Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I was talking last night about the fact that there are 4.4 million Australians who are living with a disability. People who live with a disability are 10 times more likely to experience violence. They are three times more likely to be victims of sexual assault than people who don't have a disability. Their life expectancy and their quality of life is significantly less than most Australians without a disability. Theirs—people who live with a disability—is a cause that we must all take up.

As the father of a young adult with disabilities, I have seen firsthand how government can help but also hinder efforts to raise kids and empower young adults with disabilities. That's why I've advocated for accessibility, amenity and health and social care since day one in this House.

I'm proud of the way that our parliament has worked together over the last 40 years to realise a fairer, more equitable and more accessible Australia. For over a decade, both sides of this chamber have been united in their pursuit to make the National Disability Insurance Scheme a world-class, functional and resilient institution. It's really worthwhile stopping and pausing a moment to recognise just how world-leading the NDIS is in the disability sector. We were the first country in the world to adopt such a scheme. I'm not sure if it's been replicated, even to this day.

There are critics of the NDIS about its cost, and it does cost a significant sum of money, but the lives that it changes, from young kids, to young adults, to adults—it is a remarkable scheme. It is a testament to both sides, both parties of government, working together to achieve the intended outcome. The NDIS is as much valued today in our Australian society as is our universal commitment to Medicare.

The current Disability Services Act has been in place for 37 years. In the decades since 1986, there have been numerous developments in the disability sector, including changes in legislation, regulations, international agreements and the provision of disability services.

The Disability Services and Inclusion Bill 2023 will support all Australians with a disability, regardless of whether or not they are participants in the NDIS. The bill will provide a single-source statutory framework for the Commonwealth to fund disability supports and services that are not funded by the NDIS, the states or territories. This bill will not change, nor will it impact, the NDIS or the disability support pension paid under social security law. The Disability Services and Inclusion Bill 2023 will provide legislative authority for new and existing spending on disability related programs outside the NDIS. The bill does not directly allocate funding for specific supports or services; rather, it oversees these supports and services. The bill also improves quality and safeguarding arrangements by introducing a mandatory code, which will mirror the NDIS Code of Conduct. Under this bill, supports and services may be provided to any person with a disability, including those with a physical, psychosocial, cognitive or intellectual condition or sensory impairments.

Whilst there are good parts of the bill, I don't agree with all parts of the bill. One of the concerns I have with the bill is its failure to define target groups. This is where the key issue lies with this piece of legislation. The bill does not define target groups that will be eligible for supports and services. This is a departure from the current legislation. Under section 8 of the current legislation, the Disability Services Act 1986:

(1) … target group … consists of persons with a disability that:

(a) is attributable to an intellectual, psychiatric, sensory or physical impairment or a combination of such impairments;

(b) is permanent or likely to be permanent; and

(c) results in:

(i) a substantially reduced capacity of the person for communication, learning or mobility; and

(ii) the need for ongoing support services.

While not having a legislated definition of 'target group' may provide greater flexibility and access to services and supports, without the additional infrastructure in place there may be unknown practical consequential impacts on the provision and delivery of timely supports and services to those who are most in need. The inquiry currently underway in the Senate should provide greater insights into these concerns.

I'm also concerned about the changes to funding channels through the new legislation. The current legislation only allows for funding through grants, while, under this legislation, other forms of financial arrangements, such as procurements and contracts, are permitted. The act also enables the minister to make grants of financial assistance to states and territories or to eligible organisations for capital works, research activities, disability services and rehabilitation programs. I think that in many ways this is actually a positive thing. The social care sector is in desperate need for innovation and reinvigoration. The old model of the care economy is changing, and we need to be more responsive to technology, health and medical research and opportunities for more effective but perhaps lesser recognised service providers. Loosening the legislation to allow better public access and engagement only works where procurements and contracts are awarded fairly, transparently and with regard to the private sector and community sector—specifically, localised services and small and family businesses.

I am concerned about this for a few reasons. Firstly, this either directly or indirectly means relying on the minister's discretion. Labor have shown that their exercising of ministerial discretion is unreliable. It's the same discretion which saw mobile phone service rorts. It's the same discretion which saw cuts to space, cyber and defence technologies. It's the same discretion which has seen a 90-day review to infrastructure become a 200-day political exercise, at the expense of regional communities across this country. Labor's discretion is guided by union interests and political expediency. You cannot count on Labor to have your best interests at heart.

Along the same lines, I'm incredibly concerned about the disproportionate impact of Labor's discretionary decisions on regional and remote communities. Mobile services, road and rail and defence manufacturing projects; taxes and red tape on truckies, fisheries, forestry and agriculture; and Pacific labour mobility, backpacker visas and regional student worker incentives—all of these have unfairly impacted on regional communities, regional economies, regional businesses and regional families. The fact is that, when Labor gets into power, regional Australians miss out. When Labor gets hold of the purse strings, regional Australians pay the price. Labor seriously need to consider how they engage and actually implement the concerns of regional Australians, their service providers and their businesses.

When we were in government we understood this. In 2021 we released the landmark Australia's Disability Strategy 2021-2031, which was a transformative new strategy backed by a $250 million investment. It was a decade-long plan guided by an implementation advisory council of experts and lived experience practitioners. The aim of the strategy is to improve the lives of all Australians with a disability. It sets out priorities and plans for governments at all levels to work with the community, business and people with disability to deliver the needed changes. This includes providing good employment opportunities; providing high-quality, inclusive education; and making homes and communities safe, inclusive and accessible. Signatories to the new strategy include the Prime Minister, the first ministers of all state and territory governments and the president of the Australian Local Government Association.

In our last full financial year in office the coalition government delivered more than $39 billion in direct support to Australians with a disability, including $17.7 billion in the disability support pension, $1.4 billion for disability employment services, $155.3 million for the disability royal commission, $134 million for the Information Linkages and Capacity Building program to support community based and evidence based support services and $13.8 million for the Disability Gateway. We mainstreamed the vulnerabilities of people with disabilities across all portfolios, including child safety, family violence, education, employment, industrial relations and even foreign policy. That's what a government does when it cares—it listens, it learns, it leads and it legislates where required.

We await the findings of the Senate committee inquiry into these bills. I simply ask that the government take into consideration the two concerns that I've raised: firstly, that it reconsiders the broad definition of target groups and, secondly, that it seriously considers its track record in relation to supporting regional communities and looks to rectify this before it legislates to allow funding that is open to ministerial discretion. If the government cannot be trusted to keep the faith with regional Australians then it cannot be trusted with the social care of our most vulnerable.

In the short time left for me I want to raise one thing in relation to disability services. I recently travelled with my daughter in a mobility scooter through Sydney Airport. I have to say that the disability services at Sydney Airport were absolutely appalling. Sydney Airport, particularly Qantas, needs to take a very good, long hard look at itself. I cannot imagine how a person who is unassisted would be able to navigate their way around terminals. With transport—

See this speech in context