Dr George Taleporos: Hi, everyone, and welcome. I am George Taleporos. And I am the chair of the Victorian Disability Advisory Council. Welcome you all to the first state disability plan webinar. Also with me today is a member of the Victorian Disability Advisory Council.
I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional of the many lands upon which we are today. And pay respect to the elders past, present, and to all the elders who join us today.
Thank you all for making the time. I now hand over to Amanda to provide an overview.
Amanda Lawrie-Jones: Thank you, George. And, again, I'd like to welcome everyone today as well.
So for today, I might abbreviate my name when I speak to Amanda LJ just to save confusion because we do have another Amanda involved today.
So I'd like to go quickly through the agenda you would have received when you registered. We are going to do something in two parts today. So we'll start with a welcoming address from the honorary Minister Anthony Carbines. We will hear from the deputy secretary for children, families, communities and disability in then and move to a panel discussion. I'll introduce the panellists later on.
After the panel discussion, we'll have a short break and this will be followed by a Q and A session.
I'll hand back to George.
Dr George Taleporos: I also want to mention, if you’re wondering what I look like. I'm a very handsome young man with a full head of hair. That was a joke. I am a balding man with glasses/ Amanda, do you agree?
Amanda Lawrie-Jones: Yes, George, I do.
Dr George Taleporos: All right. Welcome we are lucky to have the Honourable Mr. Anthony Carbines. He is the minister for child protection and family services. And also minister for disability, aging, and carers.
Welcome Minister Carbines.
The Hon Anthony Carbines: G’day George and everybody. Thanks so much for the opportunity to be with you today, at home in fact in isolation – something many of us familiar with. Even though the rules are changing, my 7 days end on Saturday, thanks to people getting caught up with COVID matters here at home.
I know isolation and the pandemic has affected people with disability of course and had a greater effect in many ways and in isolation. I hope that today in catching up with you hasn't affected our capacity to have a conversation and learn a bit more about what we need to cover on the co-design webinar today. But I'm doing that here on the banks of the Birrarung in the City of Banyule in Ivanhoe. And I'd like to also acknowledge the first peoples and the traditional custodians on the land we meet today, and pay my respects to elders past, present and those who may be joining us today representing the world's longest continuing culture.
George - Dr Taleporos, thanks so much as the chair of our Disability Advisory Council and for the work you have been doing before I came to this role in December last year. And Amanda Lawrie-Jones, VDAC member, and to all our VDAC members, thank you for the leading work people have applied in the development of our State Plan.
And also there is Jen Hargrave, Policy Officer from Women with Disabilities Victoria, one of our panel members.
Other panel members, Ruby Susan Mountford from the Pride Foundation Australia. Melanie Rayment who is Director of Consulting at the Australian Centre for Social Innovation. And Amanda Allen-Toland who is the Director, Aboriginal Strategy and Oversight Branch at DFFH.
Welcome, everybody. Big turnout. I'm so pleased and thank everyone for the commitment they have made to be part of today. It is important to keep the matter close and for me and my colleagues to listen and hear you advice on new policy work and I’m looking forward to hearing some of those suggestions and solutions today, more than perhaps hearing from me directly. But we'll wrap up a few things towards the end.
In past, you'll be familiar governments have made often assumptions about what is best for communities. I think in a lot of cases it is done with good intentions, but often those policies haven't always been made or had the input from people who had a seat at the table that decisions are made. This has led to often poorly framed policy advice that doesn’t really live in the moment of the experiences of the people who are affected by those policy decisions.
So in Victoria we are keen to change a lot of that. The way we have gone about in building safer and more inclusive community is to listen more and learn more effectively about how we can put into our practice our policy changes that affect people’s lives.
So how do we give more of a voice to those who are affected by decision making when we’re crafting new policies?
I've heard it said many times - nothing about us without us. And I think that really does sum up in the State Plan and something I remind myself in our work that is what has to be reflected. Often a task like mine when you come to the role in December last year with elections and things in a years’ time, you always feel like you are in a hurry. You want to make progress and get things done. Every now and then you have to remind yourself you can't be acting on your own. You have to be collaborative, and it has to be respected work and engaged work to have the respect and the intellectual community engagement and support to be effective and that is what needs to be tempered sometimes to be more effective in policy we want to bring back to my colleagues in cabinet.
You know of course, that’s part of the conversation we will have today and your reflections and thinking about how to make that work effectively.
You would know through the launch of our State Plan, Inclusive Victoria, and our ambitious reform agenda with very much co-design being at the heart of the way in which the plan has come together.
Bearing in mind that still as a Minister and in government, there's a government collective accountability for the decisions that we make. At some point the co-design process is going to be a bit of letting go and seeing who is elected to take responsibility for the decisions that it makes. We socialise a lot of the engagement and I suppose the decisions that we want to make.
We have 1.1 million people with disabilities in our state. A heck of a lot of people. Not just them, not just you. It is their families, their friends, their employers, their community supporters who have a huge interest in engagement and how we set out disability policy. But also, how we can effect to the plan that we've done collectively with VDAC and so many others throughout our community.
People have told us that it’s crucial to have representatives involved from the start in the work that we do developing policies and programs. But it’s going to be a journey right the way through as things change. So I understand how we might do some of that.
Many in the disability community here today, I want to emphasise that we've taken that advice on board. And how do we keep making sure we don't drift from it in the work we are going to do?
Co-design is one of the 6 systemic reforms in the new plan. It is a way of working that I'm interested in people's thinking about how we do that effectively. It’s lived experience of disability, policy makers and advocates and other interested parties help to shape our projects, policies and programs and lived. And our lived experience in our services and our engagement with others in the community.
Working collaboratively isn't new. That should be the heart of everything we do. I’m in politics because I like people, I like engaging and talking to people, and I was a journalist. You want to tell people stories and engage and understand what makes people tick, what motivates them, how you highlight and engage, where we need to go next and how you talk about injustice and how you highlight those challenges and what we do about them. But we don't have all the answers and it’s a heck of a lot easier when there’s the momentum of the whole community of people with disabilities and their friends and families and supporters engaged and proceeding in the same direction.
I want to work through co-design with people with disability and what that mean as part of our conversation today, and where we take some of that work. Our Disability Act Advisory Group is another group that will play a key role as a conduit around our co-design work, because there’s a lot of legislative change and opportunities across that we flagged that we want to do together. So there's some other mechanisms as well that are formal, but how do people out there in the community at home get engaged and involved and feel part of that process.
So today, I want to kick around a few thoughts that you have. Make sure there for us to report that back, and continue our conversation and engagement. There will be times, I think I can drift off a bit and you have to come back and bring it back to focus. But this is starting point and I know from what I've seen across government, we’re getting better at it. There are times you get out on your own a bit, and you have to pull back and say hang on a minute, we are out here without everybody, how did we get here?
And other times you’re going to press and push us to and go a bit further and come out from the comfortable place we sometimes are around the conventions and the processes of cabinet government and how that works and what that means about making decisions and who is responsible for them.
These are some of the things that I am interested to hear about how we kick that around. I think we will demonstrate today how effective we can be in the development of the State Plan. It is your plan, and the government has accepted as its plan, the State's Plan. How we do more around - and I know talking to the Premier, he is determined around inclusive communities and our plan to make sure across employment and a range of other elements not just Victorian public service and our statutory boards and other organisations, how is government reflecting inclusive communities and engagement with people with disabilities right across government, because if we’re asking it of everyone else, we have need to demonstrate it right here.
So your engagement on how we take the next step - not just co-design the plan - co-design implementation and getting it done and what that looks like and what your expectations are. These are the elements I'm interested to hear your conversations about today and take some of that on board. Take all of it on board and work out what are we doing already that is effective? What are some good ideas we can work on? But not leaving it to everyone else. Co-design is partnership. We have a lot of capacity, resources, support and we can do a lot of this effectively together. That is the goal and we’ve started well. It is about integrity of that right through, the implementation and getting it done.
So I want to that I thank our panel members. I look forward to the conversation and engagement today. I see this as the starting point of another element of the starting point of the work we are doing around implementation, which is going to take us through this year and beyond through the years of the Plan. So it’s a good start today - next steps, plans here, implementation, and what we can do to help make that more effective. Because right across government, they aren’t just watching, they want to learn and understand from us in our human services roles and our service delivery and engagement. We really have to do co-design and engagement better than anyone else, because people are counting on us and the way in which we do this together and do it effectively, so that can morph into how it’s done right across lots of different policy areas that affect people across government.
So I'm confident we have the right people, the right engagement to do it effectively and well, particularly off the back of the leadership of George and many others. Probably best for me to throw back to people to get on with the conversation and the work and give a little bit of reflection on that at the end. But I'm looking forward to you not feeling like you have to do some of these things on your own. That is not going to work. That will end badly. So I am looking forward to the rest of the year ahead and the parameters we can set in place about the way work is done, across the department and across the way in which government engages and works together with disability community.
So thanks a lot, George.
Dr George Taleporos: Thanks Minister. Nothing about us without us, that’s what we’re hearing now. And I think that we also need to take on what you said that co-design is good for people with disabilities, but it is also really good for government and government policy.
I'd now like to introduce the Deputy Secretary of Children, Families, Communities and Disabilty, Argiri Alisandratos, to give an overview of the State Plan Inclusive Victoria.
Argiri Alisandratos: Thanks, George. Great to be here. Great to be joining you and the minister and many others that will be on the panel. As George said, my name is Argiri Alisandratos. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the many lands that we are all meeting on today. I would like to pay my respects to elders both past and present and to any elders who are with us here today.
I like the Minister am so pleased to be here and joining you in this really important event. As the Minister said, co-design with people with a disability is one of the six systemic reforms under the new State Disability Plan Inclusive Victoria.
People told us during the consultations on the new Plan how important it was to involve people with disability when developing policies, programs, and services. And that having the voices of people with lived experience at the table will increase the relevance of those policies and services in people's lives.
Today’s webinar is the start of an ongoing conversation with people with a disability about what co-design actually is. And how we can do it well and how we can do it better, and Minister touched on the importance of co-design and how we in government adopted, engage with people with a lived experience and ensure we embody it right across every element of work that we do.
I would like to share with you some important points in the new State Disability Plan and how key design fits into the plan. We can go to slide 2. Inclusive Victoria is our 4th State Disability Plan in line with changing role of the state in relation to the delivery of specialist disability services, successive State Disability Plans have increasingly focused on inclusion and participation with people with disability.
Inclusive Victoria aims to achieve a step change in how we do this. The Plan structure includes some familiar elements from the previous Plan as well as some new elements.
First, there is a new vision. And this vision was designed by VDAC and written deliberately in the voice of people with a disability. There are also 4 new priority areas: digital inclusion, safety and emergencies, right to expression of sexuality and gender identity, and pride and recognition.
These were strong themes during the consultation process. Their inclusion reflects the strength and focus on these areas since the previous Plan was released.
The systemic reforms are a significant new development. It became very clear to us through the consultation process that real change across all priority areas under the 4 pillars won't be achieved unless we reform the way government goes I about its work.
We also know that the review of the Disability Act is likely to involve a significant strengthening of the requirements around inclusion.
We need all departments across government to be ready to respond to strengthened requirements.
The 6 systemic reforms are all based on consultation data. They have their own actions sitting under them. But they are cross government actions and these will help portfolios implement their priority areas actions in line with advice from people with disability.
Departments have committed to delivering these reforms in the way they go about their future work.
We can go to the next slide.
In keeping with the principles of “nothing about us without us” as the Minister and George have alluded to, co-design is the first of those systemic reforms. The co-design systemic reform commits government to partnering with people with disability in policy, in program work, and through our service design and delivery.
We will do this in two ways. The second point on the slide commits to the very important work of increasing the representation of people with disability across government boards and advisory groups. The Minister has alluded to how important this is for government.
The first point around identifying opportunities to increase knowledge and application of best practice co-design principles with people with disability across government is why we brought you all here today.
On the next slide, our first step in the Inclusive Victoria co-design journeys is critical. We need to establish a shared understanding of what co-design means and what it will mean in the context of the State Disability Plan.
Not every activity can or will need to be co-designed. But the ideas that we generate here today in this important conversation are the start of that discussion in the context of the implementation of State Disability Plan as well as the Disability Act review about why, when, and how we co-design policies, programs, and services for people with disability.
Our conversation today will inform the development of tools and resources in the coming weeks and months for use across government.
I know just like the Minister, I am looking forward to hearing from your expert panel and to listen to all your ideas and getting to the questions and responses that we have in plan for you today. So I'm looking forward to that. And I thank you for the invitation and I thank you for all of you being here today. And George, I'll come back to you and Amanda now.
Dr George Taleporos: Thank you Argiri, let’s get into it. I'll hand over now to Amanda who is going to introduce the panel session and all of the fantastic panel members.
Amanda Lawrie-Jones: Thank you, George. It is Amanda LJ speaking. I am really excited about this. It is going to be a great panel discussion. Today, what we are going to do is share ideas and contemporary thinking about co-design. We are going to hear from people involved with co-designing policies, programs, and services with people with disability about what is co-design. We are going to talk about what has worked well. And also discuss the good conditions needed for co-design to work well.
So without further ado, I am going to introduce the panellists. So first of all, we have and I I'm going by order on my list and not the screen. We have:
- Ruby Susan Mountford from Pride Foundation Australia. Ruby is an award-winning LGBTQ+ disability advocate. She works in community health. Ruby draws from professional lived experience to identify systemic barriers as well as develop meaningful strategies for meaningful inclusion and engage.
- Next up we have Jen Hargrave from Women with Disabilities Victoria. Jen is a policy officer. A disabled person's organisation which runs programs for community building, work force development and systemic advocacy. Jen is a community-based member of the university of Melbourne research team studying the prevention of violence against people with disabilities. Other research projects have been with the university of New South Wales., university of Sydney and DFFH.
- Next we have Melanie Rayment, the Director for consulting the Australian Centre for Social Innovation. Working across a range of policy areas, Melanie brings together her passion and knowledge for social innovation and co-design practices. Dealing with complex social issues to effect change across communities, organizations, policies, and services. So, again, welcome, Melanie. Fantastic.
- Then we've got Amanda Allen-Toland. She is the director of aboriginal strategy and oversight branch at the DFFH. So Amanda is an experienced public sector leader with a track record in delivering complex projects and policy reforms in aboriginal affairs. Population health and international development. As the director of the aboriginal strategy and oversight branch, Amanda is working in DFFH to uphold aboriginal people's rights and self-determination so the aboriginal voice, knowledge, and cultural leadership drives policy legislation and system reform.
So welcome to our panellists. This is fantastic. We are going to kick off in a second. I'll run through a few little extra pieces if I may.
The discussion is going to go for about 40 minutes. We encourage people to ask questions within the Q and A function within Zoom. So if you need support in regards to that, just pop up your thumbs up sign and somebody will assist you.
Please try to keep your questions short and clear. And just a general minder to be respectful as well.
So thank you to those who have already asked questions. We have those included in regards to the panel discussion.
Alright, so I might hand back to George.
Dr George Taleporos: And I am going to get right into it, I can't wait to hear everyone's input on this. I am going to start with you Melanie. The question on everyone's lips. What on earth is co-design?
Melanie Rayment: Thank you, George, great question. My name is Melanie. My pronouns are she and her and I am coming to you from the beautiful Bidjigal land in Sydney today.
I think that the question on everyone's lips. And in Australia, co-design in particular can mean many things to many people. But I suspect more importantly, what it represents for many people is many years of advocating for their power and influence to shape the way in which decisions and support that affects them is made with them. And so I wish to pay respect to that today first off.
At TACSI, we believe this type of co-working is a process that brings real collaboration and design practices to enabling better decisions and creating better change through collaboration of people with lived and living experiences, of course practice wisdom and that research knowledge and evidence.
But it is also about ensuring we create safe, diverse, and generative spaces for these different types of wisdom to come together and to find new ways forward so that all people can live their best lives.
Dr George Taleporos: Thinking that I find it helpful if we all use simple language and avoid words that aren't overly complicated and jargoned. I just wanted to put that out there if that is okay. Because this stuff is really complicated. And it is important that we can all get involved and understand what we are talking about here.
Melanie Rayment: Thank you, George. It is Melanie speaking. I appreciate that comment. And hear that. I think co-design really starts with a deep belief that people are the experts of their life experiences and they should have an active role in shaping those decisions that affect their lives. And it is an approach with underpinning mindsets, belief, a deep practice that brings those collaborative practices together to shape those programs and services and policies as our previous speakers have outlined. And it is across these journeys that I think it is important to think both of the experiences of the process itself for people as a really relationships-first healing and transformative journey and also the destination.
And I think more practically, it is important to locate key design as one particular phase or element of a much broader possible co-production process and of course we all know that it is not the only way to authentically involve people with lived and living experiences in the way we are planning and designing and making decisions.
Across those processes, we know that we are seeking to really, truly, and collaboratively define those problems, rally set the agenda together to plan, design, commission, or deliver, and evaluate and collectively govern these things.
And we see conversations and get questions about what is really authentic co-design. There are many well intentioned people out there. And I think we all want to recognise that there are many different views of what this might mean. And to think about what are the next best steps that we need to take within the constraints, recognising the wonderful strengths that people are bringing, the alignment or potential misalignment and the diversity of that alignment around those problems so we can find a way forward unique to that situation. We know that every situation is different. All of these things are really complex and moving quite fast. So thinking about the best way the co-way to work and move forward authentically with rigor is different depths of power sharing across a range of those phases. We think about those 4 ways of sharing decision making power. Whether it is informed, consultive and lived experience involved in parts of that process. Whether it’s more a participatory approach where there is true, strong, power balance. Or right at that other end where it is self-determined where people are designing and driving that process itself.
Lastly, I wanted to come back to a question that I had received from the audience that was posted prior to this session. It is about how do we work with cynics within a co-design process. Cynicism can be a protection mechanism. And co-design done badly is a really fast way to break trust. And certainly, we need to together think about in your unique context, what is the best next step that we can do with true heart, a relationships-first and a healing process. And a step that is going to show us that we are learning by doing. And we are going beyond the rhetoric of what this may or may not mean, and really actively with deep heart paying attention to those relationships, the safety, the diversity of those inclusive experiences to really create and hold a space for all these different types of wisdom to come together and take that step forward.
Dr George Taleporos: I think of what you said reminds me that co-design is just a process. It is also an attitude. It is saying that we really value the opportunity to work together and approximate if you are a bureaucrat and saying you are not the expert, it is the people with disabilities who are the experts.
Maybe now I'll turn to Ruby. Can you provide your perspective on what is co-design?
Ruby Susan Mountford: Ruby speaking. I'm a nonbinary person with bleached hair. Wearing a tie-dyed tuxedo shirt and leather jacket.
My idea of co-design disability justice and social model of disability. Model being the framework in which we need to think about disability to believe that co-design is possible and worth the time and effort and resources it takes. We need to change society to accommodate people with disabilities. As opposed to people with disabilities needed to be changed to accommodate society.
Co-design is about understanding the importance of leadership is most impacted to those that know the system and live in the system. And have the system operate on them.
By centring voices, we stay grounded in real world problems. And I think that in disability, that can include the importance of the amount of time and effort it takes to navigate the NDIS. Being able to connect with community groups. It is drawing on the fact that people who live in the systems, we have found ways to navigate them ourselves or through our communal networks or online groups, social works, our friends. And fining ways we can use that information and skills and problem solving we have already done and expand that and build on that with all of the clout that comes with a government. And I think it is also about challenging the power imbalance that is held by the individuals who make these important decisions that drastically impact our lives often without really having had much exposure to us let alone than what our lives are like.
I think this state plan is showing a great move for that. But recognizing it takes time and trust has to be built. You have to convince people that your table is worth us sitting at. And I think that is important part of key design as well. Switching the power narrative. To show it is on you to prove you can provide a culturally safe and respectful place for us to start to share the information that is often won by a lot of trial and error and trauma.
Thanks, George.
Dr George Taleporos: Thanks, Ruby. All of us have livid experiences, can I say when it comes to engaging with government. And we need to recognize that people need to know that it is safe and that it is going to be a worthwhile thing to do. So thank you so much for that, Ruby.
Amanda, can I now turn to you? What is co-design from your perspective?
Amanda Allen-Toland: Hi everyone. So my name is Amanda. I'm a Murri woman from New South Wales. I will talk today about co-design in a First Nations context.
For us, co-design is a dynamic, creative, social research process. Where we have the opportunity to elevate the aboriginal world view, aboriginal voices, and aboriginal people's perspective into policy and practice. It is a really great opportunity for us to embed the principles of self-determination. And the more I do it and the more I'm involved in it, I see it as the opportunity to change public to culture. So it is really about us and changing how we show up as public servants in spaces with community and challenging our mindsets, challenging our world view so that we can really connect with the people who we live with, we work with, and really deliver better policy.
So we work within the rem of the current transformation. So what we are trying to do there is change the DFFH's systems, processes, policy. And make them more inclusive. And appropriate for Aboriginal people.
So we also work within the Victorian Aboriginal Affairs Framework. And co-design, it is, if we think about the forms of self-determination and we can talk about that throughout the panel, but there's weaker forms and stronger forms. And co-design on that continuum, it is not the strongest form. But it is a pathway. It is an entry point into where we want to get to as first peoples. Which is transferring decision making and resources to community for community to make decisions about matters that affect them and us.
So that's really what it is about from our perspective. It is about power sharing. It is about transfer of resources. It is about putting relationships and healing and truth and justice many the centre. And it is about changing public to culture.
Thanks, George.
Dr George Taleporos: I think that is self-determination. There is so much there we need to learn from Aboriginal people and we can do a lot better around and disability, but also in the intersection and the multiple identities that we might have and the intersectionality.
Thank you so much for that.
And I'd like to now really focus on some practical examples of co-design.
So can I turn to you now, Jen Hargrave? Can you give us some example of the amazing work that I know you've been doing in this space?
Jen Hargrave: Thank you, George. My name is Jen. My pronouns are she/her. I'll be squinting at the screen a bit because I have low vision.
That fully fledged co-design where power is shared, I have to be honest, I haven't seen that before or not beyond a tiny scale.
What I’ve sees happening in practice is on a bit of a spectrum. One end of the spectrum, I've seen some really good examples that are really community controlled just like what Amanda was talking about. And the Aboriginal community and the queer community have done a lot in that area and so have disabled persons organisations. So where I work at WDV, occasionally, we'll have a little bit of money for a project that is not fully specified. A funder might say you have a couple of thousand dollars to do something having to do with women's safety. We take that to our staff, to our members and our experts by experience group, and all of those people are women and nonbinary folks with disability. And together we create something where people's contributions are fully visible in the outcomes.
So when they run well, the projects have been matched properly to the resources of time and to budget.
And people aren't kind of dumped with lots of parameters at the beginning of the design process. Instead, they are given time and space to think and talk and contribute.
The method of the co-design has to be matched to the output that you want. So for example, you shouldn't run co-design through online workshops if the outcome is supposed to reach people who don't use the internet.
Ideally at the end, everyone has been paid for their time and their disability access requirements have been absolutely met.
They can see that their input has been valued and the process itself is one of community building. And I agree with Amanda about her comments about how that community building in itself can be a long-term outcome from the co-design process if it is done well.
Another type of co-design I often see is where a funder contracts people to run a co-design process with disabled people. And the choices and the judgment of the funder and the contract manager are all important throughout the project.
At the early stages of the project when they choose the consultant to work well, that consultant will be trusted by people with disabilities and also have a lot of skill and knowledge about disability and disability access.
Fortunately, those who are contracted and those who are doing the contracting, in what I've seen, really have disabilities.
When this type of project works well, the contractors are making a safe space. And when I talk about safety, that really does include disability access. Because I see disability access and safety as going hand in hand.
It could get called cultural safety as well if we wanted to borrow a term from the Aboriginal community.
When it works well, the contractors do not consider themselves experts in disability. They stay open to learning about the individual's access requirements, and about what we want in the output of the project.
What can be frustrating about projects like this is they tend to only relate to one element of the broader project. And so you can't see, for example, government might be going to do a big raft of changes and run a co-design about one narrow aspect of that. While the co-design might have been well intentions, you can't see the co-designers input across the project. And it can look like the run of the mill consultation.
The other thing is, the co-design group is teaching the consultants, but it means that the public servants back in government aren't getting the opportunity to learn from the co-design group which is unfortunate.
And I guess at the poorer end of the spectrum, there are projects where the co-design is commissioned under the conditions of a project timeline and the budget and outcome are already determined. It is hard to see, I guess it is really hard to see co-design work when all of that stuff is pre-determined. I call that purposeless co-design. You probably call it consulting.
And as Amanda said, that burns down trust.
So I guess, yeah, if you know the outcome is predetermined, it’s purposeless co-design really.
If we keep running purposeless design, and we call it co-design, we wear down trust.
When co-design is working well, it is done with purpose and done with the intention to realise the group's vision.
Dr George Taleporos: Thanks Jen. I agree with all of that. Can I also add that I don't think it is co-design at all if it is purposeless? I think that co-design is something that has a purpose and that purpose is to generally develop policy and to make decisions that are clearly, clearly developed with people with disabilities. That is ultimately what we are all about.
You also raise the issue of, I think you said that $2,000 budget. I don't think you can do co-design on $2,000. What do you think Ruby, is that even possible?
Ruby Susan Mountford: Absolutely not. I'm just laughing because I've had similar projects and timeframes. You've got 8 months, we need five resources, here is $10,000 - good luck. And don't forget to do the evaluation. And prove all the things you've done and get detailed data along the way to prove it was worth the money.
A part of me, it takes me a few seconds to order my thoughts, from an emotional spike I’m feeling, my emotional regulation is a little jumpy.
Dr George Taleporos: Ruby can I then ask you've done work in this space, can you give some examples?
Ruby Susan Mountford: Yeah. Definitely. So I've run and been involved in co-design groups at the advisory level, at the co-design team level, and at the facilitator level.
What I found worked is when the group is able to change and move as a co-design team is discovering or finding new problems that weren't necessarily covered in the original brief. And when the space recognises that what is effectively being asked of a co-design team is to go through our experiences of barriers and how we solved them. That is personal, it’s often quite upsetting, and often something that causes a lot of frustration and again, like vicarious trauma. When that is acknowledged and respected and compensated properly, that is what can lead to having a good outcome. Also time. Registering that it takes time to build trust with communities, especially if there are communities that have reasons to have high distrust of government. There is high distrust of health organisations, to have distrust in general which is lot of the disabled community. And my life in the intersection of queer and disabled – I’m a non-binary person with trans experience, a lot of trans people have negative experiences in health care settings. So trying to form groups that are based on solutions means taking the time and effort and honouring the experiences that have led to them having the answers that we do.
Other examples of going well was the Employable Q toolkit, which was a toolkit for LGBTQ+ disability employment which was done by LGBTQ+ Health Australia. The reason that went well is because as we were going along with projects, the pandemic did happen which did stall things, but it also gave us a space to look at gaps in the project to recognise we hadn’t really found enough people with intersectional experience so we had to go back and focus and readjust.
I think it is when you have the time and funds to be flexible and go in with an open mind and not assume we know the answers. That is the co-design mindset as well. It works well when we are given space to come up with our own solutions, or to say, the problem you think is our biggest priority is not our priority at all. That is not what we need right now to survive. And being able to openly hear that and not get defensive I have is a skill.
Another thing that is really helpful is when the co-design team is led by someone from those communities. That builds trust quickly, if that person is able to share as opposed to feeling like we’re being observed or directed by another bureaucrat who doesn’t understand our lives and is probably judging us, even if that’s how it’s perceived. And recognising the levels of defensiveness that can come from not understanding the community, or from justified barriers and guard that will go up quickly with people who aren’t flagging they are one of our community, that they have the same experiences that we do, and they have the same amount of skin in the game. I think that is a big part of the results as well. We want to know that when those results come out that is the person running that group is as invested in the success as we are. It is not about looking good. It is about our lives. When that is acknowledged from the get-go and when we are included in the accountability process and around outcomes from the co-design, we have more trust that it will be used purposefully and that we will be able to see it through. Thanks George.
Dr George Taleporos: Thank you so much. The investment in co-design. We need to see there is an investment. We also need to recognise that it can take a long time to reach people who, for example, have communication impairments who might need support to have their voices heard.
That is really critical that you pointed that out and thank you so much.
On that note, Amanda Allen-Toland, you would have perspectives on this.
Amanda Allen-Toland: So much truth in Ruby and Jen’s comments. We could do a whole days’ session on some of the things you are talking about.
So I want to talk to you about the Aboriginal workforce funding as an example of where we really had an opportunity to go in with $40 million investment by the government in aboriginal workforce recovery from COVID.
The $40 million was given to Aboriginal Strategy and Oversight to administer. Big money. But what we did was we said, well, let's take this to the Aboriginal community sector to determine how it should be delivered and invested.
So we as public servants took the stance of facilitators and supporters. Something that is probably a little bit more power sharing than just co-design. We really did take that stance. And of the$40 million, $20 million has been allocated through Aboriginal designed, led, allocated, collectively actioned investment into the Aboriginal work force in health and human services.
So that was a process that we facilitated. No agendas. The community sector at times said to us, what is the catch? We said, no, we are genuinely here to support your aspirations. This is self-determination. As public servants, we did the heavy lifting of negotiating and navigating with our colleagues in corporate services to make those processes culturally competent so the community voice, the community aspirations could be realised.
Thanks, George. I don't know if I've got more time to go into that. But that is one example of how we did that.
Dr George Taleporos: I really love that, Amanda. I think that handing it back to community is a really big part of it. That we need to bring the community into this and not have the community an object that kind of sits there and takes what was given.
I really appreciate what you said there.
And now I know that Melanie, you do a lot of work in helping organisations and government to actually implement co-design. So I'd like us to now move to some really practical strategies on what conditions do we need to do co-design well?
Melanie Rayment: Thank you, George and recognising all of the wonderful panellists that I am privileged to share today with. Ruby in terms of your comments around social justice. Amanda, you know, deeply respect the need for self-determination in these processes. And of course, foregrounding in indigenous wisom. And Jen in certainly hearing and wholeheartedly agree with you on really the ensuring these are non-extractive processes.
Well, George, I think what we typically talk about often in these instances is we talk about these processes and the practices and the tools and the projects. But it really is that the conditions that are often overlooked to really create opportunities for this type of way of working and these approaches to work well. And it is often where this sort of type of working comes unstuck. The tenets of co-design in terms of power and decision making and curiosity and bringing that collective wisdom to bear on challenges through those healing and innovative processes is key. But as we have all alluded to, it challenges the very foundations over many of what our institutions sit on and the paradigms that we operate within Australia and certainly a colonial paradigm.
So fundamentally, I think this really requires us to consider the conditions both - I guess, in terms of our own personal self and practice and how we show up. The role we imagine we play in a workplace, in society, and the role and the value that we are thinking about creating.
Of course, in our teams in terms of sharing those externalised practices and mindsets and values that either help or hinder the way in which we truly show up. The way that success may or may not be defined and how that is defined. And a true permission for learning and growth through this.
I know this is a difficult topic in terms of government in terms of not knowing the answers.
And certainly, from a government standpoint, executive leadership and truly understanding what this might mean for the practices and the decisions that are made and how they are made is really key. And as Jen mentioned previously, it is we need to ensure that we are always building capacity and we are working openly and humbly and alongside people so that we are constantly leaving good behind and building that capacity and capability.
And of course, people have touched on really that lived experience co-leadership of this type of work is really important. And sometimes that gets in the way of our HR processes or payment processes that then create other challenges for those people personally in terms of their own payments.
And lastly, organisational and sector level, we really need to think about how are we nurturing these connections across sectors, across communities? The collaborations and the relationships beyond typical ways that we see power is held, knowledge is held, resources are held and shared. And thinking about the structures and the dynamics that continue to marginalise people.
More broadly, it is really important to note that people are succeeding in spite of these conditions. And wouldn't it be amazing if we made that more possible for people? Because people are burning out in these instances. There is a big part of vision and intent there with individuals and singular projects, we see people fighting against the tide of conditions that are not made visible. Therefore, We are not actively and collectively addressing those conditions that need to be addressed.
I think in the disability sector specifically. A couple of observations from my perspective. I recognise I am not that expert. Is there is a continued deep misalignment of expectations of what co-design is and isn't. And it is certainly the experience. And I think, whilst it means many things to many people and that is an okay thing to do, thinking about whether that is in your instance a fully self-determined agenda setting to delivery with a metaphoric blank sheet of paper, or something more rapid where you have strong alignment and trust and build upon those things and learning together for action.
And secondly, I think I hear all the panellists discussion about time and investment and I wholeheartedly agree. But I'm also coming up against people who might have actually 18 months to do something and are so stuck in that fear of taking that next step with heart and authenticity that they are stuck not able to do anything.
I think time is one notion that is definitely a factor. But it is really important that to think about more so about the degree in which there is strong diverse alignment around these issues. And is there strong trust and an equitable process. And thinking about how much of this challenge is known and unknown. Who has framed the problem? Who has prioritised the issues? Has that really reached to the people that we most need to reach in society? And what kind of evidence we are bringing to bear on this. And whose definition of evidence and certainly First Nations wisdom here and thinking about those things together is an important way to think about do we have a pathway forward or are we starting here from scratch?
And the last one I think noticing is there's often a need to hold that facade around communications that feels really one way. And how do we really truly open up for transparency and human comms, humble comms, learning orientated communications with people so that we can ensure people are aware of what is able to be changed in these instances and where there are potentially legislative constraints or other constraints more broadly.
I think Inclusive Victoria and systemic reform ambition of co-design really represents hope. And ideally, a turning point for the conditions that we all need to invest in and really make visible.
Because it is after many years of people seeking safe spaces and authentic spaces to take those steps forward that this opportunity is really before us. So we need to invest in those conditions and we need to ensure that we are making that really visible and clear and actively addressing these things so we can take those leaps forward.
And so reflect on our own organisations and institutions and our ways of working and the way in which we make decisions and show up so that we can really support this vision of what the hopes for Inclusive Victoria are.
Dr George Taleporos: Thanks. So much there, I feel like I always need to replay that and listen to it three times over to make sure that I can take in all of that. But thank you.
We are almost at the end. I want to make sure we have a chance with the Minister in this room for Jen, Ruby, and Amanda. Can you give us – each of you - two pieces of advice to the government that the government can take forward in doing co-design? So I'll start with you Ruby.
Ruby Susan Mountford: Thanks, George, Ruby speaking. Intersectionality is key. Disability is a part of our experience and all the other parts of our experience including our background, socioeconomic status, our sexuality, gender identities, all these things will be equally important in the way we experience systems and the solutions that we have and the problems that we face. And it will take time. But generally, we are small, interconnected communities. Once you lift up the voice of theirs, people can build trust.
Second thing is make sure you include a range of disabilities, and not just those that are easiest to bring in and easiest to accommodate. Where we live in Australia, it’s natural to think the more effort it takes it is harder to do, particularly when it comes to asking for help. Where our biases can play into the voices – which I don't see as a reflection being a bad person or not, it is part of the society and indoctrination we have, so you have to be active in working against it.
Dr George Taleporos: Yes, yes, yes to all those things. Jen?
Jen Hargrave: I might think a bit at a management contract sign off kind of point in my comment, George. And I think the first one I'd say is while in our governments we are looking more at having transferables, we have to think about knowledge as something that is not transferable. For people managing co-design projects, their decisions do have a big impact on how it runs in practice.
And the more knowledge they build up around the project, the better the outcomes will be.
And the other things is to argue for it. So I guess there's not much point running a whole design process over a year or so to get to levels of sign off for them to say we are not doing that. So to have a real commitment to it.
Dr George Taleporos: Absolutely. Melanie? Sorry, Amanda?
Amanda Allen-Toland: My advice to government and I often say is that Aboriginal people have been coming to the table patiently for decades, for years, asking for the same thing over and over and over. Community have the solutions. They have great solutions. Great ideas. What we need to do in government is have greater trust. Let go of some of our old mental models. They don't work. Let community take more control. And let's be the enabler of community. Let's look at our processes, let’s look at our policies and see if we can see how we can be flexible and culturally informed and culturally competent. And let's let communities solve their problems.
The second thing I would also is this is a year of truth and justice. And years of truth and justice and healing. Public servants and all community, I would encourage you to listen to the stories from Yoo-rrook and think about what we are hearing and dream and create a new public service partnership with community going forward.
Dr George Taleporos: Fantastic. Thank you to all four of you for really useful insights. And I really hope that everything you've said can be implemented and absolutely should be. So thank you. We are now going to take a five-minute break and return at 10 past 12 for the Q and A. See you in five.
Dr George Taleporos: Hi everyone and welcome back. We’ve got Q and A time. My favourite time. Amanda, what do the people want to know?
Amanda Lawrie-Jones: Thank you, George. Yeah, we do have a couple of great questions that have come through. So the first question that we have is - How do you prevent co-design becoming the new hype word and tokenistically added to all engagement and consultation, and ensure actual co-design is really taking place?
Dr George Taleporos: What a great question. It is one on everyone's mind. Who would like to answer that?
Ruby Susan Mountford: Ruby, speaking. I'll jump in real fast. That ship's already sailed. It is definitely a buzz word and is used all the time for things that are not fall under co-design in that sense of actually empowering people having a say in their own lives. Some examples that were even coming up in the royal commission, people just put that word on and try and claim that. How you prevent that is you can build the accountability for co-design, how transparent the co-design processes are, but also checking the culture of the organisation putting it forward and the timelines that are put into it. What the outcomes are expected. And really kind of being also aware that because the government is insisting on co-design that people have to include that in a grant application and they do that without having included a thorough write down of what their idea of co-design would be. So I think a way of moving it away from tokenism would be to specify what the government outlines of co-design and what is required for that. And then also kind of having follow ups in the application process about how they are going and how they are implementing it. But that is a few ideas.
I know Melanie when we heard this question, we cackled a bit. So I'm guessing you've got thoughts on it, too.
Melanie Rayment: Melanie speaking. Thank you Ruby, we did have a little giggle.
I think that is the case and it is important to think about where this is coming from and also to recognise the true intent and good intentions of what people are trying to achieve with this. If I speak at a commissioning level, we do see this term thrown around a lot without a really true understanding of what this might mean for an organisation and for how we are going to undertake this process.
And certainly, putting it into processes of commissioning processes where the constraints are really set up to not support trust and potentially do harm in some instances. It is at that point from a personal perspective that we are turning work down because of that.
But I think we need to think about are we ensuring that we are creating the right conditions through this work and ensuring that we are able to truly effect the decisions that are made in this and I think that is one way to ensure that we continue to have these important conversations about what this means and what the ambition and intent about this is as well.
Dr George Taleporos: Absolutely, and call it out. If it isn't – say dudes, this ain’t co-design! Yeah? Absolutely. Thank you. Amanda, what else do the people want to know?
Amanda Lawrie-Jones: Thanks, George. How can government include and build relationships with under-represented groups and those who don't already have a strong relationship with government?
Dr George Taleporos: Very good. Great question. Can I ask - obviously you all have expertise on that? Amanda, can I ask you?
Amanda Allen-Toland: Yep. I think that one of the best ways that government can build relationships with people who are not usually the people that we engage with, we work with, is to employ people from those communities. Make them part of our workforce if they want to be part of our workforce. Sometimes they don't want to be parking lot of our work force and that is okay. So what else can we do? We can build relationships in lots of other meaningful long-term ways.
Across Victoria, DFFH has engagement across in different places. We've got 17 areas. Those are really great platforms for relationship building. And in the Aboriginal community space and in our department, we have Aboriginal engagement teams. And their whole raison d’etre is to build relationships with community and people who don't usually talk to community. So I think we employ people who are part of community, who engage well with community, and to value those roles. I think that is really important is valuing, putting time into building long-term relationships and that is seen as important as well. And that takes us away from just doing stuff to community, being transactional with community. And seeing a long-term relationship as important with those, the people in community and in place.
Dr George Taleporos: I love that. I think that is the best place to start. Remembering that for a long time, I remember a time when job applications said you had to have a driver's license. Remember that, Jen?
Jen Hargrave: I still see that, George.
Dr George Taleporos: It is the worst. And tell your HR departments up there sort it out because it is not good enough. Can I ask you Ruby, do you have any thoughts on this question about relationships?
Ruby Susan Mountford: Ruby speaking. I definitely do. I want to echo Amanda with, firstly are you hiring us? Like, have you given us reason to want to work with you? I think that is usually a pretty big one. And also can we see ourselves in positions of respect in your organisation? I think, when it comes to when you are initially starting out, it is recognising and seeing communities as a whole communities and recognising we will most likely have connections with each other. So starting there with looking at the organisations that are around including small grassroots groups, respecting that small grassroots groups are often incredibly pressured for time and resources. If you want to spend time engaging with them, be prepared for valuing that time.
And starting to ask around who knows someone. Treat it like you are trying to build a telephone tree. I know what those are. I suppose that sense of recognising how connected people with disabilities often are. Even those of us who are bedridden and can't move much, because we have to be. That is how we learn about our communities and how to advocate and support each other. So firstly, start to seeing us as a part of a different culture you are trying to understand. Make sure you do your reading. If you mess up on those first interactions, it will spread. We talk. If we have an encounter with you that’s just really hard to have another one, in that sense of if you have done your work and you've done some reading and started to talk to people and learn how to make sure you are not going in there without a good understanding, I know it can sound really intimidating, so I'm trying to walk it back a little bit. It is important to recognise and value our time when you reach out. And start with the people that you know who will be able to give you strategies on how to reach even harder to reach communities.
For example, if you are looking for intersection of LGBTQ+ disability, it will be easier to reach autistic nonbinary folks – there’s a lot of us and we’re very vocal on the internet. It is much harder to reach people who are deaf and blind, much harder to reach intersex communities, much harder to reach people living within an intersection of marginalised ethnicity. If you’re saying well we’ve ticked these boxes of a lot of voices, but you’ll get advice about how to go further and really unpack all the layers of marginalisation that places us further and further away from power. When you go in recognising you need to do work to really reach it and not just cut it off where it is easy and the folks who are most present, because again, we are not necessarily the most impacted. I have a huge amount of privilege within my community. My voice and my expertise is going to be different from the expertise of people who are living and have to navigate a lot more systems than I do and experience more discrimination than I do.
I can potentially start telling you where to start looking to reach those people. And I can potentially, if we built enough trust, vouch for you - but you have to prove to me that I can do that because it is my community and my name on the line if they have a bad experience with you. So recognise what you are asking as well when you use connections for some leverage because if people aren't willing to speak up for you, it might be that you have to do some work on yourself, too.
Dr George Taleporos: Yes. And you know, that’s okay right? I think that we can make mistakes and we can have a few setbacks. Doesn't mean we can't get back on that
Ruby Susan Mountford: Don't give up. That is a big part, too. And we all learn. We all have to learn. Don't go in assuming you know everything and be surprised when that attitude gets you pushback.
Dr George Taleporos: Yes. Jen, can I ask you that question?
Jen Hargrave: I think the employment idea is a terrific one. I think turning up, hanging around, and watching quietly for a while. If people have AGMs or other events, community events, assisted day out, whatever it might be, if it is appropriate for you to turn up. And do a bit of learning and thinking. And, you know, Amanda A talked about how a lot of us have been saying the same things for decades. A great way of building up trust is demonstrating you are listening and working to progress what we have been saying.
Dr George Taleporos: Yes, absolutely. Amanda, do we have any other Q & A questions?
Amanda Lawrie-Jones: Yeah, conscious of time, though. The lucky last is - are there any examples of platforms, technology, or techniques, the panellists have seen or used that support a strong and inclusive co-design process?
Jen Hargrave: I've got a quick one to throw in. I think it is worth considering face to face. The amazing technology of face to face. It doesn't work for everyone, and it doesn't work for everything. But for some people’s disabilities and other requirements face to face is what works best. Yep.
Dr George Taleporos: Absolutely. But let's keep the hybrid going. We definitely have moved to a place where a lot of people who are previously shut out of these things can now participate. So we need the hybrid. Thanks, Jen.
Melanie Rayment: Can I jump in there? I agree, Jen. And I think people are looking for this formulaic approach and there's no one size fits all. We need to really, truly listen and learn with humility about what is going to work best for people. And then select the right tools, approaches, methods from that. And I think that is the only way forward is to consistently listen and learn and adapt with those processes.
Dr George Taleporos: Thanks. Amanda, do you have any resources or tips for the Aboriginal community?
Amanda Allen-Toland: Yeah, George. I just want to say like Jen, the face to face. We’re really keen to go back on country and design with mob. What you said, the accessibility of being hybrid is important. So we have to draw on two types of designing with. So, I mean, through the COVID period, we turned to a lot of different tools like Miro lots of different things online. I can't even remember now.
But I think that I'm kind of in a mindset now of keeping it lo-fi. Try not to complicate things. Stick with simplicity and go back to basics which is about starting with the relationship. Don't worry too much about the leggo stuff and all of that. But try to keep it to the people and yarning.
Dr George Taleporos: I like lo-fi. Ruby – you get the last word Ruby.
Ruby Susan Mountford: I love that for me. I was going to say a practical way to start is to read the ‘Beyond Sticky-notes’. It is a really good book about the mindset of co-design and recognising it as a people-oriented design system. To then start knowing the tools to start buildings on, it is understanding it as a mindset and that is a good way to start just kind of not seeing it as daunting and having a clear idea of where you can start looking around. They are also an awesome queer human-centred design advocate and their voice has been really useful.
And in so far as tool making, the biggest tool is anything that allows good feedback. So use Survey Monkey, use those really easy tools to check it is accessible. There are great free online checks that with let you know what tools are useful on screen readers for people who are vision impaired they can play with contrast. Make sure you what you are checking out is not something shiny and flashy that you want to use and get some government spending, but something that works for us as well.
Dr George Taleporos: Absolutely, the fact that you are looking for those resources means you are halfway there. Thank you to all our panellists – Mel, Ruby, Jen and Amanda and my co-host Amanda Lawrie-Jones, thank you to you. And thanks, everyone. I'm going to hand back to Argiri for some closing comments.
Argiri Alisandratos: Thank you, George and what a wonderful start to our ongoing conversations around co-design and an absolutely fantastic session. Thank you to everyone for your great questions and the panellists for some of the most thoughtful responses that I’ve seen and heard. I really appreciated every minute of this conversation. It was fantastic to hear those examples of how co-design has worked well. Also, examples of what we can do better and how we can learn and grow together I think in terms of this exciting body of work that we are going to be doing together.
I would like to thank all our panellists for their valuable contribution today for taking the time out of their busy schedules to share with us their interesting, diverse experiences and expertise on co-design. Particularly special thanks to George and Amanda for the hard work and chairing and facilitating and their evolving and pulling it all together with the Office for Disability and our departmental colleagues.
Before I go onto the next steps, I know the Minister is very keen to also share some of his reflections from the session today. So I'm going to hand over to the Minister who has sat through the whole session for the last 2 hours, that should demonstrate to you the importance that he places on this conversation and the work that we have to do. Minister, over to you.
The Hon Anthony Carbines: Thanks so much, Argiri. And a couple of things. I know we are up against time. Just things I noted. It is just good to put yourself in a co-design space as you understand it and listen to what people's reflections are about what they think it means.
People are the experts of their life experiences and that co-design done badly, well that’s not co-design and it does break trust. Some of the thinking there around having to challenge those power imbalances of responsibilities of government to push back to - we want to do co-design as we understand it here. But it’s also to do with a whole heap of others across government and other departments we deal with who aren't on a journey to the same extent that we are and how are we going to work with that.
Some of the other comments, too, I found this a bit too - people throw co-design around. Going forward it’s the one I can't stand, which seems to bubble up everywhere. But we can’t always assume people know what co-design means. Today's conversation highlighted those different expectations. But I think they are really important points.
Some others made, too, about how we are going to resource. Through COVID, we have drawn a lot of community support in public health and communities to support vulnerable people and groups. We've asked people to do it out of the goodness of their hearts or because they are community leaders, or fit it into your free time, or can you help us. There’s been a fair bit reflection across the Department of Health and DFFH and government more broadly that perhaps if our public service reflected more of the community we are always trying to serve, we might not have had some of those challenges because we would have had the people internally to reflect it and respond quickly. Because I think as we are drawn in so many community organisations and individuals, and then we've trained and resourced and employed and engaged them. So that is how public service is changing. I think we have to make sure we have able to show how we are doing that here in relation to our work.
I have other things, but I know we are out of time. I did notice – because I was looking – and I found in the 02 plan. I see that we did plan for 10 years back then as opposed to 4 years now. So at least we are talking with people more often. And there is lot about listening and engaging here. Things look old and it is interesting to compare to two.
A lot more then was about listening than what we were doing. It is about saying what we are up to in government, and how what we are doing is working. Where we think we are evolving here is that we’re starting with the ground floor of what do we want to do and how are we going to do it together and how we’re going to assess and bring more people into that conversation.
So there's heaps here that has been really useful and helpful. And we'll continue our conversation and engagement to make sure we are getting it right as we go. That is the whole point of it. And it will make the task of delivering and measuring our success a lot better because of the work we are able to do together.
So thanks Argiri. I appreciate people's commitment and their frank advice is going to help us. Thanks Argiri.
Argiri Alisandratos: Thanks, Minister, fantastic reflections. Just in terms of our next steps. The Office for Disability will be sending out a short survey asking for your feedback on this webinar and it is important for us to get that feedback because it will tell us a lot about whether we need to do more of these sessions as we learn and engage in the next wave of work that we've got to do together.
For any questions we were not able to answer in the Q & A session, the Office will follow up with responses by e-mail and provide those back to you. We welcome further questions or feedback on the webinar. Send your feedback by e-mail to the office of disability at ofd@dffh.vic.gov.au.
Thank you, everyone. We are going to be talking with VDAC. We are going to continue these important conversations and create the framework for how we undertake genuine co-design with respect for the lived experience with many of you across our state. So thank you. Have a wonderful afternoon, stay safe and talk soon. Bye, everyone.
Updated