have to be responsible for capacity assessments to determine the target audience, but rather the Service Provider who is sharing the “burden of proof”. It is however, the responsibility of the VEC not to exclude citizens with disability at all, and their target audience is every person with disability. The VEC’s disability target audience is all citizens over the age of 18. Citizens are eligible to enrol and vote without having any assessment. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) The DHHS and CSO’s provide a communication assessment to residents entering DAS. It is recommended that legislation should be altered and extended to confidently recognise this communication assessment process and ensure that electors communication assessments are specifically recognised and capable of assessing individuals and their electoral resources required (including individualized supports) and capacity if it is questioned. The Pea Body Assessment is internationally recognised and recommended. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) The VEC/PEMC have a responsibility to rectify and establish proper electoral processes for people living in DAS that qualifies every individual, in the very least to establish that their human rights have been recognized; after all it is Victorian Law and it is a government or government funded accommodation service. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) How do you support a resident of DAS to participate in compulsory electoral processes? For people who are not familiar with engaging with people with little or no speech, this area obviously needs to be demystified. As an experienced DSSO-Q level 5, I have assisted clients to go to the doctors when they have not wanted too. In these instances it may be essential to the health of a resident to attend a doctor’s appointment. Enrolling and voting is not essential to the resident’s health and if it were distressing, then you would not subject them to this process. However, generally there are ways around it. If the client doesn’t want to enroll and vote then they can enroll and vote by post, this method of participation can be much easier and they can be engaged and assisted when they are most receptive, they are not restricted to voting on the day or negotiating crowds. If a resident continues, and insists on not voting, then you respect their choice and cease persisting. I’ve found people with disability to be enthusiastic electors. In the view of these facts it is essential that all individuals whether they are eligible or non-eligible citizens are accounted for and registered with the appropriate Electoral Commission. This is where the compulsory element of Commonwealth Electoral Law needs to be strengthened. It is not lawful for any organization to cloister the rights of individuals under the pretense that they have not intentionally indicated that they want to vote; when voting is compulsory. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) The VEC’s predetermination of eligibility of people has severely impacted on the culture in DAS and consolidated an apathy that residents only need to vote if they want too. The VEC has a responsibility to rectify this unlawful practice and help redeem culture in DAS. One way forward is that the PEMC recommend that the VEC train a number of DAS workers as Electoral Ambassadors to help disseminate sound democratic practice for staff and the residents living in DAS for the 2018 Victorian State election. DHHS and CSO’s who run Disability Accommodation Services need to ensure Client key workers log participation in the residents Person Centered Plan (PCP). The NDIS Consumer Watch Consultants 03 8383 2735 can assist and /or facilitate in this area.

7

In the event that no changes being forth coming, the appropriate body, should give a directive to DHHS and CSO’s who provide accommodation, to automatically enroll all residents. This should not be a directive from the VEC; but specific to human rights and inclusion and could best be undertaken by the “Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) After the election the VEC will need to send out correspondence asking those who didn’t vote the reason why? Service providers should be required to document this electoral participation and recognition of human rights in the persons PCP. In the event of a resident being identified, as having unsound mind the individual should be assessed using the Pea Body Assessment. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.)

This Must be Rectified I raised the issue of exclusion of people in DAS with members of the Victorian Parliamentary Electoral Matters Committee before the 2014 election. Their response was that after the election the issue would be considered. It is after the election! (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) Despite Heathers profile amongst the major electoral organizations and direct communication with Heather’s supporting organization and the Assistance Electoral Commissioner Heather was not supported to enroll and vote and Heather did not participate in the 2014 State election or the 2016 Federal election, nor did another 5,300 other citizens. Under Australian law Heather has committed an offence by not enrolling or voting. Heather’s request to participate in the Federal election was also presented in a video to the Parliamentary Electoral Matters Committee - Parliament of Victoria (PEMC) and the Commonwealth, Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM) in 2015. The PEMC refused to accept Heathers video as part of a submission because Heather mentioned who she wanted to vote for. The JSCEM also refused to accept the video of Heather’s request because she mentioned, she had not voted in the 2014 Victorian State election. This issue, if it is not addressed properly before the 2018 Victorian State election with actual qualification of participation of residents in DAS, results in a failure of our democratic processes and our State election. It this event, it will be essential, that another election is conducted! “We shall not cease from exploration. And the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.” T.S. Eliot Issues were recorded in an incident report submitted to the DHHS in 2016 when Matthew Potocnik formally resigned. Evidence was submitted to the Parliament of Victoria in the “Inquiry into Abuse in Disability Services” 2015. Evidence was submitted to the Victorian Ombudsman in relation to the inquiry into, “Reporting and Investigation of allegations of abuse in the disability sector” & Phase 2 – incident reporting. Evidence was submitted to the VAGO in 2016. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11

In regard to the Questions on Notice, the Minister may wish to examine the compulsory component of Commonwealth Electoral Law in which case electors are not given the choice not to enrol or vote. Enrolling to vote has been compulsory in Victoria since 1923, and Australian citizens over the age of 18 are eligible to vote. It is not acceptable that the lack of participation is presumed to be the cause of cognitive limitations; especially since approximately 99% of the residents are not even registered and that the VEC only considers their target audience to be the residents that communicate that they want to vote. It is not acceptable that government ostracizes eligible citizens dependant on government supports and welfare. It is a disgrace that these citizens have been held in cloistered government accommodation and denied their electoral rights and their rights under the 2006 Disability Act; that of inclusion. This submission exposes a Minister who is aware of these facts but has continued to exclude citizens by patronising DHHS and the VECs’ disconnection from its electors and Commonwealth Electoral Law. “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” George Orwell

Other Documentation and Comments Extracts from the 2016 The Victorian Auditor General Office audit of the VEC 3.1 Introduction

The vision of the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) is to have ῾all Victorians actively participating in their democracy'. It has legislative obligations to encourage full participation in the voting process, which means actively engaging Victorians who may be disenfranchised or face physical, social, cultural or geographic barriers to voting. This audit assessed whether the 2014 state election was effectively planned and encouraged full participation in the voting process. This involved reviewing VEC's planning, recruitment and logistical processes, its performance against indicators in the state election service plan, and complaints and satisfaction data. In addition, the audit assessed VEC's participation and engagement programs. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Victorian Electoral Commission: further develops and publishes election performance indicators for activities aimed at improving participation among those traditionally under-represented in the electoral system 1 Background 1.1 Introduction

Elections need to be conducted with high levels of scrutiny, transparency and security to maintain public confidence in the democratic system. Voters need to be confident that their ballot paper is secret, securely transferred and counted using robust and verified methods. Voting is an enshrined human right in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, so all eligible voters need to have reasonable access to cast their vote in elections. Enrolling to vote has been compulsory in Victoria since 1923, and Australian citizens over the age of 18 are eligible to vote. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

12

Evaluation of this VAGO Audit The audit assessed VEC's participation and engagement programs. It is of considerable concern, that the VAGO despite auditing the VEC’s participation and engagement programs failed to report that the “Voting for Everyone 2014,” Project, was not substantiated, the Project’s objectives and goals had not been reached and according to statistics held by the VEC participation recorded only 1% out of approximately 5,400 citizens participating in electoral processes. The VAGO audit did not identify the VEC’s misrepresentation of the compulsory element of Commonwealth Electoral Law stating, “If a resident can meaningfully and intentionally indicate that they want to enrol and vote, either verbally or using their communication aids, then they should be provided with assistance to do so. This language has defined a target audience, not the eligible of citizens as represented in the Electoral Act. and does not comply with the VEC mandate. The VAGO were informed of this breach of law and the exclusion of citizens in DAS and as a consequence; the validity of the Victorian State election of 2014. THE VAGO OMITTED THESE FACTS FROM THEIR AUDIT. This unlawful qualification of residents in DAS was disseminated in kits to 5,400 residents deliberately ostracising citizens and preventing residents from being supported and engaged to vote. The PEMC need to question the VAGO regarding this audit and measure indicators need to be put in place for the VAGO. John Doyle neglected to invite public submissions from specific members of the public – Another direct consequence of this failed audit.

Please see the Submission questions addressed below.

13

Received from the Legislative Assembly on 21 February 2017:

That, under section 33 of the Parliamentary Committees Act 2003, an inquiry into civics and electoral participation in Victorian state parliamentary elections be referred to the Electoral Matters Committee for consideration and report no later than 31 August 2018 and the Committee should specifically examine:

1. electoral and civics education, the Victorian Electoral Commission’s (VEC’s) community engagement programs and other best practice approaches used by the VEC, other Australian electoral commissions, the United Kingdom and New Zealand, to ensure that Victorian citizens are adequately informed and able to participate effectively in elections;

It is important to understand that the catchment level of people with disability is the foundational point of engagement and education and must be compliant with the Electoral Act. The VEC must not ostracizing individuals via engagement processes. To ensure inclusion the VEC must recognize and qualify specialist engagement processes employed by other organizations and engage in these environments.

Voting is specifically individual and the VEC education group need to orientate their understanding to accessibility and should be less focused on disability accessibility and more focused on “Individualised Accessibility”.

While specialized disability processes are available to assist people with disability to participate in electoral processes, no current electoral material or any forms of communication to voters is specifically individualized. This is not to say that these systems, such as telephone voting for people with vision impairment can not provide an individual process, they can. However, it is not specific to the individual, it is specific to a disability. In this case people with vision impairment may be satisfied with this electoral tool, but it is not individualized. Also in this process there is only the individual’s declaration across a telephone line to state their identity and their vote is not private. In short, the process deals with the disability and is not specific to that individual. These recommendations take into account individualised processes pertinent to individual electoral inclusion that are contemporary practices of established disability reform. This is why the focus of recommendations extends to recommend amendments to the Electoral Act. to include organisational practices that are individualised and pertinent to qualifying individuals with disability and their electoral participation. These organisational practices require legislative inclusion in the Electoral Act. This also defines a level of engagement that the CERB’s branch can maintain a presence in, but which is fundamentally a separate organisation, which must be recognised as being responsible for individualized supports to ensure electoral participation. (1) Recommendation - The Communication Education Research Branch (CERB) of the VEC’s previous unlawful predetermination of eligibility of people with disability in DAS and the broader community has severely impacted on the culture in DAS and taught apathy, that people with disability only need to vote if they want too and are only eligible if this is communicated. This establishes that VEC have the need to employ a full time Disability Engagement Officer to help rectify this injustice and establish sound electoral process to ensure lawful qualification of

14

people with disability and residents living in DAS and establish sound democratic process. Full time Disability Educator (2) Recommendation - Workshops should continue throughout Victoria educating via a practical approach to voting for people with disability and conducted through community organisations, councils, Day Programs and providing support to Specialist Schools and Special Schools in running their annual electoral program. Continue Workshops

(3) Recommendation. It is essential that a program is developed for young people with disability who attend Special and Specialist Schools, similar to that of the “Passport to Democracy” program. It is my recommendation that this program, if possible, is implemented in association with the Department of Education to incorporate a program designed for special and specialist schools to run as part of the syllabus, not intermittently with elections, but annually. In the event that the Education Department does not sanction this idea, then the program should be delivered by full time VEC Disability Engagement workers. ”Specific Training included in the Syllabus at Specialist Schools” (4) Recommendation - The VEC/PEMC have a responsibility to rectify and establish proper electoral processes for people living in DAS that qualifies every individual! The PEMC need to engage with the VEO&HRC and strengthen electoral accountability by ensuring all individuals’ human rights are accounted for and that this accountability is auditable. This mechanism should be included as an amendment in the Electoral Act. In the event that not all of the residents can be accounted for, the PEMC should recommend mandatory enrollment of all residents in DAS who are over the age of 18 years, inclusion before exclusion. It is essential that all eligible citizens who are supported and live in Disability Accommodation Services are included in the electoral process but it is also important, inversely that the non-eligible citizen is registered too. By substantiating the non-eligible citizen, properly, electoral process captures a greater entirety and more electors. The relationship between these to parities can help evaluate sound democratic process. We need to understand that a quality democratic system where electoral participation and citizenship is not just defined by those that enrol and vote but it is also defined by whom we exclude. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Mandatory Enrollment” (5) Recommendation. Directly support electoral participation and a level of accountability for residents to vote in DAS by training Electoral Ambassadors. In order for the VEC to rectify its unlawful practice and help redeem culture in DAS. The PEMC need to recommend that the VEC train a number of DAS workers as Electoral Ambassadors to help disseminate sound democratic practice for staff and the residents living in DAS for the 2018 Victorian State election. DHHS and CSO’s who run Disability Accommodation Services need to ensure Client key workers log participation in the residents Person Centered Plan (PCP). It would be beneficial to include the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEO&HRC) in this initiative, because in 2007 the VEO&HRC and DHHS/DAS ran a Human Rights Ambassador program to help educate workers to the application of human rights in DAS. This was very successful. Consultants are available from the NDIS Consumer Watch to help facilitate this action on 03 8383 2735. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Training Electoral Ambassadors” (6) Recommendation - Process should be put in place to capture all eligible electors in DAS. This catchment needs to employ processes of engagement that reach individuals who have little or no speech. It is recommended, legislation should be altered and extended to confidently

15

recognise communication assessment process and ensure that elector’s communication assessments are specifically recognised and capable of assessing individuals and their electoral resources required (including individualized supports) and capacity if it is questioned. This should be a standard that is incorporated as the DAS entry assessment. The Anne Mac Donald Centre has a proven assessment program which can evaluate a person’s capacity, called the Pea Body Assessment, internationally recognised and recommended. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Accountable and conclusive Assessment”

(7) Recommendation - the Electoral Act needs to be amended to include third parties such as Service Providers and attribute a misdemeanour for failing to support citizens in regard to electoral processes; such as in Heather’s situation, this would also address the symbiotic relationship of the shared “burden of Proof”. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Penalties, the burden of proof and Service Provider responsible”

(8) Recommendation - Commonwealth Electoral Law (the Electoral Act.) desperately requires strengthening to include the bridging mechanisms such as individualized disability support (Individualized Accessibility) and the symbiotic nature of the burden of proof, which is at the very least a shared responsibility between the Service Provider, in this case DHHS and CSO’s in DAS, and in the broader community. To include the individual who is in receipt of services and supports under the NDIS. These mechanisms require mention in the Electoral Act., as dynamics that, when utilized, ensure the inclusion of electors with disability and identify a grass roots catchment of people living with disability. This further qualifies a level of participation. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Utilization, Accountability of Service Providers and their Mechanisms”

(9) The PEMC need to review, how individuals, 18 years or older, who have disability and who are in receipt of supports via the NDIS can be notified regarding their responsibility to enrol and vote in the Victorian elections. Creating a register of these electors would effectively do this. The VEO&HRC if funded by State government, could undertake the development of this register and its implementation while providing impartiality to this process, electorally. It isn’t acceptable that people with disability are excluded from our democratic processes and this approach is an accessible level to qualify electors. (Please refer to 2015 Potocnik Report and Alexander Gunn reference). The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”NDIS Register”

2. strategies to reduce informal voting at Victorian state elections which are not related to the voting system;

(1) Recommendation. Commonwealth Electoral Law (the Electoral Act.) desperately requires strengthening and should include third party accountability, to bridge mechanisms such as individualized disability support (Individualized Accessibility) and the symbiotic nature of the burden of proof, which is at the very least a shared responsibility between the Service Provider, in this case DHHS and CSO’s in DAS, and the individual in receipt of services and supports. There must be legislative amendments to allow the VEC or the third party, to provide data to substantiate (if required) from third parties, such as DHHS and CSO’s in DAS and/or there must be legislative amendment for DHHS and CSO’s in DAS to comply, this is to ensure the rights of people with disability but also to ensure compliance with mandatory, Commonwealth Electoral Law.

16

For situations where individuals are naturalized, this point of engagement should also be seen as an opportunity to qualify individuals as citizens and make them aware of citizenship responsibilities. It is recommended that the VEC develop kits in a variety of languages that facilitate information around electoral processes including the compulsory nature and privacy elements of voting, to qualify the newly ordained citizen. This third party qualification should be implemented where ever, to strengthen mandatory Commonwealth Electoral Law and should be accommodated in the Electoral Act. as an amendment. (The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human rights Commission (VEO&HRC) and the VEC should support amendments to legislation and greater accountabilities from Service Providers to ensure electoral participation and the rights of people living in DAS.) Third Party Accountability

(2) Recommendation. Legislation should be altered and extended to confidently recognise communication assessment process and ensure that elector’s communication assessments are specifically recognised and capable of assessing individuals and their electoral resources required (including individualized supports) and capacity if it is questioned. This should be a standard that is incorporated as the DAS entry assessment. The Anne Mac Donald Centre has a proven assessment program which can evaluate a person’s capacity, called the Pea Body Assessment, internationally recognised and recommended. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Accountable and conclusive Assessment” 3. how the VEC employs and trains casual staff for Victorian state elections, this

should involve discussion about methods to attract people to join the VEC’s casual staffing roster for Victorian elections, the Committee should also examine the roles and responsibilities of the VEC’s casual election staff in light of changing technological and societal demands; and

(1) Recommendation. Directly support electoral participation and a level of accountability for residents to vote in DAS by training Electoral Ambassadors. In order for the VEC to rectify its unlawful practice and help redeem culture in DAS. The PEMC need to recommend that the VEC train a number of DAS workers as Electoral Ambassadors to help disseminate sound democratic practice for staff and the residents living in DAS for the 2018 Victorian State election. DHHS and CSO’s who run Disability Accommodation Services need to ensure Client key workers log participation in the residents Person Centered Plan (PCP). It would be beneficial to include the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEO&HRC) in this initiative, because in 2007 the VEO&HRC and DHHS/DAS ran a Human Rights Ambassador program to help educate workers to the application of human rights in DAS. This was very successful. Consultants are available from the NDIS Consumer Watch to help facilitate this action on 03 8383 2735. The PEMC may decide to engage with the VEO&HRC to establish recommendations and auditable compliance under the Victorian Human Rights Charter. ”Training Electoral Ambassadors”

4. strategies to increase electoral participation amongst community groups that

traditionally experience barriers to electoral participation, such as Victorians aged 18 to 24, Victorians from multicultural backgrounds, as well as Victorians who have recently become Australian citizens and are not familiar with Australia’s electoral system.

(1) Recommendation. It is about time that the compulsory element of Commonwealth Electoral Law is strengthened and that changes to the Electoral Act facilitate the submission of a citizen’s information for the sole purpose of compliance with Commonwealth Electoral Law and the human rights of the individual. In strengthening the compulsory element of Commonwealth

17

Electoral Law it should also be designated that information can be provided by other government bodies and specific private organisations to the electoral commission for the sole purpose of compliance with Commonwealth Electoral Law and the human rights of the individual. This is most achievable in Victoria with the Victorian Human Rights Charter. This would lead the world in democratic processes and change the individuals association with democracy by appealing to motivations of morality and humanity rather than stark mandatory measures. Australia would eventually be grooming the quality of interest that electors have in our democracy and the quality of citizen’s knowledge. (2) Recommendation. For individuals or groups within our society that cannot easily “bear their burden of proof” the Electoral Act should be altered to have prevision, which can include some third party collaboration to support individuals and minorities to participate in electoral processes and thereby satisfy the compulsory element of Commonwealth Electoral Law. This would be appropriate for some disability support environments, homeless shelters and community support centres for under privileged minorities. In many isolated areas of Australia this third party intervention may help to include indigenous electors too. After all the idea is to include every eligible citizen.