DEAFNESS COUNCIL WESTERN AUSTRALIA INC

SUBMISSION TO HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION CAPTIONED MOVIES FORUM

The Deafness Council Western Australia is unable to attend the Captioned Movies Forum in Sydney on 25 February. It has provided the following statement for posting on the HREOC web site. The Deafness Council would like the statement to be read out at the Forum and hard copies provided to attendees.

The Deafness Council notes the ten submissions made to the inquiry. Village Roadshow is the only cinema exhibitor to have made a submission. Village Roadshow deserves full credit and acknowledgement for doing so. The Deafness Council expresses its appreciation of Village Roadshow for contributing to the debate. It is disappointing that other exhibitors have not made public submissions.

Among the submissions made there appears to be recognition that it will not be profitable for exhibitors to provide captions for deaf and hearing impaired customers. It may or may not be profitable. However profitability in service provision to people with a disability is not the criterion required by the Disability Discrimination Act. The criterion is whether undue hardship will be caused to the service provider. Precedents such as the Telstra case show that a service provider is required to provide a service to people with disabilities even if not profitable provided it is not an undue hardship to do so.

Some submissions mention the provision of hearing loops in cinemas. It is essential that hearing loops are provided in all cinemas. Although exhibitors appear to recognise this need, progress is too slow. However hearing loops are not a substitute or alternative to captions. All profoundly deaf people and many people with a hearing impairment require captions to be able to enjoy movies. The Deafness Council notes the estimates provided by the HREOC that that 600,000 Australians use captioned television. This is about the number of people who will benefit from captioned movies.

The most desirable outcome from the captioned movie inquiry would be for the cinema industry to acknowledge the requirements of the DDA and proceed to develop a plan to provide captioned movies in consultation with people with a hearing impairment. If the cinema chain against which the complaint has been made, and other cinema chains, undertake to prepare and implement a plan that addresses captioned movies then the Commissioner should accept this as a satisfactory outcome.

The alternative is for the Commissioner to make a determination. In this event the determination should be to require all cinema exhibitors to show open captions at all sessions of all films in all cinemas in Australia. This can be implemented more cheaply and quickly than closed captioning systems such as Rear Window. Mandatory full open captioning is the only way to extend to the deaf community the same rights as all other Australian citizens to attend a film of their choice at the location and time of their choice. Anything less than this is an inferior secondary access and is as offensive to deaf people as it is offensive for a person in a wheelchair to be required to use a service entry to a building because the main entry has steps.

Captioning can be provided cheaply by laser burning of all copies of all films distributed to cinemas in Australia. Once captions are required it is likely that exhibitors will want colour captions to blend better with the film, as is the case on television. It should be at the discretion of the exhibitor if colour captions are provided instead of white captions. Those exhibitors who wish to provide closed captions using the Rear Window system should be allowed to do so and should not be required to show open captions at those sessions where closed captions are provided.

In summary the Deafness Council Western Australia Inc considers that the best outcome would be for the cinema industry to develop a plan to provide services to deaf and hearing impaired people. If the industry is willing to do so then the complaint should be dismissed. If the industry is not willing to prepare and implement a plan then mandatory open captioning should be introduced immediately.