1.0 Introduction



center2812415Our Future Our Equality: How Accessibility Legislation Could Remove Barriers and Enhance Equality for Persons who are Blind Living in British ColumbiaBC Coalition of Guide Dog Users and the Canadian Council of the BlindA Brief Prepared by Heather Walkus and Yvonne Peters from consultations with People who are Blind, Low Vision, Deaf/Blind, Blind plus and use Guide Dogs Living in British Columbia.Heather WalkusNov 29, 2019 7900035000Our Future Our Equality: How Accessibility Legislation Could Remove Barriers and Enhance Equality for Persons who are Blind Living in British ColumbiaBC Coalition of Guide Dog Users and the Canadian Council of the BlindA Brief Prepared by Heather Walkus and Yvonne Peters from consultations with People who are Blind, Low Vision, Deaf/Blind, Blind plus and use Guide Dogs Living in British Columbia.Heather WalkusNov 29, 2019 right23002311402019760098002019Table of Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u 1.0 Introduction PAGEREF _Toc25821019 \h 21.1 Overview of Consultation Process for This Brief PAGEREF _Toc25821020 \h 22.0 Some Quick Facts About the Life of People who are blind in Canada PAGEREF _Toc25821021 \h 33.0 Can Accessibility Legislation Help? PAGEREF _Toc25821022 \h 33.1 Summary of Consultation Results PAGEREF _Toc25821023 \h 33.2 Snapshot of Concerns and Possible Solutions PAGEREF _Toc25821024 \h 43.3 The Role of Technology in Removing Barriers to Visual Information PAGEREF _Toc25821025 \h 53.3.1 Screen Readers PAGEREF _Toc25821026 \h 53.3.2 Emergence of Smart Technologies PAGEREF _Toc25821027 \h 63.3.3 Aira: The Latest Technology Game Changer PAGEREF _Toc25821028 \h 73.3.4 Universal Design is Still the Best Solution PAGEREF _Toc25821029 \h 74.0 Strengthening the Human Rights of BC Guide Dog Handlers PAGEREF _Toc25821030 \h 74.1 A Day in the Life of a Guide Dog Handler PAGEREF _Toc25821031 \h 74.2 The Guide Dog and Service Dog Act: A Help or a Hindrance? PAGEREF _Toc25821032 \h 84.2.1 Ineffective Enforcement PAGEREF _Toc25821033 \h 84.2.2 Identification and Profiling PAGEREF _Toc25821034 \h 94.3 Is Certification/Identification Really Necessary? PAGEREF _Toc25821035 \h 94.4 Recommendations for Change PAGEREF _Toc25821036 \h 9Our Future Our Equality: How Accessibility Legislation Could Remove Barriers and Enhance Equality for Persons who are Blind Living in British ColumbiaA Brief Prepared by Heather Walkus and Yvonne Peters on behalf of People who are blind Living in British Columbia. In this brief, using the word Blind encompasses People who are Blind, Low Vision, Deaf/Blind. Blind plus and use Guide Dogs. 1.0 Introduction1.1 Overview of Consultation Process for This BriefWe wish to begin by thanking every person that contributed to this Brief and who shared deeply about their experiences. We would also like to thank the B.C. Government, Minister Shane Simpson and SPARC BC for the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed British Columbia Framework for Accessibility Legislation. As this Brief illustrates, people who are blind encounter a variety of barriers on a daily basis as customers, employees, students, seniors, parents and members of the B.C. community. Such barriers are further compounded for persons who use guide dogs who are often subjected to ignorance and discriminatory attitudes that limit or deny their right to access public places because they are accompanied by their dog. We are therefore very encouraged by the Premier’s commitment to develop legislative initiatives to remove physical, information, attitudinal and systemic barriers so that persons with disabilities can participate in “day-to-day activities and take part in opportunities that are available to all citizens.” Much of the information in this Brief comes directly from people who are blind who, through consultations, shared their thoughts and experiences. For many people who are blind, accessibility legislation and its potential to remove barriers is a new concept. For this reason, our Brief highlights issues of concern and proposes ideas for further discussion rather than specific recommendations.Our Brief is divided into three main sections. We begin with a quick look at the status of people who are blind in Canada. We then provide an overview of the concerns raised by those who participated in the consultations. As more and more technology becomes available to assist people who are blind, we believe it is also important to consider the role it could play in overcoming accessibility barriers. Given the unique barriers experienced by people who are blind who use guide dogs, we decided to end the Brief with an analysis of the B.C. Guide Dog and Service Dog Act. This is because throughout our consultations participants regularly expressed serious concerns with the way the Act and related policies are being implemented. This section provides several recommendations for creating a more robust and effective system for protecting and enforcing the access rights of persons who use guide dogs.The participants in the consultations included people who are blind, low vision, deaf/blind, use guide dogs and blind with additional disabilities. We had little lead time to prepare for the consultations. Nonetheless, when the word was sent out, many individuals stepped forward and were eager to participate and have their say. Given our limited time and resources, we are indeed very pleased and grateful to the many people who took the time to participate in the consultations and who provided honest, thoughtful, informative and resolution-focused feedback on making life better for people who are blind. A total of 232 persons participated in our consultations. Consultations were conducted in person, by telephone and through Internet communications. A total of eight meetings were held throughout the province from October 26 to November 16, 2019.2.0 Some Quick Facts About the Life of People who are blind in CanadaAccording to the CNIB Foundation, an estimated 1.5 Million Canadians identify themselves as having sight loss. When compared with the rest of Canada, British Columbia, has the second highest number of blind persons at a figure of approximately 252,000 persons. The employment rate of persons who are blind Going in Canada is a shocking 38% compared to 73% for those without a disability. This inequity is further exacerbated by statistics that indicate that approximately half of all persons who are blind living in Canada live on an annual income of $20,000 or less.Arguably, stable employment is the cornerstone for attaining economic and social well-being in our society. However, misconceptions and negative attitudes about blindness continue to place such opportunities out of the reach for most people who are blind. For example, according to an Ipsos survey 70% of Canadians say they would choose a sighted job candidate over a blind candidate. Such polls provide a stark reminder of just how entrenched discriminatory attitudes are about blindness in our society.Nevertheless, education offers some hope for the future. Research demonstrates a strong correlation between higher educational backgrounds and full-time employment rates. For example, only 5% of people who are blind without high school education are working full-time compared to 35% of people who are blind who have a post-secondary degree. 3.0 Can Accessibility Legislation Help?3.1 Summary of Consultation ResultsConsultation participants echoed many of the research findings cited above. They described a number of personal social and economic circumstances that they believe have caused them to experience discrimination and limit their access to full participation in society. For many this was the first time they learned of the government’s interest in introducing accessibility legislation. They expressed support for the legislation but stressed that it must be results-oriented particularly with respect to people who are blind, rights-focused, aimed at removing barriers, properly resourced and effectively enforced. Moreover, the legislation must honour and uphold the rights of people with disabilities proclaimed in the B.C. Human Rights Code, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Consultation participants hope there will be additional time to consider more fully the ways in which legislation might address their issues and stressed that they want to be involved on an ongoing basis in crafting those solutions.Participants chose not to focus specifically on the questions set out in the government Framework. Rather they identified a number of issues which they believe need attention, and which might be resolved by accessibility legislation. Set out below is a preliminary snapshot of concerns and possible solutions identified by consultation participants. 3.2 Snapshot of Concerns and Possible SolutionsCommon themes which arose throughout the consultations are as follows: Feel isolated and removed from mainstream society;Difficult to participate in societal activities because of poverty and attitudes;Unable to access accessible information using adaptive technology because of lack of supports and poverty;Feel that there has been a long history of not being listened to;Successful employment requires supports such as transportation, health care, affordable housing, assistive technology with training and ongoing support for updates and new equipment, education opportunities and materials that are not structured only for sighted persons;Lack of good quality and reliable transportation has caused difficulties in accessing education, finding employment and participating in life activities, especially critical in the rural and northern areas of B.C. where most communities have no transportation between towns;The few appropriate services that do exist from consumer-based organizations are underfunded or volunteer run, funded on a year-to-year basis where no long term planning can occur for program and service delivery as they are at the whims of government funding approval, full of barriers related to applying for services, and centralized and too far away for many people to access; Many consumer-based service providers face the challenge of wanting to bring forward a strong voice in what will work, but fear saying too much thereby potentially risking their funding.Frustrated and disappointed with the government for funding charity organizations which say they represent people who are blind, but which never consult with people who are blind; decisions are made on behalf of people who are blind with no input;People who are blind have no options or choices for rehabilitation and habilitation services. They are non-existent and have been left to the charities to address. These areas are not a part of the education and health care system in our province and must be. The tools of People who are blind, cane skills, orientation and mobility skills, strategic situational awareness, Braille, low vision supports have never been addressed in a concerted effort to include as part of the educational and health care system; People feel shut out by a rehabilitation and habitation system of care that mainly includes the mobility aspects of the body to a certain degree and yet the does nothing to address the sensory issues of support needed in the blind, low vision, deaf/blind community; Braille is not supported or seen as the form of literacy for the blind community. There is too much reliance on screen readers and “talking” everything. The fundamentals of grammar, conceptualizing, cognitive and writing skills cannot be learned from voice only. Braille literacy and American Sign Language (ASL) skills are two foundations for success through education and employment and involvement in society; Many participants felt ASL and braille should be taught in the school system as courses for all students to learn and that will foster and encourage better communication and inclusiveness; Employers need better education on how to accommodate existing employees who develop low vision and wish to continue working;Many of the participants reported having careers, only to be forced out by employers who told them their vision loss now poses a liability and insurance risk and pushed them onto CPP Disability or Persons with Disabilities designations. Participants as young as 26 discussed having been told they could now have a great life because they could receive CCPD or PWD. There is no consideration that a person in the blind community has value to an employer or is seen as a person;Need to recognize diversity of opinion and supports, and that there is no ‘one voice’ for people who are blind;The government must ensure that services and supports are seen as part of all human needs and not stigmatize and reinforce the medical/charity model in which the diagnosis is what is wrong with a person, and that the charities are there to look after them. Instead embrace the social model in every consideration in which we are all just fine with our attributes and our bodies, and that there are ways to function with them as is. It is societal attitudes, discrimination and unknown and the non-universally designed environment that disables us. It is not either/or. We just are, and need to be supported in the way we are and not feel shut out and hidden away; Counselling and supports for victims of abuse must take the needs of people who are blind into account, particularly those of women who are blind; Need better supports for seniors and anyone who develop low vision during their life; Need supports for the individual and the families; Need to review and revise income support measures for people who are blind to ensure equity and effectiveness; Income supports must be based on the individual and not reduced based on a relationship;Need better quality services which are consumer-based, offer comprehensive services and assistance and which tailor services to the needs of the community; Need to have services and supports seen as rights based and changes are made with engagement with the People those services impact;Need to stop funding only traditional charity-based services like CNIB, and start supporting community-based services that are locally developed, consumer driven, rights focused and promote the independence, dignity and equality of people who are blind; Examine existing and previous models that have been used such as the person-centered, Get Together with Technology (GTT), Equipment and Assistive Technology Initiative (EATI) (Report attached), Measuring Up Initiative, Technology for Living (formerly BCITS), Independent Living Centres, Richmond Centre for Disability and the Victoria Disability Resource Centre. That Government develop supports and services with the Blind community at the same time as developing the framework;That government use this consultation as the beginning of the inclusion of People in the Blind, Low Vision, Deaf/Blind, Blind Plus and Guide Dog user community at the decision tables. Nothing about us without us requires developing continuous community based engagement, resource allocation and capacity building within the blind community by the community itself. 3.3 The Role of Technology in Removing Barriers to Visual InformationGenerally speaking, the term “accessibility” is presumed to mean the removal of architectural barriers to the built environment for people with disabilities. Moreover, typically accessibility is presumed to be synonymous with removing barriers for those who use wheelchairs. However, recent awareness has expanded this concept to include blindness features such as tactile cueing on doors and elevators, audible pedestrian traffic signals, and audible stop announcements on public transportation systems. While this is an important step forward, accessibility for people who are blind is a much broader issue.Given that our society is primarily designed for the benefit of sighted people, some of the most pernicious barriers encountered by people who are blind arise from having to cope with a daily barrage of inaccessible visual information. Visual information permeates most daily tasks undertaken by people who are blind such as applying for a job, shopping, going for a walk, taking a class, or obtaining the latest news. Achieving accessibility for people who are blind must therefore address the full spectrum of barriers caused by exclusive reliance on visual information. This includes the growing inaccessible use of technology in ordering kiosks and self checkouts, now rapidly being introduced in restaurants, grocery and big chain stores. Accessible buildings is important but not useful if there is no transportation to get to them. Today more than any other time in history, there is real potential to remove such barriers. This is due to the recent explosion of blindness-focused technologies and services which have the power to radically change how people who are blind interact with visual information. While environmental accessibility remains a priority, it is not too far-fetched to say that emerging technologies are fast becoming the new accessibility for people who are blind. Below is a brief description of some of these technologies, their potential to remove barriers, the challenges to implementing these technologies, and how accessibility legislation could enhance the acceptance and use of such technologies.3.3.1 Screen ReadersWhat they DoScreen reader software programs translate text information displayed on the screens of computers or other electronic devices into Braille or speech formats. It enables a blind person to interact with electronic information and perform various functions such as reading an array of print materials, creating all types of documents, shopping online, obtaining the latest news, and communicating on various social media platforms. As most information is now electronically provided, Screen readers have the potential to reduce barriers for people who are blind in important areas such as education, employment and the performance of daily tasks.The ProblemScreen readers are operated through the use of keystrokes rather than mouse clicks. Navigating a website using a mouse requires vision and thus is not an option for people who are blind. Many websites, including government websites, continue to rely exclusively on mouse-based navigation tools, effectively excluding and discriminating against people who are blind. For example, a participant recounted their difficulty in filling out computer forms related to a loan. Because of the horrendous inaccessibility of the forms, they were forced to disclose personal information to a sighted assistant. A simple and easy solution to this barrier is to ensure that websites can be accessed either by using a mouse or a keyboard. The FixFirst and foremost, government should ensure that all people who are blind have access to screen reading technology. Most computers do not come equipped with screen readers and thus hundreds of dollars are needed to purchase this equipment, which is an expense most people who are blind cannot afford. Government programs are needed to provide people who are blind with training, supports and resources so they too can benefit from computer technology.Second, governments have invested time and resources into the development of standards to ensure that the built environment is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Similar efforts are required to ensure that all websites and electronic forms of communication are screen reader accessible. Accessibility legislation must include the authority to establish clear and enforceable standards on the need to remove barriers and ensure that all electronic information and communication within its jurisdiction is fully accessible to those who rely on screen readers.3.3.2 Emergence of Smart TechnologiesWhat They DoSmart technologies such as the iPhone, iPad and the Amazon Echo have revolutionized how people who are blind can now obtain and interact with visual information in their world. With the tap of a finger or voice command, people who are blind can use various apps to check the weather, keep track of their appointments, chart their health and fitness, read a book, find a recipe, identify transportation routes, check a bank account, shop online, stay up-to-date with the news, and complete study and work assignments. In addition to regular apps, there are specialized apps for people who are blind that perform tasks such as describe photos, read print information, identify the contents of a can or package, identify currency, identify colours, and provide detailed GPS wayfinding navigation of both indoor and outdoor environments. As well, most smart devices come with built-in accessibility features such as voice output, Braille support, and text magnification.Essentially smart devices function as hand-held minicomputers. Possessing a smart device significantly reduces the barriers created by visual information and opens tremendous opportunities for people who are blind in the areas of education, employment, performance of daily tasks, leisure and independent travel.The ProblemFor many people who are blind, owning a smart device is not possible. Money is the key problem. There are a variety of costs associated with owning a smart device. First there is the initial outlay of funds to purchase the device. Then there is the monthly charge for a data plan. And finally, there is the cost of obtaining an Internet package to offset the use of expensive data plans.Taking on such costs is far out of reach for many people who are blind who are on low or fixed incomes. Even if they receive a donated phone, the ongoing costs of supporting the use of the phone can be challenging.The FixSmart devices are not luxury or recreational items for people who are blind. They are a modern assistive device required to overcome a host of informational barriers, improve accessibility, foster independence and increase economic opportunities. Government support and resources are needed to ensure that accessibility does not depend on affordability but is respected as a right.3.3.3 Aira: The Latest Technology Game ChangerWhat it DoesAira is a service developed in the U.S. and now available in Canada. This service connects a blind person with a live sighted agent who, through a camera located on a smart phone or smart glasses, provides personalized assistance to facilitate management of their daily lives. Aira agents are paid staff and are trained and certified to provide people who are blind with the specialized information they require to function independently. The tasks performed by the Aira agents are determined by the needs of the blind user. They may include describing an intersection, finding a bus stop, locating items on a store shelf, reading documents, picking out clothes, reading the cooking instructions on a package, navigating a university campus, and preparing documents for a business meeting as examples.To use Aira a blind person must be able to download the free Aira app onto a smart phone. While Aira offers some free minutes, extensive use requires the user to subscribe and pay for a monthly plan. Governments, service providers and businesses can also purchase Aira minutes. This enables blind users who have the Aira app on their smart phone to access Aira for free while visiting their premises. For example, airports in Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver now offer free Aira services. Blind passengers are now able to contact an agent through the app and, with their assistance, independently travel to their departure gate, locate their baggage on the baggage carousel and take advantage of airport amenities.The ProblemAira operates through an app which must be downloaded onto a smart phone. As indicated earlier, many people who are blind cannot afford a smart phone and are therefore unable to access Aira. Even if a person has a smart phone, they may not have the funds required to subscribe to a monthly plan, set in American dollars.The FixAs stated earlier in this Brief, smart devices are an essential aspect of accessibility for people who are blind. The revolutionizing accessibility benefits of the Aira service underscores this requirement. In other countries many governments, businesses, service providers, employers, educational institutions and recreational facilities have signed on to provide people who are blind with free Aira service. While Aira is still relatively new in Canada, the government should evaluate its benefits and consider designating it as an essential accessibility requirement.3.3.4 Universal Design is Still the Best SolutionThere is no doubt that specialized technologies have significant potential in reducing barriers for people who are blind, but they should never be regarded as the only solution. Design standards are needed that ensure across-the-board accessibility for all, including people who are blind. This concept is known as “universal design”. Incorporating universal design into the built environment is still a priority. However, more and more daily activities are being carried out using technology. Examples include self-operating kiosks, scanners, bank machines, and many home appliances. As explained earlier in this Brief, specialized technology can be expensive and out of reach for many people who are blind. In most instances it is likely far more efficient and cost effective to simply ensure that daily technologies are accessible to all people. 4.0 Strengthening the Human Rights of BC Guide Dog Handlers4.1 A Day in the Life of a Guide Dog HandlerPeople who are blind who use guide dogs regularly experience discrimination, sometimes on a daily basis. The following are some of the examples reported to us during the consultations.A father and his child went into a sandwich shop. They were told to leave because the father had a guide dog. Management said that if they didn’t leave, they would call the police and have the father arrested. Now when that child passes this shop, they remember that this is the place where their father was nearly arrested.A handler reported that they were denied access to private bus services because they had a guide dog. They needed to attend a medical appointment in another town and were forced to find alternative ernment and privately-run campgrounds consistently refuse access to campers with guide dogs. If access is permitted, they are often relegated to the outside fringes, far from central services and activities. They feel harassed and unwelcomed.Many handlers reported that they are frequently denied taxi service by drivers. Sometimes this happens late at night making them feel very vulnerable. Other times refusal of service has caused handlers to be late for work or appointments. Every time a person with a guide dog requests a taxi, they can never be sure that they will receive the service. 4.2 The Guide Dog and Service Dog Act: A Help or a Hindrance?On January 18, 2016 the B.C. Guide Dog and Service Dog Act came into effect. The purpose of the Act was to modernize the access rights of guide dog and service dog handlers. According to the government, the Act was to create higher training standards, improve accessibility to public spaces and strata properties, and strengthen public safety. In addition, the goal of the legislation was to make it clear that discrimination was unacceptable. Almost four years have passed since the Act was introduced. Consultation participants acknowledge that the Act offers some benefits. For example, it respects the difference between a guide dog and a service dog, and is restricted to dogs only (Section 1); it prohibits discrimination on the ground that a person is accompanied by a guide or service dog (Sections 2 and 3); it makes it an offence for a person to falsely claim a dog as a guide or service dog (Section 4); and it supports a handler’s right to have their retired guide or service dog remain with them in tenancy situations (Sections 1 and 3). However, participants also identified several problems with the Act as outlined below:4.2.1 Ineffective EnforcementAlthough the Act prohibits discrimination, no where in the Act does it specify how this requirement is to be enforced. Instead, enforcement is relegated to policy implementation. The Securities Program Division has compiled a Policies and Processes document which outlines a process for submitting complaints by members of the public regarding any matter that relates to the Guide Dog and Service Dog Act including complaints of discrimination from handlers. Consultation participants expressed frustration with the complaints process for the following reasons:The registrar has significant discretion as to whether a complaint will be investigated. Some participants indicated that their complaints were rejected because they were not registered under the Act even though the Act does not make registration mandatory.The options for remedying a complaint are ineffective and lack the capacity to enhance public awareness or bring about compliance and systemic change. While the policy sets out a list of progressive sanctions that the registrar can impose, according to consultation participants, the typical sanction usually involves issuing a verbal or written warning to offenders. Enforcement is generally a key component of legislation. Thus, the lack of enforcement provisions is a curious omission and may account for the half-hearted attempts by government to ensure compliance and prevent discrimination in accordance with the Act. 4.2.2 Identification and ProfilingConfusion About Identification RequirementsThe primary focus of the Act and its corresponding regulations appears to be the establishment of a registration process for people who use guide and service dogs. Registration is voluntary and not a requirement of the Act. Handlers that choose to apply for registration must meet certain requirements. A successful applicant is then provided with a certificate/identification which can be used to affirm the handler’s right to access public places. Initially this may seem a reasonable practice. However, most guide dogs are trained by internationally accredited schools which provide handlers with identification certifying that the dog is a trained guide. Thus, participants argue that the additional government certification process is not necessary.Many businesses are unaware of the voluntary aspect of registration and insist that handlers produce government identification. For example, according to participants, B.C. Ferries will only permit government certified guide and service dogs to access public decks. Participants argue that this confusion was created by government materials which encouraged reliance on government identification. Ironically, the inadvertent impact of the Act has resulted in less, and not more accessibility for some guide dog handlers.The Act Encourages ProfilingProbably the most sinister impact of the Act is the possibility that guide dog handlers can be stopped at any time, in any place, by any person and asked to produce government identification. Consultation participants say this has created a culture of carding and profiling. According to participants, in some cases, handlers have been repeatedly asked by business personnel for such identification. The following examples depict the lived experiences of some participants and the burden that profiling places on them:A handler traveled on a B.C. ferry. While onboard the handler was asked by three different ferry officials to provide certification/identification that both they and their dog were a registered dog team. This repeated request for certification caused the handler to feel anxious and unwelcome on the ferry.Another handler likes to visit a local mall on a regular basis. Each time the handler arrives at the mall, the same security guard requests that they produce their certification. Again, the handler feels anxious about visiting the mall.4.3 Is Certification/Identification Really Necessary?Handlers argue that producing certification is not necessary where the dog is behaving correctly. That is, it is focused on performing its tasks, following commands and not interfering with others. In other words, certification should only be requested where there are serious doubts about the legitimacy of the dog. Like misbehaving customers or patrons, a handler with a misbehaving dog can be asked to remove the dog from the public premise.4.4 Recommendations for ChangeConsultation participants support and endorse the following recommendations. Note: these recommendations are to be considered as a multi-pronged comprehensive strategy for eliminating discrimination against people who use guide and service dogs.a) The B.C. Guide Dog and Service Dog ActRecommendation #1: That the Guide Dog and Service Dog Act, the Policies and Processes document, and government educational materials be amended to limit the demand for identification documents and that such documents only be requested where there is serious doubt about the legitimacy of a handler’s dog.Recommendation #2: That the Policies and Processes document be revised to strengthen enforcement powers and to make it clear that complaints will be accepted from both registered and non-registered handlers. Consider placing the onus on the entity accused of discriminating to prove that they did not discriminate.Recommendation #3: That penalties for contravening the Act be strengthened and rigorously enforced. Penalties should be enforced against those who are guilty of discrimination, those who falsely claim their untrained dog to be a guide or service dog, and those who sell or make available identification, equipment or any other paraphernalia for the purpose of passing an untrained dog off as a guide or service dog.b) Government Public EducationRecommendation #4: That public education materials developed by the government clearly explain the following:Guide and service dog handlers are protected by human rights legislation and have the right to access public places accompanied by their dog;Identification/certification should only be requested where there are serious concerns about the legitimacy of the dog. It should be considered a “last resort” option;Information about how a guide or service dog works in a public place.c) Taxis and Similar Types of TransportationRecommendation #5: That licenses only be granted to those taxi drivers and drivers of similar private transportation services who agree not to discriminate against passengers accompanied by a guide or service dog. That if they do discriminate, swift and stiff penalties are applied. d) B.C. Human Rights CommissionRecommendation #6: That the B.C. Human Rights Commission be requested to conduct an investigation into the discrimination confronting guide dog handlers, and that it develops systemic solutions for addressing this discrimination. And further, that it considers how to strengthen its mandate to enforce the rights of guide dog handlers and provide public education about their human rights.e) The Proposed Accessibility Legislation Recommendation #7: That the proposed accessibility legislation include issues such as:Recognition of the primacy of the B.C. Human Rights Code and the requirement to develop legislation based on human rights principles;Requirement to consider the human rights of people who use guide dogs when developing legislation, standards, regulations and policies;Customer service standards that require businesses and service providers to accommodate people who are blind who use guide dogs and that they refrain from treating them any differently than others. That is, refrain from limiting where handlers can sit in a restaurant, what room they can stay in at a hotel, and whether or not a taxi driver will provide transportation services;Mandatory training for all businesses and service providers on the accessibility rights of guide dog handlers;Give support and proper training to existing services like Health Inspectors and educational materials in food safe courses to educate and train people in the food service industry.f) Nothing About Us Without UsRecommendation #8: That people who use guide dogs be included at the planning table to provide input and advice on all matters undertaken by the government regarding the human rights/access rights of guide dog handlers.Thank youContact:BC Coalition of Guide Dog Usersbccoalition@hooh.ca250-499-0780 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download