Although general information regarding people with disability is collected by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) more nationally consistent, disaggregated data needs to be collected and publically reported across all areas addressed by the CRPD in order for Article 31 to be properly implemented.
The lack of nationally consistent disaggregated data raises serious concerns about the ability of Australia to evaluate the implementation of the National Disability Strategy (NDS). The NDS relies heavily on data, primarily from the ABS for evaluating success in achieving outcomes.
Item A.3.2(h) of the Annex to the ‘Guidelines on treaty-specific documents to be submitted by Parties under Article 35 of the CRPD’652 specifies that statistical data regarding the realisation of each CRPD right should be recorded on an annual, comparative basis over the past four years. This has not occurred, or if it has, the data has not been released to the public, raising concerns under Article 31(3) of the CRPD.
The lack of disaggregated, consistent data was specifically referred to by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in relation to data on women with disability (see also Article 6) and children with disability (see also Article 7).653
A number of disability representative and advocacy organisations have expressed concerns about data disaggregation, thereby raising issues under Article 31(2) of the CRPD. For example, data about people with disability, or their families, from a non-English speaking background is limited.654 Similarly, despite domestic and family violence being an acknowledged problem for people with disability, particularly women with disability, the data collected by the ABS in the ‘Personal Safety Survey’ in 2005 did not include information pertaining to an individual’s disability status.
There are a number of areas where there is a complete lack of data. This includes the uptake and accessibility of health services to people with disability. For example, without the data to indicate whether women with disability are accessing health programs that provide mammograms to screen for breast cancer and pap smears to screen for cervical cancer, it is difficult to assess whether health services are being properly implemented to cater for both the general population and people with disability.655
There is no indication that the information gathered by Australia and the ABS is made accessible through Braille or Auslan formats or that the information is published in languages other than English. This raises concerns with regard to Article 31(3) of the CRPD and the commitment of Australia to ensuring accessibility to people with disability and others.
Copyright restrictions over data and reports generated by data collected by Australia have been used to prevent disability representative and advocacy organisations from making data publically available to people with disability. This also raises concerns with respect to Article 31(3).
Additionally, the ABS requires payment for disaggregation for particular datasets, which also raises concerns about public accessibility. This is particularly problematic in analysing the situation of specific groups of people with disability, such as women with disability, children with disability, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability and people with disability from non-English speaking backgrounds.
