Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The Greens have been strong supporters for a very long time of the principle of advocacy, and especially the principle of advocacy for people who are living with a disability. The Senate inquiry report had a very active participant in our Senator Rachel Siewert, who has been heavily involved for some time in the question of the NDIS and making sure that, when we ultimately have a scheme, it does enshrine in a systematic and well-thought-out way the principles of advocacy and also that advocacy continues to be adequately funded. As any perusal of that Senate report will demonstrate, especially given that there is a whole chapter devoted in the Senate report to the question of advocacy, this is something that is far from a new issue and is something that requires some careful thought to ensure that we get it right.

One of the things that come through crystal clear from the evidence received by the Senate inquiry is that the weight of evidence from people living with a disability and from the services that represent them was that, although they wanted advocacy, they did not want funding to come from the NDIS. There are a couple of reasons for that. The first is to ensure that there is more money available for the NDIS rather than more money being taken out of it. The second and important issue is the principle of independence. Even though, if this amendment were successful, we might have an agency giving money to someone who is at arm's length, they are still in control of whether they can turn the tap on or off. And that does potentially compromise the advocacy ability of the agency that may receive the funding under this amendment.

The question of a complaints body and the ability to address issues about decisions that are made under the NDIS is also a critical one. It is important that it is raised and that it is dealt with. But, again, this is something that has been the subject of extensive evidence and requires a well-thought-out response. When this legislation comes to the Senate, the Greens will be pursuing these questions of advocacy and also a complaints mechanism through the form of amendments, because it is something that we have been concerned about for some time.

I respect the spirit in which the member for Denison is moving these amendments, but unfortunately it cuts across the weight of what the Senate inquiry has been told the majority of people who are living with a disability, and the services that represent them, actually want out of this scheme.

Yes, the legislation can be improved—and I commend the member for Denison for making an attempt to do that—but this is not the right way to go about it. It would not have the support of the sector, which I think is very important. At the end of the day, principles of advocacy, at both an individual level and a systemic level, need to be enshrined and well funded, but independence must be first and foremost. In a situation where most of the people fronting the Senate inquiry said, 'For that reason, we do not want advocacy to be funded through the agency,' that is something that should be respected.

The Greens look forward to continuing our commitment to advocacy, including for people living with a disability, and pursuing appropriate amendments in the Senate.

See this speech in context