Mahi - The Disability Employment Podcast: Recent Episodes

View Details

[music]

Jonathan: Kia ora koutou. Welcome to Mahi, the disability employment podcast, brought to you by Workbridge. Particularly in New Zealand, we are recovering from the pandemic, but for many people, legacies remain, and one of those is loneliness. The disability community is one of the sector groups identified in The Helen Clark Foundation's latest report which is called Still Alone Together where loneliness is a big deal. What is the issue and what do we do about it? To talk about this issue, I'm joined by Holly Walker from The Helen Clark Foundation. Kia ora, Holly. Good to talk with you.

Holly: Kia ora, Jonathan. Thank you so much for having me.

Jonathan: What does The Helen Clark Foundation do? What's its reason for being?

Holly: We're an independent public policy think tank. We're based in Auckland, New Zealand. As you might tell from the name, our patron is former Prime Minister, Helen Clark. We're founded on the values that have grounded Helen's career through her time as both a politician and in her international career at the UN. Broadly speaking, we're interested in doing research that identifies and then looks at solutions for some of the big public policy changes facing us here in New Zealand and the world at large. We're guided by Helen's values of fairness, sustainability, and democracy. In this case, we've been looking at the issue of loneliness, how prevalent it is and what the impact of Covid-19 has been, and what some of the public policy solutions to that might be.

Jonathan: Does Helen play an active role in the topics that you choose to focus on? Does she have input into the policy process, anything like that?

Holly: She's our patron. She has oversight over the foundation as a whole but in a fairly hands-off way. Like I said, obviously, we choose our topics based on those values that have guided her career for so long and she certainly takes an active interest in the research that we're putting out but we determine those topics ourselves in partnership with some of the other organizations that we work with. In this case, my research is funded by a company called WSP which is an engineering and professional services consultancy firm, an international firm actually, but WSP New Zealand is our partner on this research.

They've got a particular interest in the built environment and how we can design our cities and towns of the future to promote social connection and encourage people to know their neighbors and things like that.

Jonathan: This was actually the second in a series of policy papers you've done on this topic, right?

Holly: That's correct, yes. In 2020, even before the pandemic hit, we had identified loneliness as an issue that we wanted to look at for that very reason, I think. It's hard to remember the before times now, but [chuckles] I think there was a growing awareness that loneliness in the 21st century was becoming a particular issue. We were interested in looking at it and looking in particular at the intersections between loneliness and the built environment. That was already on our radar as something we wanted to do some research on last year.

Then, of course, COVID hit and everybody went into lockdown and it very quickly bumped itself up the agenda of topics for us to consider because it was suddenly so immediate for people experiencing that social distancing and social isolation. We put our first report out in June of 2020. In that report, we looked at the data that was available to establish a pre-pandemic baseline for how widespread loneliness is in New Zealand and then looked at the very initial impact of the level four lockdown. That report came out in June, obviously, the lockdown was over, but it hadn't been over for very long.

We wanted to update it this year to look at really throughout the whole course of 2020 during the lockdowns themselves, but afterwards too, how this issue had been tracking and what the impact of the pandemic had been. We made a number of recommendations in our first report about how we could adopt good public policy to address this issue. We wanted to see, well, has this happened on any of those recommendations? What progress has been made? In what areas has there been not very much progress? We also included an assessment of progress against those recommendations in this update report as well.

Jonathan: It's a fascinating body of work. How do you define loneliness? You do spend some time actually defining what the problem is and the scope of this.

Holly: I think loneliness is one of those things where we all have experienced it at some point in our lives. It is a normal part of the human condition. Really what it is is an unmet need for connection. What the need is and how that need might be met will vary from person to person. We all have a different set of social needs and preferences, there's no one-size-fits-all description of loneliness in terms of the number of people you know or whether you live alone. At its core, it's about whatever our particular needs for connection are as individuals. If they are going unmet for a long period of time, we could call that loneliness.

There are a number of different ways that that can manifest or types of loneliness. For example, people may feel lonely because of the loss of a particular individual in their life, the death of a partner, the end of a relationship, perhaps the passing of a parent, or a separation from a loved one. That's one type of loneliness. There's another that is about the general level of social connectedness we have, the networks we have in our daily lives from work, from friends, from neighbors, whether they are numerous enough and of a deep enough quality to meet our social needs, or it could be a form of lacking a feeling of identity and purpose in our life.

For example, if you're unemployed or have put a lot of stock in your work as being your raison d'etre or your identity and then your work situation changes, you may feel a sense of existential loss or purposeless, which is another form of loneliness. It can take a number of forms. At its core, it's when our need for connection is not being met and its impact is quite significant. Again, short periods of loneliness are normal, but if people are spending a long time feeling like this, it's essentially putting our body into a stress response all the time which is not good for us.

It can have significant health impacts like messing with our sleep, messing with our hormones, suppressing our immune function, increasing our risk of developing various illnesses like high blood pressure, heart disease, and have mental health and well-being impacts too like increasing our risk of depression and anxiety and in some cases, dementia. It's been documented internationally that people feel really lonely for a really long period of time. It actually has a life-shortening impact. It can shorten life expectancy. It's a really significant health and well-being challenge when we have large numbers of people feeling lonely a lot of the time.

Jonathan: Human beings are very social creatures.

Holly: Absolutely. We're wired for this. It's as fundamental as our need for warmth or for shelter, or for food. We are wired to connect with other people. We evolve to rely on other people to provide us with warmth, shelter, and food, in fact. If we feel that we've in some way been separated from our group when we don't feel that sense of belonging connection, it really can be life-threatening just in the same way that going without food and shelter can be life-threatening.

Jonathan: Just listening to you talk, it occurs to me because, of course, I've also made a contribution to this report in my capacity as Chief Executive of Workbridge. We know, we talk about the importance of employment, feeling like you have some wider purpose than yourself, that companionship that comes from having a social circle that sometimes stems from work, all those things. Just listening to you talk there reminds me too that it's really important that we make sure that we don't let what we do in our job, if we're fortunate to have one, completely define us, that it doesn't form the totality of our identity.

Holly: That's a really interesting point. I think you're absolutely right. Work can be a really important part of our identity and our sense of purpose and connection. A lot of people meet their friends, even their partners at work, so it's a really important part of our social world. We all live a fairly precarious existence and many people are just a change in circumstance away from a significant loss, whether it's a loss of employment or a bereavement. Things can change in our lives.

If we are heavily reliant on just one source of social connection and that source of social connection is taken away from us for some reason, then yes, it can absolutely throw people quite significantly if we don't also have those buses of other forms of connection, other networks that we're part of, other relationships, community. All of those things are really important for our social well-being.

Jonathan: We've talked about loneliness. Let's talk about who's particularly susceptible because you have identified groups who are particularly vulnerable. At any rate, I guess we all are depending on our circumstances that may change, but there tends to be a pattern here in terms of people who are susceptible to feeling particularly alone.

Holly: Yes, that's right. Surprisingly, or perhaps not surprisingly depending on who you are in your own circumstance, it's not always who we might think, or at least who the mainstream narrative about loneliness might encourage us to think are the most lonely. What we found in our research, which drew on both sources from Statistics New Zealand and also from a survey undertaken by Victoria University during and after the level four lockdown in New Zealand last year was that some of the groups most likely to feel lonely included disabled people, sole parents, people on very low incomes, people who are unemployed, new migrants, young people aged 18 to 24, and also some disparity between different ethnic groups.

Māori more likely to report feeling lonely quite acutely, people of Asian ethnicity more likely to report feeling lonely at least some of the time compared to Pacifica and Pākehā ethnic groups who are less likely to report feeling lonely. I guess you could say across the board, first of all, there's a lot of intersection between those groups and many people will fit into more than one of those groups of people. Then that would proportionately perhaps increase their risk of feeling lonely. Looking across that group of people or those groups of people, you could identify, some common well-being challenges that some of those groups face, low income and unemployment being one thing that some of those groups have in common. There's a really close link between our economic well-being and our social well-being. That's, I think, an important finding of this report.

Jonathan: I suppose you could argue that one of the reasons why disabled people often feel lonely is because they don't have the income, the capacity to go and be sociable, but then there are also overlaps there because there are accessibility barriers. You identify some of those too. It's particularly exacerbated during the lockdown it seems that perhaps I'm thinking that this is really research whose time has come because a lot of disabled people said to others when they were locked down for whatever it was here in New Zealand, five, six, seven weeks, welcomed to our world because this is actually what we experience on a regular basis.

Holly: I think that it's very interesting the impact of the lockdown. It's had a number of different impacts in different directions. Not surprisingly, at the overall population level, I think there was an immediate spike in people reporting feelings of loneliness when we went into lockdown. Of course, it makes sense. People were no longer able to see other people, their social network was stopped overnight. Of course, it had an impact on feelings of loneliness, but for some people for whom an existence largely based at home was already the norm, as you say, there was actually a leveling of the playing field.

I do know many disabled people who talked about actually really appreciating suddenly the normalization of, for example, being able to work at home, to participate in meetings and seminars via Zoom. Their access barriers were actually in many ways removed by the lockdown because everybody had the same access barriers and that had a real equalizing impact. That was an interesting outcome. Also, I think particularly during the lockdown itself, people were very aware of the risks of people feeling isolated and lonely and often made quite a conscious effort to connect in with each other, to stay in touch with friends and relatives via phone or online, to pop up outside and talk to the neighbors over the fence, to drop groceries to people.

There was a sense of, we're all in this together, we're going to take care of each other and keep tabs on each other. For some people who lead quite an isolated existence under normal conditions, they actually found they felt less lonely during a lockdown because of this conscious checking in that people were doing. Now, unfortunately, as we've moved out of lockdown and moved back to something like "business as normal," a lot of that has fallen away.

One of the interesting findings of this report was that for some of these groups, disabled people and sole parents in particular who really appreciated that extra support that was extended during the lockdown, actually felt even lonelier later on in the year as the lockdown was lifted and conditions returned to normal because that checking in was no longer happening, but all of the factors that made them feel isolated and alone in their lives were still there. I think one of the important takeaways for me out of our research is that we must be really careful that our COVID recovery is not leaving some people behind.

We're lucky in New Zealand we've had a really effective response to COVID-19. Our lockdown period was relatively short. We've returned quite quickly to something like our regular daily lives. Some of those groups who were already most likely to be negatively impacted by COVID may have had health compromised status and needed to stay isolated for longer, may have lost employment due to the pandemic, may have had a particularly challenging time looking after young children and trying to manage all the responsibilities of that without a partner.

Those groups of people were at risk of leaving them out of our COVID recover if we don't focus on how can we create the conditions for social connection to thrive as part of the work we do as we move out of the pandemic and look at what kind of future we want to have.

Jonathan: Looking back now, yes, it was remarkable how long we were able, as a country generally, to sustain that feeling of, there's a crisis on, we have to reach out to one another, look after one another. You normally see that in times of crisis, but not for as long as we were able to keep it going. It's not surprising we're all a little bit exhausted with that now when we have gone back to our normal grumpy self-centered selves pretty quickly.

[laughter]

Holly: Maybe so. You can only live in crisis mode for so long, just as it is. You can only stay in a stress response for so long. Eventually, your body will intervene and encourage you to rest in some other way. People talk about COVID fatigue, certainly talk about Zoom fatigue, all of these modes of connection that suddenly became really important came with their own cost. I certainly don't want to idealize that lockdown period, but it was interesting to note that it did in some ways remove barriers or actually encourage a greater level of social connection for some people. We should be thinking about those people as we design our policies of the future.

Jonathan: Hopefully one of those legacies might be a bit of empathy for what people who are isolated in this way are going through. You talked about, at the beginning of this, the built environment and how important it is for the built environment to be inclusive. That was the basis of the research being funded. I wonder the degree to which you think loneliness can be mitigated by online tools. Disability is obviously a really big church, but there are some people who do have challenges in physically getting out, perhaps because the location is unfamiliar and you could probably mitigate against that with those environment changes.

Sometimes the actual act of going somewhere is quite an effort. For some people, being able to congregate virtually online, do work, interaction online, that sort of thing, it can actually be preferable to face-to-face. To what extent do you think we are hardwired to be creatures that must meet face-to-face? Can these loneliness challenges be met by simply online connections?

Holly: It's a really interesting question. I think the answer is a combination of both. I think one important thing to note which is interesting and perhaps not widely known is that loneliness and being alone are not the same thing. They are correlated, there are certainly increased risks of feeling lonely if you spend a lot of time on your own or live on your own, but if we go back to that definition of loneliness being an unmet need for connection, there are other ways to have your need for connection met. Someone might live alone and not experience a lot of loneliness if they feel that their connection needs are being met in other ways.

Whether that's online by phone or they just generally have a lower need for face-to-face contact, it varies from person to person. It's certainly possible to live a life of not a great deal of face-to-face contact with other people and still feel as though your social needs are being met in other ways if you have access to the right tools and, for you personally, they feel sufficient to meet your need for connection. On the other hand, some people just really, really do need that face-to-face contact with other people, physical context. There's a lot of research too about the health and well-being benefits of regular physical touch between human beings, which is really important.

I do think, ideally for all of us, it's a combination of both face-to-face contact and having other ways of finding community. We have recommendations in our report that cover both of these things. One of our recommendations is around closing the digital device because we did find that digital forms of communication were so critical during the pandemic and continue to be in enabling us to stay connected and also to find community and connection perhaps with people who are geographically quite far apart from us but share other characteristics or identities with us.

Online tools are amazing for that, but there's still a huge degree of disparity and inequality with access to both digital devices that are accessible but also affordable high-speed internet connections. A lot of people still don't have those. It's quite easy to feel as though everybody has access to the internet in the 21st century, but that's not the case. There's certainly policy things we can be doing to extend digital access. I think that's an important response to loneliness as well as making sure that our physical environment meets the highest standards of accessibility so people can get out, meet other people, find spaces that are accessible to them where they can meet with others.

That's really critical, as well as just really basic things like making sure that people have enough money because it's really hard to even think about meeting your social needs when you're living day-to-day in that toxic stress that poverty can create, really where you can't even get your head above water and you're trying to meet your daily survival needs. Your income is not sufficient for that. It's hard to prioritize social well-being if that's your daily reality. We need to really address income, encourage and support people into employment whenever possible, make sure the physical environment is as accessible and as friendly as possible but also make sure people have access to online tools so they can stay connected in other ways as well.

Jonathan: Does The Helen Clark Foundation have positions first on whether the internet is a human right and whether it should be funded accordingly, and second on universal basic income, which is something that bubbles away, particularly with some political parties here?

Holly: On that second one, our preferences for a guaranteed minimum income, which is a similar concept but not identical to the idea of a universal basic income. The idea would be that when you look at our income support policies overall, there should be an amount that's calculated to be the minimum that you could live on to lead an economically stable life, you can live with dignity, you can participate in society, you can have enough free time to spend with family and connect with others as well as be active in your community and be active in employment if that's possible.

I can't tell you that dollar figure off the top of my head, but the idea would be that we identify that dollar figure and then we align all of that income support policy so that whether someone was living on a benefit doing a combination of receiving state support and doing some paid employment, or working full-time, the minimum wage, the benefit rates are at such a level that everybody meets that guaranteed minimum income. I think that's a really important step towards enabling everybody to live with dignity. Similar to but less costly than a universal basic income.

Then on the question of the internet, yes, I think one of the things that we've recommended in our report is that provision of a high-speed affordable internet connection should be a standard part of all social housing tenancies, and also that any government-funded disability support services should include providing internet access. That's a way into starting to think about the internet as a human right, something that we should all have access to. We do quite heavily on some research that was done by the Vodafone New Zealand Foundation a couple of years ago on closing digital divides and looked at the recommendations that they made in their report, which do encourage thinking about connection as a right.

Jonathan: I like to think we're making progress, but I do remember in the 1990s when I was doing advocacy in this field and I talked about the impact as even then the internet was having on me as a blind person and my ability to bank with dignity and read newspapers for the first time in my life independently. Somebody from a ministry I probably shouldn't name said, "Well, we're not going to give computers to blind people just so they can surf the net." It's a very dismissive kind of approach to take because it really is the difference between just independence, connection with the world and not having those things. I think if that person had been deprived of even being able to pick up The Dominion Post in the morning, they would have taken a very different view.

Holly: There can be a huge empathy gap-

Jonathan: There can.

Holly: -in choosing people's understanding of lived experience. I think it's a chicken and egg thing because the more diversity we can encourage in our workplaces and places like government ministries and departments where people who are working in those spaces have actually got an understanding of the lived experience of disability and other forms of diversity and can be making policy accordingly is so important. I think we have come a long way, but I think we still have a really long way to go. I'm sorry to hear of the experiences. Very dismissive and indicative, I think, of the distance we have yet to travel.

Jonathan: You have a number of very important recommendations we haven't touched on yet. Can you go through some of those key ones for us from the report?

Holly: Sure. Basically, we've divided our recommendations into six broad headings. We call these the policy planks of an effective response to loneliness. At the high level, these things are, make sure people have enough money, as I talked about before, close the digital divide, as we've also discussed, help communities do their magic. One of the things we identify is that it's often community-led development and self-identified goals being met by community that can really bring connection and a sense of belonging.

Funding, for example whanau ora, funding, ethnic communities to fund their own projects of their own choosing, funding disability lead spaces in communities are really important ways of creating opportunities for connection and belonging, so supporting community-led development. Creating friendly streets and neighborhoods. We talked a little bit about that before in terms of accessibility, but also there's ways that we could be designing our housing and our urban environments of the future to facilitate more social connection.

If we are talking about building apartments, make sure there's common space on every floor where people can gather and congregate, make sure there's common green space in our parks and communities that is accessible where people can spend time and talk to others. Let's create more shared paths for active modes of transport to encourage people to be outside walking and taking social modes of transport where they possibly can. Public transport, how we design our buses and trains and other forms of public transport to encourage sociability. All of these things can make a big difference.

Prioritizing those who are already lonely. This comes down to looking at those groups we've identified that are more at risk and actually targeting services and supports towards those people. The last one is investing in frontline mental health. We know that the government has invested in a new frontline mental health service. It was a centerpiece of the 2019 Well-being Budget, but the rollout of that service has been very slow and a lot of the funding that's already been committed for it has not yet been spent yet. People are crying out for the support. That really needs to be ramped up and implemented as quickly as possible.

Jonathan: If you had to pick one thing that the government should do now to really advance this cause, could you do that? Could you say this is one key thing we'd love to be advanced?

Holly: For me, I think it comes down to income. Not only from a loneliness perspective, but if we look at well-being through just about any lens you come at looking at issues of it, making sure that people have enough money is absolutely critical. As I said before, if you live on a very low income and a state of toxic stress with your survival mode every day, it's so hard to meet your own social needs but even to participate in any other form of community building. To live with dignity, basically, and to be a full member of society requires sufficient income.

Whether you come at it through a child poverty lens, whether you come at it through a disability lens, a loneliness lens, as we do in this report, or an economic lens in terms of the well-being of our whole society and people's ability to participate in the economy, it just always comes down to income. I think we absolutely have to do something. Raising core benefits immediately would be a really, really critical step that I'd love to see taken.

Jonathan: It might be that it's because I've contributed a bit to this report that I'm noticing it more carefully, but it does seem like you've got quite a bit of cut-through as we like to say in the media on this and I've noticed a few stories being run there. What typically happens is that everybody nods their head, empathizes says, "Yes, this is a great idea," and then it just fades away and if it's a physical report, it becomes a doorstop somewhere. How do you ensure or can you ensure that actually once you've come up with these positions, which are well-researched, that you can then take that public policy work and see it turned into actual public policy, actual government policy, or political party policy?

Holly: Good question. Let me just briefly say thank you very much for your contribution to the report, Jonathan, which is a really valuable one and it talks about the importance of supporting people into employment as a mode of both reducing loneliness and of course, addressing so many other economic and social issues as well. It's great to have your contribution in there. In terms of your question, I think that's part of the reason we decided to do this follow-up report to the one we did last year for exactly the reason you've identified.

It's great to put something out that makes a splash, that gets some coverage in the media, that raises awareness of the issue, but we wanted to come back and look at it again and say, what's actually changed since last year both in terms of how people are experiencing loneliness, but also those policy recommendations that we made last year? Have any of them been implemented in full or in part and what's happened? Actually circling back and looking at these things again and continuing to bring them to the public attention I think is an important part of that.

Then, of course, the other thing that we do once a report like this comes out is try to get in front of as many people as possible who have the ability or influence or decision-making power to actually address some of these things. When I get off the phone to you, Jonathan, I'm actually going to be handwriting some notes to a number of different ministers and sending them a copy of the report, inviting them to meet with us to talk about it, as we've done with some of our previous supports and had the opportunity to do that. Also, talking to you. In this context, it's not so much action for local councils, but in the context of some of our other reports.

I'm thinking of one we did last year about low traffic neighborhoods and how it's important to move towards a low emissions future where we have greater road safety and lower emissions from reducing car traffic. We've had the opportunity to get in front of councils and talk about that as well. You're right. Our main output is to write and produce research reports, but we are also very interested in then getting that research in front of the people who can make the decisions that would actually see the changes that we need because, ultimately, that's what we're here for, to try and influence, to make some real change.

Jonathan: I guess sector groups, advocacy groups, they have a responsibility too. Don't they? Because you've essentially handed them this very well-put-together research. It stacks up, it makes sense, and then they can take that research themselves and use it in their own advocacy.

Holly: Yes, absolutely. We'd love to see people do that. We'd love to hear from anyone who is interested in doing that. From time to time, we are able to partner up with other groups who are working on similar topics or join forces if we've got similar goals and similar aspirations. Reinforcing each other's voices, I think, is so important so that the message is coming and that these decision-makers from a number of different places, but yes, absolutely, we hope our research is a tool that others can use and we're really welcoming of that.

Jonathan: The report's available in a variety of formats. How do people find it so they can read this in full?

Holly: It's available on The Helen Clark Foundation website, which is just helenclark.foundation, and it's available in a variety of formats. There's a designed PDF that looks very beautiful. There's also an accessible version that is accessible to--

Jonathan: Screen readers.

Holly: Screen readers, basically.

[laughter]

We have an easy-read summary as well of the report that is available there. Also, as I just have done this morning, if those formats don't meet someone's particular accessibility needs, please do get in touch. You can contact us through the website and we can find a way to get the information to you in a version that is accessible to you.

Jonathan: Congratulations on this report. It feels good to be heard, I think, as a disabled person because so often people feel like they are not. To have this report on a topic that impacts so profoundly on many of us is a wonderful thing. I really appreciate you coming on the podcast to explain it.

Holly: Well, thank you so much, Jonathan, and thank you again for your contribution, as well as the one that's in there from Prudence Walker, who's the chief executive of DPA. I think it was really important to me as an able-bodied person if I'm going to be writing about and talking about these impacts that are so real for people with disability that we have that lived experience and that expertise that you and Prudence have brought to the report. Thank you very, very much.

[music]

Jonathan: That's Holly Walker from The Helen Clark Foundation. That concludes this episode of Mahi, we'll be back next month for another episode. See you then.

[music]

[00:34:35] [END OF AUDIO]

View Details

Workbridge CEO Jonathan Mosen speaks with Holly Walker, Deputy Director of the Helen Clark Foundation about their latest report, "Still Alone Together".

The new report draws upon new statistics, and highlights the disproportionate loneliness felt by disabled people in Aotearoa New Zealand. The report also looks at how loneliness changed as the nation came out of Level 4 lockdown, and the progress made against the recommendations made in the Foundation's original paper on loneliness. Jonathan Mosen contributed to this paper on how being employed not only brings dignity and economic independence, but also lessens loneliness.

The report is available in a variety of formats from The Helen Clark Foundation's website.

View Details

When you're a kid who loves to draw with dreams of becoming a cartoonist, learning that you have deteriorating sight is a lot to cope with. But Brent Harpur has lived his dream and is celebrating 30 years teaching drawing, drawing cartoons, writing, entertaining and more. Quite unexpectedly and organically, he found viral success on Facebook during the lockdown. Now, Grow Digital is helping this gifted disabled artist sell his content in the digital age, potentially opening it up to a global audience.

Time and packages for Grow Digital are strictly limited, so if you'd like to discuss your ideas, give Grow Digital a call today on 0800-344-477.

To learn more about Brent's story, you can watch this documentary about him, Scattered Joy.

View Details

We begin by answering questions you've asked us about Grow Digital, our new service that can assist small to medium enterprises driven by disabled people.

Digital exclusion is a serious issue for many disabled people. Workbridge is proud to be collaborating with Manaiakalani Education Trust to facilitate the digital inclusion of disabled people, through a programme MET is running thanks to funding from the Department of Internal Affairs.

Workbridge CEO, Jonathan Mosen, speaks with Kristen Waters from Manaiakalani Education Trust about how they got strated, what they offer and the positive difference their work is making.

View Details

Kia ora koutou. Welcome to Mahi - The Disability Employment Podcast, brought to you by Workbridge. It's episode 15 of the podcast, the last for 2020. And it's a special one, because we're going to be talking about a new service that Workbridge is operating with funding from the Department of Internal Affairs. Grow Digital will be of interest to you if you're a disabled person and running your own business, or you run a business where the majority of employees are disabled. It's all about Grow Digital on this edition of the Mahi Podcast.

When New Zealanders were locked down earlier in the year to combat COVID-19, it became clear that some businesses ran by Māori, Pasifika, and disabled people were struggling. The government identified a need to enhance the digital skills of small to medium enterprises in those sectors. And the Department of Internal Affairs has partnered with Workbridge to deliver digital skills packages to disabled people. Workbridge has set up a new brand called Grow Digital, and it's specifically for this program. You can visit Grow Digital on the web at growdigital.co.nz. And that is all one word, growdigital.co.nz. To talk about Grow Digital and the kinds of things that it might assist with I'm joined by Britta Offergeld, who is Workbridge's national accessibility advisor. Britta, it's great to have you on the Mahi podcast. Welcome.

Thanks Jonathan.

Who's eligible to receive assistance from Grow Digital?

Basically a disabled person who owns their own business, or a small to medium enterprise business that has 50% disabled people employed within it. You have to be living in New Zealand. You have to be a New Zealand citizen or permanent resident, and it would be great if you had a New Zealand business number. However, it's pretty easy to get that.

When we talk about digital skills, I guess there's sometimes the misapprehension that we're talking about some sort of really high tech thing that somebody might be involved with, some computer related business. That's not it at all, is it? And I thought that it would be useful for us to go through several examples that might illustrate why somebody who's running a small business might want to contact Grow Digital. And one of the things that you identified for me was, for example, when people need assistance with note taking, just remembering things in the course of operating their business.

Yeah. I mean, some people's disability is that they've got memory issues. So it can be really helpful just to know how to set up reminders, how to use a calendar, had pop-up reminders just five minutes before you need to do a business task. And just the ability to create notes anytime if you have a digital device that we could possibly help you set up or source, it can be a huge help to keep people on track with their business.

So could even be on a smartphone app, couldn't it? Or a computer app, any number of ways of getting that done?

It depends what the person has already. So we would work with what they've got. So if they've got a smartphone, we would just show them how to do, some of these tools have got in-built things. So it's not necessarily about buying a whole bunch of things or learning new skills in terms of downloading specific apps, but just using what's already there within people's reach.

This is another key thing too, that the socioeconomics of disabled people in general means that some people really do struggle to find the funding for some of this technology that can assist, and Grow Digital is not necessarily in that area. But it is a kind of navigation service, isn't it? So it might be possible for Grow Digital to point somebody in a direction where say low cost broadband is available, or even using a Chromebook or an Android device that might be fairly low cost?

Exactly. I mean, there's a huge amount, with digital there's a huge amount of free resources, so free training, free ad-ons too, if you want to set up an email account, you could set up a free Gmail account. And that comes with a whole bunch of tools that are completely free to someone. If they are in business obviously it depends on the stage of the business, whether that's suitable or not. But certainly to start or to just get more digitally aware, you certainly don't have to spend a lot of money to do it.

In terms of the devices, you don't need the full range. So someone can do a lot of things on a smartphone. It used to be you had to have a computer and a smartphone. I would actually argue that you can do a lot of small business activities just directly from the smartphone and especially for certain types of disability that can actually be better than having a full blown computer.

Is it amazing when I think about it how much of my work has changed over the years? And I'm now doing most of it on my smartphone. You mentioned Google before. They've got G-Suite, things like Google Docs, which has great equity for collaborating with people all over the place on, Google calendar, and all those tools are free. And the accessibility commitment that a lot of these companies are showing these days is just far and away ahead of what it used to be even a decade ago. We've come a long way in terms of inclusion.

I have a theory on that, and I think it's that companies become aware that if you're an employer or a business, you have a responsibility towards your disabled staff. So I think that these companies have realized that they've got to actually do this in order to just be a tool that a business will choose. So Microsoft and Google, they're realizing that if they want to be in schools, if they want to be in businesses, they actually have to deal with this. And they're dealing with it really well. One thing in terms of Google and Microsoft that for me personally has just been a real eye-opener is just how the automatic captioning has done. So for example, if a deaf person is having issues with video calls, they can actually use something like Google Meet, which is a video calling product where you can turn on live transcription, and so you can have live transcribed captions. And for a one-on-one video call, that makes a huge difference to someone if beforehand you had a video call and you couldn't actually understand what someone was saying.

And I'm hugely excited that that is just offered as is and within the products. And that's been a huge change. It used to be so hard to actually book sign language interpreters and go through all that effort. I'm not saying that they will be ever replaced, but just for someone to actually have a one-on-one video call and for it to just work, that is hugely exciting.

What's your assessment of how well those tools are working with the Kiwi accent? And also, I was actually involved in an accessibility discussion that internet New Zealand held a couple of weeks ago. And we were having a bit of a preliminary chat about how really none of these captioning services are doing too well with [todao 00:07:18] right now.

No, not at all.

But what about just general discussions? Is it coping with the Kiwi accent okay?

You do still have to talk quite clearly in order to use them, that hasn't gone away. And yes, it does make some rather embarrassing mistakes with todao. Someone was recording a video and Microsoft Stream. So Microsoft Stream is a service where you can produce a video, add auto captions, and it auto transcribe, so it gives you a transcription. Now someone said, Kia, Kia Katur or something, and it just transcribed it as key cat. I mean, it just mangles todao. It would be amazing if eventually this would be sorted, but yes, you're right. In terms of you're a disabled Māori person, wanting to, a deaf Māori person wanting to have a Google Meet, video conference call, that probably isn't going to go too well, which is that part is disappointing.

We hear a lot about technologies like Zoom these days. I mean, Zoom has been the star of 2020 I was reading the other day that some publication rather has named it the company of the year. How do you think that Zoom stacks up in terms of this sort of technology, inclusive technology for meetings online?

I think with Zoom you can pay additionally to have Otter.ai integrated. So Otter.ai is a service that when you speak into the service transcribes what you're speaking, so you can pay for it. I don't know if Zoom will ever get to the stage where they just offer it for free. It would be great if they did.

Otter is another tool that is really great. And you can actually have that on your cellphone when you go to physical meetings as well. The right thing to do would be to tell people that you're doing this, of course, but you can have your smartphone on the table. It can record the meeting, and then you've got transcribed minutes. I know a number of people in academia who use this as well. It's surprisingly good for what it does at not only recording and transcribing what's being said, but differentiating between different speakers. So when you get the transcript back, it actually does tell you when different speakers are speaking.

It is pretty amazing. I mean, I've seen it live. So someone was talking, recording two different people, and I could see it switching between the speakers. So it would say speaker one is saying this, speaker two, and then transcribe the speaker. And it knew intelligently how to switch between them. The other thing is with a tool like Otter.ai is you can record it on a digital device, your conversation or interview, and then you can upload it into Otter.ai and it does it after the fact. So you don't have to necessarily record audio live.

People may well be saying by this point, what does all those got to do with Grow Digital? And I think the point is that people do understand that a lot of this technology has so much promise and that it can assist disabled people with a range of tasks, but often people just don't know where to go or how to get started, what tool to choose for their particular scenario. And that's where Grow Digital can help and make sense of all of these tools and what one might best work for your given situation.

Exactly. So basically what we would do, someone would come to Grow Digital. We would assess their current digital skills, what they want to do with their business. And then we would recommend certain things. They could be free products. They could be a subscription product, but just whatever suits the person and the business. One thing, and also taking into account their disability. So sometimes I find in the wider world people like to recommend complicated solutions that aren't necessarily going to work for someone's disability.

So for example, when banking websites came out first, there was this huge push to teach someone who is vision impaired, and especially people who were newly vision-impaired, how to use a web browser, how to use the banking website, which are hugely complicated. There's lots of ads for other services that they weren't interested in. And what I've found is that sometimes you can make a recommendation that they use their phone and a banking app, which is a lot more simplified. And why can't they just do their banking through an app? Rather than have to learn how to do all of these complicated tasks on a computer, on the banking website. So that's what I see Grow Digital offering is not to sort of force people to learn things that are just too complicated for what they want to do and just cut right to the chase. This is what you want to do. This is the easiest way for you to do it. This is how you can learn some digital skills in order to do that.

And that's the kind of thing where you're looking at these tasks through a disability-specific lens where Grow Digital can be very handy. I agree with you from personal experience. As a blind person I far prefer using my bank's app on my smartphone rather than the website, which is very, very cluttered. So what we're talking about, dealing with banking and paying things, obviously you've got to pay your suppliers, otherwise their people will be in touch with your people and it won't be good. But for people with a range of impairments, including print impairment, it can be difficult to complete those tasks, and digital can help here too.

Exactly. I mean, I can think of an example in business administration. So what I find is a lot of people are doing things the way that they've always done things, and they might not have some decent templates. And by templates I mean things such as invoicing templates, or even just a newsletter template that they might want to start. One of the things with the free templates on the web. So if someone was searching around for some free templates to use, sometimes they don't work very well with someone's disability. So there's a huge amount of free materials out on the web, but is it necessarily once you download it and look at it, is it going to work for you? So one of the things that Grow Digital can help with there is to have a look at that aspect as well, just to make people more productive.

Half an hour saved here is going to be much more valuable to someone. If they're just starting up with their business they can mark it instead of spending the 30 minutes typing up an invoice or rewriting the same thing in an email to tell someone to pay them $10. And I mean, there's different products available for doing accounting now, so you can hire an accountant. But you know, you can also have an accounting app. One particular product, and I haven't yet reviewed it for accessibility, but a lot of products are subscription-based, but this particular one, it's a New Zealand based app called Hnry, so H-N-R-Y. It's a tax accountancy app that doesn't force you into a subscription model. It just charges you 1% on what you're paying in tax. And I like that that scenario's happening all over the place as well, because it used to be, you either have a thing you pay for, which is hugely expensive upfront.

So let's say an package that you install on your computer, or you had to subscribe monthly to a service that you might not use very much. I'm now delighted to see apps taking another approach, which is just, "We'll work with you and just take a cut of whatever you were doing." So for a very small business, that would be a fantastic option. Again, have to have a look into the accessibility of the app, but it's certainly exciting that certain apps are starting to do that model, rather than forcing people to pay for something they're never going to use, or not use very regularly. And I think that's pretty smart, because a small business can grow into a big business and they're right there once you've got them using your product. So yeah, it's quite interesting to see that change.

For that growth to occur promotion is often critical. And again, this is an area where people know you can do stuff. If you're on social media, you'll see ads pop up on Facebook, or maybe you search for something in Google and you see those ads and you think, "Well, I wonder how that's done. How do I get my name out there?" This is also something that we can provide some assistance with.

Exactly. So it depends on your type of business. So certain types of social media will suit different types of businesses more. So I'm thinking Instagram, which is very picture orientated. If you're running a food service, that would be a fantastic fit. So we can certainly recommend that to you and give you some advice on setting it up. The same with Facebook. I personally like Facebook because it offers so much more. So you can have a business page on there. You can do appointment bookings, which I think is such a valuable service for a small business to have. So it's basically having a free website within someone else's social media product. Certain people like Facebook more than they do the other social media types. So it's just another digital tool in your toolkit so to speak, to have a presence on those sites.

Does it cost a lot to do that kind of advertising?

If you just set up a Facebook page, then it's free, but if you wanted to pay to have your business promoted on Facebook, you certainly can do that as well. But you don't have to when you first start out.

Because we hear these stories about how you can really drill down to very specific searches that people might make on Facebook, or even really specific demographics, like 26-year-olds who live in Lower Hutt who aren't married. It's remarkable how granular they get.

Yes, and I think you've just brought up a good point. Like there's a certain amount of DIY that a business should do, versus getting a professional involved. So as your business grows, you might want to consider having a social media person, or outsourcing it to someone that does social media for other companies. So there's certainly things that you should be doing, just basic things like having a page and interacting with your customers. But certainly if you wanted to drill down and really target people, it might actually be useful to pay for that just as a one-off to get some advice around it.

The next scenario I wanted to talk to you about may not apply to many of our listeners, because obviously they're listening to a podcast, but I'm thinking that they may know people who Grow Digital could assist. And I'm thinking of people who are running a pretty successful business, but it's completely offline right now. And people are coming to them, perhaps they're selling a product or service. And they're saying, "I would really like to be able to interact with you online. Have you got a website? You know, a .nz domain where I can go and visit?" And as you talked about earlier, perhaps even make appointments where that's appropriate. Or if they're selling some tangible product, can I order it on there and get it delivered? Now that all sounds pretty complicated to the uninitiated. How difficult is that to get going?

So, just having a website as such, like a one pager, if someone has a Gmail email account, they can certainly set up a Google Sites website, just a one pager for free. And they have some pretty good templates for restaurants, salons. I was especially intrigued by the dog walking business template they had, that's a very specific one. I don't quite understand why they had that, but I guess you could adapt it to whatever your businesses. And so you can start out with just something very simple, very plain, and for free. One useful bit of advice that I would have for any small business is definitely use Google for business, listing your business name, address, and open hours. Because people will be searching for businesses and just to have the information on there that is completely free. So Grow Digital can definitely help with it.

In terms of the website, I mean, you can also get a professional to design something for you. But certainly to get started you wouldn't have to. And when the business grows, you could basically get other people involved. I can think of an example of, if someone with an intellectual disability runs a cookie baking business, they might want to just start with a free Google Sites website, tell people what shops or markets they sell the cookies at. And when the business grows, they might want to then get their own website. A web presence isn't necessarily tied. It's completely changeable. You can always change it to a different address, et cetera. Yeah, that's the beauty with basically a website and a digital presence.

Certain businesses are susceptible to business continuity crises that can come up from time to time, you know? There've been a few nasty bugs going around. We all got out after the COVID-19 and suddenly there are nasties back out there. And you have a couple of staff maybe in your small business who can't come in on the same day. And when you're running a small business, that is incredibly impactful and digital tools can assist with that too.

Exactly. And Grow Digital can certainly look at your business and assist with recommendations on it. I'm just thinking of someone who has an anxiety disorder running their own business. And some staff call in sick. We could certainly help them be ready for that situation. So for example, if they're running a cafe, we could give them advice on using Student Job Search. We could give them advice to set up an employer login before the situation happens, to write a job ad before the situation happens and have it in a place that they can find. So that when this bad business situation happens, they have the tools and they have all of the templates ready to go. So then they can manage that situation in a way that's less stressful for them.

How much can Grow Digital do in a scenario where my impairment means that I use technology differently? For example, I'm blind and I need a screen reader, or perhaps I don't use a physical keyboard and I dictate into the computer. There's some pretty specialized assistive technology there. So what expectations should I have when I come to Grow Digital with those requirements?

I think the expectation you can have is that we will understand, and that we have some experience with different disabilities and what people are using out in the general disability community. One thing that's really hard for someone is to have people actually understand what the technology is that they are using. So I can put you at ease that if you are using a screen reader or any other sort of specialized assistive technology, we certainly will work with you and that technology in order to get solutions that work for you and also work with your disability.

Yeah, it's remarkable how often you still find people who don't realize that disabled people are using computers at all. There's just a real dearth of knowledge about the fact that this technology even exists.

Yes, and how people are just written off. Just, "Oh, well, they can't do that. So we won't even bother telling them about anything to do with it."

So what is the process if someone comes to Grow Digital? First of all, how do they do that? How do they make contact with the Grow Digital team, and what happens then?

We have multiple ways that people can contact us. Because obviously if you don't have email or you don't have a device that can access the internet, then the following things won't apply to you, but never fear. So we've got to growdigital.co.nz website. If you go on there, there's an eligibility checker, which will then once it determines you're eligible will give you a link to the application form. However, never fear. There's also a phone number, 0800-344-477, that's 0800-344-477. And there's also the email address hello@growdigital.co.nz. You can also use the New Zealand interpreter service. So that's nzvis.co.nz if you want to talk to us that way.

And assuming that somebody is verified as being eligible, how soon before someone starts to work with somebody and help to grow their digital capacity IN their business?

Pretty much we are currently in our pilot phase. So until the 18th of December we are taking applications and working with 10 businesses. In mid-January we're going to open it up, and another 165 businesses can become eligible for us to work with them. So please apply, because if you don't get into the cut before Christmas, you certainly are still in the running to be in the cut for mid-January. So 10 people, or 10 businesses, will have the opportunity to have something before Christmas and be on a training program or they had a digital roadmap before early January. Then the 165 businesses that we will bring in the January, will have their assessments, for want of a better term, I wish there was a better term, and their digital roadmaps by mid-February.

And in some cases that digital roadmap could mean that Grow Digital puts the individual in touch with other entities who can help with specialized information. Is that correct?

Exactly. And in fact, one of the applications already has sort of someone in mind that they would like to get some training from. So we would definitely look at that and see whether certain people in the community can partner with us on providing some of the services.

Understandably we're super excited about Grow Digital. Is there anything else you wanted to share with us before we go?

One thing that, so this initiative Grow Digital is part of an initiative with another five community organizations which covers Māori and Pasifika. One thing I'd like to say is that certainly if you're Māori and you're disabled and you'd rather work with a Māori organization, we can put you in touch with them. If you have doubts about whether you would want to work with an organization that focuses mainly on disability, we can put you in touch with other organizations that might be more appropriate for what you want.

Fantastic. So that's growdigital.co.nz. And give us that 800 number one more time.

0800-344-477.

Thank you, Britta. We look forward to people making use of Grow Digital to grow their digital confidence and capacity in their business.

Exactly. Thanks, Jonathan.

It only remains For me to wish you a very happy Christmas, a safe holiday season. I hope you get lots of rest and recreation after what has been an extraordinary year. Workbridge will be closed from the 24th of December until the 18th of January. And then we look forward to being back with you to serve your employment needs in 2021.

View Details

Workbridge's National Accessibility Advisor Britta Offergeld joins Jonathan Mosen to discuss Grow Digital. 

Grow Digital is a free service funded by the Department of Internal Affairs that assists disabled people running a small to medium enterprise (SME), or businesses who mainly employ disabled people, to boost their digital skills.

Britta provides just a few examples of how Grow Digital can assist you if you're disabled and run your own business.

View Details

In this episode, we take you virtually to Workbridge's Annual General Meeting.

Workbridge Council President Debbie Ward, Board Chair Pam Macneill, and CEO Jonathan Mosen report on the financial year just ended.

Plus, Jonathan Mosen gives an address called Expectations.

View Details

We conclude our general election series by speaking with National's disability spokesperson, Alfred Ngaro.

View Details

On 21 August, Workbridge launched our "Policy that Works" thought leadership document. The previous episode of Mahi contains a full reading of the document. In this episode, listen to the launch.

Speakers are Workbridge Chairman Pam MacNeill, Disability Rights Commissioner Paula Tesoriero, Business New Zealand Chief Executive Kirk Hope, and Workbridge's Chief Executive Jonathan Mosen. To read "Policy that Works" in a variety of formats, visit the Policy that Works page.

View Details

Workbridge is proud to launch the thought leadership document ‘Policy that Works: A fair go for disability employment post COVID-19”.

Workbridge has been at the forefront of thought leadership on the employment of disabled people since our founding in 1931. Over time, we have led advocacy for changes in public policy to reflect evolving attitudes towards the self-determination of disabled people.

This difficult COVID recovery situation has created a once in a generation opportunity to significantly reform public policy on the employment of disabled people for the better. It is the responsibility of all of us not to squander that opportunity.

The most important changes that will make the biggest impact to the lives of disabled people, if implemented, should include:

• The fee-for-service contract model be updated with a holistic framework focussing on careers rather than individual jobs, co-designed by disabled people.
• Government acts to address the widespread community concerns about the impact of the benefit abatement rate and stand-down period acting as a disincentive for some disabled people to accept some employment opportunities
• Government provides financial and practical support to Workbridge to offer career counselling, mentoring and transition services for disabled high school students.
• Government provides practical and financial support to Workbridge to train disabled people for self-employment. Initiatives should include mentoring from successful businesspeople, particularly those who are disabled.
• In collaboration with the business sector, DPOs and Workbridge, government work closely on the specifics of a public education campaign that promotes the benefits of employing disabled people and dispels common myths.

There is much more. If you would like the document in formats other than audio, visit our website and activate the Policy that Works link.

View Details

Jonathan Mosen:
Kia ora koutou, welcome to episode 10 of Mahi: The Disability Employment Podcast brought to you by Workbridge. I'm Jonathan Mosen, and we are continuing our induction 2020 series. We're going to parliament to speak with the honorable Tracy Martin. She's New Zealand First’s disabilities spokesperson. A reminder that elections are, of course, all about us, the voters, and you're welcome to join in the discussion. If you have any feedback about any of these podcasts, please get in touch. The email address is podcast@workbridge.co.nz. That's podcast@workbridge.co.nz. You can send that email in whatever means is easiest for you. You can write it down, or if you have a smartphone that has a Voice Memos app and you'd like to record a contribution, you can do that too and attach the file to your email.

Jonathan Mosen:
You can also phone the listener line and leave us a recorded message. That number here in Wellington is 044720200. That's 044720200. Before we begin our discussion with Tracy Martin, a reminder that Workbridge is open for business right across the country and virtually on the web and over the phone assisting disabled people and those with long-term health condition to find work, and of course, giving employers the next great rock star employee. So, do get in touch.

Jonathan Mosen:
I know that there is a perception out there that with tough economic times, is it worth the bother? It absolutely is. People are hiring and we are assisting, right from beginning the process of putting a CV together all the way through to acing the interview. Do get in touch with us. The number here at Workbridge is 0508858858. That number again is 0508858858. And you can visit us on the web at workbridge.co.nz. Your exciting future can start with just one phone call or by visiting our website.

Jonathan Mosen:
We're continuing our series on the general election coming up on the 19th of September and looking at issues from a disability perspective. We're joined by New Zealand First’s disability spokesperson, Tracy Martin, and she's invited me into her office. Thank you for having me. I appreciate that.

Tracy Martin:
Kia ora, thank you for coming, Jonathan.

Jonathan Mosen:
Yeah. Can we talk about an elevator pitch with respect to New Zealand First and disability issues, because I guess when people think of Labor, they think more hands on government, nationally so, but New Zealand First sits somewhere in the center. What would you say are the advantages that a disabled person should think of when they're contemplating New Zealand First?

Tracy Martin:
Well, I think it's the same advantages that any voters should think about when they are talking or thinking about looking at the policies of New Zealand First and voting on those. It is that we start from a really practical place. We start from actually, "How is this policy going to affect people at street level?" Often there are policies created in offices around the country that once they hit the ground, they either are a greater barrier to or they really don't make a difference to the people that the policy was created for. I hope that what the disability community would see from New Zealand First policies is that they're practical, they're reasonable, they're responsible, and they reflect real solution to real problems.

Jonathan Mosen:
What's your thoughts on the representation issues? You were mentioning before we started recording that you had been speaking to the Election Fund Access Bill, you'd have to say disabled people are still probably the most marginalized minority in that there really is no representation at all in parliament.

Tracy Martin:
Well, you're right. I mean, when I spoke on that particular bill, we have a member in our caucus who is legally blind. He manages very well. We have supported him with other staff. Staff might have to read documents to him and so on and so forth at certain times because of the condition of his eyes, but that was a surprise to the rest of the members of parliament because it's just what he deals with on a daily basis, and it's just what we support for him. But parliament still is not set up to recognize or to facilitate the participation of those with disabilities. The way that the house is physically set up with the seating and so on, there's no place for a wheelchair. If one had difficulty getting upstairs or up to a certain level, then if you weren't a front bench minister or member of parliament, it would be very difficult to get to your seat.

Tracy Martin:
I think with Mojo Mathers what we recognized, I mean, New Zealand First offered to take a cut in our parliamentary budget to provide Mojo with the technology she needed when the speaker at that time, Lockwood Smith, declined to pay out of the speaker's office for that technology. We said, "Well, we'll take a cut to our party budget if everybody takes a cut to theirs because it's not fair for Mojo's party to be penalized by having to pay for technology when she should be provided what she needed to do her job." That resulted in enough pressure being put on Lockwood Smith to actually fund it from the parliamentary budget.

Tracy Martin:
You're right. There isn't that level of representation, but I find it fascinating. I think New Zealand has to ask itself, "Why are political parties not picking those that have an obvious disability?" I am going to say to you, it's because they don't believe that the New Zealand public would vote for them. I think that's a conversation we have to have with the New Zealand public.

Jonathan Mosen:
I can understand that in the context of an electorate MP. In fact, I can remember having stood for parliament, being at a constituency meeting, campaign meeting, and somebody actually got up in front of a couple of hundred people and said to me, "you're going to have a really hard job if you're going to be elected, who's going to be your eyes?" I understand that fear that a lot of people have, and yet in the context of MMP, isn't that exactly what the list system was supposed to facilitate? That you could pick a minority group who might have trouble getting through the electric process, and yet they don't appear to be any MPS or any candidates put in winnable positions on the list, and Mojo was the anomaly. Of course, she was eventually not put in a winnable position on the party list.

Tracy Martin:
No, you're absolutely right. I can't deny it. There's just no way to actually counter what you say. You're absolutely correct.

Jonathan Mosen:
Is it because people aren't putting themselves forward? I mean, do we have a lack of quality candidates making themselves available?

Tracy Martin:
Well, I think there is something in that. I mean, my party, we have a lack of people with obvious disability, because some of us carry different visible disabilities, perhaps, but with an obvious disability, we have a lack of those coming forward as candidates. I guess that doesn't test our candidate selection process. We also have a lack of female candidates coming through for my particular party. I think each political party does actually need to have a look at themselves and say, "What are the structures and what are the barriers to people being able to put themselves forward?" I agree with you.

Jonathan Mosen:
And yet I suspect New Zealand First's position would be, "Those candidates are welcome, but they would have to be credible candidates." That New Zealand First would be nervous about some sort of quota system.

Tracy Martin:
Yeah. Well, that is true. But that's for both women and for those with an obvious disability. There would need to be... what is the skill that that person brings? What is the specialty area that that person brings to add to the mix of the talents at the... I guess in the pool for New Zealand First? Should they gain a place of influence, you need to be able to call on different skills from different people. But then I would have to say that in that particular instance, what we're saying is that part of the skill is that that person has lived as a disabled person in New Zealand. So, therefore, one of the weights that Mojo carried though, and this is the interesting thing. What we're saying is that by default... what I just said was, by default, that person would be your disability spokesperson.

Tracy Martin:
Does that not stereotype and put into a box, disabled people? And mojo carried the weight of all of the disability community from across New Zealand while she was here. That's a really big weight for one individual to carry merely because they themselves have a disability.

Jonathan Mosen:
Yes, disability is a very broad church, isn't it? Somebody, for example, with a vision impairment may be able to inherently identify or empathize with, say, the needs of somebody in a wheelchair, but then they are no more able to really talk from different experience of that than anybody else.

Tracy Martin:
Exactly. I mean, it comes back down to that say, little old adage, isn't it? If you've met one disabled person you've met one disabled person.

Jonathan Mosen:
That's right.

Tracy Martin:
I do think that as a country, we do have some growth to do in this space.

Jonathan Mosen:
Can we talk about the Simpson review? You'll be aware that this has caused a lot of angst in the disability community because, of course, the big catch cry in the disability community is "nothing about us without us." It seems that the Simpson review really did take place without any meaningful input from disabled people. There were no disabled people on the panel. Was that a bit dodgy?

Tracy Martin:
Well, I think it's disappointing because if I think about my own portfolio, so if I think about associate education with responsibility for learning support, and if I think about, even as the minister for children, Oranga Tamariki, I mean, we've removed section 141 and 142, which was where a parent with a disabled child who wasn't managing was able to actually come and ask Oranga Tamariki for help. That in itself causes me some concern. But what we know is that the health system... well, this is what I believe we know, the health system does not do well in supporting many in the disability community with the current structure. If we're going to have, and we are going to have a major restructure of the health system, then that voice, the users and the consumers of many of the services of health for life, should be at that table and should be part of that redesign.

Jonathan Mosen:
Would you go as far as to say it is time for a separate ministry for disability issues or disability matters, which seems to be gaining momentum out there now?

Tracy Martin:
I mean, Carmel Sepuloni, I know in this term has done an amazing job at bringing in representatives across the disability sector and getting multiple ministers to make sure that they are in the room and answerable to those representatives. I know what it costs to set up another ministry. So I guess that's probably the biggest barrier to get over is actually, where is the cost of setting up another ministry and would that ministry... how would it interact with health? Would it take some of the responsibilities of health? I think it's a discussion to have, because those are questions and answers that need to be worked through, I think.

Jonathan Mosen:
Yes, there's a danger, isn't there, that you can pigeonhole disability issues, whereas in fact, making an accessible inclusive society is the responsibility of government as a whole.

Tracy Martin:
Exactly. Again, so if I talk about one of my other portfolios in the area of seniors, so we spend a lot of time... We've got some small grant money that we give to communities to try and make those communities more age friendly. Well, being age friendly means they're more accessible. Many of our seniors also become or gain a disability, so they then become part of the disability community as well. I agree. Should we silo off those with a disability or should it... and this is what Carmel, I believe, has done very well in. Every cabinet paper now must have a disability perspective inside that cabinet paper. How will this affect the disability community? Have you considered it?

Jonathan Mosen:
Is it fair to summarize New Zealand First position as that it would be open to further debate, but you don't have a position yet on whether a ministry is actually a good idea?

Tracy Martin:
We don't have a position on whether a ministry is a good idea or not and whether that's the appropriate way to make sure that we shift some of the conversation. Yeah.

Jonathan Mosen:
Because there are these silos already out there. There's buckets of money, so sometimes you get a situation where somebody might need a piece of equipment that can really make a tangible difference, assistive technology, and depending on your use case for that technology, whether you're going to use it in your job or use it at your house, you will go to different funders. Obviously that's what the individualized funding model is seeking to fix. But at the moment, it really is quite complex for people to understand where they have to go in a given situation.

Tracy Martin:
I agree. I want to bring this back to actually, to Wokrbridge. I don't know if you know, but my mum worked for Workbridge.

Jonathan Mosen:
I don't think I did know that.

Tracy Martin:
Yeah. In the 1990s. She was a tutor, adult tutor for the Rehabilitation League, and then mutated into Workbridge. She was the North Shore manager based at the Takapuna office. I used to go and visit her there, and I remember having conversations with her about changes that started to take place in the 2000s onward. Workbridge, and I'm really worried, actually, I'm very worried. I've read your strategic plan. I'm quite worried for Workbridge. They acknowledge that they have multiple challenges for the future. Workbridge used to be able to provide fully funded, either by ACC or MSD, whatever technology was required to support that individual in a workplace, right?

Tracy Martin:
Now, that's changed substantially. That's what it looks like to me. From a New Zealand First perspective, I would like to see Workbridge achieve what they have placed in their strategic plan, which is to be the trusted provider of employment support and other supports, the place where people go for that specialty support to get what they need to be their best, whether that be at home or whether that be in the employment arena.

Jonathan Mosen:
Yes. At the moment the way it works with respect to equipment is that Workbridge is just an administrator of MSDS guidelines. MSD determines what we can and can't fund. If we have to decline an application under those guidelines, then MSD can exercise discretion. Then on the actual placement side of it, there are now... although they have been suspended because of COVID-19 for now, but for the last few years they have been outcomes based contracts where you are measured as an organization based on how many people have you placed, how long did they stay? And sometimes that's a quite arbitrary measurement in a disability context.

Tracy Martin:
I mean, it's an area that needs a great deal of attention, but let's just take it from the wellbeing perspective, which is what this government has, and New Zealand First as a coalition partner in this government.

Jonathan Mosen:
Wellbeing budget.

Tracy Martin:
Exactly. What we've tried to do is to look at the holistic needs of our citizens on an individual basis and what is it that that individual needs to be their best? Now, if you think about that in the context of what you just said with regard to contracting and judging success by how many people can you place in employment for how long, that's actually not focusing on the wellbeing of the individual citizen. That's focusing on something that is financially expedient to the state, and that's where, from a New Zealand First perspective, we would like to see that shift to that wellbeing focus. I believe that Workbridge once had greater capacity to do that, to actually interact with that single citizen, that individual and work with them on much greater levels with pots of money rather than siloed or funding streams to support them into employment or into business in their own right, or interfered the training and education.

Jonathan Mosen:
Yeah. The nature of the engagement is quite transitory now because you're specifically focusing on, say, an outcome over a 12 month period, rather than looking at an individual who has a career goal in mind. I would very much like to see Workbridge in a position where we can be working with people throughout their entire lives continuously to further their careers, rather than essentially just decide, "Can we get this person off welfare?"

Tracy Martin:
Well, yeah, that's right. I have a niece who was born without a hand and she went to Workbridge for a short period of time. But the pastoral care that she needed to actually feel confident in herself to find employment that suited her skills to make her feel valued and a contributing member of society wasn't really there, but that wasn't Workbridge's fault. That was actually the structure of the funding mechanisms that are there at the moment. Wouldn't it be wonderful to... and I do keep talking about Workbridge because it's what I know, and I believe it's got a really strong reputation of being representative for this community.

Tracy Martin:
Wouldn't it be wonderful that you see that the logo of Workbridge through the cities and it's just a trusted place that anybody with a disability or a challenge can drop into and know that regardless of where they are on the journey of their lives, that they can get a bit of support or talk something through with a person. For our students from transition from school onward, we haven't done well with that support mechanism. Yeah, I mean, I believe that we could do a lot better.

Jonathan Mosen:
It is encouraging to see that in budget 2020, there has been some funding appropriated so that organizations like Workbridge can go in and work with people in the latter part of high school, because it's a really tough business being a disabled teenager when maybe your friends are going out dating and driving and doing those things, and depending on your disability, you may find some challenges there, and teenagers can be very cliquey. If you're not "normal," you're singled out. The need for good quality disabled mentors, I think, in high school may be people who can give some inspiration in terms of being in a career that that student aspires to. There's all sorts of potential there.

Tracy Martin:
There definitely is. Actually rather than normal, I think the word is average. One shouldn't knock average. I quite like being a bridge because if you're... one way or the other, everything comes with a challenge. But I think the Blind Foundation... conversations I had with the Blind Foundation about some camps that they ran at the school for a group of young teenage males, for example. Many of those young men, it was the first time that they had been able to be at a camp with a whole group of young people that shared the same challenges. The conversations were the same as other young males. It was about dating. They were practicing shaving because... We cannot forget... this is the one thing that every now and then I have quite intense conversations with the disability commissioner. We all live in multiple communities, right? These young men have a community that they need, which is the group of them that they have now made friends with who understand the challenges.

Tracy Martin:
Then beyond that, they have the community of their peers who are able bodied or non able bodied, sighted. Then beyond that, they have the wider community, which is the community that they live in where they want to seek employment. One of the challenges I have had is having conversations with the disability community to, I guess, get across what I'm trying to make sure that we maintain is, don't force disabled people only into one community. Recognize that we all have multiple communities that we interact with, and they're all really important to us.

Jonathan Mosen:
I suppose everybody does. I mean, you can belong to, say, a political party or a church or different distinct communities, and yet there are those challenges that come from disability that it's really important to be able to compare notes on and just feel some affinity with people about. You've had some fairly robust discussions about mainstreaming and whether specialist schools should continue at all. Can you talk us through your views on that?

Tracy Martin:
Well, I came in here and one of the things that was a requirement of our coalition agreement was that Salisbury School had to stay open. I have been a champion for Salisbury School and Westbridge and Halswell. I have been from this perspective, I'm the mother of three children. I have a daughter who's 20 now, but let's say when Rose was 15, I wanted to send my daughter away to a boarding school. It was a girl's school where she boarded at. Nobody would blink an eye, nobody would say anything to me about it. But if a family wanted to send their daughter who had some complex needs to Salisbury, there were people who decided that they would articulate that they felt those parents were lesser parents or cared for their child less.

Tracy Martin:
Now, that is unacceptable, in my view. That is a discrimination that those parents should not have had to argue. I just visited Hohepa the other day. Hohepa has been going for 60 years. The amazing facility that is Hohepa with some of their residents... I was there as the minister for seniors actually, because some of their residents are now in their seventies, and we need to look at some housing issues and so on for them. But they've got their cheese factory and they've got this and that and the other. We cannot have just one size fits all. Yes, the option for well-supported, going to your local school must be there, and I'm working on that from the learning support coordinators and around other sorts of funding, but I also believe that the disability community deserves just as much choice as I have. If they believe that there is a particular educational environment that will be the best for their child, they should be allowed to select it.

Jonathan Mosen:
Do you feel there are people who seek to take that choice away?

Tracy Martin:
Yes.

Jonathan Mosen:
Because?

Tracy Martin:
Because there are. Because there are people who have become very, very angry with me when I have articulated that, because there are people who have made inappropriate comments about parents who wish to send their children to Salisbury or Halswell, and it's not fair.

Jonathan Mosen:
Isn't counter argument, though, that in a decent accommodating society, there wouldn't be a need for such facilities because we'd all be fully able to maximize our potential at the same school that everybody else's attending?

Tracy Martin:
This is not just about school though. Some of the families that I talk to are breaking. Now, that is the argument. In a perfect world, I suppose, everybody would be well supported, et cetera, et cetera. The first child and family that I became involved with had a daughter who suffered from multiple complex issues, but the main one being Prader-Willi syndrome. Prader-Willi mean that this young person would do anything for something to eat. And she did. You cannot make a judgment unless you walk in the shoes of those families and that child.

Tracy Martin:
That young woman has been at Salisbury for a number of years now. She loves being at Salisbury. She now greets me at the door and has advanced in her education and her independence and her ability to live in the world in leaps and bounds. Her family has been able to remain strong, where many families, it's breaking them apart. It's too simplistic to make that statement that, "Well, one size will fit all. Eg, we'll just all mainstream everybody." That can not be the answer if we don't believe that one size doesn't fit all.

Jonathan Mosen:
We still hear stories about the system straining to breaking point and a lot of schools where kids are going into really feeling stigmatized. They're not getting the assistance that they require to maximize their potential. It seems like there are still historic systemic underfunding of making mainstreaming work.

Tracy Martin:
Well, the system needs changing, which is what I'm trying to do. From the learning support delivery model and the learning support coordinators that... okay, we've only got 623 out there, but what we're trying to do is change the way that support is delivered. I still have some issues with regard to how health steps away from our children with high and complex needs the moment they cross the threshold of a school. Health has known these young people since birth or very early in their life. At the early childhood level they are responsible for the delivery of the support services for that young person. The moment they cross the school threshold, the health seems to pull away from that young person and leaves the responsibility to education.

Tracy Martin:
I have articulated it before. Given half a chance, I would like to change the current system of teacher aides to a split paraprofessional group, which is a group over here who are health aides, who are funded by the ministry of health because that child should have consistency of care from one group of people who are supposed to support their health needs, and then I would like a pair of professional group, which are teacher aides, who are there to support the educational side of what the students in the classroom need.

Tracy Martin:
I've articulated that on many occasions, but the system needs to change. I've started it on a pathway of change, but certainly, you don't unwind something like this in two and a half to three years.

Jonathan Mosen:
That's another example of these little public policy silos that disadvantage disabled people. I was really intrigued to hear... I believe it was last year when the prime minister made announcements that there would be significant reform of the State Sector Act with a view to try and stop these sorts of silos from happening and encouraging a lot more dialogue between different government departments. I think a lot of people felt that COVID-19 was going to be the big game changer because suddenly people started talking to each other and cross departmental dialogue was taking place. I think, like a lot of these situations, people overestimated how much change really would stick once things started to settle down again. What's actually happened to that state sector reform that was promised to get rid of these silos.

Tracy Martin:
First of all, I have seen leaders recently from a representative groups of parts of the disability community who said they were exceptionally disappointed with that multi-agency government response around COVID because they felt they were invisible. I would have to say, from the seniors perspective, I had to step in and get a representative from the office of seniors on to the crisis management team to make sure that every decision that was made was aware of how that decision would affect seniors.

Tracy Martin:
With regard to the prime minister's announcement. The prime minister and I are co-authors of the Child and Youth Wellbeing Strategy. I know that that's about children and young people, but it's relevant. What that strategy is, is to try and break down the silos of government departments and make them all responsible for the wellbeing of children and young people. The overarching question, now that that strategy is in place, that each government agency has to answer is, how do your actions affect the wellbeing of children? now? That's what health has to answer. How are your actions affecting the wellbeing of children? Because at the end of the day, Oranga Tamariki, let's just take Oranga Tamariki, who have a number of children with disabilities in our care, both from high and complex needs to moderate needs in neurodiversity, we're not health. We rely on health and their professionals to make sure that they are available and responding quickly to the needs of those children. My experience with health in my portfolios has been very difficult.

Jonathan Mosen:
Are we likely to see that State Sector Act reform actually passing through... I guess we're not going to see it pass the house or even introduced before the election now?

Tracy Martin:
I mean, Chris Hipkins has been working on that reform for the state sector and there have been cabinet papers go through, but you're right. We lost a hundred hours of house time during COVID lockdown. Next week we're going to be doing extended hours and urgency again. We've managed to pick up probably another 60 hours, but there are things that just will not keep moving because of that lost time during the lockdown.

Jonathan Mosen:
I wonder if you have a view on the Human Rights Act and whether you think it is fit for purpose in a disability context. I know that there is quite a ground sweat out there for new legislation entirely that would focus on accessibility. So I'm wondering if you can comment on the rights framework for disabled people in New Zealand and what's required.

Tracy Martin:
Yeah. I had the United Nations rep on turf around seniors actually here, and she also promoted that we put into legislation a rights framework or a rights space framework for seniors. I don't actually have a major view on it. It's still something that I need to consider. I mean, it sounds odd, I know, that you don't have a view on whether there should be human rights or whatever inside legislation. I started this by saying to you that New Zealand... I like to pride myself on being an MP and a New Zealand First MP that actually looks, "What is the problem and what's a practical solution? Does putting something in legislation, will it actually make the difference? Or what is the purpose of that and how will it actually affect downstream?" And at the moment, we're still trying to try to actually see what the flow on would be from that, or is there something far more practical that we could do faster to make a real difference to people and the problems that they're experiencing?

Jonathan Mosen:
Because this accessibility legislation idea has been babbling around for... well and truly beyond this parliamentary term. So it's been there for a while and yet it doesn't appear to have progressed.

Tracy Martin:
Well, Carmel Sepuloni, I mean, it is a shame that Carmel is not here, but Carmel has been... we have had conversations around accessibility legislation and so on, and what would that look from a... would it be retrospective? Would it be only future focused? How do you move? Again, though, I would come back down to the work that the office of seniors is doing with, I think there's at least four communities now that assist our fund to create more accessible or age friendly communities, which means that they are more accessible. Little things like when the council is building a park bench, extend the concrete pad out so that a wheelchair can fit next to the park bench. People that go around through their cafes and just say, "Actually, if you moved to this or if you changed that, then this would make your business much more accessible."

Tracy Martin:
From that perspective, there is work going on. But I take on board your comments that there may not be a large piece of legislation currently in the house.

Jonathan Mosen:
I suppose the other question is, do you do it by creating a new act or do you simply strengthen the existing Human Rights Act to avoid fragmentation? The Human Rights Act, arguably, is quite weak in the sense that you go through a mediation process and then that can take some time to conclude and of course, adoption, or whether both parties go to mediation, and then if that's not successful, then you can go on to the dispute's tribunal. By comparison with, say, Australia or the US, where you have the ADA, which I think is the iconic legislation in the space, it could be argued that we're a little behind in that regard.

Tracy Martin:
Right. No, I'm not going to disagree with you.

Jonathan Mosen:
The final question I had for you was regarding access to footpaths, essentially. We've got this Footpaths4Feet petition, and the government has come up with some proposals relating to cycling, which has got some disabled people, and actually seniors as well, so I'm sure you're getting a lot of feedback about this.

Tracy Martin:
Well, I accepted the petition.

Jonathan Mosen:
Okay. We had vehicles on the footpath causing a lot of concern for people who maybe can't see or hear them coming or who are not particularly nimble on their feet.

Tracy Martin:
It's a discussion document that's been put out by the Associate Minister of Transport, the Honorable Julie Anne Genter. This is the way this government works, right? It's a discussion document. I gave my feedback as the Minister for Seniors to the office of the Honorable Julie Anne Genter. I share the concerns. It's called a footpath for a reason. I understand what she's attempting to do, and some of it is attempting to create restrictions around the... what are they called? The new things everybody's driving now.

Jonathan Mosen:
Oh, the e-scooters?

Tracy Martin:
The e-scooters, right?

Jonathan Mosen:
Yeah.

Tracy Martin:
Because it's a completely deregulated space, really. But I share the concerns of others that the footpath is not a place for a whole lot of wheeled vehicles. She did counter with the fact that from a senior's perspective, they have got their scooters on the footpath. They are wheeled vehicles and I take it on board. But I can only encourage people to give their feedback. I'm not even sure if it's still open or not, that feedback, but to continue to give their feedback to that minister. Unless you're going to double the size of all the footpaths in New Zealand, then I think there is a real problem brewing if she goes forward with the suggestion she has in that discussion document.

Jonathan Mosen:
But I mean, given the current configuration of parliament, if New Zealand First declines to back it, it's doomed, right?

Tracy Martin:
Yeah. Well, it's only a discussion document at the moment, so I'll be interested to see whether... because this is only my view, and obviously I accepted the petition from a particular group. Like any reasonable person, I need to see what the submissions are in their entirety, because we're a representative parliament. It's not my job to just decide that I will dictate something specifically if the majority of New Zealand has feedback and say, "No, no, we think it's a wonderful idea." But you are absolutely right. It's only a discussion document and to actually create the legislation out the other side, with the current configuration, New Zealand First would have to agree to that.

Jonathan Mosen:
I can't recall there ever having been an issue that would be called a bottom line issue for any coalition partner that was disability related.

Tracy Martin:
That's a really good point.

Jonathan Mosen:
So do you think that there's a possibility, assuming a similar configuration in parliament, that New Zealand First may take a stand and say, "Actually, the safety of disabled people and senior pedestrians is paramount here."

Tracy Martin:
The way negotiations work, because you have to remember, so I was one of the leads in the negotiations that formed this government. We took 300 pages of policy into the conversations with both the National Party and the Labor Party. We never had conversations with the Green Party because we weren't creating a relationship with them from the governance perspective, the Labor Party was doing that on the side. There were a couple of statements made at the beginning of those negotiations which were very broad statements, but basically what we were doing was, now, let's say that New Zealand First... because I haven't taken this to my caucus colleagues, but I'm quite happy to on that discussion document and what we think should happen once I see the submissions.

Tracy Martin:
But New Zealand First would take into those conversations and say, "This is our policy, which is that, we don't believe there should be cyclists and these other people on the footpaths." Then we would have to get the view whether we could get agreement from one or the other of those major parties. You have to tally up the things that you have got in common. I don't like to suggest that we would blackmail the country or send the country back to the polls on one single issue, because that's not very responsible.

Jonathan Mosen:
Political scientist in me can't help asking you, obviously it's a very unusual political climate at the moment post-COVID, and New Zealand First, Labor and the Greens have just about completed a three year election cycle successfully. Are you concerned about how you are going to be able to de differentiate New Zealand First to voters and say, "This is the difference we've made," without necessarily dissing those people who have been your partners for three years. It must be a very delicate balancing act.

Tracy Martin:
Well, you don't personalize it. That's the way to do it is you actually talk about the policies rather than talk about the people. I spend a lot of my time... I tend to be the person that when things get a bit twitchy between, say, a New Zealand First minister and a Green minister or a New Zealand First minister and a Labor minister, I tend to be the one that goes in from the New Zealand First side to sort some stuff out. There's a bit of a joke that I'm the reasonable one around the place. And its hard work, there is no doubt that an MMP government is had work. This is the first MMP government that this country has really seen since '96, really, I suppose, right? Because previously what you've heard is a big major party and then there's some very small parties.

Tracy Martin:
Each small party, let's say... look at the last configuration, the ACT Party got charter schools, the Marty Party got final order, and Peter Dan, the United Future Party got the families commission or whatever. They got something and then they had to vote with the majority. There was very little conversation after that. Because the numbers are so substantially different, this government has had to keep talking on every single issue. Now, most of the time we agree, we're going for the same outcomes, we all agree on the way that we want New Zealand to become more focused on, our individual citizens wellbeing, and we weren't going to judge our success on our GDP. But there are obvious moments when we do not agree. When New Zealand First doesn't agree, we talk to our coalition partner and say, "This is just not going to go forward because we cannot reach an agreement."

Tracy Martin:
Then we will tell our coalition partner. And so we're going to state that publicly. That would be the three strikes bill, capital gains tax. We don't keep any secrets. We don't go out into the papers and tell the public before we've had that conversation with our coalition partner. Am I worried that we're going to be able to show our point of difference? No. We've been in government, so we own all the decisions of this government. Every single one of the decisions of this government, New Zealand First has had to agree to, or it wouldn't have happened. That's the same for the Green Party and the same for the Labor Party.

Tracy Martin:
You can't dish where this government has gone. What we can go out and do is say that, "If we had had greater influence, we would have gone further here. Or if we had greater influence..." like with regard to education, our tertiary policy is all of the years for tertiary education would be free to the student, but there would be a debt of your skills back to your country as opposed to a debt of money back to your country. Labor and New Zealand First agree around that we want to minimize debt for our students. It's just that Labor does not agree to the extent that New Zealand First believes that we should minimize our debt to our students. So I'll go out and campaign on what New Zealand First beliefs.

Jonathan Mosen:
It's going to be a fascinating campaign. I appreciate the really interesting discussion. So thank you so much for being willing to chat with us on the podcast.

Tracy Martin:
Lovely to see you.

Jonathan Mosen:
Thanks for listening to Mahi today. In the next episode, we'll speak with National's disability spokesperson, Alfred Ngaro.

View Details

Continuing our interviews with the disability spokespeople from political parties in Parliament, Jonathan Mosen speaks with Hon Tracey Martin from New Zealand First. In addition to being New Zealand First's disability spokesperson, Ms Martin is Minister for Children, Seniors and Internal Affairs, and Associate Minister of Education

View Details

Jonathan Mosen:
Kia ora koutou. Welcome to Mahi, the disability employment podcast brought to you by Workbridge. I'm Jonathan Mosen, and this is episode nine. It's good to have you back with us, I trust that you're keeping warm as winter well and truly sets in, we have had some cold and wet days here in Wellington. I also trust that with lockdown over, things are returning to normal for you as they are for us at Workbridge offices opened again just after Queen's birthday weekend in June. But of course we are continuing to learn the lessons from lockdown, and we're still able to provide you with service online if you prefer that. So we're working with you on your terms, do feel free to get in touch with us. Our website address is workbridge.co.nz, and the phone number toll free anywhere in New Zealand is 0508858858.

Jonathan Mosen:
At a time like this when we know that we're dealing with some economically tough times and you think, well, people are hiring, so what's the point? Definitely don't give up on your job search because one thing is for sure, if you don't apply, then you certainly won't get the job. And I am pleased to say that Workbridge is having some success in assisting people into employment even during these tough economic times. This episode of Mahi begins our series on the September 19 general election. Our franchise are going to get quite a bit of exercise this year because we will of course be voting for the person that we want to represent our electorate and the party that we would like to be in government, and we also have two referenda to vote on this year. At Workbridge, we believe in the full participation of disabled people, and those with a long-term health condition in society.

Jonathan Mosen:
Key to that participation is participation in the democratic process. Unfortunately, we don't have many disabled people in the mainstream media in New Zealand. This is an area where we have some way to catch up to countries that we like to compare ourselves with. That means that it can be hard to get quality in depth information about disability issues and things that might influence the way that you vote at election time. Since we have a podcast and we have the studio, we thought that we would make Mahi for the next little while about the general election. We've invited the disability spokespeople of all political parties who currently have members of parliament in place to come on the podcast and talk with us about a range of issues.

Jonathan Mosen:
If you have any questions that you would like us to pose to the candidates, you are of course very welcome to get in touch. You can send an email to podcast@workbridge.co.nz, that's podcast@workbridge.co.nz, or you can call the listener line, and that number is 044720200, 044720200. At this stage the only decline that we have had to our interview requests has come from the labour spokesperson on disability issues, who is the current minister Carmel Sepuloni, but obviously the invitation remains open. We will however, go ahead with the other interviews. And our first interview on this edition of Mahi is with Golriz Ghahraman who is The Greens disability spokesperson.

Jonathan Mosen:
The Green party is reaching the end of its first term in which they've played a role as a coalition partner. For the first time then, they have a record to defend as well as a vision for the future to promote. So what has The Green party achieved from a disability perspective over its last term? And what can we expect if The Greens continue to play a role in government after the 19th of September? So joining me towards the end of her first term as an MP is The Greens spokesperson on disability issues, Golriz Ghahraman, Golriz, it's great to have you here. Thank you so much.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Thanks for having me. It's great to be here.

Jonathan Mosen:
Give me a bit of an elevator pitch if you would. Why should disabled people vote green at the next election?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Well, our vision is one of equality and the way we understand disability is that it's a process of people building a world that doesn't work well for different groups, and only services the status quo. So we see it as an equality issue that we change the world that we live in both structurally in terms of institutional culture and in terms of, roads, houses, schools to sort of make sure that everyone can participate in an equal way and everyone has that equal opportunity as well. And you've touched on our track record and I do think that part of it for us, whether it's the election access act that came in under this government, whether it's our housing policy that includes accessibility, our poverty plan that includes disability benefits coming under ICC, in this equality, we include a disability lens.

Jonathan Mosen:
Not long after you became an MP, you were diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and I'm sure that was an incredibly life changing event to come to terms with. Does that mean that you now self identify as a disabled person?

Golriz Ghahraman:
I identify as being part of that community, but we're an internally really diverse community as well, and I think any policy maker really needs to acknowledge that too. So the reason I didn't necessarily speak about my MS diagnosis immediately was that I did know I'm not having the full experience necessarily just now and I need to get my head around it and know what that means for me so that I don't suddenly start speaking as if I'm representing the vast and really diverse group and all of our experiences. I wanted to keep connecting with that community, but yeah for sure, I do. And I think the other thing about my MS diagnosis is that it helps me to understand that chronic illness is part of that disability umbrella, just as we know that cognitive diversity comes under that same umbrella and that community, because in the same way, we're sort of experiencing a world that's not necessarily built for us.

Jonathan Mosen:
And even setting that to one side, I'm remembering an incident I had very early in my government relations career in the 1990s when I met with Tariana Turia. And one of the things that she said to me was actually the disability community and maoridom have a lot in common because people keep making decisions about us without us, we are often not included, we're underrepresented in all the important areas. So as a member of the refugee community, who's been very outspoken in that regard, do you identify with the plight of disabled people in that respect as well in the sense that, there's some marginalization there on both counts.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Yeah, that's exactly right. And I think what it really does make you realize when you belong to a marginalised group and I totally agree with that analysis of everyone's always making decisions for us without us, is that people see you as a marginalised group, having a role to play sometimes only on issues that they say apply to this particular group. So you have disability issues and then you might go and talk to some disability group, you might only talk to one group. And it's the same with refugees, with migrants, with Maori, but all issues affect us.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Housing is a disability issue, roads are a disability issue, just as they are women's issues and refugee issues. So we do need to be at that decision making table and sort of main stream, if that's the right word into all policy making processes and that lens needs to come into all of those policies, because how is an able-bodied pakeha 5th gender straight man going to decide what shoe will fit that disabled woman of color. That's what you kind of realize that people don't know that your experience is impacting on how you experience everything from justice to accessibility and then building. So you do realize there's so much need for representation that's much more real than what we allow for it in the moment.

Jonathan Mosen:
You made the point that disability is really a part of The Greens kaupapa, and of course there has been the legislation this term, which seeks to facilitate greater participation by disabled people in democracy. And Chloe Swarbrick shepherded that through, but you lost Mojo, is that a bit of a blot on the Greens copy book, that there was somebody who identified as disabled, was a member of the deaf community, making a difference, she had done the hard yards to get the accommodation she needed. And then because I guess of The Greens democratic processes where the list is voted for, she ended up being in an unwinnable list position, and now there is no real disability representation in parliament, you let her get away.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Oh, it's a huge loss. I can't even tell you how heartbreaking it felt. I have been for years sort of on the party's national executive with Mojo and other groups and committees. So it was a huge loss, and of course she was actually in a very electable position. She was number 9 and we'd always had 14 MPs. So that election just kind of was just the heartbreak of what happened in the 2017 election where we got into government eventually, but we had our caucus numbers almost half, but it was a huge loss because of course Mojo, she wasn't just a disabled MP, she was much more than that. And she had this incredible record on animal rights, and activism rights, and policymaking, and environmental issues as well. But what she brought really sort of unapologetically, was that disability voice as well, because often you do see members of marginalized groups come into parliament, and then sit as almost tokens, I hate to say it.

Jonathan Mosen:
One dimensional figures, right?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Yeah. Well, you just kind of do what everyone else is doing, but you just happen to also then get brought out to go and meet with that group.

Jonathan Mosen:
Right.

Golriz Ghahraman:
And I'm really acutely aware of that for me because I don't want to just go off to sort of refugee events, but not speak as boldly as possible to the experiences of that community. Same goes now with chronic illness and disability, I don't want to just sort of say things about myself as an MS sufferer once in a while, and then not sort of go, wait a minute, that policy doesn't include this lens and actually criticize policy that doesn't include that lens. And so it has been important in the COVID response for us to have brought that up and in terms of the way that in very early stages, the government sort of guidelines didn't take account of people who were compromised or disabled in a way that would allow them to properly self isolate or to for example, stay home if they were an essential worker and still get the subsidy and all of those kinds of things that you don't think about, unless you have a personal connection sometimes. So that's what makes it important that we do have people like Mojo that are in parliament as well.

Jonathan Mosen:
And how is the party doing in terms of its list of this year? Are there disabled people in remotely winnable positions in 2020 on the list?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Well, if you look at it in terms of the way we're polling, it would probably be only me, but there're others ... So unfortunately, that's sort of the reality of having a small caucus, but we can grow our vote.

Jonathan Mosen:
The unemployment rate among disabled people has always been shockingly high. And of-course a job is the key to so many things, mana, dignity, economic independence, that's likely to worsen one would think, the unemployment rate during the economic crisis that's been precipitated by COVID-19. What should or can be done to make a dent in those dire unemployment statistics, do you think?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Well, we've got one, weird anomaly in our law, in my opinion, which is the human rights act sort of opt out discrimination against persons with disabilities that allows us to be paid less. But leaving that to one side, that's a discrete reform that I think needs to be done, and we've been championing a little bit. It is about accessibility because there's absolutely no reason for there to be a different employment rate for very able people that just aren't able to access the workplace in the same way. And one of the things that I'm looking at really closely now and after the election, act is a really good example of this, where you can just accommodate a group properly to make sure that we had substantive equality in this one area with politics, and you just want to recognize that candidates actually need different things and what is the stand and run, and be elected. But one of the things that I'm looking at that's kind of the next step for that is the Access Alliance Disability Act.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Well, it would be a bill, but hopefully an act where we do set minimum standards for government and non-governmental workplaces, voting, schools, hospitals and other public spaces that if met, would make those spaces equally accessible and equally usable by people with all sorts of disabilities. So defining disability also in the proper way, which includes varying diversity and chronic illness. So things like that would actually mean that we one day would not enter a workplace and be seen as having special needs, that's what I realized with MS is that people think that you shouldn't be promoted to a higher role, for example, it's almost well-meaning because you wouldn't be able to cope and actually it's better to just kind of rule out people who've declared their illness with disability if they could have kind of kept secret. And as I heard more and more about that, I kind of thought, well, no, we do actually have to be much more public about these things, thesee being these obstacles.

Jonathan Mosen:
Potentially a key need for public education then, the people genuinely don't always intend to discriminate, but they simply don't know what they don't know, and public education is a little bit sparse.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Yeah, absolutely. So public education about who we are and what we need. And it's really interesting that in a way, the COVID lockdown and the talk about, this term, compromise, started to bring us to the fore in a way, where other members of the community realized, everybody new someone who fell into, whether they new someone that has an autoimmune illness ... And they realized, well that person that I know who is in a wheelchair may not always have been, or maybe this other condition. And, Oh, we can actually do something to make their life safer or better. And I don't think everyone had kind of thought about, we all have a role in making the world safer and more inclusive, but beyond that ... And it is things like public education. So you go, well, actually this person can absolutely work, they just need different hours with different time off or whatever else. But part of it is regulation.

Jonathan Mosen:
Is the Green party policy then to support the accessibility legislation? Or is it simply a commitment to investigate its viability at this point?

Golriz Ghahraman:
So when it came to forming a parliamentary group on it, we represented and supported it because it does fit really into our equality policy. We don't have a specific policy that references the bill, but if it were in parliament, for example, we would definitely vote for it.

Jonathan Mosen:
You're a lawyer of some distinction, not only nationally, but internationally with the work that you've done on human rights. It's interesting to me this whole accessibility legislation question, because if you look at jurisdictions like the United States with the Americans with disabilities act, to a lesser degree the UK and Australia, where they have made some progress on accessibility, those accessibility victories have been won within their existing disability civil rights legislation. So they don't separate out accessibility, it's that the human rights legislation or the disability rights legislation has sufficient teeth, that you can actually take cases against people who are not accommodating disabled people and win. Whereas here we tend to have more of a focus on mediation in our human rights legislation. And then you go on to the disputes tribunal if that mediation hasn't been successful. Do you think there could be potential dangers in separating accessibility from the rest of the civil rights framework for disabled people, particularly given that we are signatories to the UN convention, which is rights-based.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Yeah, we do have it in different areas. So our human rights your absolutely right, has mediation as a core remedy, which is really inappropriate in lots of different ways. And we kind of came up against that when suddenly post-Christchurch terror attack we were talking about, how mediation was the only remedy, and that just seems really unsafe again, but in terms of accessibility, it just makes some of the discriminatory practices really, or rather the human rights standards really unenforceable and that sense go to go with the courts. So we do it in different ways. For example, we have different employment law, so employment discrimination, or things that breach your rights in the employment field are very enforceable because they have a secret act that legalize that, we do the same with privacy and in other areas as well.

Golriz Ghahraman:
So it is very workable, it's just that it hasn't been prioritized having a secret enforceable law and having proper regulations. And one of the things I really like about the accessibility act is that it places hard time limits on when post-passing the act people have to actually meet them. And you don't often get really hard line standards and social economic and cultural rights enforcement because people kind of go, well, the standard is whatever is sort of reasonably able to be done with taking account of money and for lack of better words, we didn't have the resource yet. Whereas this sets really had limits and the regulations would be then really clear and lead to legislitive form. So we can do it, we do it in other areas, we just haven't prioritized it and that kind of what's not really good enough.

Jonathan Mosen:
In general, do you think our human rights act particularly in a disability context is fit for purpose? Or do we need to look at its effectiveness as well?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Yeah. I see the human rights act as just essentially it sits that grounds of discrimination, that you can then litigate in various areas. So when I was involved in one of the trenches of the family care, just vast, ongoing saga of litigation under the previous national government. What they did was they cut off access to the human rights act as a discrimination ground, which was the family status ground for the family care, profoundly disabled people so they couldn't say that the government not paying for the care at home was discriminatory because as it was and the courts had repeatedly found that it was, it was extraordinary. I've never seen a parliament put court papers into legislation and say they have no personal value, but the government did. And it took away access to the human rights act.

Golriz Ghahraman:
So it wasn't the remedies regime that really killed it for us when we came to do the next tranche and we had to do it in a different way, it was the fact that that ground of discrimination didn't exist anymore really for us. Then they cut off a class that litigate the family care from that ground. And so those grounds do exist and you can litigate in different ways and kind of hold government to account. But in areas where we value those grounds of discrimination, we've come out and created a proper legislative regime that gets them what that means. And that's not necessarily the case that we'd need that all to be in the human rights act but then we have to put it on everything we have, for example, like rental protection laws.

Golriz Ghahraman:
And we want them to be much more detailed and enforceable, and we don't necessarily want to put that into the human rights act either. But a renter could bring a claim and refer back to the discrimination ground, as well as other things that renters have protection against. So it's not necessarily that we have to reform that act, that act points to the discrimination issue, although there is that one area where it does allow discrimination against the disability's community and we do need to change that. But I think in terms of the remedies and the detailed regulations, it would be appropriate to have a seperate for that.

Jonathan Mosen:
Can I talk about the footpaths of a feet petition, which has been put together because some people are concerned that some of the initiatives being advanced by Judy Anne Genter, who is a fellow Green MP of yours will go too fast, swing the pendulum too far, and make the streets less safe for disabled pedestrians to navigate. Is there a conflict there between the green ideals of getting more people cycling and disabled people's desire to just go about their business safely as pedestrians?

Golriz Ghahraman:
I think that's, again a case of people being able to be properly heard as we were saying earlier on all policies and it may be that traditionally people haven't sort of heard those things, "disability's issue" but it is. So it is a case of all of the communities that are actually impacted by policy and being able to properly engage with it, and set limits to safety and accessibility for all of the different groups, so it's kind of like securing the safety of young people vs. the elderly with accessibility issues or elder disabled. So absolutely we have to balance everybody's interest and safety, but I think that was okay. So it kind of came a bit late, that that particular group and the disability community had input. So if we can get proper input, I think we can probably come to a place of agreement.

Jonathan Mosen:
Just one more question in the time that we have available, there has been a lot of talk of late, obviously about the Simpson review and a prevailing view that disabled people weren't a proper path of that process, there was no one who was disabled on that panel. Do you think the government got that process wrong? And what's your view on a separate ministry for disability issues, which appears to be gaining momentum now in the disability community?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Yeah, I support the ministry idea, I do. Again, it would only be really workable if there wasn't all of government culture of including disability issues in all of the work streams. And if the ministry for disabilities or whatever it's going to be called, would ensure that, then that's how it would become workable rather than if that means that disability issues and even more silos. But a really good example of where policymaking worked really well across, when all ministries kind of affecting the issue came together was when Jan Logie kind of designed her domestic and sexual violence response in the last wellbeing budget.

Golriz Ghahraman:
And it was laundered as being exactly how wellbeing was meant to work because she got the budget across, it was justice police courts, that's kind of one that you think of as being enforcing of these issues, but then also ethnic communities, maori, MSD, children and all of these administrative had to be in coordinate with each other. And that was for those coordinated as well as down into the grassroots and you think sort of this revolutionary approach. And I think we do need that for disability as well. The last thing we need is to be more siloed, but I think to have our interests and use sort of elevated to the extent that we deserve a ministry, it might be a really good thing.

Jonathan Mosen:
And the Simpson review, was that a dodgy process from a disability perspective?

Golriz Ghahraman:
Look, if you don't have a disability perspective on the committee, that's always going to be criticized and it should be. So we do need to do better than that.

Jonathan Mosen:
There are plenty of issues we can talk about, but that's the time we have. Thank you so much Golriz for coming on the podcast. I really appreciate your time.

Golriz Ghahraman:
Thanks so much for your time.

Jonathan Mosen:
And if you'd like to comment on anything that Golriz Ghahraman has said, you can leave a message on our listener line and it could be included in a future episode of the podcast, the phone number to do that is 044720200, that number is available 24/7. 044720200. You can also drop us an email and that email could contain an audio attachment. If you would like to use your voice memos app on your smartphone, or your computer to record something, or you could just write something down in the good old fashioned way, you can send it into podcast@workbridge.co.nz, that's podcast@workbridge.co.nz.

And if you'd like to know more information about the green party, you can visit their website at greens.org.nz. That's www.greens.org.nz. And I'll be back with you soon for another interview with a disability spokesperson from a political party as we head towards the 19th of September election.

View Details

On 19 September, we will choose who governs New Zealand for the next three years.

Disability issues are not often discussed in the media, so over the next few episodes of Mahi, we are inviting the disability issues spokespeople from all political parties represented in Parliament to join us. We'll discuss a range of disability-related topics that may be on your mind as you decide who to vote for.

Joining Jonathan Mosen on this episode is Golriz Ghahraman, Disability Issues spokesperson for the Green Party. They discuss representation, employment, accessibility, the Simpson Review, if there should be a Ministry for Disability Issues and more.

For more information about the Green Party, you can visit their website. 

If you have a comment about anything discussed in this episode, please share! Email podcast@workbridge.co.nz or call our listener line, 04-472-0200.

View Details

Jonathan Mosen:
Kia ora koutou, welcome to episode eight of Mahi, the Disability Employment Podcast brought to you by Workbridge. I'm Jonathan Mosen. It's good to be back with you. And I trust that everything's going okay for you during what has been an extraordinary time, not just in New Zealand, but around the world. It's great to be getting back to some degree of normality with Level 2, although depending on the nature of your impairment, it certainly may have significant challenges, for sure.

Jonathan Mosen:
A reminder that Workbridge has been here for you, right throughout this COVID-19 situation. We've still been working with people right across, Aotearoa working on CVs, job preparedness, and even though we know that times are tough right now, we have been able successfully to connect people to employers who are hiring. So don't give up. And I know you may be thinking about restarting your job search, if you took a break during Level 4 and Level 3, and now you see businesses are opening and it might be time to really start looking in earnest. Again, we are here for you. We have been doing work via phone and electronic means like Zoom and similar technologies, but it won't be too far away before you can make an appointment to meet one of our employment consultants face to face.

Jonathan Mosen:
Once again, the best way to keep track of what's happening. If you have social media is to follow us there. We are on Twitter and Facebook and LinkedIn and some other places as well. So, that's a great way to connect with us. And of course, you can give our toll free number a call, which has also been functioning throughout the pandemic. 0508-858-858 is the number to call, 0508-858-858. We've also been communicating with job seekers via email at various points during this situation. So if you are seeking work and you're not registered with Workbridge, then it's a good idea to do that and we'll be in touch with you regularly. You can do that by giving us a call or going to the website at workbridge.co.nz, that's workbridge.co.nz. And we certainly appreciate the positive messages we've had from job seekers and employers during the situation.

Jonathan Mosen:
I must say that the team has been fantastic. We worked very hard on a continuity plan. And then when we went into Level 2 the first time, when we were on the way up, as opposed to being on the way down, we seamlessly implemented that continuity plan and just kept working from homes around the country, serving you. Now what's on the podcast this time, we're going to be looking at the budget and you may be all budgeted out by now because whenever the budget comes along, there are lots of articles in the paper and news stories on radio and TV. But very few, if any programs, that look at the budget from the perspective of those who are disabled or have a long-term health condition. Is there anything in budget 2020 that we should be excited about? It turns out there actually is. And we'll discuss this with our panel on this episode of Mahi.

Jonathan Mosen:
Political tragics like me and probably everyone else on today's panel anticipate the government's budget every year. These days delivered sometime in May, but as we start to pick up the pieces of the economy and the recovery from COVID-19 begins in earnest, this year's budget delivered by Finance Minister Grant Robertson was one of the most anticipated in recent memory. In her pre-budget announcement, the prime minister said that the budget was about jobs, jobs, jobs, and that's what Workbridge is about too, specifically jobs for disabled people and those with a long-term health condition. When there's a surplus of labour or in other words, high unemployment, it makes finding a job when you're disabled or have a health condition even tougher than it usually is. So what are the highlights of the budget for the people that Workbridge has the privilege of serving? And is there anything missing that should have been in it?

Jonathan Mosen:
I'm joined on our panel today by Paula Tesoriero who is New Zealand's Disability Rights Commissioner, Garth Bennie, Chief Executive of the New Zealand Disability Support Network, and Nick Ruane, who is the Workbridge Manager of Stakeholder Relations. Welcome to you all. Let's start with your overall impressions of the budget and then we can drill down into the specific policy areas, Paula, this wasn't the budget the finance minister was anticipating delivering even three long months ago. What stood out for you from a disability perspective in terms of what was there and what should have been there?

Paula Tesoriero:
Kia ora koutou, I think as always with a budget, the devil is in the detail as agencies now work to allocate investments that they've been given. I think from a specific disability perspective, it's been really good to see the investment in Disability Support Services and I'm sure that we'll talk about that. And the fact that not really largely as cost pressure increase, great to see 12 million specifically around employment for disabled people, good to see some money, ballooning support and education and funding to enable community based service providers to contribute to the wider community. I think, although not disability specific, I'm sure our community should benefit from funding to address family and sexual violence, the new housing initiatives, transport and funding for child wellbeing. I think the trick here will be making sure that we are front and centre. I would have liked to have seen more in terms of disability support services, so that there was a larger actual increase.

Paula Tesoriero:
Although recognizing the economic situation we're in, it's this year that's difficult. And hopefully we might see that in Phase Two. I would have also like to have seen an increase to child and adult disability allowances, particularly in this context is them just try and rebuild post-COVID. And I'm not surprised there wasn't a significant investment in mental health, given there was such an investment last year, but I do put this as an area where people that want to access those services and they need to in this environment and hopefully citizens can be responsive to that. So I think, you know, we make up 24% of New Zealand's population so every aspect of this budget affects us in some way.

Jonathan Mosen:
Garth NZDSN has been doing a lot of lobbying ahead of the budget seeking some better outcomes. What's your overall impressions?

Garth Bennie:
Well, I guess the first impression is that this has been one of the single largest increases in disability support funding that we've seen in many, many years. And it really reflects a desperate need to catch up and close the gap between the cost of providing services and the funding that's been made available up until now. So it's been very much a catch up and we're very pleased to see that. The Ministry of Health Disability Support Services, for them, it will mean being relieved of the burden of having to focus their efforts each year on a deficit. And all of us can now turn our attention to what will this additional investment mean in terms of a focus on improving outcomes for disabled people and their families and how providers can be supported to contribute to that. So I think from that point of view, the budget was a surprise.

Garth Bennie:
And certainly late last year, we released our sector briefing where we estimated that the shortfall was around $220 million per year. This budget has delivered $230 million of increase funding over the next, for each of the next four years across the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Social Development Disability funding. So we're really pleased with that, but, of course, the trick now and the effort now will be, now that we've caught up, that will be important to keep up and that we don't slide back over the coming years into a situation that we found ourselves prior to this budget. From an employment perspective, it was pretty pleasing to see the funding increases for community participation. They are the Cinderella of Disability Support Services.

Garth Bennie:
A lot of focus tends to be on Ministry of Health funding shortfalls, but Community Participation Services have been one of the most poorly funded service lines across all disability. And it's really pleasing to see that increase. A lot of those services provide something in the pipeline, in terms of assisting people to move into employment or into engaging with employment services. The $12.5 million to expand employment support services, I think is really good to see, however, given the challenges that disabled people are going to face in a rapidly changing labour market as you said Jonathan, unemployment is set to rise. It already is, and that's going to make competition for existing vacancies and temps. And in times of high unemployment, we need to be very aware that history tells us that government programs tend to respond and focus on the avalanche of new job seekers, not on disabled unemployed people per se, but I think we need to be very focused on how we can use that $12.5 million to better support and expand access to support services for disabled people.

Jonathan Mosen:
And Nick from Workbridge, the Workbridge perspective on how the budget has gone down.

Nick Ruane:
Sure. Thank you, Jonathan. I mean, I think I support the comments that Garth made around what the $12.5 million will actually achieve. I think the thing from my perspective, looking at the budget, there was actually a lot of money that was spent right across the whole disability vote. If you looked at it from a global perspective, which is obviously really good to see one of the things that caught my attention was the $1.6 billion that was allocated to vocational education. And I think that's going to be really interesting. It's certainly been something that we've been very actively engaged in, in the last 12 months is looking at what vocational education will look like, particularly for disabled people. So, that was something that we were very encouraged to see.

Jonathan Mosen:
One of the things that like to raise is the silos that exist within government that seem to really punish or be disadvantageous to disabled people. For example, if you want a piece of equipment where you go, well, it might depend even on where you are in the country, of course. Whether you have enough individualized funding available to you or not, but if you don't then depending on what you're going to use it for, you might go to support funds. You might go to health, it gets very confusing. Similarly, there are some programs that are very worthwhile that have fallen through the cracks because different parts of them require funding from different arms of government and there hasn't really been a lot of coordination. So disabled people are worse off because of the arguments over which bucket of money certain things should come from. And I was interested to note last year, some comments about reform of the State Sector Act, so that these things could be addressed. Do any of you know whether that work is continuing because, you know, it's great to see, for example, the extra $12 million for employment, but if we can't get these cross organizational, cross governmental initiatives going, it may well not be used as effectively as it might've been.

Paula Tesoriero:
I think Jonathan, that you raise a really great point about coordination across government. And as I think we all saw during the immediate COVID response, actually how agencies can work together when there's a very strong imperative. And I saw situations where providers, government agencies were able to respond in a really agile, quick way without quite so much concern about which particular bucket the money came from and whether your impairment was able to tick this box or that box. And that was actually really, really refreshing and encouraging to see. And the trick will be how do we ensure that that continues in the post COVID environment? And I think that's imperative on all of us to make sure that that can happen.

Paula Tesoriero:
The public sector reforms, as I understand, are still going ahead. And it does really provide that more joined up machinery of government approach to making sure that our agencies are working together in a coordinated way. And I think that for so many of the barriers that disabled people face, they're really faced at that systemic level. And it's very hard to get systemic change when you have to deal with individual agencies or take a very bespoke focus and real systemic change means an all of government approach. And I think that's certainly something that I'll be continuing to put my efforts into because that is the way in my view that we will see real change and progress for our community.

Garth Bennie:
Yes. I think that momentum for that kind of reform is really, really important. And I agree with you, Paula, the COVID-19 crisis required funders to be a lot more flexible. It required providers to be a lot more flexible and some things have happened over the past few weeks that we don't want to see stop in terms of the added flexibility, new ways of supporting people and some work across those silos. Interestingly, one of the policy changes that was buried in the budget papers and the release of information was the decision to now allow Employment Support Services to work with people two years before they leave school. That's a significant change and has all sorts of implications in terms of how that whole transition school process can operate a lot more without all the different silos having to wait their turn, as it were to get involved in supporting transition from school outcomes. And so I think that's an important development. It's been a long time coming. I have no idea why it took so long to make quite a simple policy change, but I think that has potential to have a significant impact.

Jonathan Mosen:
And Nick, that would be something that would be pleasing I'm sure, because Workbridge has had a program called ‘Workbridge in Schools’, which has sort of fallen through these cracks. And we also know that when you are at the tail end of high school and you really start to focus the mind on what you want to do with your life, it's really important that high expectations about what you might be able to achieve as a disabled person are set.

Nick Ruane:
Yeah. And you're right, Jonathan, and we've worked on that program for as long as I've worked at Workbridge, at least three years now. And certainly when we developed it in a co-design passion with the schools and with employers, we certainly wanted to provide that opportunity for young children with disabilities when they're in their final years of school to get that opportunity to go into the workplace. And up until this point, we have been pretty much prevented from engaging with those young people. So this is something that we noted with a great deal of positivity because we've always seen it as being a really important hinge point. And if we don't engage with those young people at that time, their life outcomes for them are particularly precarious. So, so we were very positive.

Jonathan Mosen:
One of the things that I have observed since COVID-19 arrived is that there really is an appetite for very significant re-thinking of a lot of things. It's almost like everything's on the table in a way that I can't recall really since the beginning of the Rogernomics Era. So although times are tough, it's also a time of extraordinary potential and opportunity. And I'm wondering if there has been further impetus given to this sort of division. Garth, I think you made the comment about the sort of poor cousin approach that often employment services get because it's tucked away there with MSD and most of disability comes under health. Do you think there's an appetite that says maybe it's time for a disability ministry or some sort of greater coordination?

Garth Bennie:
I have mixed views. I think one of the challenges of pulling all the funding and policy for disability and to something like a ministry for disability is that you create a silo with every other government department playing a hands-off kind of role. I think we need to be careful. I think it will be interesting to see what Heather Simpson's Health and Disability Review produces by way of recommendations. And whether there have been some final changes to that report or additions to that report, in light of the experience around COVID-19, where disability services and disabled people were not that well served by elements of the health system that had a very significant focus on the DHB world or 20 different DHB worlds, rather than a disability focus per se. And so the relevance of some of the initiatives that developed during the COVID-19 crisis did not sit well for disability providers and indeed for disabled people and families as well. And of course, we all know what those examples are.

Garth Bennie:
So I think we, we need to proceed with caution, but certainly there's been a narrative around the disability sector for some years now around the importance of a far more focused and integrated approach for disability policy and disability funding. And also the importance, particularly more recently with the Enabling Good Lives initiative of having a set of arrangements where disabled people feature far more prominently in governance roles, wherever a disability might end up being located in the machinery of government. And I think that's a really important and central development that's needed in any change. So I think, and of course, you know, there's the narrative that basically says any where but health, but if it's not health where, and just let's be cautious about that and wherever it ends up, if it does end up somewhere else other than where it is now, which is mainly in health, let's make sure the governance arrangements, secure the voice of the people at the centre of all of this; disabled people.

Jonathan Mosen:
Paula, you'd be aware I guess of the work that ODI is doing. And the fact that it's no reflection on the work, the quality of the work that ODI is doing, and that's the Office for Disability Issues, I apologize to listeners for getting into the acronyms, but there's almost a sort of a silo effect there, isn't there? That there's a danger that government departments kind of think, "Oh, this is a disability issue. Disability is ODI's problem. We'll shut it over to ODI."

Paula Tesoriero:
Yeah. Look, I share much of the sentiment that Garth talked about and your remarks, Jonathan. I think that if we want genuine enduring systemic change for disabled New Zealanders, then each and every agency has to make sure that it is truly delivering on the obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. And so often in my role, it really is about getting individual agencies to understand that, and you know, it's hard enough now. And part of the reason is because there isn't the number of disabled people in agencies to bring that perspective. And one of the difficulties is, as you say, with an organization like ODI, I do see that often agencies will say, well, I think you should talk to ODI about that. And in actual fact, no, that's not the solution. ODI has a very specific role, but every agency is responsible for delivering policy and services to 24% of the population.

Paula Tesoriero:
I think that the machinery type issues are ones that it is important for our community to discuss. And, you know, I see a lot of social media and various comments pop up in different forums about whether it's time to have a ministry and, you know, talking with some of the other population agencies, it isn't always the case that you can get more and do better because you have that. And precisely because of the reason that Garth touched on, which is that you create that silo effect. I think the trick is that, you know, in a utopian world, we would have every agency really delivering to disabled people, but we're certainly not there yet. So what is it that we can build on from the experiences that we've learned through COVID to create that. You know, part of this in my mind is really about investing in DPOs, making sure that there is the real capacity there for DPOs to be at the table, for them to be able to expand their networks right across the disability sector. You know, that takes resource and DPOs aren't funded at that level.

Paula Tesoriero:
So I'm a big supporter of more funding to go there. And then I think there are some real opportunities, post COVID, with some of the new working groups and things, I guess for want of a better word, that we established. You know, how do you resource those and create something that is enduring, that stops short of a separate ministry, but coordinates the sector in a better way. So, you know, I should stop talking there because I could talk all day about it but I think these conversations are really important and actually disabled people need to be owning a large part of this conversation and we need to make the space for that.

Jonathan Mosen:
Can I talk about individualized funding? Because it's a lot of interest in this obviously, and those in parts of New Zealand who don't have access to individualized funding often wish that they did. What can we glean from the budget about the future of Enabling Good Lives and it's roll out?

Garth Bennie:
Well, an additional $12 million was made available to, as I understand it, to explore and proceed with an expansion of system transformation. How that will unfold and whether system trench transformation means one single big bang of change, or whether this is about a program of work that will systematically transform the way services are funded and provided over a period of time remains the same. But I think we certainly have a situation at the moment, which is really inequitable. You know, some parts of New Zealand have some access to some parts of individualized funding and depending on where you live, depending on eligibility for different programs.

Garth Bennie:
And so the extra investments and in the budget, I feel will enable a much more coherent approach. My view is that the time for demonstration, prototypes, trials, new models, whatever is over, we've got to start mixing this together. So that access to a personable budget, if that's what people want, is far more consistently available right across the country. And providers are enabled to interact with people who have personal budgets, budgets in a far more effective and efficient way. So that there are real options for people in terms of the level of choice and control that they want to have over of getting access to a personal budget and to choice and control over how that person budgets use so that each person, family can, in a sense, find their spot in terms of what other things in relation to a personal budget that they want a great deal of choice and control over. And what are the aspects that they would rather have a provider or other individuals support them for.

Jonathan Mosen:
Calling time on prototypes though would suggest that there is definitely a model that we can all agree is successfully implemented and working somewhere. I mean, is that actually the case? Do we know the model for Enabling Good Lives that should now be rolled out nationally?

Garth Bennie:
I think what we will find, and I understand officials have got to come to government before the end of this year with "What have we learnt? What does this look like from here?" I think from all the different demonstrations, pilots, and prototypes, we now have enough information that tells us what are the kinds of changes that need to be made and some decisions need to be made about how we roll that out, nationally.

Jonathan Mosen:
One concern many disabled people have is that when the chips are down and jobs need to be kept, disabled people are particularly vulnerable. And one of the roles that Workbridge plays is to promote the benefits to employers of hiring and keeping disabled workers. But Paula, I imagine the Human Rights Commission can play a helpful role here, both in terms of public education and also assistance with specific cases where people feel that they may have been singled out because of their disability when they are in fact performing well.

Paula Tesoriero:
Absolutely, disabled people should feel absolutely welcome to approach the Human Rights Commission, take a formal complaint if they feel they have been discriminated against. You know, employment does make up one of our top disability related complaint areas to the commission. And that's sort of in roughly equal proportions to education, just by way of interest. And so really encourage people to make use of that complaints process. It does often lead to satisfactory outcomes.

Paula Tesoriero:
I think it was really good to see the acknowledgement by the Employment Minister Willie Jackson and business leader, Phil O'Reilly, when they spoke to the Epidemic Response Committee. But given the impact of the COVID lockdown on jobs, they said it's even more critical that business and government support just enable people to get and keep meaningful work, and to retrain or gain qualifications. I think that, as we've talked about, you know, there is the $12 point million specifically for the employment of disabled people, but, you know, I expect to see accessibility and inclusion across all of the employment related initiatives, like the Free Trade training apprenticeships, the Maori and Pasifika employment initiatives, the apprenticeship schemes in vocational training that Nick touched on.

Paula Tesoriero:
And I think that it's incumbent on all of us to make sure that disabled people are front and center in those conversations. And you're absolutely right about education. You know, we've all got that role to play in making sure that employers really understand the benefit from having a diverse workforce. And, you know, that really pro diverse attitudes, as we know, helps businesses to access untapped skills and talents. Best person for the job, you know, show customers how diversity is valued near the market. You know, we need to keep getting that 24% figure out there that, you know, over 1 million new Zealanders impacted through disability and you know, so much of the service and advocacy don't mirror the market. So I think it really is about continuing to get messages out, continuing to break down myths and, you know, we've all got a role to play in it. And I really hope that, you know, part of rebuilding New Zealand must include disabled people in those conversations and improved outcomes.

Jonathan Mosen:
Do you have any advice on when somebody should use the classic employment grievance model that eventually could end up with the employment relations authority and when they should use the Human Rights Commission for assistance?

Paula Tesoriero:
I think, you know, people should use as Human Rights Commission to check a pathway, you know, which way. I think if people feel that they have been discriminated on the basis of disability, then most definitely the Human Rights Commission can offer a way through the year. You know, often, you know, we have a very successful resolution rate through our mediation service. And so often, you know, that might be where an employer has not been able to make, or has chosen not to make reasonable accommodation or hasn't been aware of the issues and often, you know, mediation is all that it takes, that it needs to get resolution.

Paula Tesoriero:
So I would encourage when people feel that it's because of disability rather than another reason, then they should absolutely come to the Human Rights Commission. I think your more traditional employment related grievances where it's more difficult to tie it to disability, in some of those other channels, are more appropriate, but absolutely, you know, I think. Look, we're in a really tough environment and the thing that none of us want to see is disabled people being left behind in the employment market because you know, it's expeditious to do so. So we need to watch them.

Jonathan Mosen:
And what can be done with the funding from the budget to perhaps assist in the area of public education and helping employers understand that it's not really the risk that they think it is to hire a disabled person or someone with a long-term health condition.

Nick Ruane:
That's a good question. I mean I think a lot of times employers that we talk to, which many of times are really great employers, but there is sometimes a perception that to hire a disabled person, it might be a greater cost, there might be a lot of equipment that might need to be purchased. And we do get those types of questions and they are really fairly reasonable questions. And I think for the employers we talk to, it's just really a conversation around the supports that we provide and the funds that are available. So for us, it's about pointing employers in the direction of the support funds, which are available relatively generous to make employers aware that there are relatively generous funding available to provide reasonable accommodation for workplace supports around technology, around making the accommodations available to make an employee their very best in the workplace. So in terms of the budget allocation, I mean, there was obviously 12.5 million to make the job of supported employers a little bit easier. And I think we need to just wait a little while just to find out exactly how that's going to play out.

Jonathan Mosen:
I know Garth that you have a lot of interest and experience in this area of disability employment. What do you think the balance should look like in terms of this new funding allocation regarding increasing the capacity, if you will, of disabled people at a very difficult time to obtain jobs that are out there and actually dealing with some of these employer misconceptions? There's a huge perception gap out there.

Garth Bennie:
Well, I think particularly in times of high unemployment, which is clearly where we're going to end up over the coming months and years, is that competition for existing vacancies is going to be intense, to say the least. And particularly for disabled people who experience greater barriers to employment, I think the solution's going to be found in the ability of employment support agencies to craft proposals for employers that create and carve new roles that secure a job for the disabled person, but also increase the business' productivity. That's a very highly customized approach, requires a bit of extra time and effort to craft those sorts of proposals to achieve that sort of win-win situation for both the person and the employer. But I think that's where some of the capacity investment needs to go. We need to get a lot better at doing that. And in doing so, you know, employers need to know about and how to access the kind of partnership that they can have with employment support agencies that will essentially enable them to put their existing disability programs on steroids.

Jonathan Mosen:
The Government has said, "Look, this is just the beginning. There's a lot that has to be done to try and insulate as much as possible from the COVID-19 consequences." What would you hope will come that hasn't yet been unveiled in the budget from a disability perspective? Nick, what are your thoughts on that?

Nick Ruane:
From a disability perspective? I mean I think we really want to see a greater focus in and probably a greater monetary spend around internships and funded apprenticeships. So it goes back to that vocational apprenticeship space, there's a bunch of disabled people that are currently in tertiary education, I'm using it in the widest possible sense. That are currently in some form of training that they really want either an internship or a job at the end. So I think we really need to put some focus into what that job looks like at the end for them. So obviously the government is putting a lot of focus into that space for generally. So I think partnering up in that space and making that space as inclusive and accessible as possible would really pay off for certainly for disabled people and their space in. There's over 20,000 disabled people in some form of tertiary education at the moment. So I think looking at that space will really pay dividends.

Jonathan Mosen:
And Garth, we're in this wonderful part of the electoral cycle where every politician is your BFF, every politician is everyone's BFF at the moment. So what are you advocating for?

Garth Bennie:
Well, I think some work has already started on expanding the current employment support contract to include a training dimension to recognize that the benefits of supporting someone onto the training journey with a specific, usually with a specific employment outcome in mind and that's an outcome that's worth supporting within the contract itself. Since the budget announcement, I think we now need to look at those, that training pathway in terms of while the person is still at school and then post school now because of the policy change that enables providers to work with people before they leave school. So that opens the possibility of some much better support efforts directed at things like internships, with experience and supporting people on to some of those vocational pathways, those tertiary education pathways that will increase the chances or lead directly to the possibility of an employment outcome.

Garth Bennie:
The other announcement in the budget was to fast track some of the vocational education reforms. So prior to the Budget Workforce Development Council, replacing the ITO and much of the functions of the ITO weren't going to be set up fully until the end of next year. Now they all have to be set up by October this year, and there's some real opportunity in how those workforce development councils operate to make sure that when the one that has stood up that's going to focus on training on the disability perspective.

Garth Bennie:
But more broadly for each of those workforce development councils, how are they going to respond to learners with disability? And what kind of provision and equity approaches are going to be built into the work of those workforce development councils and the subsequent training programs that result from their efforts, what’s going to be in there that is going to really support far more equitable outcomes for disabled learners? You know, one of the classic examples is the multitude of online learning platforms that are around tertiary education at the moment, and how incredibly inaccessible most of them are for people with disabilities.

Jonathan Mosen:
My thanks to our panellists: Garth Benny from the New Zealand Disability Support Network, Nick Ruane from Workbridge and Paula Tesoriero Disability Rights Commissioner, and my apologies for some of the vagaries of Zoom and Voiceover IP there with some of that audio. But I hope nonetheless, you found the discussion interesting, and that wraps it up for this edition of Mahi. If you'd like to be in touch, we love getting your feedback. You can drop us an email to podcast@workbridge.co.nz that's podcast@workbridge.co.nz. And the listener line is open as well. That is in Wellington. 04-472-0200. That's 04-4720200. We'll see you next time.

View Details

It's hard to find extensive mainstream media coverage of the Government's Budget from a disability perspective. On this episode of Mahi, Workbridge's Chief Executive Jonathan Mosen is joined by an expert panel to discuss what the Budget means for disabled people and issues arising from the recovery from COVID-19.

We'll hear from Disability Rights Commissioner Paula Tesoriero, New Zealand Disability Support Network Chief Executive Garth Bennie and Workbridge's Manager Stakeholder Relations Nick Ruane.

View Details

In this special episode of Mahi, Jonathan Mosen speaks with Disability Rights Commissioner Paula Tesoriero about COVID-19. Paula details some of the input she continues to have in the formulation of public policy around managing the pandemic, and we discuss some specific issues of concern to disabled people.

During the pandemic, we will gladly use this resource to conduct interviews of interest to the disability community. If you'd like to hear from someone in particular, contact us via the methods mentioned in the podcast and we'll do what we can.

Kia kaha.

View Details

We hope you and your whanau are doing well as we all unite against COVID-19.

The team at Workbridge are working from home, but we're still here to serve our jobseeker and employer customers. We'll be reaching out, but should you need anything, please be in touch.

The Support Funds team is also fully operational. Jonathan Mosen speaks with Lee Nattrass. She provides us with an overview of Support Funds and tells us how the team continues to be processing applications.

And we meet Whitney Tangaroa, Workbridge's Manager Brand Development. Six months into the role, she talks about what she does and what she's learned.

View Details

It's the question that vexes many disabled people seeking work. Whether, when or how to disclose your impairment to a potential employer.

In this episode of Mahi, Workbridge Chief Executive Jonathan Mosen is joined by Chris Ford, Nick Ruane and Katy Hetherington. Each has their own unique experience and perspective to share on the disability disclosure issue.

What do you think? Drop us an email to the address mentioned in the podcast, either written down or by way of an audio attachment. You can also call our listener line any time and leave a message, 04-472-0200.

View Details

Jonathan:
Kia ora koutou, and welcome to episode four of Mahi, the disability employment podcast brought to you by Workbridge. I'm Jonathan Mosen. It's good to have you back with us. If you'd like to be in touch with the podcast, there are two ways in which you can do that. Drop us an email to podcast@workbridge.co.nz. That's podcast@workbridge.co.nz. You can attach an audio clip if you prefer or you can just write something down and you can call our feedback line. That number is 04-472-0200, that's 04-472-0200. Charges may apply if you're calling outside the Wellington free calling area.

Jonathan:
On the podcast this month, Workbridge is celebrating that once again, we have a council president, a board chairman, and a chief executive all with lived experience of disability. I'll be speaking to our new council president, Debbie Ward and our new board chairman Pam McNeill about the experiences that have led them to their respective roles, and what they hope to achieve now that they have the roles.

Jonathan:
But before we hear from them some important information. The government has released its disability employment action plan. We're delighted about that, a national strategy on disability employment is something Workbridge has been calling for for some time. When the prime minister made the announcement that there would be a series of action plans introduced and that disability would be one of those categories, I met with the minister of employment and fed back to him about some of the issues that we felt the document should contain.

Jonathan:
The document has been published under the auspices of the ministry of social development and there's a link to it in the show notes for this episode. We encourage everybody with an interest in employment to submit on this. There's an online form you can complete which makes the process simple, you can also write your own document and submit that and you can submit by phone as well. All of the details on how to submit your feedback are on the page that we link to in the show notes for this episode. I realise Christmas is coming up, but you do have until mid February to make a submission, so maybe when you're fresh in the new year, give that some thought and let the ministry of social development know what you think about matters pertaining to disability employment, and specifically what they're suggesting in the disability employment action plan.

Jonathan:
Earlier in the month was the international day of persons with disabilities. This is a UN organized event, and in this year's event they were fostering leadership potential among disabled people. So I thought that December would be a good time to introduce you to the new leadership team at Workbridge. At the most senior level, we have our new council chair, Debbie Ward. Welcomed to you, Debbie.

Debbie:
Thanks, Jonathan.

Jonathan:
And chair of the board, Pam McNeill. Although you don't mind chairman, right, Pam?

Pam:
No, chairman's fine. Kia ora.

Jonathan:
Yeah, it's good to have you both here. Debbie, can I start with you? Tell me a bit about your background, and a little if you would about your lived experience of disability.

Debbie:
So I obviously am a disabled woman, and I have had my impairment since birth. And I've been very fortunate to have been born into a family that have never seen my impairment as a barrier to stop me participating in all family events, from holidays camping to doing household chores from a very young age. And that set me up really in a good state because my parents fought for me to have mainstream education, from primary school all the way up to high school. When I was a teenager, sort of around 16, 17 years old, I got quite involved with Crippled Children's Society back then, now known as CCS Disability Action. As an individual prior to that, they were supporting my mom with advocating on her behalf for whatever it took for me to be included in schools and out in the community.

Debbie:
When I started getting involved as an individual with CCS Disability Action, that was like a stepping stone for my leadership development in the disability sector and as a disabled person, they encouraged me to go along to conferences, national conferences. And at those conferences is where I met disabled men and women older than me, that I got to see were actually having really great lives, having jobs, having families, driving their own cars, living in their own homes. And that gave me as a young woman, some hope that I could have just a greater life as them.

Debbie:
And alongside that I've always been very actively involved in my church group and the youth group, and been encouraged and supported within my church community to lead groups, so they were fostering leadership in me as well at that same time. And it was just, it's a natural part of me to want to see people find their purpose and know their purpose in life, and support and help develop them and finding out what their purpose is, and how they can contribute and add value to the communities that they're in, whether it be disabled people or young people or anyone really.

Debbie:
Doors have opened for me to be in leadership roles in my jobs that I've had, and finally, even in my family, I have three sisters. I'm not the oldest, I'm the second eldest, but whenever we go to family events where someone from the family has to talk, they always say, "Oh, that's Debbie's job, Debbie will do that," so I've been blessed with the gift of the gab, I guess.

Jonathan:
How about you, Pam?

Pam:
I'm smiling listening to that last comment from Debbie because that seems to happen to me as well. If I can start with now and then work backwards, so right now my three roles really in life are to be the Workbridge board chair, which I'm really honored to be, and I'm looking forward to all that will bring and all I can contribute to that. I'm the owner and founder of Disability Responsiveness New Zealand Limited, which provides capability building workshops for disabled people and responsiveness training to the rest of the community. And I'm a PhD student doing what else, but researching employment for disabled people this time in the disability sector. I was born into a family of four siblings, I'm the only one that's blind. I had partial sight growing up and by the time I was in my mid twenties I guess I was blind. It was so gradual, it's really hard to know, but I know that it all accelerated when I became a teenager, which was a very difficult time for that to happen.

Pam:
But I spent a lot of years in my younger life unemployed, so I really understand that side of things, and know how frustrating it is. As time went on, I was able to attend university as an adult student, and since that time I've done a number of qualifications and also had a number of roles from running the mainstream program for the state services commission, through to care and protection, social work, probation officer, and I've done a couple of very short stints lecturing at university. And a lot of work in all sorts of things to do with disabled people, but mostly employment, quite a lot really, and I won't go into it all here, but mostly to do with employment.

Pam:
Employment is my passion because it's something I felt I missed out on a lot when I was younger, and lots of disabled people did, and still do. And why I was drawn to the governance role at Workbridge is because I think that by now with all of the knowledge and experience I've built up, I've really got something to offer Workbridge, and I'm really as I said, looking forward to being able to do that.

Jonathan:
One of the things I wanted to pick up on was your comment, Debbie, about mentoring and just how much of a difference seeing older people who were established when you were young made to you in terms of your aspirations, what you knew was possible. Is that harder now that disabled people are more in the mainstream, which I'm sure most people will agree is a good thing because people are participating in their communities, staying with their families, going to local schools, but I guess there are greater challenges now around fostering those mentoring opportunities.

Debbie:
Yes. I know for me it's shaped who I am today, how I look at my life. And I feel that I have a responsibility to pay it forward, I guess to younger disabled people, to be like a role model or a mentor to them. And it is exciting that mainstreaming is so much more common for young, disabled people to be in the community, but I think there's always going to be a opportunity when it comes to knowing who your identity is, and how your identity fits in with how you live your life and relates back to living your life. Disabled people who are mainstream I think are still going to face those challenges of barriers, people's attitudes, environmental barriers, for them to be really fully inclusive in their communities in the lives they have.

Debbie:
It's quite common as young people to go through a phase where you don't really want to identify with other disabled people or associate or be with them. I went through that in my early teenage years. It really wasn't until in my later teens that I saw the value of actually socializing and engaging with other disabled people. Because you get into a space where you can just be, and you don't have to try and justify why you do get around the way you do, or have to explain yourself. Because when you're with other disabled people, it's that place of just being.

Debbie:
And I still believe that there is a group of disabled people that still exist in residential facilities, maybe who've been captured what I call by the system, from a very young age going into special needs type schools, and right up until the age of 21, and then going into vocational programs or places of employment that specialize employing disabled people, but really they're just a cover up of the old sheltered workshops. So you know, there's still, I believe a large population of disabled people that need to be around and see other disabled people having really good lives out in their communities.

Pam:
Debbie, I'm interested in what you were saying about perhaps internalizing other people's negative attitudes as a younger person and not wanting to have anything to do with other disabled people. I was exactly the same and had the same experience as you. I remember when I went to a meeting where there were lots of other disabled people, some blind people and people with other impairments, I think I relaxed for the first time in my life because I didn't really have to explain myself.

Jonathan:
That's interesting, I was talking to a young person the other day and I was making this very point about how some younger people find it difficult, or just choose not to identify themselves as disabled. And this person said to me, "Ah, that's old hat now Jonathan. Actually these days, younger people are quite happy to celebrate their diversity and their difference," and I hope that's true, that this is maybe something that today's young people don't feel so reluctant to do.

Debbie:
And I think they're quite fortunate that they're growing up in a society where diversity is celebrated in so many different ways, and that human rights for people are a lot more obvious and seen and known. Not saying it's perfect, but I don't believe you get the same level of discrimination that maybe we did 30 years ago.

Jonathan:
You talked a bit about your childhood and your youth. What keeps you busy these days besides being Workbridge council president, Debbie?

Debbie:
I have a full time job with CCS Disability Action as their national disability leadership coordinator, and that keeps me busy traveling around the country, engaging with staff from all around the country and disabled staff as well, and training and delivering training and having those challenging conversations that provoke people's thinkings around language conversations, around how we provide services to disabled people and their family members in a way that is valuing and inclusive for all people. Family is still very important to me all these years later, and being involved with family activities and connected. And I'm also a Toastmaster, and enjoy different Toastmasters clubs, improving on my public speaking and developing that gift that I have for speaking publicly.

Jonathan:
Okay. The next board meeting we're going to appoint you Grammarian for the duration there.

Pam:
Absolutely.

Debbie:
Please don't count my um's and ah's.

Jonathan:
So, you're both busy people and yet here you are holding these significant roles in Workbridge. Pam, can I come back to you? For people who aren't living and breathing Workbridge like the three of us, can you explain why we have a council president and a board chairman and what's the difference?

Pam:
Well, the council is the governing body overall of Workbridge, and it's made up of people representing a number of disability organizations. And so well before we had the emphasis that we do now on disabled persons organizations, disabled people leading and managing our sector that we're starting to get now, Workbridge really led the way and enshrined that in the constitution of the organization. And Debbie as president is in charge obviously of the council, the council appoint the board members and the board members appoint the chief executive. So that's kind of the way the structure works. But Debbie, you'll have a more in depth view of that as well, I'm sure.

Debbie:
Yeah. I've been on the Workbridge council for two years, and now will be going into my third year and first year as the council president. So what I have seen that what the council's role is, is actually keeping people first, the job seekers first. At the end of the day, that the service that Workbridge provide to the job seekers out there and to employers, are in line with where the shift with the disability movement is at the moment in New Zealand and around the world. Are we actually providing jobs that value our job seekers? Are they in jobs that align with their career paths and aspirations? Are employers being well prepared to provide inclusive workplaces and practices in their workplaces. Are job seekers prepared for that as well?

Jonathan:
There are various sector interests on council, which really makes the council an incredibly important body. Not withstanding the constitutional role it has, but just the amount of expertise it brings to the table. How do people get on the council? What does it comprise of?

Debbie:
It does comprise of some DPO's, Disabled Person Organizations and each of those DPO's nominate or put forward someone to sit on the council on their behalf. So I represent DPA, Disabled Persons' Assembly, on the council. And so there is an expectation as the council representatives that we are feeding back to our DPO's. We're hearing what is happening out there for employment within the people group that we represent, and feed that back at the council meetings. We also have sitting on the council, different union representatives from the different union organizations and business organizations who have a representative sitting on the council. So they support us as a council, updating us of what the latest employment legislation might be, and that can feed in and be helpful to Workbridge, to the senior management and the chief executive that comes and attends the council meetings.

Jonathan:
Pam, the interface between council and the board must therefore be critical, and that's something that you'll be maintaining with Debbie of course, keeping in regular touch and making sure that the various arms of the organization are functioning.

Pam:
Yeah, absolutely. And Debbie and I have set up some times already that we'll keep in touch but also informally as well does from time to time letting each other know what's happening. I'll be attending the council meetings to report on what's happening at board level, and Debbie attends board meetings the same way so that she can let us know what's happening at council, and also take back any decisions or requests that the board might make of council so that she can have that two way relationship as well.

Debbie:
And I think the benefit of being part of those board meetings and attending those board meetings as the council president is they hold a lot of responsibility around the financial sustainability for Workbridge, or that business side of Workbridge. And often in that business side, there may be times where the board could lose a little bit of focus on what they end user, the outcome for the end user of the service. And so being around the board table is quite good because then I can just every now and then, okay, what's the outcome for job seekers? Well, what's the outcome for employers in this conversation?

Pam:
Absolutely.

Jonathan:
So in your role, especially Debbie, having lived experience of disability seems really critical, doesn't it? To be that authentic voice when that's needed.

Debbie:
Yes.

Jonathan:
And Pam, are you the first, no you're not. You're not the first person with lived experience to be chair of the board. But it is an unusual situation that we're in compared with most other disability organizations in New Zealand, certainly. When you look at other sectors such as Maoridom, it's really positive to see how much... Well, tino rangatiratanga is there, you know? People taking charge of their own destinies. It is not that common to see a situation where quite a significant player in this sector has a council president, a board chair, and a chief executive all with lived experience at the same time.

Pam:
Absolutely. It's definitely to be celebrated and it is unusual, but I'm hoping that we could perhaps be in the vanguard of leading the way for that to happen more often, in more other organizations.

Jonathan:
How can that be the case? Obviously Workbridge is in a pretty unique situation because not only hopefully leading by example with this initiative, but of course its business is employment. What can Workbridge do to foster greater leadership in the sector?

Debbie:
You know, I heard a few years ago, and I'm not sure whether the statistics have changed, but within the disability sector itself, the employment of disabled people is sitting somewhere around 7% of the workforce within the sector, it's only 7%. So I think one thing Workbridge can really be doing is advocating within the sector itself to be looking at employing more disabled people across all levels of the business, of a provider or an organization. Not just in administration roles or coordination type roles, but in senior management roles, governance roles, even hands on providing support roles.

Debbie:
I have a number of friends with impairments that are in support worker roles for different school agencies, and yet I have heard from support agencies when I've raised the conversation about employing more disabled people, "Oh, but disabled people can't do housework," or, "They can't do personal care, assist with personal cares," but that's just people's assumptions.

Pam:
Yeah, and I think too that people forget that you don't have to employ a person with the impairment that your organization supports. You can employ somebody with a different impairment but still be recognizing that potential leadership of disabled people and that authenticity of having those people providing service throughout the organization. And as you say in senior leadership and management roles as well, there are plenty of really well qualified disabled people out there.

Jonathan:
Pam, I know that you have been really passionate about the concept of 100% accessibility, and that if you are going to be more inclusive of disabled people, then it's obviously important first that these organizations walk the talk. But second that they are welcoming places and truly accessible. So that's something you've been championing for some time within Workbridge.

Pam:
Absolutely. I think that we need to show the way for lots of other organizations. Because people will tell you that they are accessible and it's a bit like asking the motel owner down the road, "Are you accessible for me to come along with my guide dog?" And they'll tell you, "Yes, it's fine," and you get there and find that the patch of grass for your dog is three miles down the road, that's not accessibility. And neither is in a lot of organizations if you can't access the information in a way that you can manipulate it with, I mean, if it's on your iPhone or your computer, if it's just put in front of you or if you attend a meeting and there's no sign language interpreter. If we can't get it right ourselves as disabled people and as disabled people's organizations, then really it's pretty hard to ask the rest of the world to get on board.

Debbie:
Too quickly you get given the excuses, "Oh, we can't do that because..." Actually, it would be great when the day comes, is that your response isn't and excuse, or a... But it's actually like, "Yeah, this might be challenging but hey, how can we find some creative solutions around this?"

Pam:
And ask disabled people, we know what the answers are most of the time. Jonathan, you'll know a lot of the electronic and adaptive sort of ways that we can manage a lot of these things. There are lots of expertise in the disability area in disabled people out there. If people would just ask us, we could probably come up with a solution ourselves.

Jonathan:
Are there challenges that your respective impairments impose on you completing your role? And if so, what strategies have you devised to overcome those challenges?

Pam:
For me, I guess it's more about time really. I've got to divide my time equally. Probably more so with the PhD if my supervisors are listening, they'll probably wonder why I said that. But in terms of my impairment, I am going to have to really get on top of the electronic stuff, the computer stuff. I am probably a pretty average user of screen reading software and of computing, and I think I need to probably up my game, especially with someone who's such an expert in the role of chief executive. And there will be new ways of doing things and new ways of managing information across the board and council. So I'm going to need to really up my game there. But that's just a learning thing for me and gosh I'm always learning, and I hope to be till I draw my last breath. So that's a piece of work I'm going to have to do.

Jonathan:
Anything for you, Deb?

Debbie:
Yeah. I think my biggest challenge I guess sometimes is my energy levels. With a role that does involve quite a lot of travel, I've had to learn how to make the best use of my energy levels. So it might mean, when I know I'm going to be away for a week traveling, leading up to that, make sure I have good early nights and good routine, eat well. And while I am away, make sure I do have early nights, or if there's a nine o'clock start down in Christchurch or Wellington, I'd go down the night before just to conserve my energy.

Debbie:
The other big challenge I have being a wheelchair user, people tend to sometimes think that I'm not capable of doing some things, or some of those unconscious biases that I encounter that can be quite obvious sometimes that maybe people with impairments that don't use a wheelchair might encounter differently. I'm not saying they don't. But I find if I have had good sleeps, and if I am eating well, then my tolerance level is much higher, and I know how to counteract some of those unconscious biases in a way that doesn't maybe upset me more than anything.

Pam:
That all sounds really familiar to me as well Debbie, and I think it's so important for us as disabled people to be very mindful of the things that impact on our ability to prove our capability that we do every day, and often are asked to, that we do have to really take care of ourselves and make sure that we have the sleep, the good wholesome food, and the support around us that we need.

Jonathan:
I'm really impressed by the frankness of your answers and the degree of disclosure there, because there will be people listening who perhaps have had a few knock backs. And let's face it, for you both to have achieved what you have, you've had to put yourselves out there a bit and I'm sure from time to time there have been situations where someone's tried to knock you back or you've had a situation that's been embarrassing for one reason or another, you know, we've all been there. But you can either try and perhaps have a few knock backs and keep going, or spend the rest of your life wondering what if, right?

Pam:
Yep, absolutely. Just as you said that Jonathan, I just saw this amazing idea for a disability bloopers program would be hilarious, when you get up and your cane falls to bits or something like that. But I think, I don't know about you Debbie, but I've had lots of times in my life where people have questioned my capability. I've, even with a really good CV, gone for positions, and this is why I think of the people that Workbridge serves. You can go along, you can know you're absolutely perfect for the job and it can always feel like you're not getting it because you're a disabled person.

Pam:
Now sometimes that's going to be true, sometimes it might be, "Actually we've already got someone like you in our team and we need somebody different," but it often will feel like it's your impairment that's really gotten in the way or their attitude's gotten in the way. That can be pretty tough, but I think determination and just absolute stubbornness are required. Debbie?

Debbie:
Yeah. And knowing who you can talk to as well. I've learned over the years that sometimes it's really good talking with other disabled people about the experiences I've experienced. Because when I've tried to talk about it at times with maybe my non disabled friends, and sometimes even family members, you just know they don't get it, they don't understand. And it's something you cannot explain really easily because it is emotional, and it just kind of sometimes gets you in the gut when you have to face or come across people's unconscious biases.

Pam:
I remember a good friend of mine saying that she always feels when people questioned her, "Look, I'm just making my way through my life and if you have a problem with it, you're the one that's disabled."

Jonathan:
Pam, you've had a lot of background in the business that Workbridge is in, which is fundamentally ensuring that disabled people have access to meaningful good quality job opportunities. Why do you think these stats after all these years, are still so hard to crack in terms of the number of disabled people who are in work compared with the rest of the population?

Pam:
Well, a couple of things really. I think one of the things is that we, despite the diversity that we are bringing on board in workplaces now, I think there is still a tendency out there for people to see disability is a sort of nice to have. That it's not really as important as the other groups, which is really unfortunate. But the other thing I think that is really impacting on us is the connections, making connections. And I think that the more disabled people can be in a position to make connections with employers, this is something I'm researching as part of my PhD, the better it will be for disabled people. Because I think when you talk to someone about employing a disabled person, apart from the sort of horrified look that you often get from them, they'll sort of say, "Oh, well look, I don't know that that person would be able to do this."

Pam:
And often I find, and I used to find when I was managing mainstream, if you just introduced someone to that person that you think might align with what they're looking for and actually get them in the in the same room, and even if you can do a little bit of background work and find out some hobbies they might have in common, that will be a way that they can form that connection and start their process to get to know each other, and the fear factor just kind of falls away at that point.

Jonathan:
What do you reckon, Debbie?

Debbie:
Yeah. I'm sitting here thinking, it's around also what's the message employers are given? I think we need to change the concept of marketing disabled people as employable, to actually marketing disabled people as being a talent pool that come with qualifications, that come with strengths that can add value to a business. Rather than employers feeling that they're doing something good for society, it's a do good thing, "Yes, we employ disabled people because it's giving them a job," but actually changing the message that actually, when we employ this disabled person, we're actually not employing them because they have an impairment, and we're giving something good socially back to the community. But actually we're employing them because they have the skills, the qualifications, or they're the right person fit for the workforce that they have.

Debbie:
I think there's still a bit of work, a lot of work to be done around that kind of marketing for employers. And rather than trying to sell, that's probably not the right term to use, but profile disabled people as being needy, and needing to have a job, and if you don't employ them they'll be on the benefit forever. So that's quite a charitable way of looking at employing people, but to rather say actually, what is the value that this person can add to the workforce? They're great at teamwork, they are good at analyzing data, or they have real strong technology skills that can add value to your workforce. Marketing disabled people or job seekers in that way to employers.

Pam:
The charitable model has not served us well in the past and I don't think it's going to in future. And part of that charitable model, you sort of hit the nail on the head there, Debbie. You talk about the benefits system, that's all very well, but unfortunately a lot of people think that, "Oh well, disabled people are on a benefit so we don't really have to care. We don't have to employ them because they can be on that benefit," and that's that charitable state of mind. So I agree with you about shifting the message.

Jonathan:
And yet it's complicated in a social policy context, because it's become the norm in New Zealand to think you're either on a benefit or you're in work, and the two don't overlap. And there's an argument that potentially says, well actually having an impairment comes with certain costs, and if they're not compensated for, then effectively if you are in work, you're being financially penalized for the privilege of having an impairment.

Pam:
Absolutely, that's very true. There are certain costs and sometimes those costs can be pretty fundamental about enabling you to get to work, or being able to manage a work and a home life balance that everyone else wants, and so do disabled people.

Jonathan:
Workbridge is going through a lot of change at the moment and that's been signaled with the publication of a consultation document a little while ago, where people had the opportunity to have input into the new strategic direction for Workbridge. Debbie, when your time is up eventually as council president, what do you hope to be able to look back on and say, "This is how Workbridge changed for the better while I was here?"

Debbie:
I hope that the new strategic plan for Workbridge does reflect all the conversation we've just been having around bringing that shift and change for job seekers and employers. And I think hopefully this time next year I can look back on 2020 and say, "Yeah, there's begun to be a cultural shift in the way Workbridge itself views job seekers, and the way Workbridge works with employers." That the feedback that we're getting around the council table from DPO's and council members reinforce that message as well, are reinforcing that message.

Jonathan:
And Pam of course the Board will own the strategic plan. What is your thinking in terms of what you'd like to have been able to achieve when your chairmanship is up?

Pam:
I would like to see us well on the way to addressing the terrible unemployment statistics out there for disabled people, where at least twice as many disabled people are unemployed as non-disabled people, so I'd like us to be really addressing that and pairing that back. Also, I'd like to see a good number of disabled people working for Workbridge and managing that organization so that we are walking the talk.

Jonathan:
That's chairman of the Workbridge Board, Pam McNeill. We also heard from our new Workbridge council president, Debbie Ward. And that wraps up this edition of Mahi, we're likely to be back in February with our next episode. Our last day of business for 2019 at Workbridge is the 20th of December and we'll be returning on the 6th of January. You should also be mindful that because our contract partners are taking a well earned break over the Christmas period, you may find that enrollments take a little longer to process over this period than they usually do. We apologize for that, but we're still as keen as ever to work with you and assist you on your employment journey.

Jonathan:
On behalf of all of the team at Workbridge, thank you so much for listening to this podcast, for any interactions with us that you've had in 2019. 2020 promises to be a big year for Workbridge where we have many new exciting initiatives planned. We look forward to telling you about those on this podcast and of course on social media. Wishing you all the very best for the holiday season, and we look forward to being back with you in 2020.

View Details

We begin this episode with news that the Government has begun a consultation process on its Disability Employment Action Plan. If you'd like to, you can read the document and let them know your views.

At Workbridge, we're proud that our Council President, Board Chairman and Chief Executive are disabled people. Workbridge Chief Executive and host of Mahi, Jonathan Mosen, speaks with new Workbridge Council President Debbie Ward and new Workbridge Board Chairman Pam MacNeill. we learn a little about them and what they hope to achieve in their respective roles.

View Details

An important part of changing the dire unemployment statistics for disabled people in New Zealand is giving employers greater confidence to employ disabled people. Many have concerns about perceived risk and poor productivity, and Workbridge helps to allay those concerns.

Recently, Workbridge held a lunch for some of New Zealand's top chief executives. In this podcast, you'll hear our Chief Executive, Jonathan Mosen, and the keynote speaker, Phil O'Reilly, Managing Director of Iron Duke Partners. It's encouraging to hear this global business leader speak with such passion to other business leaders about why New Zealand business should step up and be more inclusive of disabled people. If you're an employer of any size, you'll find Phil's talk informative. If you're a jobseeker, we hope you enjoy hearing some of the work Workbridge is doing to make New Zealand a more inclusive place.

Whether you're an employer wanting to make your workplace as good as it can be, or a jobseeker who wants to work with someone who focuses on your abilities, give us a call on 0508-858-858, or visit our website above.

View Details

[intro music]

Jonathan Mosen: Kia Ora Koutou, welcome to Episode Two of Mahi, the Disability Employment Podcast brought to you by Woodbridge. I'm Jonathan Mosen, and it's good to have you back with us. If you'd like to be in touch with a podcast, you can email us either with an audio attachment or just write something down and send it to podcast@workbridge.co.nz. That's podcast@workbridge.co.nz. You can also call the Mahi listener line. And that number in Wellington is 044720200, that 044720200. And we appreciate all the comments that we've received in the first episode of Mahi. On this episode, we're going to be geeking out because we're going to be talking about technology. First I'll be speaking with Phil Hendry. He's our information technology manager at Workbridge. Workbridge is going through a big IT makeover, and there are some things that will directly benefit you. And remaining on the technology theme I'll be speaking later in the episode with Barry Burgess. He's the director and founder of Pacific Vision in Christchurch. Thanks to Pacific Vision and Vispero all Workbridge centres are much more accessible for our customers who are blind or have low vision. Pacific Vision is a successful international company. And Barry tells us about how Workbridge gave him the confidence to give starting his own business a try. That's all coming up on this episode of Mahi. Before we get onto that, though, thank you to those who have participated in our strategic planning process. The consultation period has now ended. And we really appreciate those who have sent us very thoughtful feedback on the future of Workbridge. What happens now is that all that feedback gets considered by our Strategic Planning Committee, which includes representatives from our council, our board and the entire senior management team and we’ll be putting a new strategic plan together for our board to consider at its December meeting, when that plan is in place, we'll share it with you. And we'll also be heading into the new year with some changes that will help us make that plan a reality. So your feedback has made a difference. I'm really grateful for the advice that you shared with us as we make Workbridge even better in the future.

[music]

Jonathan Mosen: As a service provider for disabled people, it's important that Workbridge walks the talk and part of that includes making sure that our services are as accessible to a wider range of people as possible. IT is a big part of that. People want to consume services online or with a range of devices these days. Somebody who's thinking a lot about this is Phil Hendry, who's in charge of Information Technology at Workbridge. Good to have you on the podcast, Phil.

Phil Hendry: Thank you, Jonathan. It's really good to be here. This is my first time on a podcast. So that's exciting for me too--

Jonathan Mosen: Tell me a little bit about your background what brought you to Workbridge and what do you bring to the organization?

Phil Hendry: I've had a very varied background. So my working career started many moons ago as a dairy farmer, believe it or not. And over time I transitioned to forestry as some of the dairy farmers do. And from there, I got involved with software development, which was actually quite a big leap for me. For the past 12 years, I guess, I've been working in the not for profit sector, which is actually quite a nice departure from what I was doing before I get a bit of a kick out of working with organizations that actually make a difference rather than just enrich the shareholders. On a personal note, I've got two sons, who’re on the autistic spectrum, and it gives me a little bit of an understanding, a little bit of insight of some of the challenges that people who have friends, family or whatever disability themselves face when society judges them or puts a label on them that no way reflects their ability to contribute. So it actually makes me really I'm excited that I have an opportunity in a small way to change it working for an organization like Woodbridge.

Jonathan Mosen: It's a journey that Workbridge is on, isn't it? And you've been key in advancing work bridge on this journey of accessibility because I think it's fair to say that one of the bits of feedback we've been receiving in recent times, is that Workbridge had some way to go in terms of its accessibility journey when it comes to our information technology.

Phil Hendry: Absolutely. When I started it Workbridge was only about a year and a half ago now. We've very much just started the beginning of that journey in reasonably small ways momentarily so we had have accessibility guidelines and standards and things like that, but you know we’ve really only just begun to scratch the surface. One of the biggest barriers that we had actually is an organization is that our former information system that we used to do our work was such that it wasn't accessible you couldn't use a screen reader with it, it’s a bit of a shocker was a bit of a refugee, I guess from a time gone by when people just didn't even think about accessibility with software systems. And, as a consequence, locked out people who had vision disabilities, for example, from even applying to work for us. I'm very pleased to say that's no longer an issue. We've got a beautifully accessible system now, which we call Mahi, which runs on top of the Salesforce CRM.

Jonathan Mosen: So that means then that we're looking at this with two lenses. One is making sure that as customers as job seekers or employers, of course, people can engage with Workbridge, but also we want to make sure that every job that Workbridge has could be doable by as wide range of people as possible.

Phil Hendry: Yeah, Jonathan. So that's really where I believe true authenticity comes from if we're not walking the walk, how on earth can we expect anyone else to do that? And it's actually not hard. It's not a hard thing to do. It's all about just putting a little bit of thought upfront. And being cognizant of the choices that you make, it hasn't really added any cost to what we've done. It's about thinking about the systems and the things that you provide that enable people, all sorts of people to work for you.

Jonathan Mosen: In terms of the customer-facing side of this, there is a lot that is going on. That's exciting that we wanted to talk about. We know for example, that more and more jobs are being advertised exclusively online these days. And that poses a challenge for many people who just simply can't afford to access information online. And so there are various things that Workbridge's attempting to try and bring that digital divide to a more favourable position.

Phil Hendry: One of the exciting things that we're in the process of rolling out right now is fully accessible kiosk machines in every Workbridge branch. And we've been very fortunate that our partners at Pacific Vision have provided us with licensing for the fusion product that includes jaws and other accessibility software tools that will be running on these machines. So people will be able to come into any Workbridge office and use these machines to access the internet, to browse for jobs, to sign up if that's what they want to do. The other thing that we're working on because we actually recognize a lot of people often have the technology but the barrier is access to the internet. It's a lot of people, the young people will have a smartphone, but they can't afford to run it in terms of the data. So we're opening up public Wi-Fi at every Workbridge branch to allow people to come in and again, if access to the data is a barrier, that's not a barrier with Workbridge. One of the other things that we are also looking at, which we’ll probably talk a little bit about further on with our app that we will be building for our job seekers, is working with our partners at Spark to see how we can make use of that app toll free in terms of the data.

Jonathan Mosen: Timeframes? When can people expect to be able to use these accessible computers at Workbridge centres or bring their device in and take advantage of the free public Wi-Fi?

Phil Hendry: The PCs will be rolling out progressively over the next fortnight and as we roll the pieces out, so the access to the Wi-Fi will be made available around about the same time. So within the next fortnight, Jonathan, exciting times.

Jonathan Mosen: Yes exciting times, although I'm sure there will be some people asking the question; Does this mean that there will be fewer humans that I can talk to at Workbridge? Are we going all technology-focused all automated and cutting back on staff?

Phil Hendry: No, absolutely not. That's just another channel that you can engage with us on. You can always talk to our friendly ECs at our local offices if you prefer to use paper, or if you need assistance, filling in forms, there's always going to be a person to help you. This is just providing another way of achieving the same thing I guess. You're in control of how you choose to work with us.

Jonathan Mosen: How much of the Workbridge journey can take place online? And is that likely to increase? For example, I know that younger people who might consider themselves digital natives, they might want to be able to start their first contact with Workbridge by enrolling online they might prefer to receive text message updates, they might want to meet with an employment consultant, virtually, and attend seminars potentially that would strengthen their job skills online. Is that where we will be able to be or is there some sort of hybrid there?

Phil Hendry: Well, we're actually already there in some ways you can already sign up to Workbridge, fully online through our website, there's a link under the job seeker section and if you prefer to work with us using SMS and all sorts of technologies then that is available now, but one of the very exciting things that we're working on right at the moment and in fact we’re in the process of doing some of the planning work right at the moment is our job seeker portal. We're in the process of building a fully accessible job seeker portal, and mobile app that runs on Android or iOS that will allow you to essentially completely do your Workbridge journey, almost end-to-end if that's how you choose to work with us. And again, we've seen other service models and the service model that we quite like as one that Air New Zealand has, where you can work with them in a few, like you can go through your whole journey from booking your flight to boarding the airplane without ever touching a piece of paper or even talking to anybody. But at any point, if you need help, then there's an off-ramp to talk to a real person to help you, and then you can get back on that journey. So it's about having a multi-faceted approach that allows the job seeker to work with us on their own terms, and also work with us at their own pace. One of the challenges that we have with the legacy systems that we've been running so it can be quite slow, particularly working through on the early phases of our process as what we call the pre-employment preparation. Where we work with the job seeker to help them develop their CVs, job search skills, and other necessary skills that make them work ready. A large part of that can and will be able to be done online, including things like the seminars that you already alluded to Jonathan. So they will allow the job seeker to actually go through their particular process as quickly as they like, they’re in control. And that's actually an important difference with the way that our service model is changing.

Jonathan Mosen: We know one of the big challenges we face is education actually explaining to employers that employing disabled people is not the risk that they might think it is. The health and safety worries they have may be unfounded. But many people feel that one way of getting around that while that public education continues is self-employment or working from home opportunities. telecommuting. And New Zealand is quite fortunate that we have invested in this world-class fibre infrastructure now, which makes self-employment or telecommuting extremely viable. Do you think that this is somewhere New Zealand is particularly excelling at the moment?

Phil Hendry: We've always been innovators and operating down at the bottom of the world, yet competing, US and European markets has really sharpened our skills and our appetite to actually work in that way. I think it's a wonderful opportunity. And I'd like to see a lot more done in that area. I know, at Workbridge we've got some work to do, in terms of taking our funders on a little bit of a journey to help us help others in that area but I think we'll see more and more of that particularly as this notion of the gig economy moves forward where people have often lots of smaller jobs or lots of project work rather than necessarily having one full-time job.

Jonathan Mosen: Now we are on this journey and we're not quite there yet. I attended recently a conference of Blind Citizens New Zealand. And they quite rightly raised with me, for example, the Support Funds application process and some difficulty that some screen reader users were having with this. How are you feeling about those aspects, that some of the forms might be a bit challenging for some people to complete?

Phil Hendry: We are trying to work with our MSD partners at the moment around this. One of the things that I've been looking at recently is providing an online portal to support the whole Support Funds process and it's actually bigger than having accessible forms to apply for it. It's the whole way the service is run is frankly not particularly customer-centric or focused. So one of the things that we'd like to do is provide people who are the recipients of Support Fund, grant portal access where they can sign up online in an accessible way where they can see the status and stage that their grant is going through and keep up to date with how they are doing against the drawdown of the fund again, in an accessible and easy to use way so they can control and have some idea of where they're at with a fund and also, where the system reminds them when it's due to reapply and when they do reapply not to have to litigate the disability again. But rather just confirm that their circumstances haven't changed and reapply. That's the work that we're doing right now.

Jonathan Mosen: In terms of the accessible kiosks, it's great that for those who are blind or have low vision, these devices are going to be fully accessible. For those who aren’t either blind or low vision. You can switch all the software off of course, and just use the gear should you need to. Are we thinking also about people who may have some difficulty using a keyboard people who require assistive technology such as switch access to make these devices even more inclusive.

Phil Hendry: We are certainly thinking about how we can incorporate that type of assistive technology and to these devices and that’s the sort of thing that we are likely to trial at some of the largest centres first to see what the demand is but we do walk a reasonably tightrope of how we fund these things, but certainly in the areas where there’s demand for it then we’ll absolutely do everything we can to make all of our systems as accessible as possible.

Jonathan Mosen: You must be pretty pleased with the way that accessibility is evolving. Yeah, I'm sure you've immersed yourself in this technology over the last little while, as you've learned about, say what constitutes an accessible document or an accessible website, or even an accessible operating system. And it really is quite interesting to watch the change that has occurred in the last even decade or so, where you see mainstream operating systems, including now increasingly viable accessibility tools, so that while there may be a need for third-party accessibility tools, particularly for vocational requirements, where you might really need a higher customizable top of the line solution to equip you to do a particular job with maximum efficiency for a lot of day to day kind of use. It's a radical change isn't it that now you can take any device off the shelf and use it quite effectively with a range of disabilities.

Phil Hendry: Actually blows me away just how fast things are changing. And this year, and really as mobile phones become faster and faster and the operating systems become more and more mature. Likewise, desktop operating systems, a lot of the barriers that used to be are falling away but personally for me, where I see the most exciting opportunity is the application of things like AI, where the computer is able to respond to voice prompts to the movement of your eyes, movement, palm of your hands, those sorts of things. Just add a whole new dimension. In fact, I was at a show the other day where they were demonstrating to me talking to the same system that we use with Workbridge now. And it was merely doing what it needed to do with no keyboard access and all. So that's actually quite a productivity boom for not only people who have accessibility needs but everybody.

Jonathan Mosen: And this often happens with accessibility everybody benefits when we make the world a more accessible place. I've been playing with voice control on iOS 13. And even though I'm totally blind, voice control really isn't designed for me because I can use the touch keyboard or a Braille display or a Bluetooth keyboard but I find it has benefits for me because for example, when I'm moving around in the mornings, or just on the treadmill, and I need to keep my hands on the bars and not on my phone. I can respond to email, navigate tweets or whatever, all with my voice. And I find that what used to be downtime is now a chance for me to catch up on those things because I have that voice control, which was put in there so that people with a physical impairment can control their phone. So everyone wins.

Phil Hendry: Yes, and I've got a really good example of that type of tech. So everybody knows the iPad right? One of the complaints that people have about it is that when you pair it up to a keyboard that there's no mouse and you got to put your finger on it? Well, if you turn on the assistive touch the iPad and pair, any Bluetooth mouse to it, you've got a mouse. So pretty awesome. It was never designed with that intent. It was designed around supporting assistive touch on the iPad, but it also benefits a much wider pool of users. So I would say to tech companies, it's absolutely worth investing in these things because really all I see is really with people with disabilities who don't have a chance to contribute as a missed opportunity. And I guess that’s what Workbridge is about opportunities for job seekers and also opportunities for employers.

[music plays]

Jonathan Mosen: And joining me from Pacific Vision based in Christchurch is its founder and director Barry Burgess. Hi, Barry.

Barry Burgess: Hi Jonathan.

Jonathan Mosen: Well, I was talking with you about the exciting partnership that we have with Pacific Vision and I'll get to that in a sec. You mentioned to me in passing that Workbridge encouraged you to start Pacific Vision so this is an example of the difference that Workbridge can make.

Barry Burgess: To me it changed my life completely when I was at work, and I been in this sort of industry that I'm in now for seven to eight years, and I didn't really know what to do. So I went to Workbridge to try and gain employment. And they talked me into "Why don't I start my own business?" And when I told them that "I didn't have the capital to get through." They sat me down, and we worked through it. And eventually, we got to the stage where I could go ahead and start my own business. And I have got to say, Workbridge was very, very good. The whole thing was very successful.

Jonathan Mosen: Was it partly a confidence thing that having worked for others here you were at a bit of a crossroads in your life, and you just needed somebody to tell you "Actually, yes, you do have it in you to do this."

Barry Burgess: I think we're all like that, Jonathan. At some stage in our lives, we all need that little push and if you've got someone there that believes in you. And they have the skills and the knowledge and know that what is possible out there in the way of funding because basically, as members of the foundation, we don't really get to know what's out there. And to sit down with somebody and let them tell you what there is out there what is possible, and to boost your ego a little, basically just telling you that you can do it.

Jonathan Mosen: So that was all the way back in 2002. So we're talking 17 years ago. What’s' Pacific Vision like now? Tell me a bit about the business its size and what exactly you do for those who aren't familiar with Pacific Vision.

Barry Burgess: Okay, well back in 2002 when we started, just to let you know, I started Pacific Vision with 100 US dollars and the help of Workbridge and lots of friends and we’ve moved on quite a bit since then. Today, we cover the biggest landmass in this industry. I’ve been told I've never actually worked it out myself that we're the biggest independent dealer in the world. We cover from Hawaii, we don't do Hawaii, because it comes under the United States. But we come all the way through the islands, through New Zealand, through Australia, to Norfolk and Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, the Philippines, and the whole of Southeast Asia.

Jonathan Mosen: And you're covering blindness and low vision technology. Is that correct? That's your specialty. So there's not other assistive technology at this point.

Barry Burgess: At this point. No, it is still just blindness and low vision.

Jonathan Mosen: And one of the exciting things that we are really pleased about is this partnership where we've been talking to Vispero who manufacture both jaws and ZoomText and in fact, they put it both together and they call it Fusion. So ZoomText is a low vision product. It's the industry leader. JAWS is the industry-leading screen reader for people who use speech or Braille. And we have this really exciting partnership where we are rolling out computers with Fusion. So you have JAWS and ZoomText on the same computer at all of our Workbridge centres. When people ask you about JAWS and ZoomText and what they do, what do you tell people if you're introducing somebody new to this software?

Barry Burgess: If you're looking at Fusion for somebody who's in the middle, they’ve still got a bit of vision, but can't cope with that in front of a computer for six hours plus a day, then your large image makes it easier on your eyes and you can certainly read and compete. For people who are total with no vision whatsoever JAWS is capable of doing anything on a computer. I always tell people that the only thing you can't do on a computer with JAWS is draw a picture.

Jonathan Mosen: There are built-in technologies now, of course, so when you bring the Windows accessibility settings up, there's some magnification in there. And Windows has a screen reader built-in called Narrator. So I suppose people who might not be familiar with this industry might say, "Is there a need now for third party software like JAWS, and ZoomText when these things are built into the operating system?"

Barry Burgess: Unfortunately, the answer to that is still yes. The big companies like Microsoft, in my opinion, they just pay lip service to it. To say that they have a screen-reader and they have magnification. Most of it does not get you through a situation in the workplace where you need to have a computer that is fully accessible.

Jonathan Mosen: One of the things that I have found as a blind person myself over the years is that sometimes you get a job with a new employer, and you find they’re using something a little bit unorthodox. So sure, you might have to use Microsoft Word and Microsoft Outlook. And you might be okay. You might be okay with some of the built-in solutions there depending on your needs. But then what happens is that there's some sort of software, something that's unique to the company you're working for that’s a bit proprietary, and it needs lots of configuration so that you can be just as efficient and productive as anybody else. And that's where you start to really get into the JAWS and ZoomText area, isn't it?

Barry Burgess: Yeah, that's right, Jonathan. The nice thing about JAWS is it's more or less 100% configurable. It can be adapted for nearly any application that there is that runs in a Microsoft application. It allows people to be that bit more independent.

Jonathan Mosen: There are a lot of commands, keystrokes to remember I guess for both JAWS and ZoomText, what support is available, say I get the job of my dreams and I go in there, and I've got my JAWS and my ZoomText setup, what sort of support is available if I just need to understand how I can optimally do my job with the software?

Barry Burgess: Well in New Zealand, we’re extremely lucky because we have the blind foundation or Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind, who have skilled people, you have ourselves, who are users of JAWS and support. And at the end of the day, we're all backed up by this fantastic back up team back in the United States, where we can get answers overnight.

Jonathan Mosen: I think all of the people who work in that support area, at Vispero in the US are actually either blind or low vision themselves. So they're immersed in the product, not just as specialists, but as users as well, which is pretty neat.

Barry Burgess: That is right. Absolutely. So basically, you know, for them, it's just so easy because they're everyday users.

Jonathan Mosen: How does that work for you? Have you been able to employ others who are low vision or blind?

Barry Burgess: Oh, yes. The company, over the years, has employed quite a few people that are totals or low vision and I myself came through the low vision. Although I could have always used magnification and speech, I've always loved using JAWS because even today, in my very busy life, I have absolutely adapted JAWS to read my emails to me and just roll from one to the other while I sat there eating my breakfast. So basically by the time I literally start work I’ve already done quite a few of my emails.

Jonathan Mosen: Was that difficult to do because I think what can sometimes happen is that we understand intrinsically that it is more efficient to have a text to speech engine and they sound a lot more human than they used to read you your emails because there's less eye strain, it's more efficient. And yet there is this feeling that some people have that it's kind of an expression or an admission of defeat because you're not using the computer the same way that everyone else does. Did you find that a hard thing to get your head around or was it just so much stuff that you had to get done and it just was a pragmatic solution for you?

Barry Burgess: I think anybody who has low vision, you have a pile of work that you’ve got to get through by the end of the day, you're going to take the easiest and the simplest way that you can do this job. Having speech to me on a computer just makes total sense if you are struggling to see a computer, in fact, believe it or not, Jonathan, we have customers that do not even have an eye condition that use some of our technology for when they are driving. And they want to listen to stuff like note-takers, that they have all their clients and their note-takers and they're listening to all their information while they're driving.

Jonathan Mosen: A lot of people will be listening and I think, envious or looking up to what you've achieved because many people dream of running their own business and I know from first-hand experience, it's very hard work, but it is rewarding because you know that it's the fruits of your labour that count and you have a lot of control. But it also can mean very long hours. What would you say to people who are thinking about starting their own business? What do they need to know about making a success of it or what they're in for?

Barry Burgess: I would say, sit down and do your homework first. Look at your market and your potential customers and believe, totally believe in what you're doing is the right answer. And you will succeed and for me, when people say, "Well, how can you do this with a disability?" My answer has always been all my life since my vision problems started. "I've always believed you've only got a disability if you think you’ve got a disability." And if you keep that in your mind all the time, do your homework, talk to people, you will succeed. It is hard work. I wouldn't deny that. And there are some days I work 18 hours in a day and spend probably 35 weeks of the year away from my wife. But we both enjoy doing what we do.

Jonathan Mosen: You will have seen some changes in the technology side, which will have helped. I mean, for example, I mentioned when you started in 2002, you must have been dealing with a lot of annoying bits of paper and I say annoying because you know somebody with low vision. Sometimes you might not have been able to read those pieces of paper and these days, I suppose it's a bit easier, is it?

Barry Burgess: Oh, absolutely. I can remember back in the days when I first started in this industry in the early 90s for a company called Pulse Data International which went on to become HumanWare, when they produced their first CCTV, the Smart View. I used to spend all my time just playing with it before it was even released. And when OCR came onto the market, and for people that had very bad low vision or was totally blind, it gave us all access to be able to read the written print. And today, these machines are nearly 100% accurate.

Jonathan Mosen: It's remarkable how far we've come in terms of their accuracy. And a lot more electronic documents are being produced that are readable now. So it is--

Barry Burgess: That's right. Yes.

Jonathan Mosen: It's a good time to be doing this. Well--

Barry Burgess: Yes.

Jonathan Mosen: We are really appreciative to both Vispero, the parent company that manufactures Fusion and to Pacific Vision for their support of this initiative, where we now have these accessible computers rolling out at all Workbridge centres so that blindness or low vision isn't a barrier. So we're glad to have the chance to talk to you on the podcast and just acknowledge how valuable this partnership is to us and to our job seekers.

Barry Burgess: Well, we're very proud to be associated with Workbridge because that's why as we say, "You know, my roots go from that's where I started in this business." And if it wasn't for Workbridge, I certainly wouldn't be here today talking to you, Jonathan.

Jonathan Mosen: Well, that's a real success story, isn't it? And it's great that Workbridge was able to get Barry on his way and we certainly appreciate Barry's support. That's Barry Burgess, from Pacific Vision in Christchurch. You can find a link to Pacific Visions website in the show notes. And that's where we wrap up this edition of Mahi let me just give you the contact information one more time. If you have any feedback, you can send an email to us with an audio attachment or just write something down and send it in to podcast@workbridge.co.nz. That's podcast@workbridge.co.nz. If you prefer, you can leave a comment on our Mahi listener line. And that number is 044720200, that's 044720200. Remember that charges may apply if you're calling from outside the Wellington free calling area. And if you want to get in touch with Workbridge, remember you can visit us on the web at Workbridge.co.nz or phone us toll-free that number is 0508858858. That number again 0508858858. We'll be back with another episode of Mahi in November. Until then, this is Jonathan Mosen saying thank you for listening. Bye for now.

[end]

View Details

There's an app for almost anything, so why not for Workbridge too?

Jonathan Mosen speaks with Workbridge's General Manager for Information Technology, Phil Hendry, about some big changes being implemented that will give you more choice over the way you receive services.

Many jobs are now advertised online exclusively, and IT skills are critical for many jobs, yet the cost of this technology can put it out of reach for many. Phil tells us about the free public Wi-Fi now rolling out at all 22 Workbridge centres along with the introduction of new computers for all our customers to use for job-search-related tasks.

These computers are fully accessible to people who are blind or have low vision thanks to a donation from Freedom Scientific, a division of Vispero, and it's New Zealand distributor Pacific Vision.

Fusion offers the industry-leading ZoomText magnification for those with low vision, and JAWS, the world's leading screen reading software.

Barry Burgess from Pacific Vision joins Jonathan to talk about how Workbridge assisted him to start a journey that has seen him running his own multinational company. We talk about why software like ZoomText and JAWS is still helpful for those with career aspirations in an age of built-in accessibility tools.

View Details

[music]

Jonathan Mosen: Kia ora koutou. Welcome to the first episode of Mahi, The Disability Employment Podcast brought to you by Workbridge. I'm Jonathan Mosen and with so many podcasts for you to choose from, I really appreciate you giving this one a try. Here's what you can expect if you stick around for this and future episodes.

First, who is Mahi for? Mahi is for you if you're disabled or you have an injury or an illness and you're interested in employment issues. We'll be discussing issues from a job-seeker's perspective and hearing some first-hand accounts of what works and what hasn't worked for job seekers. If you're an employer who wants to make the workforce more diverse and you want to tap into a pool of talent that is far too often underutilised, then Mahi is also for you. We'll be featuring employer interviews and success stories. If you have an interest in Public Policy on Employment in the Disability sector, Mahi will be an important listen for you too.

We'll also be keeping you informed about what's happening right across the country at our Workbridge centres. We’re keen to make sure that Mahi isn't just a one-way thing that you listen to. We'd like this podcast to be interactive and for you to have your say. Why not get the ball rolling? If you'd like your voice to be heard, then you can record an audio file such as with the voice memo's app on your smartphone and attach that file to an email message which can be sent to podcast@workbridge.co.nz.. That's podcast@workbridge.co.nz or you can just give us a call at the Mahi Listener line and leave us a message. That number is 04-472-0200. That's 04-472-0200. If you're using a landline and you're calling from outside the Wellington region, then charges may apply. You can also write an email and send it to podcast@workbridge.co.nz.. That email address again, is podcast@workbridge.co.nz..

Today, I'll be speaking with Danielle Van Dalen of the Maxim Institute. She has prepared a couple of papers recently on the dire unemployment of disabled people in New Zealand, the latest and most comprehensive of these is called Creating Opportunity. And then, Workbridge has begun a new strategic planning process and we’re keen to know your views. I'll let you know how you can have your say and why it's important. Stay with us from Mahi, Episode 1.

[music]

Jonathan: While we're an inclusive nation in many regards, we are failing to value people with disabilities and improve their ability to participate in society. That's a conclusion of a report called Creating Opportunity: Opening Doors to Employment for People with Disabilities. It's been produced by Danielle Van Dalen of the Maxim Institute. Prior to the publication of this latest paper, she also produced another piece of research on disability topics called Acknowledging Ability. Danielle joins me now from the Maxim Institute. Hi, Danielle.

Danielle Van Dalen: Hi Jonathan, it's such an honour to be talking to you today.

Jonathan: Great to have you here on the first episode. Look at you go.

Danielle: Yes, ecstatic.

Jonathan: Yeah. Tell me about the Maxim Institute. What does it do?

Danielle: We are a public policy think-tank that is a-- First, it's a little bit foreign in New Zealand, they’re more common in DC and London but we do research and policy analysis. We make policy recommendations and essentially, we try and help our nation's leaders make good decisions. We go away, do some research, talk to the people that are impacted by the areas that we work in. Parliament has a language of its own. I talk about the fact that we speak the parliament or can interpret for people the language of parliament.

Jonathan: When I read about the Maxim Institute, it's often prefaced in the media by language like right-wing think-tank. Is it fair to say that the Maxim Institute looks at social policy through a conservative lens?

Danielle: Yeah, I think so. It depends how you define that. I would say that we are a conservative organization. What we mean by that is we really believe in the dignity of every New Zealander and the value of every New Zealander. We believe that there are great ideas and background of history and thinking and we shouldn't just throw that away. We should actually pay attention and listen to those ideas. We're standing on the shoulders of giants. Let's pay attention to that and not make change for change's sake.

Jonathan: How did you come to write Creating Opportunity and Acknowledging Ability? Because the disability sector doesn't get a lot of research in this country. Actually, you make that point, that there's very little research that you could draw from when you put these reports together.

Danielle: Yeah, that's right. We research or do research into a bunch of different areas. One of those, being poverty in New Zealand. My manager had spent about three years doing some research into poverty in New Zealand looking at meaning and definition and also what the key pathways are out of poverty. This is all before it was--a while ago. It's come up again in recent political conversations which has been really cool to see. Rather unsurprisingly, I suppose, they found that there are two key pathways out of poverty; and those being education and employment. When I came on staff, one of the things that I was employed to do was to begin looking at that employment stream and looking at particular areas underneath that because employment is a huge question just by itself. There were so many different areas that we could have looked at. But disability was one that was suggested to us actually by a public servant, as an area that the government were struggling to do anything useful in. We had a massive whiteboard full of post-its and I was trying to figure out what is it that really stands out that we want to be spending a couple of years researching and thinking and writing about and me in particular. This was one that keeps coming up and it was something that the more I thought and read about it, it really impacted me. I don't have any experience of disability, not personally anyway. But I realized how prevalent it is around New Zealand and how many New Zealanders are impacted by disability but aren't really talked about. For me, that's really powerful. We need to be talking about these kinds of things.

I re-thought some of my own experiences. My grandfather was legally blind in the last years of his life. I realized how he had this amazing support network around him. My grandmother and my mom, in particular, was able to drive him places to doctor's appointments he had, he could get to the supermarket to buy food or all the local things that he was involved in. He had tapes, he loved the newspapers, he'd have the newspaper delivered on tapes. He really was surrounded by that but as it was, life wasn't always easy but their support made a huge difference and it made me realize that for so many people who don't have quite so much support or-- My mum wasn't working so she was able to drive him around wherever he needed to be. Some people don't have that luxury. It opened my eyes, I guess, to the lack of what we're doing in New Zealand and our own need to do something more.

Jonathan: Disability is a really broad term.

Danielle: Yeah, it is.

Jonathan: It's interesting that some people don't self-identify as being a disabled person. Your comment about your grandfather is really poignant too because more people are expected to work longer. The idea that everybody's gonna retire at 65 is long gone and disability tends to onset with age so we can expect more disabled people than ever in the workforce. As a country, we might not be quite ready for that and that's certainly one of the things that your report indicates.

Danielle: Yeah, completely, it makes sense. As you get older, you've lived more life, you're more likely to be involved in an accident of some sort or have a health issue and as a result, have some sort of disability. In my grandfather's case, he had skin cancer and had an eye removed. As a result, he became legally blind. When that means that we're working longer or even if you are in your 40s and 50s and suddenly your life changes in quite a drastic way, you still need to be able to live and a big part of living, I believe, is working. There are huge benefits to work and if people want to be working and not able to, we've got a bit of a problem.

Jonathan: You made the point and many disabled people feel this way, I think based on what they're telling me that disabled people feel that their social policy issues are often forgotten about and other disadvantaged groups whose statistics are actually a bit less dire tends to get a little bit more attention. Why do you think that is?

Danielle: Yeah, it's a bit of a heartbreaking thing to realise. To put it bluntly, I think disability isn't sexy enough. It doesn't get the attention of the media in a way that it should. When I released my first research paper, Acknowledging Ability, the amount of media attention that it got in comparison to the other work that we've done was pretty abysmal. We had done more prep, setting up and having stories ready for the media to take and run with than we would even normally do. We got a little bit more for Creating Opportunity but that was in part because of some of the other stories that were just over in the ecosystem. It really highlighted to us the lack of interest of the New Zealand public.

Jonathan: I mean, there's nobody who's a prominent journalist or media presenter who identifies as having a significant disability, right? It's just not there.

Danielle: That's right. We did have Mojo Mathers, Green MP but she's no longer in Parliament so there's no disability representative there. Disability is a little bit invisible or not even a little bit. Actually, it just is to most people. The fact that I haven't even thought about my grandfather as being disabled and thought that it's a fact of old age is a clear example of that. Obviously, through this work, I've met a lot of people with disabilities and it's been an amazing opportunity to have some conversations and realize that we really need to be having more of them.

Jonathan: What's the cause? I think, when we look and drill down at the causes, one of the issues relates to this Catch-22 thing that we're in, which is that people want to work but they're not in large number. That means that disabled people are often highly-invisible and that means that a lot of potential employers don't know firstly about what the consequences are or the potential benefits are of employing a disabled person. Secondly, what assistance might be available to accommodate any greater costs that might ensue as a result of employing a disabled person?

Danielle: Yeah, exactly. I think you've hit the nail on the head. A lot of what we found has to do with perception. It's the fact that people with disabilities are invisible. The employers, when someone or say they come across their desk or they've got two CVs in front of them, one is of a person with a disability and one is of a person without a disability. There's all these fears that may come up about it being really expensive, really difficult, they might not work in the team or other people might react weirdly. They might have to put on all these ramps because according to a lot of people, really the only disability is someone in a wheelchair which is not the case at all. It definitely is one but it's not the only.

People have a misperception as to what disability is like and what it's like to employ a person with a disability. There is a cost sometimes to employing people with disabilities. Sometimes you do need to have adjustments made and you do need to put things in place. But as you say, there are supports available for employers and government are trying to make that better. Actually, there's a huge benefit to society but also to the employer for employing people with disabilities. What we found is that people with disabilities, when you employ them, they are more likely to stick around, the longevity. They're less likely to take sick days which seems unusual but they're incredibly loyal. They're beneficial because they encourage improvement of the systems and processes. Everything becomes more accessible essentially because of that person being in the place of work and that is beneficial for everyone, there's some beneficial-- It might be changes to processes, changes to becoming more flexible about when people turn up or leave work which is really beneficial for appearance. It can be changes to ramps and things, all that is beneficial for the person with the disability if they need that. But it's also beneficial to all the people if they need it and don't identify as being disabled but actually still need easier access to buildings. It's beneficial because you have a greater understanding of a huge proportion of New Zealand's population who are your customers.

Jonathan: Having defined the problem, you looked at some potential solutions. Obviously, there's the supported employment model that Workbridge strongly believes in. Workbridge is placing thousands of people every year but it can't be denied that the unemployment rate is still way above the usual national average. You talked about education campaigns and the benefit of those. One thing that's interesting is, and I guess this could come back to perhaps the conservative lens that Maxim Institute looks through but you were quite dismissive of the idea of quotas. I don't know whether you talked about the potential benefits or otherwise of subsidies or tax breaks so that actually, it becomes more attractive for an employer to go for a disabled applicant because it is less impactful on their bottom line than it otherwise would be. Did you have a view on not just quotas but also some sort of subsidy or tax break--

Danielle: Yeah, sure.

Jonathan:--modelled to stimulate the market in the right direction?

Danielle: Quotas, to be honest, my dismissal of that comes from some research looking at Europe and from the OECD and they're looking at the impact and effectiveness of quotas. What they found is that while quotas are helpful in getting the very capable people into work, it doesn't have a long-term impact. It results in what is called cream skimming. That means that the very capable people who probably are already in work are the people the employers end up employing. It also perpetuates misunderstanding of people with disabilities not being able to work because they are capable. It suggests that people with disabilities will only be employed because they have to be because government is telling a particular employer that they have to. In Europe, there are definitely a number of employers, depending on what their regulations around quotas are, who will stay part of that by just paying the fine. I don't think that solves the problem in the long-term. I think we can be--

Jonathan: [crosstalk] Right. Is it the case like affirmative action argument though? Would you also make that same argument, say, for racial minorities who, it has been said, do benefit from affirmative action even though it's controversial?

Danielle: I'm not sure, to be honest. This is how I've read the research. It seems to show that we can be more effective. Otherwise, the Ministry of Health did some investigating into the impact of quotas and the desire for quotas in New Zealand. Actually, both employers and people with disabilities were not particularly interested in having them and preferred things like supported employment like education campaigns which I think, there's a lot more that we can do before we need to go down that path. I'm not saying it's necessarily forever the wrong solution. I just think right now, we should be trying a whole lot of other things. And there are some very practical things that we can be doing that will be more effective.

Jonathan: What are your thoughts on subsidies or greater use of tax credits for example as a financial incentive to employers. Do you think that that's a viable option?--

Danielle: Yeah.

Jonathan: --Or does it also send those same negative signals that you're talking about in the context of quotas?

Danielle: I'm not sure about the negative signals. Sometimes, we do talk about wage subsidies at the end of the paper and currently, the government has been investigating the need to do that to raise the minimum wage exemption so that we can get rid of that essentially for people who are working in what are effectively sheltered workshops. Actually, I think, sure, I think we should be doing that. I don't think anyone should be paid $1 an hour when it costs more to get to work than to do the work. That doesn't make any sense to me. But we also have to recognize that the wage subsidies are for-- We're talking about a really small number of New Zealanders, about 1500, I think, and it will be quite expensive. But sometimes it's still the right thing to do. From what I see right now, I think that it's probably the right thing to do.

Jonathan: In the mainstream market though and obviously, sheltered employment is a very controversial area-- [crosstalk]

Danielle: Sure, yeah.

Jonathan:--for many disabled people who feel that it's exploitative. There are others who feel that well, it gives a certain group of people a sense of dignity and meaning that they otherwise wouldn't have--

Danielle: Yes, yes.

Jonathan:--and that debate will go on. But in the context of say, a situation where I don't know, it might be a position in retail or an office position involving, say, clerical work in front of a computer. Is it appropriate to say, "Okay, we've got to incentivize for the time being anyway, the employer to employ a disabled person by, in some ways, subsidizing or giving him a tax credit so that the option to choose a disabled person is more financially attractive"?

Danielle: I've read a little bit of that. I'm still convinced that the evidence is in our favour. It beneficial financially and in terms of business to employ people with disabilities. If we make that clear to employers, if we shift attitudes around that, I actually think that that's probably going to be more effective in the long-term. And more effective as a society about how we value people, how we see the person sitting in front of us as a person.

Jonathan: You talked about the Think Differently campaign as an example of an education campaign that could be expanded upon,--

Danielle: Sure.

Jonathan:-- as a template. For those who aren't familiar with that, talk us through what that did and why you consider that that was in fact, an effective campaign.

Danielle: Well, I think it was an effective-- I mean, it was a smaller campaign, I think. Just let me start by saying, I think we need a big scale campaign. The Think Differently campaign was really interesting. It's a series of little videos and parts that show people with disabilities in a range of different employment places and both the employer, the person with disability talking about how it works and how it is very normal and it's actually a great thing and it's been beneficial to them to employ people with disabilities. The example that I actually keep going back to...and I always forget his name, I'm finally starting to remember, which is terrible. I apologize but it's John Kirwan, the former [All Black?]. Clearly not a huge sports fan. The Depression campaign that he's done, that's how I know him, through TV ads and things like that. It's the linking, the fact with the knowledge that there is support and care available. I think we actually need something on that kind of scale. Something really huge that it removes that barrier in terms of people with disabilities are no longer invisible. They are incredibly visible to all of us on a day-to-day basis and it becomes normal to think, "Oh yeah, of course, I would employ someone with disability."

Jonathan: Right and that campaign probably worked because Sir John Kirwan is a household name, isn't he? Everybody knows who he is. Unfortunately, because of this Catch-22 we were talking about earlier, there aren't actually that many disabled people out there who are household names in New Zealand. I mean, you look at the UK for example and you'd immediately think, say, of David Blunkett who got all the way to Home Secretary. He was the Home Secretary during 9/11 actually and he was a blind guy with a guide dog and every time he changed his guide dog, it was national news. If you were going to do an education campaign, somebody like him who had a very high national profile there would be obvious. In New Zealand, we don't really have-- I'm trying to think of a disabled person who really could be described as a household name in New Zealand.

Danielle: Yeah. I'm not a comms person, to be honest, but I agree we don't...that I can think of. But sometimes, campaigns don't have to be just a face. They can be satirical, they can be a lot of faces. It's bringing to the attention of the public the kinds of people that make up this beautiful country.

Jonathan: You talked about anti-discrimination legislation. This is a tough one, isn't it? Because most modern jurisdictions have it but increasingly, discrimination is quite difficult to prove. One of the things that is challenging and I don’t think anyone would suggest that it should be lawful again to discriminate on the grounds of disability but it’s hard when the discrimination goes underground. I know that with job interviews that I've done, because I'm totally blind and I'm walking in there with a white cane, so it’s pretty jolly obvious that I have a disability and if my disability hasn't come up by the end of the interview, I will volunteer it when they get to the section that says, "Do you have any questions for us?" And I'll say, "Well, you may be wondering how I would do this job since I can't see and here are some of the tools and techniques I would use." It's hard, isn't it?...when the discrimination could be happening but people are sensitive to the fact that they can't do it and so it's harder to prove now.

Danielle: 100%, it's really difficult. We have some anti-discrimination legislation. I can't or I haven't been able to see a way that makes that smoother or easier other than through making that employment process easier. Disclosing whether and when you decide to disclose that you have a disability, it's a huge question that people will have to come to grips with and figure out for themselves and really difficult. For me, going into an interview, it's hard enough. I don't have that question to contend with. But when you do, yeah, it's much more difficult.

One of the things...I guess, this is moving a little bit into the recommendations that we've made, about some of the recommendations we've made specifically around that. One of those being the employer's support passport. The idea behind that is that you have your CV but you also have this kind of passport. I'm not sure exactly what it would look like, a piece of paper or it could look really cool. Some document that you'd give to an employer when you're applying for a job to say, "I have a disability. I've worked in this place or I've had work experience here. These are the supports that I've had there and this is how that worked," or "These are the supports that I would be eligible for." In that way, an employer sees immediately rather than hearing, "Oh, you have a disability. Oh no, how is this gonna go? I can't do this, this is too difficult." They see immediately, "Oh, these are some of the supports that would work." There's immediately a solution to those questions.

Another thing that we talked about was human resource practices. For some people with disabilities, that question of "Do you have a disability?" or "Do you have any assistance needs?" things like that, when you're applying for a job, can be really off-putting. You can say that, "Oh well, I'm not gonna bother applying for that. They're just gonna immediately rule me out. There's just no point." Actually, re-learning or educating HR teams to figure out and make that more inclusive, that process.

Jonathan: The driver's license is a big one too, isn't it?

Danielle: Yeah, totally.

Jonathan: Because the employer is interested in somebody getting from A to B and they conclude based on their own experience that the way to do that is by having a driver's license--

Danielle: It's such a Kiwi attitude.

Jonathan:--and making sure that the individual can drive.

Danielle: Yeah.

Jonathan: And yet I'm just as able to jump in a cab or an Uber as somebody who doesn't drive and get from A to B in my job and the effect is the same as far as the employer is concerned. I've got from A to B but when that driver's license requirement is observed in a job interview, it disincentivizes disabled people who don't have a driver's license from even applying.

Danielle: Yes, that's right. Those kinds of things are some of the very practical things that we can begin to shift if we learn that actually, there are different ways. People with disabilities are amazing at working with what they have and the supports around them. We definitely need to improve some of that. There's no question there. But I don't think we can say that someone, just because they don't have a driver's license is unable to do a job.

Jonathan: You made the point, I think, in one of your reports that the nature of work is changing in a couple of ways. First, that people are just graduating to flexible hours anyway--

Danielle: That's right.

Jonathan:--but also that you know the fibre infrastructure that New Zealand has means that work from home opportunities and doing really extensive work from home being logged-in to a virtual private network or whatever, it's absolutely possible and it's being done a lot. And that would benefit people either who perhaps are best at working at specific times of the day in terms of managing their disability or perhaps just have a challenge getting into a physical office but they're absolutely capable of doing the work.

Danielle: Yeah, exactly. We talked about flexible work. It's quite a common thing to talk about these days. We talked about it as being beneficial to parents or to people who don't want to do long commutes. Well actually, it's a huge benefit to people with disabilities that transport--question is, it's a bit of an issue. And the idea of being able to work from home for a number of hours or to work hours that are best suited to energy levels or appointments or anything, the life outside of that. It's really powerful.

Jonathan: If a disabled person does something differently but gets the job done in the end, then an employer doesn't necessarily have to understand how it was done. What they really need to measure is, did the outcome get delivered that I'm employing this person to deliver? Because sometimes, an assistive technology or alternative techniques are just so outside the experience of many employers that they struggle to understand how is the disabled person going to do this? But if they can be assured, "Don't worry about how I get it done, it will get done."

Danielle: That's right.

Jonathan: That may well help.

Danielle: Oh yeah, completely. That requires trust on the part of the employer and it requires learning and understanding that that is a possibility. That requires not just the employer having that trust and understanding but the direct manager or the team around them. It is not just managers or employers that need to be learning about this. It's New Zealand as a whole.

Jonathan: I imagine you will have been heartened by the announcement recently that the government does intend to put an employment action plan in place and no doubt your report and the thoughts of many will form a part of the consideration that leads to that action plan.

Danielle: Yeah, yeah, that's really exciting. That's the hope that's why we do this work. We've certainly had really positive feedback from people within government. I really hope that we see some positive outcomes in this country.

Jonathan: I appreciate your being on the first episode of Mahi, Danielle. That is Danielle Van Dalen. She is from the Maxim Institute. If you would like to read the papers that we've been talking about, they are available online, the PDFs are accessible, maxim.org.nz is where you will find them. That's maxim.org.nz.. We also have a link to the papers in the show notes. Having had a read or even just heard this interview, what do you think? Do you think the Maxim Institute is on the right track? Do you have an alternative view? Are there things that were overlooked in the paper that you think are relevant to this discussion? Have your say and remember, there are a couple of ways in which you can do that. You can attach an audio clip or just write an email down and send it in to podcast@workbridge.co.nz.. That's podcast@workbridge.co.nz or you can phone the Mahi Listener line and that is 04-472-0200. That number again, 04-472-0200 and we'll play a selection of your comments on the next episode.

[music]

Jonathan: I hope you've enjoyed this first episode of Mahi. This podcast is just one of a series of initiatives we've been working on to communicate with you in new ways and to improve the service that we deliver to you. I took up the role of Workbridge as Chief Executive at the beginning of June. Since then, I've been taking time to become familiar with the way Workbridge currently operates, what we're doing well, where we're falling short and how we can do better. That involves meeting staff from all 22 Workbridge centres across New Zealand as well as talking with many other individuals and groups who have an interest in making an even bigger dent in the unemployment statistics that plague our sector. And those meetings will be ongoing as long as I occupy this role.

As part of this improvement process, Workbridge has published a green paper on some of the strategic issues we face. It's publicly available from our website now and it gives you an opportunity to think about how we can best achieve our goals of maximising opportunity and outcomes for disabled New Zealanders and those with an illness or injury.

Please visit our website at workbridge.co.nz.. That's workbridge.co.nz or you can follow the link in the show notes to the page containing the green paper. We're excited about all the initiatives that we're working on and we very much look forward to receiving your thoughts.

There you have it, Episode 1 of Mahi, New Zealand's disability employment podcast brought to you by Workbridge. You can find out more about us by going to workbridge.co.nz or you can give us a call at 0508-858-858. That number again is 0508-858-858.

[music]

[END]

View Details

In this our first episode, we begin by introducing our new podcast and what you can expect to hear in future episodes.

Jonathan Mosen speaks with Danielle Van Dalen from the Maxim Institute. They’ve published a couple of papers on the employment of disabled people, the most recent of which is called Creating Opportunity. We discuss what might be done to make a real dent in the dire unemployment statistics for disabled people.

Workbridge wants to know what you think. We’ve begun the process of putting a new strategic plan together, and you can have your say. To find out how, and to read the document, visit the Workbridge Strategy page. Submissions close on 18 October.

We welcome your feedback for the podcast. Email podcast@workbridge.co.nz or call our Listener Line on 04-472-0200.

View Details

Be sure to subscribe to mahi and catch our first episode, available soon.