Submission to the Review of the Disability

12 NOVEMBER 2025
PREPARED BY: DR BEN HILLIER

Introduction

As the peak body for volunteering in NSW, The Centre for Volunteering (The Centre) supports many people living with disability, as well as many people who work and volunteer with and for people living with disability. We recognise that the Disability Royal Commission (DRC) has identified 15 recommendations that are considered as part of the review of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) and that these recommendations affect many areas of the legislation. We broadly support the aims of this review in creating a more equal Australia and modernising the Commonwealth’s approach to disability legislation. However, we also recognise that, in our understanding, NSW currently has a different legislative framework regarding its own disability/anti-discrimination legislation (itself recently reviewed) which may mean that some of these proposed changes impact NSW to a greater degree than other states and territories.

We are not experts on legislation, disability, or discrimination law, and as such we will leave responding to much of the issues paper to the members of the community best suited to comment on these areas. Our key area of advocacy in this submission is around the effects that changes to how a positive duty is defined may have on smaller, volunteer-led organisations, and their concerns about being able to meet the new requirements for inclusivity. The stakeholders that have responded to our consultations on this Review have identified concerns about being able to meet new legislative burdens, in addition to the various regulatory requirements that they must already adhere to. The aim of our submission is to highlight these perspectives so that the Attorney-General’s Department can balance the real need for better support for people living with disability alongside a sufficient level of clarity and support for smaller non-profit and volunteer-involving organisations (VIOs) so that changes to the DDA do not inadvertently restrict the work of these small organisations, or, in worst cases, render them impracticable.

This submission will respond to Parts 2 and 3 of the issues paper, specifically recommendations 4.25, 4.26, 4.27, 4.28, 4.32, and 7.26 as well as the discussion questions outlined in these sections.

Responses to focus areas and discussion questions

Part 2 – Positive duty to eliminate discrimination

Recommendations 4.27 and 4.28 – Positive duty for duty holders to eliminate discrimination

Consultation questions

12. If there was a positive duty in the Disability Discrimination Act, who should it apply to?

13. Are there lessons from the operation of the positive duty in the Sex Discrimination Act that could be incorporated into a positive duty in the Disability Discrimination Act?

14. What costs, benefits and other impacts would duty holders experience in meeting a positive duty under the Disability Discrimination Act? If you are an existing duty holder under the Disability Discrimination Act, please specify how you think meeting a positive duty would impact you.

15. Should there be exceptions or limits to the application of a positive duty?

The Centre recognises that the DRC has recommended a positive duty be introduced modelled on the Sex Discrimination Act (SDA) and that this would consider the size of a duty holder’s business or operations and resources. We agree that the SDA is a strong basis as a model for the DDA for the following reasons:

• The definitions of workers and employers in the SDA include volunteers and VIOs explicitly

• Positive duties are not imposed on volunteer associations (i.e. organisations that are entirely volunteer-run and not engaging contractors to complete work on their behalf)
• The duty’s effect is applied only to the workplace, not private contexts
• Specific elements of the duty holder’s responsibilities are considered when assessing if they are compliant with the SDA, such as the size, practicality, resources, and other relevant matters.

We strongly recommend that the exemptions and considerations provided to volunteers, VIOs, and voluntary associations currently enshrined in the SDA are also included in any amendments to the DDA. We also note that any of proposed amendments will have a larger impact on current responsibilities for duty holders in NSW (among other states) where there is currently not a positive duty to eliminate discrimination in the same way as the Issues Paper outlines for the NT and ACT.

Should volunteer-involving organisations be responsible for having a positive duty to eliminate discrimination under an amended act, we foresee an unjustifiable level of hardship on many of these organisations. We anticipate an increase in insurance and legal advice costs for these organisations to ensure that they are compliant with changes to the act and to ensure that they are covered for any liabilities that may now arise. Volunteers are rarely covered by worker’s compensation insurance and are rarely able to take out tailored insurance policies for their work and organisation. Many of these organisations do not have dedicated staff or departments that manage human resources and legal compliance and are often either working as volunteers themselves or are working significant additional hours in addition to their paid work to meet current work demand.1 This would also require an increase to funding and time for these organisations to properly manage their compliance in this area.

The complexity (or perceived complexity) of compliance with the DDA may unintentionally reduce the likelihood of volunteers willing to engage as volunteer managers, or their willingness to establish VIOs, charities or other not-for-profit organisations in the first place, thus inadvertently increasing discrimination as more organisations feel unable to properly support their volunteers and meet the compliance requirements of new legislation. This issue is not solely the result of amendments to the DDA; over 95% of volunteer managers in NSW have rated risk, insurance, and legal requirements as an important issue for their organisation.2 There is a genuine anxiety in many organisations that continued changes to the legal environment of volunteering hampers the ability of these organisations to deliver their services and engage volunteers.

This is not to say that amendments to the DDA should be avoided entirely. We recommend that volunteers and VIOs be specifically and explicitly considered when the Commonwealth decided who a positive duty should apply to. A balance must be achieved between supporting volunteers and volunteer managers who live with disability to participate in their communities free from discrimination, and not inadvertently disincentivising their participation. The approach to a positive duty in the SDA provides a strong model for how this can be achieved.

We also recommend that any changes to a positive duty be clearly communicated to the volunteer and not-for-profit sector. We recommend that a suite of resources are developed by the government that outline the exact requirements under the new legislation for VIOs

1 For example, paid volunteer managers are working an average of 10 weeks of overtime without pay each year, approximately double the national average of unpaid overtime. See Muller, P. 2025 NSW State of Volunteering Report. Sydney: The Centre for Volunteering, p. 25. 2 Muller, P. 2025 NSW State of Volunteering Report, p. 37.

and that a transition period to full compliance be provided to VIOs. This will assist in assuaging the anxieties of the sector surround legal compliance and changes to legislation.

Part 3 – Encouraging inclusion of people with disability in employment, education and other areas of public life

Recommendations 4.25 and 4.26 – Strengthening the duty to provide adjustments

Recommendation 4.32 – Definition of and considerations for unjustifiable hardship

Recommendation 7.26 – Expanding the factors considered by employers when determining if an employee can carry out the inherent requirements of particular work

Given the similar responses to these recommendations, we will respond to them as a collective. Broadly speaking, The Centre is naturally supportive of promoting the inclusion of people with a disability in employment, education and broader public life.

Our main concern is that the issues paper again is broadly focused on the context of employment and should explicitly consider volunteers as workers. Volunteers and VIOs require specific consideration, and we recommend that further consultation specifically targeted at the volunteering sector around Australia is conducted as part of the review of the DDA.

We are concerned that the proposed changes to the DDA in strengthening the duty to provide adjustments does not fully consider the impact that this would have on small, volunteer-led organisations. As outlined in the previous section, many VIOs are already facing difficulties with the current bureaucratic requirements of other legislation that impacts volunteers. Creating further requirements for reporting, documentation, and record keeping in order to prove unjustifiable hardship will disproportionately impact small VIOs and voluntary associations. We recommend that clarification is provided as to what is meant by “detailed documentation” (as discussed on page 52 of the issues paper), and that resources such as templates and examples are provided to assist VIOs with understanding their obligations and to make the process as streamlined and straightforward as possible. Further consultation with the sector may establish further avenues of support for the sector.

The NSW Disability Inclusion Volunteering Guidelines

We also note the NSW Disability Inclusion Volunteering Guidelines as a framework that may assist the Review with understanding how disability inclusion is currently being addressed by the NSW volunteering sector.

These guidelines were developed by the NSW Volunteering Taskforce in collaboration with the NSW Department of Communities and Justice to assist VIOs to build capability to support volunteers with diverse needs, based on current research and best practice. These guidelines clearly outline the reasons for support, define key terms such as “accessibility” and “inclusion” and provide clear, simple definitions of the legislative environment that binds volunteers and VIOs in NSW.

The NSW Disability Inclusion Volunteering Guidelines also contain resources to assist volunteer managers with assessing their current practice and their programs to understand how they currently meet the 9 principles of disability inclusion in the context of recruitment, retention, and recognition of volunteers. The guidelines also provide a range of resources to assist volunteers and VIOs with understanding all aspects of disability inclusion.

We strongly recommend that the Review consider these guidelines, both as an example of how to encourage and support disability inclusion in the volunteering sector, and as an

example of the type of resources that will be required to support volunteer managers, volunteers, and VIOs in understanding any changes to the DDA and any changes to their obligations

Summary of key recommendations

• Ensure that changes to the Act do not create an unworkable burden for small, volunteer-run organisations
• Ensure that changes to the Act do not appear so insurmountable that smaller organisations lose confidence in their ability to comply with the requirements of the act
• Provide support and resourcing for small organisations to understand requirements, understand what is needed of them, and to make the required changes. This includes a transition period to enable organisations to build capacity for compliance with the new legislation.
• Ensure that any changes are clearly communicated to the volunteer and non-profit sector, where there is genuine anxiety around these changes and the impact they will have on small organisations
• Consider existing sector supports, such as the NSW Disability Inclusion Volunteering Guidelines, when exploring impact on the sector.

Conclusion

We thank the Attorney-General’s Department for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Review of the DDA. Disability inclusion is an important part of building a fairer and more equitable society for all Australians and we commend the efforts of the DRC to understand what is required to achieve this goal. However, we strongly recommend that the Review give appropriate consideration to the needs of volunteers, VIOs, and other aspects of the volunteering sector when drafting changes to the review. These groups often engage people living with disability, both as participants of their programs and as volunteers and volunteer managers. Any changes to the DDA need to carefully consider the impact that said changes will have on the volunteering sector to ensure that a good balance is achieved between increased inclusion for people living with disability and the long-term viability and sustainability of volunteers, volunteer managers, and VIOs who work with them.

Authorisation

This submission has been authorised by the Chief Executive Officer of the Centre for Volunteering.

redacted

Chief Executive Officer

About the Centre for Volunteering

The Centre for Volunteering (The Centre) is the peak body for volunteering in NSW, supporting and connecting people and organisations to enrich the community. We are a not-for-profit organisation with almost 50 years’ experience providing leadership on volunteering in NSW. This involves playing a key role in advocacy, support services and sector development.

Our membership services are available to a range of primarily not-for-profit organisations of varying scale, spanning all sectors. Additionally, we work with government organisations on corporate social responsibility and employee volunteering programs.

The Centre for Volunteering Contacts

Chief Executive Officer

redacted

Dr Ben Hillier

Director: Policy, Advocacy. And Research

redacted