Community Law Reform Assistance Animals Final Report 16

Who Should Be Eligible For Accreditation?

Organisations

5.60 Almost everyone agreed that training organisations should be eligible for accreditation. However, there was some concern that the current lack of Victorian providers of non-sensory dogs may increase reliance on private or self-trainers, or force people to use interstate organisations.

5.61 As noted by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), the accredited training organisation model "opens up the question of current gaps in provision. Both as regards geographic spread of training organisations, costs, and the range of disabilities they provide trained dogs for".³³¹

5.62 We agree with HREOC that if an accreditation system is to work there needs to be a range of organisations accredited to provide well-trained assistance dogs to alleviate a range of disabilities.³³² The industry needs to develop further in order to ensure that people have access to the benefits that assistance animals can bring. A monopoly of trainers is to be avoided.³³³

Private And Self-Trainers

5.63 One of the issues the commission grappled with in the consultation paper was whether accreditation should be extended to private trainers and self-trainers (sometimes called informal trainers).

5.64 People with a disability may wish to train their existing dog to be an assistance animal themselves. However, in its research, the commission found only one self-trainer in Victoria.³³⁴

5.65 With waiting lists of up to 12 months long people may seek a private trainer if they have the means to pay.³³⁵ One submitter told us: "I have tried to get my privately trained dog recognised. In Victoria there is no organisation to help. [I have been] met with brick walls".³³⁶

Costs and benefits

5.66 The main benefit of including informal trainers in an accreditation scheme is that it allows greater inclusion and constitutes a more comprehensive approach.

5.67 The Public Interest Law Clearing House notes "an important objective … is to facilitate more people with properly trained assistance animals. Arbitrarily restricting the ability of properly qualified individuals to accredit assistance animals seems counterproductive to such an aim".³³⁷

5.68 However, many participants expressed concern that only organisations have the capacity to provide the long-term support and follow-up that is required of an assistance animal partnership.³³⁸ This support includes ongoing training with the animal, provision of a peer network and advocacy support, as well as financial support for veterinary costs.³³⁹ It was suggested that private trainers may not be in a position to provide this level of ongoing support.³⁴⁰

5.69 Some strongly discouraged extending accreditation to self-trainers.³⁴¹ They expressed the view that to accredit self-trainers would risk compromising quality.³⁴²

5.70 Others identified that a key concern is the importance of not locking self-trainers out as this may discriminate against people with forms of disability where training organisations have not yet emerged locally.³⁴³

5.71 Of those that thought that self-trainers should be included in an accreditation scheme, all were of the view that self-trainers should have their dogs certified by an accredited organisation.³⁴⁴ Discussions also considered whether existing training organisations could not only test but also continue to provide ongoing follow-up for self or privately trained dogs.³⁴⁵ On the other hand, some suggested self-trainers might co-train with an organisation.³⁴⁶

5.72 A related issue was quality assurance around the sourcing of dogs and matching dogs to clients. There was a divergence of opinion as to whether accreditation should be limited to trainers who use particular breeds of dogs and purpose-bred dogs³⁴⁷ or whether eligibility requirements should extend to trainers that work with any breed.

58

5.73 Some training organisations expressed a firm view that breeding and genetic makeup is a determining factor. Guide Dogs Victoria states:

The experience of Guide Dog organisations and obedience trainers and instructors around the world is that many dogs can be trained to do numerous tasks, but a dog's ability to learn depends on the dog’s genetic makeup and/or breed and reinforcement of the learning over time.³⁴⁸

5.74 The commission notes that some organisations do not place particular significance on the breeding of their dogs.³⁴⁹ However, most of the major training organisations including Seeing Eye Dogs Australia, Guide Dogs Victoria and Assistance Dogs Australia invest significant resources in breeding programmes in an effort to ensure the best standards.

Revised Accreditation Model

5.75 One solution would be to accredit all trainers, be they individuals or organisations, according to a set of minimum standards. The commission's view is that this model of accreditation is inclusive, without sacrificing quality.

5.76 Private trainers could be accredited providing they can demonstrate that they operate under the same set of objective standards.³⁵⁰

5.77 Self-trainers would not be eligible for accreditation but could have their dogs tested for public access by an accredited trainer, who in turn would provide follow up. Public access testing is discussed further later in this chapter.

5.78 In order for accreditation to be inclusive, well-established local training organisations need to support the development of new organisations providing services for non sensory or mobility disabilities. Otherwise, there may be a failure to provide services to people experiencing all forms of disability. ³⁵¹

5.79 Trainers employed by accredited assistance-dog training organisations should be taken to be covered by the scheme. This is consistent with models in other states.³⁵²

5.80 The commission also accepts the suggestions made during consultation, that trainer accreditation should be subject to regular renewal. A suitable suggested period for review would be once every five years.³⁵³

5.81 Given that there are only two Victorian based training organisations currently operating, interstate trainers should be eligible for accreditation in Victoria, as long as they meet the accreditation standards discussed below.³⁵⁴ This is necessary to protect the existing rights of people using hearing dogs and other assistance dogs trained by national organisations based interstate.³⁵⁵

5.82 To ensure fairness, applicants should have a right of review through the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).³⁵⁶ This is consistent with provisions relating to domestic animal business under the DFNAA.³⁵⁷ Similarly, in instances where accreditation is withdrawn or suspended, appeal rights should apply.

5.83 Only dogs certified by accredited trainers would have the legal status of assistance animal in Victorian law. Therefore, it will be very important that people with a disability are easily able to find out which trainers can lawfully train assistance animals. To facilitate accessibility, a list of accredited trainers should be made publicly available, including on government websites.

Recommendations

15. That the Act provide that the Minister for Community Services accredit individuals and organizations to breed, select, train and certify assistance dogs in Victoria. Accreditation should be subject to renewal after a reasonable period.

16. The Minister may refuse or discontinue accreditation of an assistance dog trainer or organization if they fail to meet or no longer meet the criteria. A trainer or training organisation whose accreditation is refused or discontinued should have the right to appeal the decision to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

17. A list of accredited trainers should be made publicly available including on government websites.

59