Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I begin by commending the member for Lindsay for bringing this very important motion on the National Disability Insurance Scheme to the attention of the House. The NDIS, as we all know and acknowledge, is an historic reform initiated by the previous Labor government, designed to support Australians with disabilities to have the best opportunity for the same quality of life as the rest of us in the community. This is why this government must match its rhetoric with action to ensure the commitment it has repeatedly given to Australians with disability and their carers provides adequate funding and resources to support and provides all measures necessary to live their lives without barriers to the fulfilment of their potential.

In March this year the NDIS began rolling out in my electorate, giving my constituents the very-long-awaited opportunity to finally transition to and access the scheme. My constituents will join thousands of others across the north-western region of Melbourne who will be required to submit their care packages for assessment and hopefully approval. For some the process they have engaged in is already providing a source of anxiety and frustration. The longer-than-expected rolling-out in the federal seat of Calwell has been a source of concern to begin with, but now the assessment experience itself is proving a challenge, as is the pricing structure.

For instance, to date we do not have a local area coordinator for the Brimbank area, which is at the north-western end of my electorate. Many of my constituents are facing unnecessary delays and unwelcome hurdles to accessing the NDIS as a result. Despina Havelas, who is a parent and activist for families with autistic children and has founded a local support group, Autism Angels, tells me our local parents are very worried and concerned about the lack of help provided to help them navigate a very technical and different approach to assessing their cases. Most of these families are of non-English-speaking backgrounds, and that in itself is an additional disadvantage to defending the rights of their child, family friend or relative who is trying to access the NDIS.

So far the rate of approvals has been disappointing. Complaints by people trying to access the scheme are mounting, as people believe their individual needs are not being properly considered. Those who have gone through the assessment often cite the phone interview as a major obstacle, as this method of interaction does not allow person-to-person contact, which is vital in helping assess the needs of the applicants. The lived experience cannot be gauged by telephone-only assessments, as the approach by the case workers appears to be primarily driven by cost-saving attitudes and measures, which means the experience is more about deleting or refusing services that once were provided in the package in order to save money. This should not be the overriding concern of the assessment process. The best package for the individual's needs to be the primary concern. People with disabilities have a right to access the NDIS fully, not partially. They should not be made to feel that they have to fight every step of the way in order to justify the most appropriate package to help them and their carers live fruitful and valuable lives.

One of my constituents, Andrew, attempted to access the NDIS and was refused for both the NDIS and the disability support pension. Andrew's a good example of someone who hasn't been able to convince, despite medical records, either providers that he is eligible. He has an impairment in his back, hip and shoulder that make it difficult for him to work. Andrew cannot stand for long periods of time, he cannot lift heavy things, he finds it difficult to write and has restricted movement when sitting. Andrew's treating doctor considered him eligible for the NDIS and the DSP. Despite this, an unnamed delegate told Andrew that he could not access the NDIS because the delegate was not satisfied that Andrew has a physical impairment. He is 64 years old and very soon he will not be able to even access the NDIS. He won't be able to access the age pension age pension for six month. So, the question is: what is someone like Andrew expected to do in order to support himself?

See this speech in context