1.REP1871087 International approaches to accessibility legislation redacted copy.pdf

Report

Date:
31 August 2018
Security Level: IN CONFIDENCE
1982
To:
Hon Carmel Sepuloni, Minister for Disability Issues
Act
International approaches to accessibility legislation
Purpose of the report
1  The purpose of this report is to inform you about what we have learnt following an analysis
of accessibility legislation in jurisdictions internationally, and to present some
recommended next steps to pursue accessibility legislation.
Executive summary
2  The Access Alliance has been campaigning for accessibility legislation during the lead up to
the 2017 parliamentary election. While they acknowledge that New Zealand has gone some
Information
way to improve accessibility, change has been slow and haphazard. The Alliance has
suggested that enacting legislation based on the Ontario (Canada) model is the
recommended solution.
3  After meeting with the Access Alliance and officials on 1 February 2018, you directed
officials to:
•
complete a stocktake of current accessibility policy
Official
•
provide a report on a range of international approaches to improving accessibility.
4  The Office for Disability Issues will draft a paper for you to present to Cabinet which will
the
include an analysis of the impacts, risks and costs of accessibility legislation as:
•
legislation would provide a strong mandate for a sustained, long-term work
programme to improve accessibility
•
legislation would mandate creation of new standards for accessibility and consolidate
existing standards and guidance to make it easy for organisations to implement
under
•
legislation would set a target date for achieving a 100 percent accessible
New Zealand, achieving change faster than without legislation
•
legislation would also align with other government priorities such as improving
employment outcomes for disabled people
•
legislation would provide positive impacts beyond the disability community.
5  There are a number of key elements identified from the international jurisdiction review
that should be considered if accessibility legislation is to be introduced in New Zealand:
Released
•
resourcing to implement the legislation
•
the approach to implementation, including:
−
the mechanisms that would need to be set-up, such as a Secretariat, complaints
mechanism, compliance mechanism and an evaluation mechanism

−
the inclusion of disabled people as co-design partners
−
the accessibility domains the standards would cover.
Recommended actions
It is recommended that you:
1  Note that accessibility legislation would increase the pace of current accessibility
improvements by setting out the requirements for accessibility thus providing the mandate
for a long-term work programme with dedicated resourcing.
2  Note that legislation would align with other government priorities including improving
employment outcomes for disabled people.
1982
3  Note that developing, implementing and ensuring compliance with accessibility standards
would require additional dedicated resource within government.
4  Note that compliance costs may be a potential barrier for some parties, such as smaller
Act
organisations, if obligated under the legislation.
5  Note that we can use learnings from accessibility legislation in other jurisdictions to inform
the development of a regime in New Zealand. We can also use existing international and
domestic resources and guidance to implement the legislation.
6  Note that from our analysis of other jurisdictions we would need:
a.  dedicated resourcing (a Budget Bid would be required)
b.  mechanisms to implement the legislation set-up, such as a Secretariat, complaints
mechanism, compliance mechanism, and an evaluation mechanism.
Information
7  Agree the Office for Disability Issues will develop a Cabinet paper recommending the
development of accessibility legislation which will also map out the legislative process and
what will be required to enact legislation.


                                                                                                 Agree/Disagree



Official

Brian Coffey

Date
the
Director, Office for Disability Issues

under

Hon Carmel Sepuloni

Date
Minister for Disability Issues

Released
2

Accessibility  is  a  precondition  for  disabled  people  to  participate  fully
and equally in society and live independently with dignity.
1  Accessibility has to do with our ability to engage with, participate in, and belong to, the
world around us. Without access to the physical environment (built environment and public
and green spaces), transport, information and communication and services, disabled people
do not have equal opportunities for participation in society.
2  Access barriers impede disabled New Zealanders from studying, securing employment,
getting the services they need and taking part in community and social life. 1
3  The data available points to disabled people’s lower levels of participation in society
compared to their non-disabled peers.2
1982
The  Access  Alliance  has  proposed  new  mandatory  and  enforceable
accessibility legislation to enable disabled people’s full participation in
New Zealand society.
Act
4  The Access Alliance is a group of Disabled People’s Organisations, disability service
providers, community and disability advocacy organisations. This group has come together
to campaign for accessibility legislation (“Accessibility for New Zealanders Act”).
5  The primary goal of this proposed Act is to make New Zealand 100 percent accessible for
everyone, which will enable disabled people to fully participate in New Zealand society.
6  The aim is that Government and the Access Alliance will co-design “shell legislation that will
support enforceable and mandatory accessibility standards and set a deadline for the
removal of access barriers” (Access Alliance briefing to Minister Sepuloni – December
2017). The Access Alliance’s goal is for the Act to be enacted by 2020.
Information
7  The Access Alliance wants accessibility legislation to be introduced because:
•
New Zealand’s current human rights legislation does not provide organisations with
clear and specific expectations and guidance as to what they are required to do to
become fully accessible as educators, employers, or providers of information or
services.
Official
•
There is a lack of specified accessibility standards or requirements for organisations
to meet and no penalties for non-compliance.
8  The Access Alliance believes that an Accessibility for New Zealanders Act would scale up
the
efforts to improve accessibility for all New Zealanders, not just disabled people, as it would
put the onus on all obligated parties to become fully accessible.
Findings of the Office for Disability Issues international comparison of
accessibility legislation identified some key things to consider.
9  The Office for Disability Issues undertook a comparison of accessibility legislation in seven
under
other jurisdictions: Norway, Denmark, United Kingdom, Australia, Ontario (Canada). We
also analysed legislation not yet in force in the Canadian Federation and the
European Union.

1 Although it is reasonable to argue for a causal link between disabled people’s ability to access the built
Released
environment, transport, information and services and equal opportunities to participate in society,
more robust data is required to substantiate this explanation.
2 The four national disability surveys undertaken by Statistics New Zealand since 1996, and the
Household Labour Force Survey (June quarter 2017, 2018) – show that educational outcomes,
workforce participation and income outcomes for disabled people are consistently lower than for non-
disabled people.
3

10  We analysed the legislation in terms of:
•
scope
•
accessibility domains used
•
the body/entity exercising responsibility to develop accessibility standards
•
the timeline for implementation of legislation and accessibility standards
•
compliance monitoring and impact reporting
•
the mechanism(s) for enforcement of accessibility standards.3
11  From this analysis we identified key elements that any New Zealand legislation should
consider. A lot of this advice is taken from the Ontario model which is in an advanced state
1982
and is the model recommended by the Access Alliance.
Implementation of accessibility legislation requires a dedicated work programme.
Act
12  A comprehensive work programme for accessibility legislation would:
•
be long-term (10 years plus), with a goal to be 100 percent accessible within 10
years
•
be allocated dedicated resourcing (staff and funding)
•
be informed by comprehensive engagement with stakeholders
•
focus on improving accessibility in the public sector first, before requiring accessibility
in the private sector.
Legislation would need to mandate for standards and their timely review.
Information
13  Rather than standards being “fixed” in accessibility legislation, it is important that the
legislation provides flexibility to create new standards and regularly review established
standards.
14  We expect that technology will have an impact on accessibility standards for information
and communication.
Legislation will need to specify which accessibility domains require standards to be
Official
created.
15  Each jurisdiction chose different accessibility domains for which guidance is provided.
the
16  For example, Norway has three accessibility domains:
•
the built environment
•
transport
•
information and communication technologies.
under
17  The United Kingdom’s Equality Act (2010) targets:
•
the built environment (premises)
•
services
•
employers
•
education
•
partnerships.
Released

3 See Appendix 1 for a brief analysis of international approaches to accessibility legislation in the selected
jurisdictions.
4

18  It would be important to agree with the New Zealand disability sector which accessibility
domains should be included in the legislation. Legislation can also provide for the creation
of other standards as appropriate.
Accessibility standards should be created through working groups using co-design
principles.
19  Working groups established to create accessibility standards should include:
•
disabled people
•
technical and legal experts
•
government officials
1982
•
representatives from the sectors/organisations that would have to meet the
standards.
20  Lessons should be taken from the Disability Support System Transformation approach to
Act
co-design.
A way to enforce the legislation needs to be created.
21  We advise that the legislation can only create systemic social change if there are
mechanisms to enforce the standards in situations when compliance is an issue4.
22  The compliance process could take the approach of education and encouraging compliance
rather than penalisation.
23  There is a need for a compliance process that does not put the burden on the individual
making a complaint about non-compliance with accessibility standards.
24
Information
  Lessons can be learnt from Ontario where they have focused on creating a strong self-
reporting tool to help organisations assess how they are implementing their obligations.
They also undertake compliance monitoring on specific industries each year/two years.
25  Legal orders can also be imposed in Ontario on non-compliant bodies/entities.
Administrative penalties may be issued by a director or the Licence Appeal Tribunal.
There needs to be clear and reasonable timeframes to implement accessibility
requirements to allow organisations to comply.
Official
26  Organisations obligated to comply with accessibility standards are likely to be concerned
about the cost imposed on them to become accessible. This has been managed in other
the
jurisdictions by providing reasonable timeframes for organisations to achieve compliance
with standards once they have been established.
Raising public awareness about the importance of accessibility is critical to successfully
implementing accessibility legislation.
27  In order to introduce accessibility legislation that would contribute to the removal of the
under
barriers faced by disabled people, it is necessary to promote information about accessibility
standards. This could be achieved through a web platform which consolidates all
accessibility standards, reporting obligations and guidance to help with compliance. Ontario
has a comprehensive web platform which provides this function.
A dedicated Secretariat with adequate resource would be needed to facilitate the
accessibility work, if legislation were enacted.
28  A Secretariat is necessary to co-ordinate and provide administration for the development of
standards, monitor compliance, provide a complaints mechanism and evaluation
Released

4 A place for complaints by members of the public should continue to have a place in a robust standard
enforcement legal environment.
5

mechanism, as well as to provide a web platform to bring together accessibility standards
and information.
29  Ontario established an Accessibility Directorate to provide this function. Norway’s
coordinating agency is the Norwegian Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion.
There are many advantages that accessibility legislation would bring.
Accessibility legislation would help New Zealand to meet its international and domestic
obligations.
30  Accessibility legislation would help New Zealand to proactively implement the Article 9,
Accessibility, United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)
and Outcome 5: Accessibility, New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016-2026.
1982
Accessibility legislation would lead to sustained social change by mandating a long-
term work programme with resourcing for action.
Act
31 Legislation provides a strong mandate for a dedicated work programme. Given the
Norwegian and Ontario experience, it is well-established that legislation is an effective way
to accelerate culture change because it mandates for work to be done such as the creation
of standards.
32  A long-term work programme is necessary because accessibility will take a long time to
achieve. For example, Ontario and Norway’s goal is to be fully accessible (or a universally
designed society) by 2025. Even if accessibility is not achieved within a specified
timeframe, targets focus efforts on improving accessibility in society.
33  We also know that some actions to improve accessibility have been implemented through
the Disability Action Plan 2014-2018 but that legislation would provide a much stronger
Information
mandate to progress action.
Accessibility legislation would help improve many outcomes for disabled people.
34 It is well-established that accessibility is a fundamental enabler contributing to the
improvement of economic and social outcomes for disabled people in areas such as
education and participation in community and social life.
35
Official
  Improved access, in particular to buildings, public infrastructure, the digital environment
and goods and services, would lead to increased workforce participation for disabled
people. This being the case, it is reasonable to argue that the Government’s future welfare
liability would be reduced5 and that disabled people’s outcomes in employment could be
the
improved by accessibility legislation.
Accessibility legislation would bring positive outcomes for non-disabled people too.
36 Legislation would have a positive impact beyond the disability community. For example,
accessibility barriers affect: older people, people with children in pushchairs, people who
have temporary injuries, tourists (domestic and foreign) and people who use English as a
under
second language.
37  We also know that disabled people do not exist in isolation. They have families, whānau
and friends who will be affected in a positive way as access barriers are removed and more
opportunities arise for disabled people.

Released

5 Research carried out by the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research suggests that accessibility
legislation would add an estimated $1.45 billion per year to real gross domestic product and reduce the
annual fiscal cost to government of $270 million. See: https://nzier.org.nz/publication/valuing-access-
to-work.
6

There are some issues to be aware of in pursuing legislation.
There are some drawbacks to legislation. It is costly, can be inflexible, and concerns
have been raised by some about effectiveness.
38  We know that:
•
enacting and maintaining legislation is costly (writing legislation and taking it through
the parliamentary process will take government resource and implementation will
require continuous dedicated government resource)
•
legislation itself is inflexible once enforced and amending the law is a slow and
complicated process6
1982
•
legislation’s effectiveness is reliant on the buy-in of interested stakeholders, including
those who are affected such as business owners and government agencies
•
compliance with legislation may be challenging, particularly, if there is a complex
Act
regime of accessibility standards and inadequate support for implementation for
obligated parties. For example, Ontario’s accessibility legislation was considered “lost”
among the array of government regulations and activities that businesses already
had to comply with.
Developing  and  implementing  accessibility  standards  would  be  resource  intensive  for
government and for small and medium sized enterprises to implement.
39  There is a need to establish a number of mechanisms to implement accessibility legislation
including a Secretariat7, working groups to create standards, a complaints mechanism, and
a mechanism to evaluate how effective legislation is.
40
Information
  Organisations, particularly small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), may face significant
difficulties in finding the resources to fund any new obligations.8 However, this could be
mitigated by legislation not applying to businesses with 1-2 employees. There is also the
option to take a staged approach to which organisations are obligated to comply with the
standards. For example, it could apply first to Government agencies and then, in a few
years’ time, to organisations with more than 10 employees.
There would be challenges in measuring the impact of accessibility legislation.
Official
41  It would be difficult to assess “real compliance” and ensure that organisations are, in fact,
complying with accessibility standards. However, the New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016-
2026: Outcomes Framework accessibility indicators could be used to measure change.
the
Accessibility legislation would not fully address all the disadvantages experienced by
disabled people in society
42  Accessibility legislation would be a catalyst for positive social change leading to improved
economic and social outcomes for disabled people. However, we should not rely on
accessibility legislation alone to tackle the systemic inequalities that disabled people are
under
subjected to in our society and there is a need for a whole work programme.

6 However, this can be mitigated through future-proofing legislation and providing the detail in standards
which can be more easily reviewed and amended.
7 A Secretariat’s role would likely include: coordinating and providing administrative support for five
Released
Standards working groups which would meet regularly over the course of 1-2 years (depending on the
complexity of the Standard); working with a reference group of disabled people to provide strategic
direction over the work, running and maintaining a website and regular communications to provide
resources for obligated organisations; and potentially to provide a complaints mechanism and
compliance monitoring duties.
8 The majority of New Zealanders are employed in SMEs.
7

The Office for Disability Issues advises that you should present a paper
to Cabinet to propose enacting accessibility legislation.
43  We advise that there are many advantages to enacting accessibility legislation, and that
legislation would provide a strong mandate for action.  Progress through the current
Disability Action Plan 2014-2018 has been haphazard and at differing paces over the past
four years due to the level of government commitment and resourcing.
44  We suggest that legislation would provide a strong signal to government, the private
sector, disabled people and society that disabled people are equal citizens and should be
able to participate in society.
45  We expect that improvements to accessibility will have a huge impact on improving
1982
outcomes for employment, education and overall life satisfaction for disabled people.
46  We note that we can use learnings from other jurisdictions, particularly Ontario, to inform
the creation of legislation, standards and a framework to enforce the regime. From these
Act
learnings, we can mitigate some of the risks and issues that other jurisdictions have
already experienced.
47  We note that there are existing domestic and international resources, guidance and
standards that we could adapt or adopt in implementing the legislation.
48  We recommend that the Office for Disability Issues will develop a paper for Cabinet
recommending the development of accessibility legislation.

Information

Official
the
under
Released
8

Appendix  1  –  Detailed  international  comparison  for  jurisdictions  with
accessibility legislation.
Scope of accessibility legislation in selected jurisdictions prohibits discrimination on the
basis of disability in various sectors of society
49  The legislation chosen for analysis includes:
•
Norway’s Anti-Discrimination and Accessibility Act (2009)9
•
Denmark’s Act on Prohibition of Discrimination because of Disability (2018)10
•
Denmark’s Executive Order on Building Regulations 2018 (BR18)11
1982
•
United Kingdom’s Equality Act (2010)12
•
Australia’s Disability Discrimination Act (1992)13
•
Ontario’s Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2005)14
Act
•
European Union’s Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector
Bodies (2016)15
•
Federal Canada’s Accessible Canada Act bill (presented to Parliament in June 2018).16
•
European Union’s European Accessibility Act (tripartite negotiations regarding
enactment are on-going between the European Parliament, Council and
Commission).17
50  Norway’s Anti-Discrimination and Accessibility Act aims to ensure equal opportunities and
rights to social participation for all disabled people. A distinctive feature of the Norwegian
legislation is that inaccessibility is viewed in the context of discrimination, including the
Information
obligation to use universal design. The vision underpinning the Norwegian legislation is a
universally designed society.
51  Denmark’s Act on Prohibition of Discrimination because of Disability (2018) prohibits direct
and indirect discrimination on the basis of disability in all areas of Danish society, except for
areas that are covered by the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination in the Labour Market.
Official

the
9 The legislation can be read in English at: https://www.legislationline.org/topics/country/11/topic/84.
10 See https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/4623-denmark-adoption-of-a-new-act-on-disability-
discrimination-pdf-93-kb. This new piece of legislation is not available online in English as yet.
11 file:///C:/Users/rande016/Downloads/BR18 Executive order on building regulations 2018.pdf /
under
http://bygningsreglementet.dk/Tekniske-bestemmelser/02/Krav
12 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents. The Act replaces all previous equality
legislation, including the Disability Discrimination Act 2005.
13 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2013C00022. It is important to note that the Disability
Discrimination and Other Human Rights Amendment Act (2009) made significant changes to federal
discrimination law, including the Disability Discrimination Act (1992).
14 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/01o32.
15 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L .2016.327.01.0001.01.ENG.
Released
16 http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer//en/42-1/bill/C-81/first-reading.
17 These tripartite negotiations are known as Trilogue. The European Council, charged with defining the
European Union’s overall political direction, comprises the heads of state or government of the Member
States. The European Commission operates as a cabinet government with 28 members. The
Commission is responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding European Union
treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the European Union.
9

However, there is no obligation in the 2018 Act to provide reasonable accommodation and
meet accessibility requirements.
52  The United Kingdom (UK) does not have one clear piece of accessibility legislation.  The
Equality Act (2010) is the closest the UK has to accessibility legislation, aiming to protect
from discrimination people with particular characteristics (known as “protected
characteristics”), including disability. The UK legislation includes an explicit positive duty to
make “reasonable adjustments” for disabled people.
53  Australia’s Disability Discrimination Act (1992) applies to the Australian Government, the
States and Territories and private sector bodies. Similar to the UK, it contains a positive
duty to make “reasonable adjustments” for disabled people. In addition, the Australian
legislation includes a defence of “unjustifiable hardship” against a claim of discrimination. 1982
54  Ontario’s Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2005) aims to identify, remove
and prevent barriers that impede disabled people from participating fully in all sectors of
society. It applies to public and private sector organisations (with 1+ employees). Similar
Act
to the UK and Australia, the Ontarian legislation also implies a positive duty to achieve
accessibility for Ontarians.
55  The purpose of Directive 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and Council on the
Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector Bodies is to realise an e-
inclusive society in the European Union (EU), where both disabled and non-disabled people
have equal opportunities to access and use information and communication technologies.
56  The scope of the proposed European Accessibility Act is broader in that the objective is to
improve the functioning of the EU market for accessible products and services by removing
barriers created by divergent legislation.
57  The proposed Accessible Canada Act aims to “identify, remove and prevent” accessibility
Information
barriers in areas that fall under federal jurisdiction.
The legislation enacted (or in draft form) focuses on the accessibility domains or
targets key areas of social life
58  Norway’s Anti-Discrimination and Accessibility Act focuses on:
•
the built environment
Official
•
transport
•
information and communication technologies.
the
59  The Danish Executive Order on Building Regulations 2018 (BR18) relates to access to
buildings, including provisions on stairs, fencing, hand rails and information about the
layout and use of buildings.
60  Given that the UK does not have one clear piece of accessibility legislation, it has a number
of laws, regulations and standards which aim to address accessibility in different areas of
public life. In particular, the positive duty to make “reasonable adjustments” for disabled
under
people under the Equality Act applies to the following areas:
•
employers
•
education
•
premises
•
services and public functions
•
partnerships.
Released
61  Australia’s Disability Discrimination Act protects disabled people against discrimination in
the following areas of public life:
•
employment
•
education
10

•
accommodation (for example, renting or buying a house or unit)
•
getting or using services (for example, transport or telecommunications services)
•
accessible public places (for example, government offices, parks).
62  The focus of Ontario’s Act is five accessibility domains:
•
Customer service
•
Information and communications
•
Transportation
•
Employment
1982
•
Design of public spaces.
63  The EU’s Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector Bodies applies to
all public sector websites and mobile applications, with a limited number of exceptions (for
Act
example, broadcasters and their subsidiaries, live-streaming). In addition, websites and
applications sold to the public sector by private sector organisations are also included.
64  The purpose of the Accessible Canada Act bill is to remove accessibility barriers and prevent
new barriers in areas within federal legislative jurisdiction, including:
•
built environment (buildings and public spaces)
•
transport (by air, rail, ferry and bus carriers operating across a provincial or
international border)
•
information and communication technologies
•
delivery of programmes and services
Information
•
procurement of goods and services
•
employment.
65  Flexibility is built into the Canadian draft legislation in that the bill allows the Government
to identify other priorities in the future.
66  The EU’s draft European Accessibility Act would establish EU-wide functional requirements
Official
which would indicate what features of products and services need to be accessible.
However, detailed technical solutions (that is, how to make products or services accessible)
would not be imposed, allowing for innovation. The built environment is not included in the
the
draft EU legislation. The proposed list of products and services that would need to be
accessible include:
•
smartphones, tablets and computers
•
ticketing and check-in machines
•
TVs and TV programmes
under
•
banking and ATMs
•
e-books
•
e-commerce.
Various bodies exercise power/responsibility to develop accessibility standards
67  A robust process for the development of accessibility standards is a proactive means of
combating disability discrimination. Such standards specify requirements for the
identification, removal and prevention of barriers that impede disabled people from fully
Released
participating in and contributing to society. Some jurisdictions have established bodies to
create standards, whilst others have developed action plans.
11

68  Universal design is an enforceable legal standard in Norway. For example, Norway amended
its Planning and Building Act (2008)18 in 2010 to include universal design.
69  Norway’s Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion is the coordinating ministry for
The Government’s Action Plan for Universal Design 2015-2019,19 with special responsibility
for cross-sectoral challenges and measures. The focus of this Action Plan is information and
communication technology and welfare technology. Ministries are responsible for actions in
their areas of responsibility.
70  In the UK standards for disability access may arise under the Equality Act through the
following processes:
•
Standards may be created through “reasonable adjustments” which are defined as
modifications that must be made, if it is foreseeable that policies, practices or
1982
procedures will pose barriers for disabled people. For example, the onus is on service
providers to plan and take steps to address barriers that impede disabled people.
•
Standards may be developed through regulations (for example, Rail Vehicle
Act
Accessibility [Non-Interoperable Rail System] Regulations 2010, British Standard
Institute revised BS 8300:2018 for the Design of an Accessible and Inclusive Built
Environment).
71  Australia’s Disability Discrimination Act enables disability standards to be created under the
Act. These standards are legally binding regulations set by the Attorney-General, informed
by advice from the government department responsible for administering the particular
standard. The Australian Human Rights Commission may also advise the Attorney-General
on the development of standards.
72  Standards can be created in the areas of employment, education, access to premises,
public transport and the administration of Commonwealth laws and programmes. It is
Information
necessary to regularly review the standards. The following standards have, so far, been
developed:
•
Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 200220
•
Disability Standards for Education 200521
•
Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 201022
Official
•
Digital Services Standard 2016.23
73  Under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the relevant Minister sets terms
of reference, and with the assistance of the Accessibility Directorate of Ontario establishes
the
Standard Development Committees which develop the standards. In addition, the
Accessibility Standards Advisory Council advises the Minister on the process and progress of
standard development. So far, five standards have been enacted as regulations:
•
Customer service standard
•
This was followed by the Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulations (IASR) in
under
2011 which initially included three standards:

18 https://dibk.no/byggereglene/Building-Regulations-in-English/.
19 https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/regjeringens-handlingsplan-for-universell-
Released
utforming/id2473299/.
20 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2005B01059.
21 https://docs.education.gov.au/node/16354.
22 https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/LVDC/Aus AccessStandards.pdf.
23 https://www.dta.gov.au/standard/.
12

o  Information and Communications
o  Employment
o  Transport.
•
The Design of Public Spaces (Built Environment) Standard was added to the IASR in
2013.
74  Regarding the EU’s Directive on the Accessibility of Website and Mobile Applications of
Public Sector Bodies, the European Standard EN 301 549V1.1.2 (2015-14) will be
considered the minimum principle until a specific harmonised standard is decided upon.
75  The Accessible Canada Act bill stipulates that a Canadian Accessibility Standards
Development Organisation (comprising a board of directors, the majority of whom would be
1982
disabled people) would form technical committees (including disabled people, technical
experts and representatives from sectors/organisations that would have to meet the
standards) to develop standards.
Act
A timeline for implementation of accessibility standards is specified in a few
jurisdictions
76  In Norway, the universal design content is determined when detailed requirements
regarding access to buildings, means of transport and information and communication
technologies are specified. Norway has set the goal of a universally designed society by
2025.
77  In Ontario, there is a phased-in approach to compliance with standards, with deadline dates
for each standard, based on organisation type (for example, public or private sector) and
size (large or small). The goal is to achieve full accessibility for disabled Ontarians by 2025.
Information
78  Member States of the EU have until 23 September 2018 to transpose the text of the
Directive on Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector Bodies (2016)
into their national legislation. The accessibility deadlines are as follows:
•
23 September 2019 – all websites created after 23 September 2018
•
23 September 2020 – existing websites
•
Official

23 June 2021 – all mobile applications.
79  As to the proposed European Accessibility Act, the Directive would apply in all Member
States six years after its entry into force.
the
Monitoring and reporting on compliance with accessibility standards is required in a
few jurisdictions
80  The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act requires organisations (with 20 or more
employees) to file accessibility reports, when directed, confirming compliance with the
relevant standards. The review of these reports by a director is the principal means for
under
monitoring compliance.
81  The Accessible Canada Act bill proposes that:
•
Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities would be responsible for periodic
independent reviews of the Act, and reporting on those to Parliament.
•
Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organisation would present annual
report on its operations to the Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities.
•
All regulated entities in consultation with disabled people, would have to prepare and
publish regular progress reports detailing how they implement their disability plans.
Released
82  The EU Directive on the Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector
Bodies specifies that:
•
Member States must monitor compliance using a methodology (ie, a process) to be
adopted by the European Commission by 23 December 2018
13

•
By 23 December 2021 and every three years after, Member States will submit a
report that presents the results of monitoring.
Various mechanisms for the enforcement of accessibility standards have been
developed
83  Standard-setting legislation can only effect change for disabled people if there is a
mechanism to enforce the accessibility standards, when enforcement is necessary. The
accessibility legislative models analysed in this report rely on two methods of enforcement:
•
an individual faults-based complaints approach
•
legal orders imposed on noncompliant bodies.
84
1982
  In Norway, the revision of the Act relating to the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud
and the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal (Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud Act) entered
into force in January 2018.24 Individual complaints of discrimination will now be dealt with
by the Equality Tribunal. The Equality Tribunal also has powers to award
Act
redress/compensation for non-monetary damage, where breach of anti-discrimination
legislation is found.
85  The Ombud will continue to have legal standing to bring discrimination complaints to court.
86  In Denmark, the Board of Equal Treatment deals with individual complaints of
discrimination that fall under the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination because of Disability.
The Board bases its decisions on written information received from the complainant,
defendant and the secretariat.
87  In the UK, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) may assist individuals with
disability discrimination claims that fall under the Equality Act. The EHRC also provides
claimants with information on the Equality Advisory and Support Service.
Information
88  In Australia, individuals must bring claims if they believe they have been subjected to
disability discrimination, including breach of the Disability Standards.
89  The Australian Human Rights Commission has legislative responsibility for inquiring into
alleged infringements under the Disability Discrimination Act. There is a compulsory
conciliation process for the resolution of discrimination complaints. If the complainant is
unhappy with the outcome of conciliation, they may commence court or tribunal
Official
proceedings.
90  The Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (within the Ministry of Economic Development and
Growth) is responsible for administering (including compliance and enforcement) the
the
Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.
91  Rather than an individual faults-based complaints process as in Norway, Denmark, the UK
and Australia, legal orders are imposed on noncompliant entities in Ontario, Canada. Those
responsible for the enforcement of the accessibility standards include:
•
under

director (appointed by the Deputy Minister)
•
inspectors
•
Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT).
92  Administrative penalties may be issued by a director or the LAT for lack of compliance. The
order may be enforced through the Supreme Court as a judgement of the court.
93  The entity/body subject to compliance may appeal to the LAT.
94  As to the EU Directive on Accessibility of Websites and Mobile Applications of Public Sector
Bodies, the onus is on the Member States to designate a national authority to monitor and
Released

24 https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/2017-06-16-50.
14

enforce the regulations. Each national authority will provide a non-judicial avenue to deal
with individual complaints.
95  The Accessible Canada Act bill states that the Ministry of Transport, the Canadian Transport
Agency and the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications would be responsible
for the enforcement of accessibility standards in their respective sectors.
96  The Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities would implement the Accessible Canada
Act in all other sectors, including employment and the built environment.
97  An Independent Chief Accessibility Officer would carry out enforcement activities across all
sectors, including:
•
inspections
1982
•
compliance audits
•
compliance orders
Act
•
notice of violation with warning
•
administrative monetary penalties
•
compliance agreements.
98  In addition to orders being imposed at the federal level on noncompliant entities (as in
Ontario), four bodies would be responsible for dealing with accessibility complaints:
•
Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission
•
Canadian Transport Agency
•
Federal Public Sector and Employment Board  Information
•
Accessibility Commissioner.

File ref: A10749856 / REP/18/7/1087

Official
Author: Catherine Brennan, Advisor, Office for Disability Issues
Responsible manager: Brian Coffey, Director, Office for Disability Issues
the
under
Released
15