ASSOCIATION OF BLIND CITIZENS OF NEW ZEALAND INC
ANNUAL REPORT
1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010
National Office, Ground Floor, 113 Adelaide Road
Newtown, Wellington
PO Box 7144, Newtown, Wellington 6242
Board
National President
Clive Lansink
Vice President
Jonathan Godfrey
Board Members
Martine Abel-Williamson
Dave Allen
Ann Bain
John Corder
Andrea Courtney
Shaun Johnson
Lynette Simon
Staff
Executive Officer
Rose Wilkinson
Administrative Assistant
Jenni Dunkley
Board Minute-Taker
Sarah Knowles
ABC NZ Branches
Auckland
Otago
Canterbury
Rotorua
Gisborne
Southland
Hastings
South Canterbury
Headquarters
Taranaki
Mid Central
Napier
Wanganui
Nelson
Wellington
Contents
Reports
National President
Executive Officer
Audited Accounts – National Office and Branches, Financial Statements for the Year
Ended 30 June 2010 (BDO Spicers)
Bankers Association Focus Group
Blind and Low Vision Education Network NZ (BLENNZ)
Braille Authority of New Zealand Aotearoa Trust (BANZAT)
Cassette to Digital Leadership Project (C2D)
Disability Advisory Council
Ministry of Health Disability Directorate Consumer Consortium
RNZFB Product Evaluation Panel
Workbridge Council
World Blind Union (WBU)
National President’s Report
Clive Lansink
Introduction
First, let me say to anyone reading our Conference agenda and in particular our
Annual Report, whether you read it in full or just skim through it, I hope you will ponder
on how much work is really involved behind the scenes to do the work we do. It doesn't
happen by itself. Much of this work is done voluntarily by blind people following the
principle as expressed in our motto: "blind people speaking for ourselves".
Our Annual Report will give you a detailed picture of all our activities. Here in my
President's report, I will draw your attention to some particularly significant issues, but I
am always fearful that by doing so I might diminish the importance of other activities.
That is not my intention because all the things we do are important as we strive for a
better world for blind people.
It is well accepted nowadays that we people with disabilities have a fundamental right
to directly determine for ourselves the services we need as we aspire to be fully
productive citizens in Society. This is quite simply why we have our Association, to give
blind people a voice that we otherwise would not have.
I urge you to keep this one thought in mind as you read our Annual Report. If you find
yourself wondering why we are saying or doing a particular thing, it may just help to
remember that it is our right to speak for ourselves.
Making Our Voice Heard
Much of what we do involves making formal submissions to the numerous reviews that
successive governments carry out on matters to do with disability. This is backed up by
the regular contact we maintain with Government departments, mainly through the
work of our Executive Officer. We have learned in recent years that when making our
points, we have to "keep it simple". We started this process by producing our "Great
Barrier Brief" document and "is this the right bus". This year we have added two more
"briefs" to our list.
"Are we being taken for a ride" gives clear statements about the Total Mobility taxi
subsidy scheme. Being unable to drive, we blind people often find our need to use taxis
unavoidable. We call for an effective, equitable, non-judgmental, consistent, nationwide
Total Mobility Scheme that is clearly focused on the transport needs of people with
disabilities in today's urban communities.
"Who's walking the talk" deals with the need for telecommunications to be accessible. It
should be obvious to everyone that modern telecommunications services are changing
the very fabric of how Society works. Blind, low vision and deafblind people must be
able to use today's telecommunications services or we will be more and more shut out
of everyday Society. This is as important to us as physical access to public buildings is
to someone in a wheelchair.
Both these issues featured strongly in this year's Wellington Seminar, which is an event
we run in which we meet personally with Government ministers, politicians and policy
makers.
The theme for this year's event was "we are citizens too", highlighting that what we are
asking for is really nothing more than anyone would expect from a society that is truly
inclusive. This event is an annual opportunity to raise their awareness of how blindness
impacts on our everyday lives and what Society can do to remove the barriers blind
people face.
Another issue we have pushed this year is our right to cast an accessible vote. We see
this as a fundamental political right that has the backing of the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which New Zealand has formally
ratified. We have again met with the Electoral Commission and we feel it is unfortunate
that the Commission has somehow lumped our issues in with the development of
electronic voting.
We know that electronic voting or e-voting as it is sometimes called is particularly
controversial and it may be many years away. We argue that we do have a right to a
system of voting that is fully accessible so we can cast our vote with complete dignity
and privacy. Systems are available now that could be utilised to meet this objective,
and we do not accept that our needs should be held back while Society in general
wrestles with the complexities of e-voting. We urge the Government to take steps now
to clear the way so we can work with Government to assess the available systems,
even with the possibility of piloting something in next year's general election.
Sometimes we get the opportunity to attend and speak personally in support of our
submissions. During this last year, we sent delegations to speak in person to the
Government's review of special education and to the Ministerial Committee for
Disability Issues.
Regarding special education, we said that like all other students, blind and low vision
students have a right to be educated to their maximum potential. Like most other
disability groups, we support the principle of inclusion, which in simple terms means
that a student with a disability has the fundamental right to be educated at a local
school along with other students who do not have a disability. But we also stand united
with other organisations in the blind community and uphold the importance of a special
school. A special school is important because it can provide an alternative setting for a
student to be educated if he or she is not coping in a mainstream school. It might be
easier for that student to spend some time learning in a special school setting, where
they might more easily learn the fundamental skills of blindness, so that they might
then be able to cope properly in a mainstream school environment. A special school
can also be a centre of excellence, providing a setting to bring blind and low vision
students together in small groups for short-term intensive courses focusing on specific
topics, such as learning music through braille, gaining the most from adaptive
technology, and learning other fundamental blindness skills.
One advantage of this approach is that if a student is the only blind or low vision
student at their school, they get the opportunity to meet other students with a similar
disability.
They learn that there are other young people just like them, and friendships can thus
form. Nowadays there is considerable scope for blind and low vision students to
support each other around the country by phone, email and social networking
websites.
This year, we have also had significant input into and have endorsed two documents
recently published by the Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind. These are the
Accessible Signage Guidelines and new educational resource materials for schools.
While we continue to express our displeasure at the Foundation's insistence on using
the term "partially sighted" in its documents instead of terms such as "vision impaired"
and "low vision", we are pleased that the Foundation agreed to acknowledge in these
documents that organisations such as ours use different terminology. Ultimately we
believe it is more important that we present a strong voice to the community at large,
and I am pleased that through this compromise we were able to give these documents
our formal endorsement.
I have already mentioned the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (UNCRPD). The Association is participating as one of six disabled people's
organisations participating in a project to monitor and report on New Zealand's
performance as a country that has ratified the Convention. The project will describe in
its report the areas in which New Zealand is doing well, and where we are not doing so
well. This will be based in part on the actual lived experiences of people with
disabilities, with One hundred formal interviews of disabled people contributing to the
report.
You can see that our voice is part of a bigger voice of all people with disabilities. The
Association works closely with other blindness consumer groups and like-minded
disability organisations such as the Assembly of People with Disabilities (DPA) to
speak with one voice on matters that concern us all. But there is still a feeling that the
problems faced by people with sensory disabilities are not widely understood. We in
the Association still feel there is a lack of hard facts and evidence at our disposal to
really highlight the needs of people with sensory disabilities which are not well catered
for by New Zealand society. To this end, the Association has been working closely with
other organisations of blind, deaf and deafblind people to focus on common concerns
so that together our voice might be more strongly heard.
In addition to all the above, when you look through our Annual Report, you will also see
all the other organisations, committees and panels on which the Association is
represented. It is through all of these processes that we deliver our voice to the wider
community on behalf of all our members. This is the essence of how we as blind
people speak for ourselves, and I am proud that the message we deliver is firmly
founded on our policy decisions which in turn are founded on the grass roots feelings
and beliefs of our members.
Audio Description on Television
I drew attention to this in my report last year and called for the first audio described
programme to be broadcast on Television New Zealand by the end of that year. For us,
it is like captioning is to people who are deaf. For those TV programmes that are
described, we will be able to switch to a special audio channel that lets us hear a
description of what is happening on the screen.
This is increasingly important if we are to have any hope of enjoying and appreciating
modern films, where often something very significant is conveyed in the action. Without
a description, we are oblivious to such detail.
We see this as a human rights issue because TVNZ is our public broadcaster and its
service is a service to the public as a whole. We are part of the public and they are
obliged to make a reasonable effort to meet our needs. The advent of digital television
means there is no longer a technical barrier that prevents them from doing this. Well,
we haven't yet had our first broadcast, but I am pleased to report that recently the
Government announced the provision of half a million dollars of funding out of the
broadcasting budget to establish audio description as a service during this year. At a
recent meeting with Television New Zealand, I was pleased to see their enthusiasm for
the idea now that actual funding has been committed, so they can get on with it. Now
we know it is going to happen.
We congratulate the Government for responding favourably and taking this initiative
that will make audio description a reality on television in New Zealand hopefully within
the next six months. We are also very pleased that the technology to receive audio
description is available as a standard feature on all standard FreeView televisions. This
to me is particularly important because it will ultimately mean that audio description will
just be seen as inherently part of television broadcasting and not something only for
blind people that require special equipment.
Audio description as a concept is of course not well understood in New Zealand,
compared to captioning for the deaf, for instance. Perhaps no better illustration of that
came from Tom Frewen, the Media Watch commentator for the National Business
Review. As the self appointed guardian of taxpayers' funds, he took the opportunity to
mock New Zealand On Air when he said "Whatever will they think of next-radio for the
deaf? Don't laugh, your government is spending $500,000 on television for the blind."
He went on to say that television without pictures is radio, implying that since many
people undoubtedly enjoy listening to radio, there should be no problem just listening to
television even without the pictures.
But we'll have the last laugh. Persistence does indeed pay off. As a result of our
persistence over a number of years, I am confident that audio description will become
established on television in New Zealand like it has in the UK, the USA, Canada and
many other countries. We now know the country as a whole will switch to digital
television as early as 2013.
As the population gets older and more and more people face up to deteriorating eye
sight and find they can't see the screen so clearly, audio description will gain wide
public acceptance, particularly when people realise that they will already have it
available on their television. As long as a programme is broadcast with audio
description, anyone essentially who wants to will be able to just push the appropriate
buttons on their remote to enjoy the added benefit it brings. It is a fine example of
catering for the needs of people with disabilities directly in the mainstream without
having to feel "special", so that everyone potentially benefits.
Broadening Association Membership
Frankly, the traditional model of an association like ours having neatly organised
geographical Branches feeding into a national voice to speak on our behalf is no longer
working. There are many reasons why people don't find it enjoyable to come to Branch
meetings, or they may simply be unable to get there. But it might also be fair to say that
people are more easily motivated on specific issues that concern them, and one
problem that Branches face is that people can be bored by coming to meetings which
spend a lot of time on issues that don't concern them. It's not that Branches are coming
to the end of their useful life, but we need to be aware of new ways in which people
today connect to exchange ideas. Ultimately it is the exchange of ideas that leads to
the development of policy and action.
I am pleased the Association is developing new ways for blind people to link arms so
that our voice is as strong as it can be. It is now easier to form special interest
branches and for other organisations to affiliate to our organisation. The next step is to
actually reach out now to blind people in other organisations so that they can be
included in our collective voice without losing their autonomy, and I urge the
Association to give some priority to this in the coming year.
At the same time, we are looking closely at the constitutional requirements we place on
Branches. We want to explore other ways in which people can come together to
express their views without having to maintain a formal branch structure.
Last year I reported on the youth forum we held which gave some indications of what
we could do to be more inclusive of blind youth. I regret that we haven't been able to
progress these initiatives as much as I had hoped during this year, but it hasn't been
entirely overlooked. We have been talking to some young people who expressed an
interest in taking some ideas further. Right now we have just about established a
nucleus of young people who will accept the challenge of developing a presence on
Facebook or some other social networking website that has strong youth appeal. I
hope this initiative will deliver something tangible in the near future and I am personally
committed to keep progressing this activity.
Funding Crisis
You can see from the above that there is a lot to be positive about. But it would be
remiss of me as your President if I did not draw serious attention to the difficult
situation the Association is in with respect to funding.
First we need to understand something about where our funding comes from. Most of
our funding in fact comes from the Foundation of the Blind. Under a long-standing
agreement the Association has had with the Foundation that dates back to the early
1980s, the Foundation has agreed to primarily fund our activities in return for the
Association agreeing not to actively raise funds from the public. That arrangement
proved very successful and allowed both organisations to flourish through the 1980s
and 1990s, supported strongly by a single and arguably very successful fundraising
activity as carried out by the Foundation with the Association's support.
More recently, perhaps in the last six or seven years, the Foundation's Board has been
questioning the value of funding consumer activities. It must be remembered that
nowadays there are as many as ten separate consumer organisations funded by the
Foundation compared to three or four in the 1980s.
The Foundation's Board is understandably concerned about what it sees as an
unsustainable model of funding. Funding of all consumer organisations by the
Foundation has been capped for at least the last six years, and last year funding was
actually cut by 10 percent. So when inflation is taken into account, this amounts to a
significant decline in funding in real terms for all consumer organisations.
The funding issue has been the subject of considerable discussion between the
Foundation and consumer organisations this year. We don't accept that the funding
model is in fact unsustainable, though we do readily agree that there must be clear
criteria for funding and organisations that receive such funding must be held to high
standards of accountability.
We feel strongly that the Foundation and consumer organisations have worked in
harmony for some thirty years and this is one reason for why the Foundation has such
a successful public fundraising image. We feel the Foundation has inherited the
benefits of this fruitful relationship and is really breaching faith by changing the rules
without proper discussion. The Foundation should be ready and willing to provide
consumer organisations that meet the criteria with an equitable level of funding that is
raised in the name of blind people. But it is increasingly clear to all consumer
organisations that the Foundation no longer understands us and the work we do, and it
fails to truly appreciate the value we bring to the Foundation and to blind people
generally.
At a recent meeting of the Consumer Consortium, which is a group comprising the
Foundation along with all the consumer organisations it funds, the Foundation made it
clear that it wants to further reduce funding in the next few years by making more
funding contestable and by encouraging consumer organisations to more actively raise
their own funds.
Though the details are not yet clear, the Foundation's Board has since agreed to relax
the constraints that currently prevent consumer organisations from public fundraising.
Consumer organisations are united in their response, which is that our focus should be
on doing what we do for our members and we do not want to be fundraisers. We also
recognise the damage that can be done to the overall fundraising activity on which
much of our blindness services depend, if consumer organisations are to increasingly
depend on our own fundraising.
We recognise that, like everyone else, the Foundation is feeling the effects of the
economic downturn. Directors are quick to remind us that the Foundation is running an
annual deficit of some three million dollars and we understand the Board has instructed
Management to balance the budget by 2012.
Consumer organisations have always been willing to take our share of the pain when
there is a downturn but we would also expect to reap the benefits of good economic
times. We remind the Foundation that at the time it put an arbitrary cap on funding
consumer organisations, the Foundation was enjoying strong positive cash flows and
was generally expansive in its behaviour.
We estimate conservatively that during the last seven years, while funding of consumer
organisations has significantly declined, the Foundation's overall budget increased by
more than 60%. We estimate also that the overall cost of the Chief Executive and
senior management team has also increased by more than fifty percent in that time. It
is not hard to see why consumer organisations find it difficult to stomach the argument
that we must now take our share of the pain in hard economic times.
So what is the reality for the Association.
You can see from the accounts that the annual grant from the Foundation was
$261,000 for the year just ended, down from $290,000 for the previous year. In fact it
has been at that level for the previous five years at least. The funding we receive under
our agreement with the Foundation is meant to pay for our national activities, which
primarily include the cost of the Board, Council and Conference, plus administration
and the office. That totalled roughly $420,000 in the year just ended. There is a clear
funding gap, but some of that is bridged by income from other sources such as interest
and investments. The reality though is that the overall gap we face between the
funding we get from the Foundation and what it really takes to run our activities
continues to rise.
Last year the Board accepted a budgeted deficit of approximately $70,000. That was
done in the hope that discussions with the Foundation regarding funding would
produce a positive outcome this year.
This year, which is the current year that began on 1 July 2010, the Foundation has kept
the annual grant steady at $261,000. We acknowledge that this is a decision the
Foundation's Board made in good faith while discussions continue in the hope of
finding a long-term funding model that is agreeable to the Foundation and consumer
organisations. Nevertheless, the Association's Board at its July meeting was faced with
a budgeted deficit of approximately $95,000, which was clearly unsustainable in
anyone's terms. Furthermore we also know, as I have already mentioned, that the
Foundation would like to see the overall level of funding of consumer organisations
reduce rather than increase. Therefore the outlook is not favourable, and the Board is
not hopeful that funding from the Foundation will return to a level sufficient to fully fund
our activities as in the past.
There are only two ways to reduce a deficit, either find more income or reduce
expenditure.
The Board could see no other source of income that could be immediately utilised to
reduce the deficit, so we have had to make immediate and painful decisions aimed at
reducing expenditure.
These have already been conveyed to our members so I won't repeat them in detail
here, except to say that casualties include reduced Board meetings, reduced support
to branches, cutting issues of our regular magazine Focus, reducing our telephone
based feedback line, and cancelling our leadership seminar and advocacy training
programme for this year. The Board has anguished over these decisions and deeply
regrets the impact, but it must be remembered that even after these cuts the
Association's national budget is still in deficit by some $55,000, which is not
sustainable in the long term.
Consumer organisations have all signed up to a letter which calls on the Foundation's
Board to meet face to face with us so we can highlight to all Board Directors the true
impact recent decisions are having on the very viability of consumer organisations, and
potentially the Foundation itself, now and in the long term. This was seen as a last
ditch attempt to find a solution. The alternative, if a solution is not found, is that we will
have to explore how best we can gain income through our own independent
fundraising. The Association's Board is already seeking professional advice and will be
considering options later this year.
People should not under-estimate the significance of the situation that now presents
itself. If we want this Association to be here in the next ten years, and in fact if we want
it to be stronger and able to hold to our principles, we probably need a level of funding
of roughly $450,000 to $500,000 in today's terms. If we can no longer rely on the
Foundation to fund the true cost of our right to a consumer voice, we must be prepared
to find that funding from other sources. Otherwise our organisation will just bleed to a
slow death. We must not be foolishly confident about our ability to raise part or even all
of our income from fundraising activities if that is what we must do. On the other hand,
let us not be afraid of standing on our own.
Let us not overlook the positive opportunity it brings, if we just have the courage to
grasp it. Remember, other organisations similar to ours depend entirely on fundraising
and they have shown that they can raise this kind of funding. It can be done. What's
more, it should put us more in our own driving seat, allowing us to truly aspire to do the
things we really need to do.
More funding at our disposal would allow us to do more research for instance so we
can be more strongly able to argue our case. And we could offer more direct support
and assistance to blind people in need, something we can only do right now in a very
limited way. It would allow us to respond more effectively to the changing nature of the
Foundation of the Blind, so we are able to deal with that organisation as an equal
rather than from a position of subservience.
While I do not personally relish the idea of active fundraising, I do see how it can bring
real benefits to us because it will create major new opportunities for us to deliver our
message directly to the community. Remember what I said at the start of my report
about keeping our message simple? Our message is simple and we should not be
afraid to stand up and clearly tell the public what we blind people need if we are to be
fully functioning citizens in our own country. Engaging in some Active but carefully
managed fundraising will allow us once again, like we have done in the past, to show
the community that we are capable of standing up for ourselves and that we don't
need, in fact don't want, the Foundation as a service provider to speak for us. But if we
must do it, then we must do it soon and decisively.
Conclusion
I hope anyone reading our Annual Report will appreciate not only the amount of work
we have done but the depth of the detail at which we work. It's great to have a voice in
the community but there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes to make it possible.
And every so often there is something new we can point to in everyday society that we
can say has resulted from our work.
Every few weeks when I go to get some cash out of the talking cash machine at my
local bank, and I plug in my headphones and take full charge of my transaction, I leave
with a great feeling of empowerment. I say to myself with some pride that this talking
cash machine is there largely as a result of our work, the Association's work. That is
just the most recent example of our success. Next year when I turn on my TV and hear
an audio described programme, again I'll be able to say that it was largely our voice
that brought that about.
There are many other examples, and often these can all be traced back to the feelings
expressed by someone at a branch meeting, that then turned into a remit, and
ultimately got passed as a resolution at our Conference. The most important thing to
remember about our work is that persistence pays off in the end. Sometimes we might
work on these issues for years, many years, before eventually something changes and
we suddenly find we have achieved success. And more often than not, our success
comes through working collaboratively with other disability organisations. We must
never forget the importance of maintaining strong relationships with likeminded
organisations and our ability to influence change simply by making our presence felt in
the wider disabled community.
Right now though, the Association internally is under considerable stress. We have
very limited staffing resources and in my view we are asking far too much of our staff
without being able to give them the resources they really need to work effectively. The
Board is aware of this also and we have to signal that we are turning our immediate
attention to addressing our funding situation and looking closely at everything we do so
we can be certain that we are using our resources most effectively. The long term
viability of the Association must be the Board's number one priority.
In closing, I would like to acknowledge with appreciation the work of all our Board
members who give their time not just to read the materials and attend Board meetings,
but often also to work on subcommittees and to represent us in other forums. I won't
name them specifically because everyone contributes to their best and everyone's
contribution is valued. We also acknowledge with appreciation the work of some other
people who are not on the Board but who also progress the Association's activities by
representing us in a number of ways.
I would however pay a special tribute to our Executive Officer, Rose Wilkinson,
particularly because I work closely with her as President. I very much appreciate her
passion and commitment to our work, her thorough knowledge of what we do, and the
profile she has achieved for us in the corridors of power. Make no mistake, we are
known and respected in Government circles, and this is largely due to the relationships
Rose cultivates on our behalf.
Everyone who participates in our activities, whether at a national or branch level, does
so because you are passionate about how you believe the world can be made better
for us as blind people. It is this passion for a better world that I think really justifies why
we are here. To each and every one of you, I pass on our sincere appreciation for your
efforts on behalf of all of our members. Without you all being willing to give your best to
our cause, we would not be celebrating the successes we are able to celebrate today.
Executive Officer
Rose Wilkinson
The Association has recorded several achievements on the advocacy front this past
year and what better place to celebrate these than at Conference.
I’ll start with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(UNCRPD), an international, rights-based convention, ratified by New Zealand in
September 2008. A significant part of the UNCRPD is the monitoring process and to
this end, six New Zealand Disabled Peoples’ Organisations (DPO’s) came together to
form a governance level steering group called the Convention Coalition. Membership is
principally for organisations governed by disabled people (as defined in Article 33 of
the UNCRPD). The Convention Coalition is leading disabled peoples’ work on
monitoring and implementing the rights of disabled people as set out in the UNCRPD
and other UN Conventions affecting disabled people. The Association has played a
leading role on the Convention Coalition – first in the adaptation of the Disabled Rights
Promotion International framework for implementation in New Zealand and then
involvement in facilitating and implementing the adapted framework. The work nearing
completion is the result of the first monitoring project of this kind in New Zealand and
has involved blind, deafblind and vision impaired individuals.
Involvement with the Convention Coalition and the monitoring project has provided
many opportunities for the Association and has gone some way towards heightening
our profile. Through networking and the development and maintaining of relationships
within government and across the disability sector, the value of collaboration, when
issues of commonality exist, has become more evident. There are risks thus each
situation is carefully weighed up - we must be clear about what we are seeking, and
that collaboration does not compromise the Association’s objectives, its ideals or
philosophies. Paramount is that we uphold our organisational position.
We have the ability to create opportunities through collaboration, for there is no doubt
that cross-disability and blindness sector efforts send a strong message to decision
and policy-makers alike. However we should not underestimate the inherent impact we
have when working in a collaborative situation, for it is often the intangible outcomes
which are the most valuable. There is always something to be learned, so when we
collaborate across the disability sector, then we have an opportunity to also educate
others about the needs of blind and vision impaired people. The reverse is also true.
Disabled Persons Assembly has recently co-ordinated two specific forums for disabled
peoples’ organisations. The first of these was around special education and the second
relates to employment. We have an opportunity in each of these situations, to reinforce
the needs of blind and vision impaired people, and to strive towards sending a joint
single message to politicians. This approach sits well with the current Government,
which has sent strong messages that it sees value in communities working together…
Audio Description is perhaps the most notable of our achievements and we should be
celebrating this victory for blind and vision impaired New Zealanders. If ever there was
a question about the Association’s purpose and why it exists, this outcome is but one
that reinforces the value of advocacy by a consumer-driven organisation. We have
been plugging away at Audio Description since the early 1990s.
Over a period of time, working in a commercially sensitive area, we have worked
extremely hard to earn the trust of NZ On Air and Television NZ. In 2010, at a time
when Government has stated no new money and no new services, this has paid
dividends. The $500,000 allocated by NZ On Air is but a starting point. Once Audio
Description is delivered in 2011, then we will be focussing on the service expanding to
meet the needs of a diverse blind and vision impaired population. Working with TVNZ
and NZ On Air, a strategy that includes broadening the service to include New Zealand
produced content, will be developed.
The annual Wellington Seminar is our advocacy platform where we identify issues
topical to the blind community, and then promote them to politicians and interested
parties. The highlight of this year’s event was the meeting with the Ministerial
Committee for Disability Issues. Fortuitously for the Association, the Ministerial
Committee met the evening of the Parliamentary Function, thus the topics presented,
were top of mind for many present. Salient issues raised with the Ministerial Committee
have been taken up by Ministers and their staff and we are encouraged at the ongoing
dialogue.
Banking services (including talking ATMs), braille signage in taxis, accessible
government elections, accessible websites and access to information are a few of the
many perennial issues we continue to progress.
We talk about making information accessible, and glibly trot out this phrase, but for the
uneducated, what does this mean? Our forward planning involved the development of
a set of guidelines to respond to this eternal question. In the knowledge though, that
the Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind was doing a similar piece of work, we
suggested our endorsement of the guidelines would send a stronger message to those
we seek to influence. We proposed the same approach with an educational resource
for school teachers. The Association was one of several consumer organisations that
offered input into each of these documents. This has resulted in two valuable
documents being endorsed by this Association (and others), for wide distribution.
Members and Branches are integral to the life-blood of this Association. The
significance of the co-ordination of member-activities at Branch Level and the
responsive of Branches to the many issues submitted for feedback that influence
Board decisions is paramount. The co-operation and willingness to work with staff and
Board together with the free-flowing exchange of information demonstrates a level of
collegiality that I have come to value of this organisation.
From the regularity of contact I have with Branches, I am all too aware of the tireless
effort and voluntary hours you each dedicate in your respective roles and areas of
activity. Accumulatively these are significant and contribute towards the Association’s
viability and sustainability into the future, and I wish to recognise these, and to place on
record my thanks for your support.
We work in an ever-changing environment which requires us to be fleet-footed - often
at times when we least expect it. So as I take stock of the myriad of issues simmering
away, it is resoundingly clear that the Association needs to be better resourced in order
to achieve its objectives. Changes in our funding regime have meant that I must put
some of the advocacy work to one side momentarily, in order to give greater attention
to sourcing alternate income streams.
There is no doubt that changes to our funding regime have created an environment of
uncertainty and angst for the Board, staff and the wider Association Membership. We
worked hard to trim the 2009-2010 projected $70,000 deficit to less than half. Longerterm, the funding situation will take some time to resolve and already, we are seeing
evidence of Branches coming to the aid of the Board as it makes those hard decisions.
So we have weighed up the risks and are now well on track towards identifying new
opportunities that will contribute towards the Association’s sustainability well into the
future.
In bringing my report to a close, it goes without saying that it’s been an extremely busy,
productive year. I have enjoyed working with you all, and take this opportunity to once
again acknowledge the support received from members, Branches and the Board. I
also acknowledge Jenni Dunkley’s contributions – as Administrative Assistant she is
often the first port of call when anyone contacts the office. Thus, her cheery disposition
and supportive approach are greatly valued characteristics.
Remember, there is much to celebrate and I hope you all take time to reflect on your
respective contributions to the outcomes we’ve collectively achieved.
ASSOCIATION OF BLIND CITIZENS OF NEW ZEALAND INC
NATIONAL OFFICE AND BRANCHES
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30 JUNE 2010
CONTENTS
Statement of Financial Performance
Statement of Movements in Accumulated Funds
Statement of Financial Position
Notes to the Financial Statements
Audit Report
Statement of Financial Performance for the
Year Ended 30 June 2010
Note
Income
Financial Support RNZFB
Calendar Sales
Donations and Grants
Interest Received
Subscriptions
Trading Sales
Legacies and Bequests
Conference Sales
Sundry Income
3
4
5
Total Income
2010
$
2009
$
261,000
11,441
30,276
80,365
10,099
888
3,731
4,310
290,000
14,130
29,421
108,283
8,375
539
12,082
7,380
5,516
402,110
475,726
Less Expenditure
Calendars
Cost of Goods Sold
4
7,016
10,353
Trading
Cost of Goods Sold
5
787
103
Conference, Council and Board
Conference
Board
Council
President
6
6
6
6
46,630
44,359
506
91,495
44,966
53,138
11,230
2,757
112,091
Administration and Office
Administration Expenses
Office Expenses
7
8
255,688
82,860
338,548
256,919
76,612
333,531
437,846
456,078
(35,736)
19,648
Total Expenditure
Net Surplus
Statement of Movements in Accumulated Funds
for the Year Ended 30 June 2010
Note
Net Surplus
2010
$
(35,736)
2009
$
19,648
Total Recognised Revenues and Expenses
(35,736)
19,648
10,552
-
1,671,708
1,652,060
1,646,524
1,671,708
Branch Funds Brought to Account
Accumulated Funds at Beginning of Period
Accumulated Funds at End of Period
9
Statement of Financial Position as at
30 June 2010
Note
2010
$
2009
$
11
1,251,570
800
178,710
5,512
6,697
1,125
830
1,445,244
1,239,290
464
11,050
4,957
2,542
2,851
2,412
1,143
1,264,709
208,075
57,508
265,583
383,976
66,716
450,692
1,710,827
1,715,401
Current Liabilities
Accounts Payable and Accruals
Subscriptions Received in Advance
Total Current Liabilities
63,383
920
64,303
42,838
855
43,693
Total Liabilities
64,303
43,693
1,646,524
1,671,708
617,002
576,107
442,863
10,552
659,991
576,238
435,479
-
1,646,524
1,671,708
Current Assets
Bank Accounts and Term Deposits
Cash on Hand
Investments
Provision for Doubtful Investments
GST Refund Due
RWT Recoverable
Accounts Receivable
Interest Receivable
Trading Stock
Total Current Assets
Non-Current Assets
Investments
Property, Plant and Equipment
Total Non-Current Assets
13
13
13
14
Total Assets
Net Assets
Represented by:
Accumulated Funds
National Office General Funds
Branch General Funds
Specific Funds
Branch Funds Brought to Account
Total Accumulated Funds
National President
Date
24 September 2010
9
9
10
12
Notes to and Forming Part of the Financial Statements
for the Year Ended 30 June 2010
1.
Statement of Accounting Policies
Association of Blind Citizens of New Zealand Inc. is an incorporated
society registered under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908. These
financial statements are general purpose financial statements and have
been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice.
Measurement Base
The accounting principles recognised as appropriate for the measurement
and reporting of earnings and financial position on an historical cost basis
have been used, with the exception of certain items for which specific
accounting policies have been identified.
Specific Accounting Policies
The following specific accounting policies which materially affect the
measurement of financial performance and the financial position have
been applied:
(a)
Subscriptions
Subscriptions are recorded when earned.
(b)
Receivables
Receivable are valued at expected realisable value.
(c)
Inventories
Inventories are recognised at the lower of cost, determined on a first
in first out basis, or net realisable value.
(d)
Fixed Assets and Depreciation
Fixed Assets are recorded at cost less accumulated depreciation.
Depreciation is provided at the rates calculated to allocate the
assets cost over their estimated useful lives.
The rates and methods applied are as follows:
Fit-Out
Motor Vehicles
Furniture and Fittings
Office Equipment
Recording Equipment
(e)
20% DV
20% DV
20% DV
30-50% DV
30% DV
Income Tax
Association of Blind Citizens of New Zealand Inc has been granted
charitable status by the Inland Revenue Department and is
therefore exempt from income tax.
(f)
Investments
Investments acquired at other than face value are adjusted so as to
account for the premium or discount over the remaining term of that
investment. Other investments are recorded at cost.
(g)
Goods and Services Tax
These financial statements have been prepared on a GST exclusive
basis, except for debtors and creditors, which are stated inclusive of
GST.
(h)
Differential Reporting
Association of Blind Citizens of New Zealand Inc is not publicly
accountable and meets the size criteria under the Framework for
Differential Reporting. It therefore qualifies for differential reporting
in respect of accounting standards, and all appropriate exemptions
have been applied.
(i)
Changes in Accounting Policies
There have been no changes in accounting policies. All policies
have been applied on bases consistent with those used in the
previous year.
2.
Business
The principal activity is that of providing advocacy on behalf of blind
consumers.
3.
Financial Support
The Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind provides financial
assistance to the Association under the Financial Agreement entered into
by the two organisations.
4.
Calendars
2010
$
11,441
2009
$
14,130
7,016
10,353
Net Surplus/(Deficit) on Calendars
4,425
3,777
Trading
2010
2009
$
888
$
539
1,143
474
1,617
1,457
(211)
1,246
Calendar Sales
Less:
Cost of Sales
5.
Trading Sales
Less:
Opening Stock
Purchases
Less Closing Stock
Cost of Sales
Net Surplus/(Deficit) on Trading
6.
830
787
101
1,143
103
436
2010
2009
$
$
Conference
Travel
Accommodation and Meals
Other
Raffle
15,027
29,240
2,114
249
17,637
22,295
4,777
257
Total
46,630
44,966
Board
Travel
Accommodation and Meals
Other
Total
23,741
13,335
7,283
44,359
30,060
16,632
6,446
53,138
506
506
2,757
2,757
-
8,799
2,431
11,230
2010
$
7,919
4,643
853
9,425
768
9,660
16,473
9,984
3,210
3,025
6,182
2,533
960
3,971
6,310
7,167
5,917
2,368
2009
$
9,524
4,562
2,631
10,340
1,015
764
10,438
14,986
8,832
6,960
2,425
7,608
3,304
1,220
3,924
4,969
4,059
1,418
Conference, Council and Board
National President
Travel
Total
Council
Travel
Accommodation and Meals
7.
Administration Expenses
Accounting Fees
Advocacy
Advocacy Workshop
Audit Fees
Books/Magazine Subscriptions
Branch Support
Catering and Functions
Depreciation
Focus
Gifts and Donations
Honorarium
Leadership Seminar
Loss on Sale
Member for Life Expenses
Motor Vehicle Expenses
Other Expenses
Projects
Recording Expenses
Staff Expenses
8.
9.
Subscriptions
Travel
Wages and Salaries
Wellington Seminar
White Cane Day
Write-off of Investments – Auckland Branch
World Blind Union Fees
World Blind Union - International Expenses
2,583
9,058
120,590
3,314
2,375
9,673
3,021
3,706
1,667
12,271
114,473
2,265
2,584
3,219
21,461
Total Administration Expenses
255,688
256,919
Building Expenses and Maintenance
Christmas Function
Cleaning
Phone and Internet
Office Expenses
Insurance
Kindred Conference
Postage
Power
Printing and Stationery
Rent
TIS Rental
TIS Toll Charges
2010
$
2,365
407
2,430
11,880
6,867
2,533
1,243
6,120
3,523
9,461
32,190
1,361
2,480
2009
$
2,165
345
2,377
9,326
4,365
2,472
196
5,575
4,059
8,712
32,255
1,365
3,400
Total Office Expenses
82,860
76,612
Movement
In / (Out)
$
(131)
(42,989)
Balance
2010
$
576,107
617,002
1,193,109
Office Expenses
Accumulated Funds
Note
Branch General Funds
National Office General Funds
Branch Funds Brought to Account
Balance
2009
$
576,238
659,991
1,236,229
-
10,552
10,552
Note
Recording Fund
Member for Life Fund
International Fund
Conference Fund
Leadership Fund
Total Accumulated Funds
10.
10
10
10
10
10
Balance
2009
$
Movement
In / (Out)
$
Balance
2010
$
157,612
31,584
30,403
47,229
168,651
1,671,708
3,926
995
2,654
(191)
(25,184)
161,538
32,579
Specific Funds (National Office)
47,229
168,460
1,646,524
2010
$
2009
$
157,612
9,843
167,455
5,917
161,538
150,608
10,907
161,515
3,903
157,612
31,584
1,955
31,537
1,067
33,539
32,604
Less: Member for Life Expenses
Balance at End of Year
960
32,579
1,020
31,584
International Fund
Balance at Beginning of Year
Add: Transfer from Accumulated Fund
30,403
6,360
45,505
6,360
36,763
51,865
3,706
21,462
33,057
30,403
Recording Fund
Balance at Beginning of Year
Add: Investment Income
Less: Recording Expenses
Balance at End of Year
Member for Life Fund
Balance at Beginning of Year
Add: Subscriptions Received
Less: World Blind Union International Expenses
Balance at End of Year
2010
$
2009
$
Conference Fund
Balance at Beginning of Year
47,229
47,229
Balance at End of Year
47,229
47,229
Leadership Fund
Balance at Beginning of Year
Add: Interest Income
11.
Less: Leadership Seminar Expenses
168,651
5,991
174,642
6,182
166,370
9,890
176,260
7,609
Balance at End of Year
168,460
168,651
Total Specific Funds
442,863
435,479
2010
2009
$
$
3,675
500
56,417
599,859
660,451
71,965
500
109,579
515,331
697,375
2010
2009
$
$
66,621
29,201
84,241
23,990
2010
2009
$
$
Term Deposits
Canterbury
Hastings
Mid Central
Nelson
Otago
Rotorua
Southland
South Canterbury
Taranaki
Waikato
Wanganui
Wellington
10,000
10,000
6,918
43,215
8,829
16,000
12,974
165,000
9,300
3,494
180,416
29,151
10,000
10,389
6,683
12,631
8,470
16,000
14,060
145,000
9,300
3,274
170,000
27,877
Total Branches
591,111
541,915
1,251,570
1,239,290
Bank
National Office
National Bank - Current Account
National Bank - Imprest Account
National Bank - Call Account
National Bank - Term Deposits
Total National Office
Branches
Bank Current Accounts
Savings/Call Accounts
Total Bank
12.
Branch Funds Brought to Account
Funds received from disestablished Branches are as follows:
Bay of Plenty
305
Far North (North Harbour)
10,246
Total Funds
13.
10,552
Investments
Short-term
General Fund
Bank of New Zealand
ASB Bank Ltd
Maturity
15/09/10
15/06/11
Interest
7.50%
7.03%
Total General Fund
Short-term
Recording Fund
Bank of New Zealand
Maturity
15/09/10
Interest
7.50%
Total Recording Fund
Leadership Fund
ASB Bank Ltd
15/06/11
7.03%
Total Leadership Fund
Total Short-Term Investments
Face
2010
2009
$
$
60,000
20,000
59,647
19,796
-
80,000
79,443
-
Face
2010
2009
$
$
50,000
49,778
-
50,000
49,778
-
50,000
49,489
-
50,000
49,489
-
180,000
178,710
-
Long-term
Maturity
Interest
Face
2010
$
2009
$
General Fund
Bank of New Zealand
ASB Bank Ltd
Westpac (NZ) Ltd
Deutsche Bank
15/09/10
15/06/11
19/12/11
15/06/14
7.50%
7.03%
7.23%
3.72%
60,000
20,000
50,000
20,000
49,417
20,000
58,989
19,606
49,063
20,000
150,000
69,417
147,658
Total General Fund
Long-term
Maturity
Recording Fund
Bank of New Zealand
ANZ National Bank
Deutsche Bank
15/09/10
15/09/11
15/06/14
Interest
Face
2010
$
2009
$
50,000
50,000
40,000
48,846
40,000
49,420
48,154
40,000
140,000
88,846
137,574
50,000
50,000
49,812
49,015
49,729
Total Leadership Fund
100,000
49,812
98,744
Total Long-Term investments
210,000
208,075
383,976
Total Investments
390,000
386,785
383,976
7.50%
7.16%
3.72%
Total Recording Fund
Leadership Fund
ASB Bank Ltd
Rabobank
15/06/11
03/05/12
7.03%
7.68%
A Doubtful Provision was made in 2009 for the following investments held by the
Auckland Branch:
Hanover Finance
$ 7,000
Dorchester Finance
$ 4,050
$11,050
The above investments were written off this financial year.
Any amounts recovered in the future will be recognised as income when it arises.
14.
Fixed Assets and Depreciation
Depreciation
Leasehold Improvements
Motor Vehicle
Furniture and Fittings
Office Equipment
Plant and Equipment
Total Depreciation Expense
2010
2009
$
556
6,457
1,817
7,355
288
$
609
5,936
1,602
6,465
374
16,473
14,986
Fixed Asset Book Values
Leasehold Improvements
At cost
Less Accumulated Depreciation
Motor Vehicles
At cost
Less Accumulated Depreciation
Furniture and Fittings
At cost
Less Accumulated Depreciation
Office Equipment
At cost
Less Accumulated Depreciation
Recording Equipment
At cost
Less Accumulated Depreciation
Total Fixed Assets
15.
23,962
19,473
4,489
23,962
18,917
5,045
68,109
42,278
25,831
68,109
35,821
32,288
27,765
22,501
5,264
27,765
20,682
7,083
142,436
121,590
20,846
160,101
139,167
20,934
39,993
38,915
1,078
39,993
38,627
1,366
57,508
66,716
Capital Commitments and Contingent Liabilities
Association of Blind Citizens of New Zealand Inc has no capital
commitments or contingent liabilities at balance date (2009 - Nil).
16.
Operating Lease Commitments
The current National Office lease expired in March 2007. At balance date
a renegotiated lease was under action but had not been finalised.
17.
Related Parties
These financial statements include both the National Office operations and
all Branches. All inter-branch transactions have been eliminated for the
purpose of these Accounts.
No related party debts have been written off or forgiven during the year.
18.
Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards
In December 2002 the New Zealand Government announced that New
Zealand International Financial Reporting Standards (“NZ IFRS”) will apply
to all New Zealand reporting entities for the periods commencing on and
after 1 January 2007.
In September 2007 the Accounting Standards Review Board announced
that small to medium-sized businesses which satisfy certain criteria would
not be required to apply the NZ IFRS until further notice. Association of
Blind Citizens of New Zealand Inc. satisfies these criteria. All the financial
information in these financial statements has been prepared in accordance
with current New Zealand Generally Accepted Accounting Practice, (NZ
GAAP).
Bankers Association Focus Group
From Ann Bain, ABC NZ Representative
This report is on the Bankers Association Focus Group originally set up to review the
Code of Banking Practice as it relates to the needs of older and disabled customers.
There was a meeting in June, the first since the launch of the Guidelines late last year
which were written to assist banks to use the Code. The Guidelines have received
acclaim both within New Zealand and overseas. Citibank USA has asked if they may
use information in the Guidelines for their own internal purposes.
Few representatives of the banks were present at the June meeting. Sarah Mehrtens
Chief Executive Officer was present for a short time at the lunch prior to the meeting
but had to leave to attend another engagement.
Colleen Bermingham-Brown from Westpac spoke of her Bank having a Consumer
Consultative Council which covered a wider base of customers (45 organisations) and
had included representatives from the Foundation of the Blind and ABC NZ (Rose)
when they had met in Auckland.
Robyn Hunt said that she had resigned her position with the Human Rights
Commission but would continue to be part of the Focus Group as a representative of
DPA.
The banks felt it was too early to give feedback on how helpful the Guidelines were to
them.
The future of the Focus Group was discussed. The terms of reference require revision.
It would be desirable to include other representatives of disability organisations and
exclude some from professional groups who are not themselves disabled.
The Code of Practice is due for review. This is undertaken by an external reviewer
who then seek submissions from the public on the revised Code. At this point the
Bankers Association put in a submission.
At this stage I am uncertain as to the future of the current Focus Group.
Blind and Low Vision Education Network NZ (BLENNZ)
From Clive Lansink, ABC NZ Representative
This report covers the highlights that I think will be of interest to Association members
concerning my involvement as your representative on the BLENNZ Board since my
report to last year's Conference.
This year's report will be rather different because I no longer have to talk about
governance issues staffing or property. With these issues largely behind us, there is a
sense that BLENNZ is at last able to move forward into a new era.
Before highlighting the year's main activities, I will briefly acknowledge the passing into
history of the Vision Education Agency. At the time of my report to last year's
Conference, VEA was in the process of being wound up. This has since been
completed. It must be remembered that much has changed since VEA was created,
and much of the progress made towards the development of the National Plan and the
formation of BLENNZ itself has been the result of the initial work carried out by VEA.
We should remember the outstanding contribution it has made in bringing us together
to unite as a sector behind the National Plan. Ultimately we were able to convince the
Ministry that we are a united sector. We must continue to make all efforts to remain so.
I hope that the new Board structure now in place for BLENNZ and the on-going fabric
that binds our various groups will ensure that we all are ready to unite and act
decisively when needed.
The dominating issue for BLENNZ during the last year has of course been the final
design of the new facilities. I myself have not been closely involved with the plans and I
really do not have a detailed knowledge of them. Instead of being a whole series of
separate compartments, the new facilities are said to be much more based on
concepts of open plan and multi-use spaces.
The design of the new facilities has been strongly influenced by the architects'
involvement in other recent school projects and their visit to special school facilities in
Australia. It is not easy for an organisation like BLENNZ to work with the Ministry
because we find we don't easily fit the pattern set by numerous other regular schools.
Nevertheless the Board has been assured by staff that while they will be challenged by
the need to work in a new way in the new facilities, they are excited about the benefits
the new facilities will bring. Much of the old school has now been demolished and
construction on the new facilities is about to begin.
The Board has confirmed the new boundary for the property it needs. This clears the
way for the Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind and perhaps other entities to
lay a claim to remaining land in the area. It should be noted that this land was put aside
by the Government in the late 1950s for the education and rehabilitation of blind
people. But it is understood that any land deemed now to be surplus to requirements
will revert to other users and may well be sold off, so there is only a short window of
opportunity at present for blindness organisations to make proposals regarding the
remainder of the land.
Normal Board elections were held in May this year which is the regular time for all
school boards to be elected. A lot of time has been spent on developing the current
model of governance which gives parents of blind and low vision students from around
the country a voice on the Board, even if their children are not formally enrolled at
BLENNZ. It is clear though that very few parents as yet are interested in coming on to
the Board. The Board is discussing possible ways to generate interest amongst
parents around the country, including the possibility of a travelling roadshow which
would allow more parents to meet some Board members and learn more about what
we do.
In my President's Report, I commented on the Association's submission to the
Government's review of special education. BLENNZ hosted a sector forum, which also
included the Association, to develop and present a sector wide submission to the
review. As explained in my reports last year, with VEA no longer in existence, it will fall
to BLENNZ from time to time to host such sector forums.
Most people reading this will be aware of the Government's introduction of national
standards for schools. The BLENNZ Board has obtained clarification on the position of
students with significant learning disabilities in relation to the implementation of these
Standards. It has been confirmed that the IEP will remain the key instrument for
planning learning programmes and assessing achievement.
This year we acknowledged with deep sadness the passing of Tom Rogerson ONZM,
former Principal of Homai College. Throughout his tenure, the philosophy of residential
schools was changing and it was Tom's innovation, flexibility and unswerving belief in
the capabilities of young blind students that enabled him to make the transition to an
education service that, today, supports students and their families in local
neighbourhood schools. Tom will always be respected in Foundation and education
circles as an innovative humanitarian, a man of principled action and commitment.
Braille Authority of New Zealand Aotearoa Trust
From Paula Waby, ABC NZ Representative
By Conference time I will have attended four meetings since taking on this role a year
ago. Much of the business has involved ending the Braille Authority of New Zealand
and Braille Literacy Panel Committees and establishing the new organisation of Braille
Authority of New Zealand Aotearoa Trust. This is now up and running with two
Trustees from BLENNZ, two from the RNZFB and representatives from ABC NZ, PVI
and Ngati Kapo. Four other Trustees with the relevant interest and qualifications have
been appointed.
The new accessible signage guidelines produced by the RNZFB have been endorsed
by ABC NZ and I attended the launch for these in August.
Tom Rogerson and Lorna Grant were two people who played a vital role in the
education of blind students and the importance of Braille. We acknowledged their
passing with a minute’s silence.
Braille statistics given by the RNZFB for the last financial year were as follows. There
were 745 contacts. Eleven certificates were presented for Uncontracted, Use Your
Braille and Contracted Braille. There were over 132 contacts with people about braille
which was a new figure made available.
The RNZFB launched their new teaching programme earlier this year known as STAR
– Simply Touch and Read. They have received expressions of interest for the purchase
of this programme from a number of sources.
During the coming year the Braille Authority of New Zealand Aotearoa have many
interesting projects to work on including the development of an online course for
teaching braille to sighted people.
Cassette to Digital Project Leadership Group
From Dave Allen, Consumer Representative
I have enjoyed representing your interests on this project, when I have been an
opportunity to offer assistance.
We have made considerable progress since Conference last year. By now a few
hundred library borrowers are receiving talking books on CD that previously received
them on cassette.
At last year's Conference, it was agreed that we would continue advocating for
electronic delivery of talking books at no additional charge, and I have continued that
effort, as well as the need to have an accessible way of identifying media content.
Borrowers will notice that a hole appears in the top right flap of the CD mailer that
contains a magazine disk. I recognise that this is not as good is Braille, but I hope it
has been somewhat helpful.
The group has not met since April, and some key staff members who were part of the
group have left. This has resulted in leaving us less informed about progress in this
area, but I have tried to keep the Board advised about this.
Ministry of Health Disability Services Consumer Consortium
From Carolyn Weston
I would like to thank the ABC NZ Board for having confidence in me to represent the
Association’s interest on this Consumer Consortium for another two years. The Board
appointed me for a second term at their November 2009 meeting.
Since Conference 2009 the Consumer Consortium has met twice in Wellington, once in
mid October 2009 and in early March 2010. We were scheduled to meet in late July
2010 and then again in November 2010, these being two day meetings, however
without consultation with members on the Consortium, the MoH (Ministry of Health)
staff decided to alter this to one three day meeting to be held from the 4-6 October
2010. This decision did anger a couple of Consortium members however another
representative did remind these people that this Consumer Consortium is funded by
the MoH and we advise the MoH on disability services so really it is their prerogative to
determine just how many meetings a year they will fund.
The main reason why the MoH have reduced the number of meetings is due to no new
money being injected into the Consumer Consortium budget for this year’s meetings,
despite the fact that costs are increasing and other disability consumer organisations
have joined the Consortium which places even more stress on the static budget. As
many representatives who attend these meetings have found that three day meetings
are very tiring, the NZFDIC (New Zealand Federation of Disability Information Centres)
have assured us that meetings will conclude at 3 pm so no one should get too tired.
Well, we will just have to wait and see what happens on that front.
There are two major issues I wish to report on here. I have provided the ABC NZ
Board with a comprehensive report after each meeting so if you wish to read more
about these issues, I am sure you will be able to access my reports from National
Office.
LAC (Local Area Coordination)
Over the past two years the MoH staff have been identifying other mechanisms in
which disabled people can access disability support and rehabilitation services. Most
of you will be conversant with the NASC (Needs Assessment Service Coordination)
method of accessing such services. After-all, the RNZFB use this mechanism for new
members to access its services. Other agencies either provide such mechanisms
themselves, like the Foundation does or the NASC is carried out by another agency
prior to the client determining which disability service provider they require, (with the
help of the Needs Assessor). This NASC method was introduced into New Zealand in
1993 after a national conference was held in Wellington to determine which method
should be used for accessing services. At that time, the New Zealand NASC method
was seen as revolutionary within the international disability environment and New
Zealand was seen as a leader in this field. However time passes and New Zealand
has not modified its NASC method in any way since the mid 1990s.
The MoH have investigated a number of newer methods of accessing disability
services and they have concentrated considerable time on examining various methods
in Australia.
They tend to favour the Western Australian model however they still see some flaws in
this so they are striving to bring the best from several models, hoping that we have one
of the best methods of accessing disability services in the future.
At our last meeting in March, they presented the concept of Local Area Coordination.
This model would split regional areas into smaller local areas where coordinators
would be employed to assist disabled people in obtaining information about disability
support and rehabilitation services. A coordinator would work with a disabled person
and their family/whanau, examining the holistic needs, networks, activities one is
currently doing or wishes to do in the future and services one is already accessing.
From what I have heard of this model, the coordinator does not go out and find
services for a disabled person but only provide information so the disabled person and
their family can go and obtain the required services themselves. From all I know of this
model to date, it appears that disabled people and their family will need to be more
assertive, know more about what services are out there and maybe even have to go
out and advocate for services they require. It is hard to know just how much advocacy
will be required for each individual to obtain disability services in the future but it must
be recognised that some self or personal advocacy will be required.
Despite this massive change in the access of disability services, the MoH staff stated
that if a person wishes to use NASC as a method of accessing disability services in the
future they will still be able to do so. However the big question is how long will the
MoH fund NASC services? If they find that the LAC model is more efficient in many
ways including being more cost effective in funding disability support and rehabilitation
services (which ideally means saving money) then it is unlikely that the option of NASC
will be with us for too long after the LAC model is introduced.
Environmental Disability Services
In my last Conference report I informed you that this service which funds disability
equipment and home modification was seriously in strife. The resources in no way
match the demand for service. Over the past 12 months, the MoH have developed a
temporary policy to deal with this problem whilst examining methods in addressing this
long-term. A policy has been instigated where only applications will be funded if they fit
into priority one and relates to safety of a disabled person, their family or carer. This
means that all applications that are in priority one or two will not be funded in the
meantime. To my knowledge adaptive technology for blind people fit into priority two
and if there was any that did fit into priority one it would have to be deemed it was
required due to safety reasons.
The MoH have investigated ways in which to address this problem and late in 2009 two
workshops were held in Christchurch and Auckland where representatives from
disability consumer organisations discussed this issue. I understand that the
Association had representatives at both workshops. At the time of writing this report I
do not have any further information on this issue and how the MoH intend to deal with it
long-term. At our last Consumer Consortium meeting in March, MoH staff were
delighted to inform us that Government had provided more money and this was to be
spent in the area of hearing-aides and home modifications
As the Consortium is meeting only days prior to our Conference I will have more
information about these two topics so I hope that I will have time to update you verbally
then.
Product Evaluation Panel
From Dave Allen, ABC NZ Representative
I would like to thank Conference for confirming my appointment to serve on this panel
for another year.
While there is no shortage of new products on the market that our members should be
exposed to or made available through the Foundation's Equipment shop, the logistics
of having this happen have been negatively impacted by the panel's failure to meet this
year. If deliberations consisted of discussing written work such as reports, email might
be a very efficient and economical way of "meeting." The reality is that a physical
evaluation of physical products cannot reasonably be achieved by email. While some
communication did take place via that medium, the low amount of that suggests that it
was not of great use to panel members.
The panel agreed last June that face to face meetings were needed, and this
Association regularly advocated for this to happen, without success. The Chief
Executive told us that the panel could meet, but this never filtered down to
management.
An evaluation of the Soundpost orientation system was completed.
The Penfriend labelling system was evaluated and is now being stocked, as is a new
audible volleyball.
I am finalising evaluations of the Touch memo and Voila labelling systems that
compete favourably with the Penfriend.
I'm told that an evaluation of the Cobalt talking microwave convection oven has begun.
I've been advocating for this to happen for over a year. A member was keen to
participate in this evaluation, and I have furnished the member's contact information to
the Manager of Equipment services.
Over the year I have assisted any member who contacted me about equipment
availability.
Workbridge Council
From Bev Duncan ABC NZ Representative
Greetings All
Since the Association's last Conference in 2009 I have represented the Association on
the Workbridge Council and have attended two meetings. I am pleased to say that
both meetings have been held at the Brentwood Hotel in Wellington which as most of
you will know is very user friendly for everyone. I understand that the issue of non
friendly venues for meetings, particularly for guide dog handlers, has been ongoing for
some years.
The first meeting in February was a Council meeting which saw us discussing further
draft policies on human resources, privacy, quality, Treaty of Waitangi and Pacific and
cultural diversity. I continue to bring to the Council's attention that accessible
information and communication need always to be in the chosen format of the person
receiving the information and communication. One Council member is concerned
about the use of the word support in many of the Workbridge policies. I reminded
Council members that Workbridge is a Supported Employment Agency so therefore the
use of the word support is not there to in any way put people with disabilities down but
to enable them to gain and stay in employment.
The Chief Executive, Grant Cleland, along with the Senior Management Team, are
working through restructuring of Workbridge. The restructuring process is still ongoing
however, it is hoped that when it is complete that it will greatly benefit Workbridge as a
whole. The rationale for the restructuring is to increase the number of people with a
disability, injury or illness into jobs and the length of time they stay in jobs. To increase
the income of Workbridge so that Workbridge can grow and enhance their
performance.
The new structure will enable Workbridge to be better able to respond to regional
needs and contracts, improve consistency, devolve responsibility for regional contracts
and human resources functions to three regional managers and area and hub
managers. To provide more of a career progression for some staff and in the longer
term hopefully enable Workbridge to employ more employment consultants.
It is interesting to note from the client satisfaction survey which took place in 2009 that
over eighty percent of those that responded are happy with the service from
Workbridge. The older the client is the happier they are with the service. Also the
longer the person has been receiving service from Workbridge the happier they are.
People with mental health issues are the least happy with the services Workbridge
provide.
The second meeting I attended which was held in June was a strategic planning
meeting. This meeting was facilitated by a facilitator from outside Workbridge. I
understand that it was the first time that the Board, Senior Management Team and
Council have come together for such purposes. It was a great meeting with much
enthusiasm and energy as we work together to improve services that Workbridge
provides. I heard some people say that this was the most positive meeting that they
had attended in a long time.
One thing that did concern me at this meeting was the fact that the two interpreters for
the deaf did not introduce themselves when we had the roll call. I am given to
understand that these people are supposed to be invisible, however, I believe that if
others in the room can see them there, then we as vision impaired people, have the
right to know they are present. Much of what was discussed at the meeting is not for
public knowledge yet as it was about funding, relationships with stakeholders,
restructuring, and the new Workbridge Service Model.
Workbridge Agreement: Martine Abel-Williamson reported to you at last Conference
in 2009 that she didn't sign the agreement forwarded to her in September 2009. I
haven't signed this agreement yet either as I understand this is still being worked
through by the Association National Office and the Chief Executive of Workbridge.
Council Membership: Council is currently made up of representatives from various
organisations. Currently we still don't have any one representing people with mental
health issues. A replacement for Thomas Bryan as an individual member has not yet
been found so there is only one individual member. The membership of Council
remains the same as was reported to last Conference.
Workbridge Board: There are two vacancies on the Workbridge Board that we are
currently looking to fill. Again, I think it would be beneficial to the Board to have
someone with a sensory impairment appointed.
Disability Issues Paper: This paper is now drafted by Karen Beard, Quality
Assurance, Workbridge staff, and all Council members are encouraged to submit items
for inclusion in the document from their constituencies. The timeframe for information
to get to Karen is very tight and often doesn't give time for me to get anything from the
Association.
Annual General Meeting: The Annual General Meeting of Workbridge is set down for
Thursday 21 October 2010 and is to be held at the Brentwood Hotel Wellington. This
will be the first annual meeting of Workbridge that I will attend on your behalf so if you
have any comments or issues you would like me to raise please don't hesitate to
contact me and I will do my best to raise them and report back to you the outcomes.
Conclusion: I look forward to representing the Association on the Workbridge Council
for a further year.
World Blind Union
From Martine Abel-Williamson
Capacity Building and Community Development: This past year has been indeed
very busy in terms of international community development items. Just prior to
Conference 2009, I was invited, as Chair – Women’s Committee, World Blind Union
Asia-Pacific (WBUAP) Board and Policy Council and New Zealand representative, to
participate in a capacity building planning exercise in Mongolia. This was to benefit
developing countries such as Laos, Mongolia and Vietnam. The first part of the
session was spent on evaluation in order to determine whether current practices,
sponsored mainly by international aid, are indeed fruitful, successful and sustainable.
In December, I was again invited, and again, all expenses paid for by the Danish
Association for the Blind as part of DANIDA (Danish International Development Aid)
funding, to complete the mentioned planning, and to recommend future activities that
might benefit the whole of our region.
We ended up drafting proposals in areas of capacity building, organisational
development and gender equity, and submitted that for the Danish’s attention. Our
recommendations had budget implications of over USD1 million, but we realised that
we’re needing to be aspirational and yet quite detailed, in case the Danish government
was to cut back on our proposals, etc.
In July 2010 we received the news that most of our recommendations have been
approved, so, implementation will commence formally in January 2011, but some items
will be progressed to coincide with the upcoming Mid-Term Assembly, planned for
October and November 2010. The main areas of work done and recommendations
progressed, fall into seven categories, as summarised below:







Employment of a Project Co-ordinator, whose job it will be to support Laos and
Mongolia in their development initiatives but who’ll also support the WBUAP region
with specific tasks such as website development, collation of toolkits and other
resources in fields such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities (UNCRPD), assisting other countries in the region with funding
application advice and small-scale project identification, etc.
Attendance and contribution at WBU Mid-term and General Assembly level of
developing countries.
Training of trainer initiatives in areas of rehabilitation, advocacy, etc.
UNCRPD initiatives at regional level.
Steering Group capacity building (and here we’re referencing the Group that will
work closely with Laos and Mongolia to help realise their goals and objectives).
Assist other regional countries to work on small-scale projects.
WBUAP developing as an information hub.
WBUAP Meetings: The WBUAP Board and Policy Council did meet twice formally in
the past year and once informally, face-to-face, and twice via phone and SKYPE. The
Association contributed mostly towards the face-to-face meeting, held in May in Seoul,
South Korea, as most of the other meetings’ costs were linked with sponsored Danish
capacity building meetings.
While in Seoul, I made use of the opportunity to visit their audio description studios, as
their main blindness service provider has a government contract to that regard.
They’re also very up to date in terms of adaptive technology development and their
built environment is being influenced to great extent by their Japanese neighbours, so,
it is mostly quite accessible, including blindness/tactile features.
Mongolia, on the other hand, was quite inaccessible, in the strictest sense of the word
re built environment matters, as their physical infra-structure developed at a higher
pace, due to traffic demand, while they didn’t keep up with aspects to do with universal
urban design. In Mongolia they’re still in the business of providing blind people with inhouse employment opportunities, for instance, in Ulaan Baataar, their capital city, the
main blindness service provider supports two clinics for blind masseuses and they’re
also receiving government contracts to produce parts of wooden structures for rural
housing.
Publications: Editions of the WBU E-bulletin, IDA (International Disability Alliance)
Disability Rights and the East Wind (WBUAP regional publication) are being received
and distributed. Articles of possible interest are often posted on blindness related
email lists, especially in topical areas such as notification about Braille labels on
medication packaging in Europe, noise/sound issues to do with hybrid and electric
vehicles, the Right to Read Campaign, etc.
I’ve submitted articles to mentioned publications on commemorating the Bicentenary of
Louis Braille in New Zealand and events around that, regional women’s updates,
Conference 2009 information sharing, and I’ve also contributed to Focus, our
Association publication re matters listed above.
WBU Forum: The Forum met a couple of times over the past year and membership
has changed at RNZFB level. RNZFB members used to include: Geoff Gibbs,
Geraldine Glanville and Sandra Budd. Now that Geoff is no longer the RNZFB’s
representative, he’s not on the Forum any longer, but he’s still of course a WBU Life
Member though. Sandra Budd, CEO – RNZFB, is now the RNZFB’s WBU
representative.
Two RNZFB Board Directors, interested in international matters, namely, Jonathan
Godfrey and Jillian Mills, are now on the WBU Forum and Geraldine Glanville is not a
member of this Forum any longer.
Regional Committees: As already mentioned, I’m our regional link with the global
Women’s network, thus Diversity Committee. Paul Manning is still involved in
education for children matters and as of earlier this year, we had the opportunity to
appoint someone on our regional 3E (Employment and Economic Empowerment)
Committee.
I recommended that Thomas Bryan, past Employment Services Manager – RNZFB, be
appointed to this role and this has been approved.
Thomas, a current Manager in the Direct Client Contact Services Directorate at the
RNZFB, is now our link with regards to employment initiatives, etc.
WBU Mid-Term Assembly: Planning for this to occur is well in hand. It will take place
in Chiba, Japan, from 29 October till 1 November. The main theme has to do with
UNCRPD ratification and a sub-theme has been added about employment of blind
people.
On the first day, a Women’s and Youth Forum will take place and I’m to facilitate the
former. Two days of business will then follow and on the last and 4th day, people will
have the chance to attend the Sight World Exhibition, usually occurring in early
November in Tokyo. This expo will consist out of adaptive technology products and
services, built environment best practice examples, daily living items, etc.
On 2 November, I’ve been invited to participate in further DANIDA capacity building
initiatives, now that the funding has been approved for ongoing work, small scale
projects and the like, so, our skills are once again being valued and requested at
international level.
ABC NZ Resources: Our latest items “Is this the right Bus” and “the Great Barrier
Brief” have been welcomed by developed and developing countries, so, I’ve been
incorporating those in general awareness raising of our advocacy examples as well as
during capacity building exercises.
Women’s Committee Update: While in Seoul, Korea, I met up with members of the
Korean Blind Women’s Union and linked them in with current women’s networks
already established.
In Seoul, I also met, for the first time with WBU representatives from Fiji and one of
them became a women’s contact for me, to be integrated with my current Pacific
women’s links.
I’ve been distributing scholarship information, UNCRPD training resources and general
project updates to the regional Women’s Committee and to my women’s network in
general.
Information around what they’re all doing on International Women’s Day, International
Day of Persons with Disabilities and International Day against domestic violence, are
just some examples of how the women are being linked with one another, how we
remain connected and of how we can support each other.
Development in the Pacific: Blind Citizens Australia has adopted Papua NewGuinea, so to speak, in terms of contributing to their financial WBU subscription and by
generally supporting them in terms of information and advice and the initial hope was
for ABC NZ to provide the same kind of assistance to Samoa, as the latter was, up to
last year, a Special Member, not having paid much of their fees as yet, etc. I managed
to build good networks in Samoa at both women’s network and service provider level,
but the intent is not as such at present, by Samoan blind people, to re-subscribe.
They’re finding current support received as part of the Pacific Disability Forum ample
and adequate.
Global Update: The WBU office now has a staff member, working in the field of
Resource Generation (what we’ll refer to as Fundraising), so, efforts are being put into
sustainability of the organisation. The RNIB (Royal National Institute for the Blind) is
providing this staffing resource at present.
Word of Thanks: Allow me to conclude with a word of thanks to Clive Lansink and
Dave Allen, current ABC NZ WBU Committee members, as well as to Rose re ongoing
National Office support. Your involvement and commitment is much appreciated, as
it’s always great to have others contributing and assisting in what has ended up being
quite a busy, yet fulfilling portfolio for me.