However, the venue staging was awful, in terms of its accessibility. High, and only accessible by temporary stairs, the stage was off-limits to anyone in a wheelchair, anyone in an electric scooter and anyone with a significant mobility impairment. This included one recipient in a mobility scooter who – ironically – won an award celebrating how much she’d given to the local community through her participation over decades.

This should not be acceptable to us as a community in the twenty-first century.

People with a disability should have the same opportunities to participate on-stage as everyone else. I’ve seen it several times in the last few years, so it’s not a problem confined to Western Australia. Far from it. These sort of things are primarily controlled by the venue, not the convention committee, and can’t be fixed unless addressed a long way out. That’s why we need to talk about it as a community now.

We wouldn’t for a second tolerate a sign saying: “No red-heads or women allowed on stage” and we shouldn’t tolerate staging that says exactly same thing to people with a disability.

Ultimately, it’s sensible on many levels. Proper access for people with a disability is also better access for older members of our community who also face mobility challenges too.

I raised the issue with Damien Warman and Dave Cake after the ceremony, both of whom are on a sub-committee that helps run the awards process. They understood my concerns and gave a commitment to undertake steps to help address the issue. But ultimately they can’t fix it. They can’t force a convention committee to do it, and they shouldn’t have to. We should insist upon it as a community.

If it means staging the awards differently – we should do that.

If it means committees asking someone with a disability to walk the space with them before setup – we should do that.

If it means tougher negotiations with hotels – we should do that.

If it means everyone pays $5 extra on their membership to allow for improved staging – we should do that.

These things are important to us as a community, and we should fix them.

Disability Bitch has done a nice piece on it from the British perspective. It’s worth a read, especially given what’s going on in the UK at the moment. And lots of others have run through things like his choice of language and some of the logical fallacies inherent in his argument.

I can’t work up too much vitriol about it because mostly it just strengthens my belief that actors who play intelligent and cultured characters should not walk out their door without a script in their hand. I do however suspect Mr Irons may rethink his comments if he was confronted by a few angry people waving a saw, a few bottles of vodka and a pack of cigarettes in front of him while looking longingly at his left leg.

And yet, those who are online have a trump card. They have each other. This survey finds that having a chronic disease increases the probability that an internet user will share what they know and learn from their peers. They unearth nuggets of information. They blog. They participate in online discussions.

I suspect it’s similar for people with a disability.

Indeed I’d be keen to see a survey similatr in size to this one that went further and looked at whether people with a disability or a major chronic illness not only used social media to engage more about their affliction but about anything. The internet lowers the barrier for disabled people to find their tribe (whether it’s an online writing group, manga chat room or a MUD) as well as making it easier to find information about their health. It certainly has for me.

Research grant anyone?