Post by bear on Feb 7, 2021 8:23:42 GMT 7
'Uphill battle': for disability advocates, there's something missing in Hobart's Parliament Square
David Cawthorn wants a lift added to the redevelopment so he doesn’t have to wheel himself up a 35 metre incline
It was once touted as Hobart’s answer to Melbourne’s Federation Square. Now, the $220m Parliament Square redevelopment is at the centre of a legal dispute over equal access that is headed to the high court.
Four years after disability advocate and pensioner David Cawthorn first lodged a complaint, developer Citta Group last month appealed to the high court in a bid to block the case from being heard at Tasmania’s anti-discrimination tribunal.
Cawthorn argues the design means people like him will be forced to wheel themselves 35 metres up a hill when entering the development from Salamanca, its southern end.
There are two accessible entrances further north, but only a set of stairs at the centrepiece entrance. Since 2016, Cawthorn has had one request: that the development include a lift.
“We just want to be able to access the same facilities as easy as everyone else,” he says. “For me to push up that hill or go all the way 250 metres around Parliament House and up Salamanca towards Davey Street, it puts a lot of strain on our shoulders. Our shoulders are our knees.”
Lack of Covid plan for Australians with disability a 'serious failure' of government, report says
The historic Parliament Square block was sold by the Tasmanian government for redevelopment in 2009, in what was claimed to be the Apple Isle’s answer to Melbourne’s Federation Square.
The development includes the $150m Salamanca Building, which houses government offices and was finished in late 2017, and the Tasman hotel, which is still being built. It will also include retail, bar and restaurants and open public space, according to the developer’s website.
After a lengthy mediation and complaints process, Cawthorn’s claim was to be heard by the anti-discrimination tribunal last May, before lawyers for Citta argued a week before the trial date that the case related to federal law and the state body did not have jurisdiction.
That kicked the matter to the full bench of Tasmania’s supreme court, which sided with Cawthorn in a unanimous 3-0 decision in December.
Following that ruling, it was expected the tribunal would then hear the case later this year. Instead, last month Citta announced it would appeal to the high court.
Cawthorn, who is being represented pro bono by top silk Ron Merkel QC, says it’s likely the developers have spent more money fighting him in the courts than it would cost to build the lift, which is estimated at between $125,000 and $435,000.
His lawyer, Ben Bartl from the Hobart Community Legal Service, says the fact the case had dragged on over four years is “very concerning”, particularly given the development is now almost finished. This would mean retro-fitting the lift, which is more costly.
“Now that it’s before the high court, it’s spiralled out of control,” Bartl says. “We believe the issue is very straightforward. It is about equal access to public space and we’re gobsmacked that rather than simply installing a lift, which will ultimately bring more people into the development, the developer has [taken it to the high court].”
Citta did not respond to questions, including about the cost of the lift compared to its legal fees. It referred Guardian Australia to a statement from its managing director, Stephen McMillan.
'I felt less alone': how Australians with disabilities are fearing life after the pandemic
“We do not believe Parliament Square has been built in a way that discriminates against people with disability,” McMillan says. “Of the three access points to Parliament Square, it is only one which is being complained about in the anti-discrimination complaint.
“The other two access points specifically accommodate disability access.”
Explaining the decision to appeal to the high court, McMillan says the developer was only was seeking to resolve an “untenable conflict” between federal and state laws.
Cawthorn emphasises that the company’s claims of compliance with the relevant laws is yet to be tested by a court. He says that is why he wanted the case to be heard by the anti-discrimination tribunal in the first place.
Cawthorn, an accessibility consultant who also receives a part disability pension, argues the lift would also provide equal access for parents with prams.
In documents previously filed with the tribunal, he had explained the difficulty he experienced when he attempted to wheel up the hill to use one of the other entrances at Parliament Square.
“As we wheeled up Murray Street, the hill seemed to get gradually steeper, although that might just have been the build-up of lactic acid in my arms and the fact that I felt physically exhausted,” he says.
“We had to stop a number of times, either because people were obstructing our path or because we physically needed a break.”
The former Tasmanian anti-discrimination commissioner Robin Banks and Queensland’s anti-discrimination commissioner, Kevin Cocks, have backed Cawthorn’s call for the lift to be added. In the mid 90s, Cocks won a landmark case against the Queensland government when he called for a lift to be built at the Brisbane Convention Centre.
“We’re still fighting the same battles that we were fighting 20 years ago,” says Cawthorn.
Asked if he has considered giving up since he first lodged his complaint in December 2016, he says: “A lot of my friends say, ‘Once this dog gets a bone, he won’t let it go.’ I just thought, ‘I’m not going to be rolled over.’
“There have been a few sayings that have come from it. ‘It’s been a David and Goliath battle. And ‘We want to see a hearing, not an uphill battle.’”
www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/07/uphill-battle-for-disability-advocates-theres-something-missing-in-hobarts-parliament-square
David Cawthorn wants a lift added to the redevelopment so he doesn’t have to wheel himself up a 35 metre incline
It was once touted as Hobart’s answer to Melbourne’s Federation Square. Now, the $220m Parliament Square redevelopment is at the centre of a legal dispute over equal access that is headed to the high court.
Four years after disability advocate and pensioner David Cawthorn first lodged a complaint, developer Citta Group last month appealed to the high court in a bid to block the case from being heard at Tasmania’s anti-discrimination tribunal.
Cawthorn argues the design means people like him will be forced to wheel themselves 35 metres up a hill when entering the development from Salamanca, its southern end.
There are two accessible entrances further north, but only a set of stairs at the centrepiece entrance. Since 2016, Cawthorn has had one request: that the development include a lift.
“We just want to be able to access the same facilities as easy as everyone else,” he says. “For me to push up that hill or go all the way 250 metres around Parliament House and up Salamanca towards Davey Street, it puts a lot of strain on our shoulders. Our shoulders are our knees.”
Lack of Covid plan for Australians with disability a 'serious failure' of government, report says
The historic Parliament Square block was sold by the Tasmanian government for redevelopment in 2009, in what was claimed to be the Apple Isle’s answer to Melbourne’s Federation Square.
The development includes the $150m Salamanca Building, which houses government offices and was finished in late 2017, and the Tasman hotel, which is still being built. It will also include retail, bar and restaurants and open public space, according to the developer’s website.
After a lengthy mediation and complaints process, Cawthorn’s claim was to be heard by the anti-discrimination tribunal last May, before lawyers for Citta argued a week before the trial date that the case related to federal law and the state body did not have jurisdiction.
That kicked the matter to the full bench of Tasmania’s supreme court, which sided with Cawthorn in a unanimous 3-0 decision in December.
Following that ruling, it was expected the tribunal would then hear the case later this year. Instead, last month Citta announced it would appeal to the high court.
Cawthorn, who is being represented pro bono by top silk Ron Merkel QC, says it’s likely the developers have spent more money fighting him in the courts than it would cost to build the lift, which is estimated at between $125,000 and $435,000.
His lawyer, Ben Bartl from the Hobart Community Legal Service, says the fact the case had dragged on over four years is “very concerning”, particularly given the development is now almost finished. This would mean retro-fitting the lift, which is more costly.
“Now that it’s before the high court, it’s spiralled out of control,” Bartl says. “We believe the issue is very straightforward. It is about equal access to public space and we’re gobsmacked that rather than simply installing a lift, which will ultimately bring more people into the development, the developer has [taken it to the high court].”
Citta did not respond to questions, including about the cost of the lift compared to its legal fees. It referred Guardian Australia to a statement from its managing director, Stephen McMillan.
'I felt less alone': how Australians with disabilities are fearing life after the pandemic
“We do not believe Parliament Square has been built in a way that discriminates against people with disability,” McMillan says. “Of the three access points to Parliament Square, it is only one which is being complained about in the anti-discrimination complaint.
“The other two access points specifically accommodate disability access.”
Explaining the decision to appeal to the high court, McMillan says the developer was only was seeking to resolve an “untenable conflict” between federal and state laws.
Cawthorn emphasises that the company’s claims of compliance with the relevant laws is yet to be tested by a court. He says that is why he wanted the case to be heard by the anti-discrimination tribunal in the first place.
Cawthorn, an accessibility consultant who also receives a part disability pension, argues the lift would also provide equal access for parents with prams.
In documents previously filed with the tribunal, he had explained the difficulty he experienced when he attempted to wheel up the hill to use one of the other entrances at Parliament Square.
“As we wheeled up Murray Street, the hill seemed to get gradually steeper, although that might just have been the build-up of lactic acid in my arms and the fact that I felt physically exhausted,” he says.
“We had to stop a number of times, either because people were obstructing our path or because we physically needed a break.”
The former Tasmanian anti-discrimination commissioner Robin Banks and Queensland’s anti-discrimination commissioner, Kevin Cocks, have backed Cawthorn’s call for the lift to be added. In the mid 90s, Cocks won a landmark case against the Queensland government when he called for a lift to be built at the Brisbane Convention Centre.
“We’re still fighting the same battles that we were fighting 20 years ago,” says Cawthorn.
Asked if he has considered giving up since he first lodged his complaint in December 2016, he says: “A lot of my friends say, ‘Once this dog gets a bone, he won’t let it go.’ I just thought, ‘I’m not going to be rolled over.’
“There have been a few sayings that have come from it. ‘It’s been a David and Goliath battle. And ‘We want to see a hearing, not an uphill battle.’”
www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/07/uphill-battle-for-disability-advocates-theres-something-missing-in-hobarts-parliament-square