Review of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission's Guidelines for Providers of Insurance and Superannuation under the Disability Discrimination Act
Call for comments
Dear Colleague
I am asking for your input to a review of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission's Guidelines for Providers of Insurance and Superannuation under the Disability Discrimination Act ("the DDA").
A copy of the existing version of the Guidelines is attached.
These Guidelines were issued in 1998 after considerable discussion with community and industry representatives. They were intended to assist in decision making consistent with the legislation. The intent of these Guidelines is to explain existing rights and responsibilities, rather than to impose new regulatory requirements.
Although the Guidelines were designed specifically to apply to the life insurance and superannuation industries, it was also hoped that they would assist providers of other types of insurance.
It appears timely to review these Guidelines for a number of reasons:
- There has been five more years experience with the operation of the legislation than was available when the Guidelines were first issued, in complaint handling through this Commission and (in a small number of cases) through the courts, as well as the experience of providers and consumers in seeking to interpret and apply their own rights and responsibilities, and the experience of State and Territory equal opportunity bodies in administering the anti-discrimination laws of those jurisdictions.
- Submissions to the current inquiry by the Productivity Commission
into the Disability Discrimination Act indicate that there may be a
need (both from industry and community perspectives) for more detailed
guidance than is currently available.
Guidelines issued by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) are not the only mechanism, and for some purposes may not be the best means, for clarifying rights and responsibilities of insurance and superannuation providers and consumers in relation to the DDA. In particular it is open to industry members or their associations to develop their own codes and procedures, and possible to seek recognition of these through the temporary exemption process under section 55 of the DDA.
However, even where industry bodies decide to pursue these courses, HREOC guidelines may still have valuable functions, pending the conclusion of industry standards and as a reference point for their making and the making of decisions by HREOC on exemption applications.
After receiving initial comments and suggestions, my intention is to circulate a draft revision of the Guidelines for further comment before putting a revised version of the Guidelines to a full meeting of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission for adoption.
I would appreciate accordingly any comments and suggestions you may be able to provide by 18 December 2003, preferably by email to disabdis@humanrights.gov.au, or by mail to Disability Rights Unit, HREOC, GPO Box 5218 Sydney 2001.
Yours sincerely
Dr Sev Ozdowski OAM
Acting Disability Discrimination Commissioner
7 November 2003