Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Housing and Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me state clearly and unequivocally, in the words of the Leader of the Opposition: the NDIS is an idea whose time has come. All in this chamber know that the system of support for Australians with a disability is broken. The level of support a person with a disability receives can depend on a number of factors: what state they live in, whether the disability is congenital or was acquired, and if acquired, whether it was in the workplace, in a motor vehicle accident or in some other context. Workers compensation and motor vehicle accident insurance provide coverage in some states, but if you were born with a disability or acquire a disability later in life it can be a different story—waiting lists and queues. The result is that many people with a disability are left without the assistance they need. I suspect many in this chamber, like me, know this from personal experience from their extended families.

We need a new system of support based on need rather than rationing, with the entitlement to support going to the individual. The individual needs to be at the centre and in charge, able to pick the supports, the aids, the equipment and the service providers of their choice. This is the vision of the Productivity Commission's landmark report into the long-term care and support for people with disability. This is the vision of the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

The coalition has enthusiastically supported each milestone on the road to a National Disability Insurance Scheme. We supported the initial work by the Productivity Commission; we supported the $1 billion in the last budget; we supported the five launch sites; we supported the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales for a full statewide rollout after the Hunter launch; and we support the legislation. The coalition believes an NDIS can be delivered, within the time frame recommended by the Productivity Commission, by a prudent government that manages well. Any comments that we therefore make about the NDIS are offered in a constructive spirit in an endeavour to help make the NDIS the best scheme it possibly can be. The coalition stands ready to work with the government to see an NDIS delivered as soon as possible.

But there is one quibble we have with the government, and that is when Labor members and senators say that the NDIS represents quintessentially Labor values. It does not. The NDIS represents Australian values: a fair go and helping those who face challenges for reasons beyond their control. No side of politics has a mortgage on these values.

The NDIS is a person-centred and self-directed funding model. It is aligned to the objectives of empowering the individual, removing government from people's lives and reducing red tape. The coalition believes that the full implementation of an NDIS would be nothing short of a new deal for people with disability and for their carers. We have to get this right.

Because the NDIS is a once-in-a-generation reform that will unfold over the life of several parliaments, it should be the property of the parliament as a whole, on behalf of the Australian people, rather than that of any particular political party. To get this right will require a very high level of consultation and attention to detail, not just now, not just in the launch sites, but from now until the full implementation of the scheme, in some years time.

The coalition has called for the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the establishment and implementation of the NDIS. A parliamentary oversight committee would lock all parties in and provide a nonpartisan environment where issues of design and eligibility could be worked through cooperatively. My friend the member for Dawson has had a motion in the House for some time to establish this committee. Regrettably, it has not been brought forward to a vote. The coalition moved a similar motion in the Senate to establish the oversight committee, yet Labor and the Greens combined in the Senate to vote it down, so we will move another motion here in the House of Representatives.

The Leader of the Opposition reiterated this offer in his National Press Club speech last week, where he said:

The Coalition is so committed to the National Disability Insurance Scheme, for instance, that we have offered to co-chair a bipartisan parliamentary committee so that support for it does not flag across the three terms of parliament and among the nine different governments needed to make it work.

Labor like to pay lip service to wanting cross-party support for the NDIS, but when the opportunity has presented to give this real meaning, they have declined to do so. And Labor should accept our offer of a parliamentary oversight committee. The coalition intends to give the government, the Greens and the Independent members in this place an opportunity to accept our hand of cooperation by moving an amendment to this bill that will establish a non-partisan oversight committee.

I appeal in particular to the Independents and the other non-government members in this place to look at the advantages of having a cooperative approach over a period of time to this important initiative.

It is also important to note that every government and every opposition in Australia supports and wants to see an NDIS in operation. That is why, at the COAG meeting before last, it was disappointing that the Prime Minister could not rise above her partisan instincts. It is to the credit of premiers Baillieu and O'Farrell that they continued to negotiate in the face of public attack and misrepresentation by the federal government and reached agreement to host the launch sites. The coalition urged the Prime Minister to adopt a more cooperative approach, as there can be no NDIS without the states. They are partners in this program, not enemies.

The fruits of a constructive approach were there to be seen when Premier O'Farrell from New South Wales and the Prime Minister signed an intergovernmental agreement in December for a full state-wide NDIS rollout after the Hunter launch project. It is now up to the Prime Minister to continue this constructive approach in discussions with other jurisdictions to conclude further bilateral agreements. There can be no full NDIS without an intergovernmental agreement with each state and territory.

A word in defence of those states who are not hosting a launch site: the Productivity Commission never envisaged every state hosting a launch site and never saw the absence of a launch site as a bar to taking part in a full national rollout. Indeed, Premier Newman has written to the Prime Minister with a proposal for Queensland to be part of a full national rollout and Premier Barnett from Western Australia has written to the Prime Minister proposing a joint Western Australia-Commonwealth NDIS.

The coalition will continue to place this issue above politics and is prepared to work with the state and Commonwealth governments towards a better deal for people with disability. While we emphatically supported the government's commitment of $1 billion for the NDIS in the federal budget, we had some difficulty reconciling this figure with the $3.9 billion the Productivity Commission said would be necessary over the forward estimates for the first phase of the NDIS. We assume the government will account for this and make appropriate provision in the forthcoming budget.

The bill establishes the framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. This will enable the scheme to be launched, and the agency to operate the launch, in five sites across Australia from July 2013. The first stage of the scheme will benefit more than 20,000 people with disability, their families and carers living in South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania, the Hunter region in New South Wales and the Barwon area in Victoria. The scheme will provide funding to individuals or organisations to help people with disability participate more fully in economic and social life through the provision of an entitlement, enabling such things as aid, equipment, supported accommodation and personal attendant care.

The mechanics of the agency will be established by way of legislative instruments called the NDIS rules. These regulations, the NDIS rules, will establish, for example, eligibility and assessment criteria. The government released a discussion paper on the rules on 1 February. It would be fair to say that this paper does not contain much information. It proposes a series of questions; it is not a draft set of rules. This is significant, as the bill itself is essentially a framework. It establishes the transition agency, the board, the CEO and a general definition of eligibility. But the guts of the scheme, the mechanics, will be established by the rules.

The bill is currently being inquired into by the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, which will report on 13 March this year. A recurrent theme in evidence presented by witnesses to date is that it is hard to offer advice or pose questions or plan for the launch sites in the absence of the rules. These rules need to be released quickly and well before the passage of this bill through the Australian parliament. The Prime Minister in her second reading speech indicated the government's intention to bring the final version of the bill to a vote in the budget session. Therefore, the rules need to be released soon.

On 7 December 2012, COAG released a consultation regulation impact statement as a basis for further consultation on the regulatory impacts of the NDIS. Submissions closed on 1 February. The regulation impact statement focuses particularly on market and business changes driven by the move from block funding to individual funding and regulatory changes such as quality assurance and reporting requirements. This is another important input into the design of the NDIS.

The risk, as always with this government, is in its capacity to competently implement schemes. The interaction of three components—the NDIS Bill, the NDIS rules and the operating guidelines for the NDIS Launch Transition Agency—will determine how the NDIS operates. At this point in time, developing a complete picture of how the NDIS will unfold is limited by insufficient information. The work of the Senate committee is therefore critical, and it is to be hoped that it will have the benefit of the NDIS rules and the operating guidelines for the agency before it concludes its work. In the absence of these other two elements, it is difficult to determine if further amendments to this legislation will or will not be required.

I reiterate that we want the NDIS to be a success. We want the launch sites to run smoothly. We stand ready to work with the government. The concept of a national disability insurance scheme has gained momentum over the past five years. It would be churlish not to acknowledge the role played by Minister Shorten in helping to elevate the public policy profile of disability. But the lion's share of the credit goes to people with disability, their families, their carers and the organisations that support them. They came together. They decided enough was enough. They spoke with one voice. They declared, 'We're as mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore.' The NDIS is where it is—in this parliament, the subject of legislative proposal—because tens of thousands of people right across Australia have done the hard yards.

Acknowledgement should be made of the grassroots campaign by the sector coordinated by the Every Australian Counts organisation run by John Della Bosca and Kirsten Deane. The two main intellectual drivers of the NDIS have been John Walsh AM, a partner of PwC, and Bruce Bonyhady AM, chair of Yooralla and president of Philanthropy Australia, without whose determination, professional experience and personal knowledge this legislation would not currently be before this parliament.

I am proud to be the shadow cabinet minister responsible for this very important area. In closing, I must acknowledge the work of my friend and portfolio colleague, the shadow minister for disabilities, Senator Fifield, who has worked so tirelessly and so hard to elevate the NDIS above politics. It is just too important and I hope that the Prime Minister does the right thing and accepts our generous, open offer to establish a bipartisan committee.

In closing, it would be remiss of me not to mention the Leader of the Opposition's strong personal commitment to Australians with disability and those who care for them by dedicating $540,000 to Carers Australia raised by the 2012 1,000 kilometre Pollie Pedal charity bike ride, an event I am proud to be associated with and to participate in. Along the route we met with people with disability, with carers and with disability organisations. The next two Pollie Pedals, one starting in Adelaide and concluding in Geelong in a few months' time, will also be in partnership with and raise funds for Carers Australia.

In commending the bill to the House, I move the amendment which has been circulated in my name:

(1) Page 80 (after line 17), at the end of Part 6, add:

Part 7—Joint Select Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme

103A Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme

(1) As soon as practicable after the commencement of the first session of each Parliament, a joint committee of members of the Parliament, to be known as the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, is to be appointed according to the practice of the Parliament.

(2) The Committee is to consist of 10 members, made up of the following:

  (a) 2 members of the House of Representatives who are Government members;

  (b) 2 members of the Senate who are Government members;

  (c) 2 members of the House of Representatives who are Opposition members;

  (d) 2 members of the Senate who are Opposition members;

  (e) 1 member of the House or Representatives or the Senate who is a member of the Australian Greens;

  (f) 1 member of the House of Representatives or the Senate who is an independent member.

(3) A member of the Parliament is not eligible for appointment as a member of the Committee if he or she is:

  (a) a Minister; or

  (b) the President of the Senate; or

  (c) the Speaker of the House of Representatives; or

  (d) the Deputy-President and Chair of Committees of the Senate; or

(e) the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives.

(4) A member ceases to hold office:

  (a) when the House of Representatives expires by effluxion of time or is dissolved; or

  (b) if he or she becomes the holder of an office specified in any of the paragraphs of subsection (3); or

  (c) if he or she ceases to be a member of the House of the Parliament by which he or she was appointed; or

  (d) if he or she resigns his or her office as provided by subsection (5) or (6).

(5) A member appointed by the Senate may resign his or her office by writing signed by him or her and delivered to the President of the Senate.

(6) A member appointed by the House of Representatives may resign his or her office by writing signed by him or her and delivered to the Speaker of that House.

(7) Subject to the requirements of subsection (2), either House of the Parliament may appoint one of its members to fill a vacancy amongst the members of the Committee appointed by that House.

103B Powers and proceedings of the Committee

     All matters relating to the powers and proceedings of the Committee are to be determined by resolution of both Houses of the Parliament.

103C Functions of the Committee

(1) The functions of the Committee are:

  (a) to review the implementation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme; and

  (b) to review the administration and expenditure of the National Disability Insurance Scheme; and

  (c) to review any matter in relation to the National Disability Insurance Scheme referred to the Committee by:

     (i) the responsible Minister; or

     (ii) a resolution of either House of the Parliament; and

  (e) to report the Committee's comments and recommendations to each House of the Parliament and to the responsible Minister;

  (f) such functions as agreed to by resolutions of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

103D Annual report

     As soon as practicable after each year ending on 30 June, the Committee must give to the Parliament a report on the activities of the Committee during the year.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the amendment seconded?

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendment.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is now that the amendment be agreed to.

Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. I want to commence my contribution with an account of a phone call I received from a constituent in my electorate in South Australia. This particular person—and I am sure we all get these types of phone calls and discussions with our constituents—was phoning not only on behalf of herself but also on behalf of her daughter of whom she was the principal carer. Her daughter has a physical disability and is reliant on assistance in and around the house. The daughter fell over in the shower one day and was taken by ambulance to hospital where she waited for assessment until the following day. She is incontinent, therefore, soiled the bed in which she continued to lay throughout that night. The next day she became frustrated waiting for the assessment and went to check herself out. Being incontinent, she requested a nappy, a blanket, anything she could use around herself. Before a staff person gave her something, again the same thing happened.

This lady's mother went on to say that disability agencies cannot meet this request or that request, but when push comes to shove they can meet some of the requests. Staff who visit the home to assist are not particularly well coordinated, nor is the equipment, or accessories to that equipment, that are made available. They are understaffed for tasks requiring two people, for example, and support is very, very awkward.

So what happens? This particular person's mother does what she can to help day in, day out, week in, week out, year in, year out. It is tough. It is absolutely, really, really tough, not just on this particular person with a disability, not just on her mother, but on this particular person's sister who also lives in the same house. The battles that are waged to draw in sufficient support to just get through one day for this particular person, the stress that is repeated again and again as this person strives to live her life, take their toll on all those concerned, all those around her—the person with the disability, her sister, her mother, carers, et cetera.

This is only one account of a household in my electorate of Hindmarsh. I am sure that each and every one of us has stories that they can share in this place. I am sure that there are many similar households in Adelaide, across the nation, in every state, in every city, in every town. There are hundreds of thousands of people whose lives are an exercise in endurance—enduring pain, enduring discomfort, enduring helplessness and dependency, and enduring the humiliation that comes from being unable to manage oneself or, as in the account I have just given, managing one's own bodily functions, which would be a terrible, terrible thing. There is the endurance of the disability support systems and agencies which, I am sure, do the best that they can with the available resources that they have to care for people. And there is the endurance of the absence of hope—the very different pain that comes from seeing with your own two eyes that society perhaps does not care, or that nobody cares bar a direct family member. This is an existence; it is not a life. This is an existence unbecoming of a member of our community or of our society. It is totally unsuitable for any one of us and inexcusable in its absence of both quality of life for the individual and level of care from a civilised community.

This is why we must support a complete reworking of the nature and the quantum of care that is accessed by members of our community that require it. It is right that we as a society embrace change for the good of members of our community. Our society's approach to such issues has changed radically over the years and over the decades. Without making light of it, it reminds me—and many of you may have read this novel—of Nikolai Gogol's Dead Souls, in which the hero passes through a rural Russian village and hears of a person who one day, years ago, went to bed and has not got out of it since. It is a cursory curiosity noted, I suppose, with a raised eyebrow or mild amusement but forgotten in an instant within the context of the story, but it is also perhaps a sign of the debilitating and untreated illness effectively ignored by this person's community in the 1800s in rural peasant life in Russia. But here today in 21st century Australia we do more, and we are recognising that we need to do a tremendous amount more still. We should not need anecdotes like that of my constituent to spur us to action. We should not need those horror stories and shock tactics. We should be able to look and listen much more attentively than that and act before a situation becomes so bad that it causes us to cringe.

The assistance that individuals receive is one side of this greater question: what do those in need need and want? Another side is the quality of life that by far the majority of us, I believe, take for granted. Late in 2012, Minister Shorten and I visited an organisation in my electorate in which people with disabilities come together and apply themselves to gainful employment. That is Orana Inc. at Netley. It does a great job in providing sustainable work to those who are able to receive training and perform one or more of a range of duties in this particular Netley factory. I thank Nicholas Mihalaras, Orana's CEO, for introducing the minister and me to so many of its employees that day. There are several businesses in and around Adelaide's western suburbs where people with disabilities work and through which people are active and gaining a sense of accomplishment. More than that, employment also provides routine and discipline that keep us as individuals moving and growing through our lives.

It is the control of people's own lives that has been lacking in far too many people's lives in the past, right around the nation, so we have before us a bill which will establish the framework of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and support the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency move towards the launch of the NDIS in five sites around Australia from July this year, 2013. The first stage of the scheme will benefit more than 20,000 people with disabilities, their families and their carers living in South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, the Hunter in New South Wales, and the Barwon area of Victoria. The bill sets out the objects and the principles under which the National Disability Insurance Scheme will operate. This includes giving people choice and control over the care and support they receive, ensuring that it gives effect in part to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The bill sets out the process for a person becoming a participant in the scheme, how participants develop a personal goal based plan with the agency and how reasonable and necessary supports will be assured to those participants. People will be able to choose how they manage their care and support and can receive assistance from local coordinators should they wish to do so. The bill also provides that the agency will be responsible for the provision of support to people with disability, their families and their carers and may provide funding to individuals and organisations to help people participate more fully in economic and social life.

People with disabilities, their families and carers will be key beneficiaries of the NDIS, starting with the launch of the first stage in mid-2013. In the first stage of the NDIS, the whole of the states of South Australia and Tasmania, including rural and regional areas, will be covered for young people with disabilities in the nominated age ranges.

I would just like to note, in concluding my remarks here today, that this bill reflects extensive work undertaken with the states and territories and with people with disability, their families and their carers, disability care workers, service providers and advocates on the design, funding and governance of an NDIS. The engagement process has included detailed consultation with the NDIS Advisory Group and NDIS expert groups and public engagement, which has been undertaken around the country by the National Disability and Carer Alliance. I commend the bill to the House.

Ken Wyatt (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this evening to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. It gives me great pleasure to do so because in 1972, when I worked for the Department of Education, I was asked to become involved in the international year for those experiencing disabilities. Those 12 months gave me an incredible insight into what I did not know about the challenges that young children, and particularly their carers, face. That passion has remained, and I am glad that there are families across this nation, along with the relevant organisations, who stood up and said, 'Enough is enough.' It is about time that governments of all political persuasions came together and provided the types of services and support that are necessary to improve the quality of life not only for somebody who experiences a disability but for their carers and families. We often forget about those children who do not have disabilities and who often share their time disproportionately between their parents, their friends and others because of the intensity of the 24/7 role that is required.

I am proud to be part of the coalition, because we have had a strong record on supporting the NDIS. We are not here to debate whether the NDIS is a good idea or whether it is essential for our future. All sides of the political spectrum agree that the NDIS is critical. It is about ensuring that all Australians have the support that they require. It is about ensuring that all Australians have a brighter future to look forward to, and that not only encapsulates the whole concept of making decisions with respect to somebody who is a family member who may not have the capability to make their own decisions but equally is about those who have the capacity to make their own decisions and should have the right to make choices and not have them made for them.

The coalition stands ready to work with the government to see an NDIS delivered as soon as possible. The coalition also believes that the full implementation of an NDIS would be nothing short of a new deal for people with disabilities and their carers. We have got to get this right, and no second chance should be afforded or accorded the passage of the reforms that are required. The coalition has called for the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the establishment and implementation of the NDIS, because it is a bipartisan position that we should take forward our combined efforts to ensure that all levels and tiers of government create the best possible opportunities for families to engage with those who experience disabilities to make the choices that are pertinent to them.

A parliamentary oversight committee would lock in all parties and provide a non-partisan environment where issues of design and eligibility could be worked out and worked through cooperatively. George Christensen has had a motion in the House to establish this committee for some time. Regrettably, it has not been brought forward for a vote. Senator Fifield moved a similar motion to establish the oversight committee, but Labor and the Greens combined in the Senate to vote it down. Yet I know that within Aboriginal affairs we have established joint parliamentary committees to ensure the passage of some key initiatives, and I do not see any dissimilarity to the need to do this in a very key and critical area. I would hope that we are not playing politics with the NDIS, that our commitment transcends that, and that the combined approach will enable a smoother and better process to occur. It is people's lives that we are talking about, and this issue is of no political advantage to either side.

This bill establishes the framework for the NDIS and the NDIS Launch Transition Agency. It provides for the establishment of a national disability insurance scheme for which many families across this nation have been waiting for some considerable time. We know that the first stage of the NDIS will benefit more than 20,000 people with a disability, their families and carers living in South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon region of Victoria.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme will provide funding to individuals and organisations to help people with disabilities participate more fully in economic and social life through an entitlement that will enable the provision of things such as aids, equipment, supported accommodation or personal attendant care. The mechanics of the agency will be established by way of legislative instruments called the NDIS Rules. These regulations and rules will establish areas such as eligibility and assessment criteria. It is important that that is established so that it gives a clear understanding to those who will access those services and to those families who are hoping and waiting for the time when the detail will become available so that they know what their future is.

When I was first elected I made a commitment, following my predecessor in the seat, to continue the dialogue with families who had children with disabilities. In that process, what I found challenging not only as a member of the Australian parliament but also as a fellow human being was the frustration experienced by those who were the recipients of services that were provided to those with disabilities. There was their inability to make the decisions and choices that they thought would be best for their child or family member. Equally, there were some frustrations about a career pathway for those who were in a position to progress in opportunities. But the bottom-line concern was: what happens to my child when I die? It is important that we transcend all of that and provide those entities of surety that will enable families to make those decisions.

The government released a discussion paper on the rules on 1 February. It would be fair to say that this paper does not contain much information. It proposes a series of questions. It is not a draft set of rules as yet. This is significant, as the bill itself is essentially a framework which establishes the transition agency, the board, the CEO and a general definition of 'eligibility'. But the guts of the scheme, the mechanics, will be established by the rules.

The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee is currently inquiring into the bill and it will report on 13 March 2013. A recurrent theme in evidence presented to date by witnesses is that it is hard to offer advice, pose questions or plan for launch sites in the absence of the rules. These need to be released quickly and well before the passage of the bill through the parliament.

There is bipartisan support for the NDIS, and the NDIS needs time and investment to ensure that it is effective. It is important that the NDIS is managed effectively for the benefit of the thousands of Australians who will be assisted under the scheme. Labor does not have a good track record in managing programs, and it is important that we do not get this wrong. We do not want to see the NDIS become the latest victim of waste and management issues. Already there are serious concerns that the government has not put in sufficient funds for the scheme. Although it was positive to see the government's commitment of $1 billion to the NDIS in the federal budget, this is a long way short of the $3.9 billion that the Productivity Commission said would be necessary over the forward estimates for the first phase of the NDIS. We assume that the government will account for this and make appropriate provision in the coming budget. Not only is there concern about the funding; the full detail of the NDIS rules are yet to be released. The interaction of the NDIS bill, the NDIS Rules and the operating guidelines for the NDIS Launch Transition Agency will determine how the NDIS operates.

The Prime Minister has said that the government intends to release only the final version of the bill, including the NDIS Rules, for the budget. Such a delay can only be a move to reduce transparency and accountability on the government's part. Introducing such a complicated new program, with far-reaching impacts on the community, deserves appropriate attention and scrutiny. The work of the Senate committee is critical to scrutinising this package, and it is hoped that the committee will have the benefit of the NDIS Rules and the operating guidelines for the agency before they conclude their work. In the absence of these two elements, it is difficult to determine whether this legislation will require further amendments.

There can be no full NDIS without an intergovernmental agreement with each state and territory. It is imperative that the government be involved in productive discussions with all states to determine a full rollout so that all families that require the support are part of the program. It is important to realise that the Productivity Commission never envisaged every state hosting a launch site and never saw the absence of a launch site as a bar to taking part in a full national rollout. Indeed, Premier Newman has written to the Prime Minister with a proposal to be part of a full national rollout. Premier Barnett in Western Australia has written to the Prime Minister proposing a joint WA-Commonwealth NDIS.

The states have always been at the forefront of providing disability services. The coalition will continue to place this issue above politics and is prepared to work with state and Commonwealth governments towards a better deal for people with a disability. In the Hasluck electorate, as I have indicated earlier, I have a disabilities forum group of carers whose children experience varying degrees of disability and they have been providing sound and good advice that I need to take on and advocate on their behalf, not only within government but also with the agencies that support. I have a carers forum—at which there are some 60 people that I spent time with—where I heard from all of them one particular morning about the challenges and the issues that confront them. There is also the Disabilities Advisory Group.

It is important that the jurisdictions work together to provide the level of support that is needed for each of those families. One mother in particular—Shirley Fitzthum—has provided sound advice on the challenges that she faces as a grandmother who has taken on her grandchild, who has a disability, including the challenges that she has in dealing with multiple agencies. What she is looking forward to is the NDIS providing the option for her to make choices that are real to her, that service the needs of her child. It is clear from the feedback that I have been getting in my electorate that an NDIS is an important step for Australia. Let me also say that I support the amendment proposed by my colleague the member for Menzies.

In conclusion, the coalition wants the NDIS to be a success. There is no disagreement about the need for an NDIS. We want the launch sites to run smoothly. We stand ready to work with the government at all levels to make sure that the NDIS provides the scope of service and the choices that are needed in the context of meeting the needs of people with disabilities. It should be inclusive of the families—who play a very vital and critical role—but at the same time ensure that the red tape, the barriers and the strains placed on the families can in many instances be alleviated—not fully, because that will never be achieved—to give them some comfort and ensure that they know that what they are getting is an avenue for the best possible service. I commend the government for bringing forward the legislation. I commend all of those who have been a critical part of the process and I look forward with my coalition colleagues to playing an integral role in the rollout of the NDIS and to shaping its future. This includes shaping the potential capacity of this bill to determine how money and services are provided and how the rollout will make the quality of life far better for any person in Australia experiencing a disability and give future certainty to fellow Australians.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I speak in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a Labor initiative. It is a Labor proposal. It will be a Labor program. It will only be Labor that delivers the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I rather like the member for Hasluck. He seems like a decent bloke. I have not had a lot to do with him. He comes from the state of Western Australia, which has not signed up to the National Disability Insurance Scheme and is not part of this program. There will be 20,000 Australians covered by a National Disability Insurance Scheme in launch sites across the country, including people with a disability, their families and their carers in South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria. There are 400,000 people suffering from a disability in this country—none of those from Western Australian—who will be covered by a launch site.

Do not believe the sanctimonious unction from those opposite. They do not put a dollar on the table on this stuff. We have put $1 billion into the launch sites to get the thing underway. If you think those opposite support a National Disability Insurance Scheme, do not look at their words—look at their deeds and their actions.

I come from the state of Queensland. Campbell Newman, the Premier of Queensland, and his LNP state government promised hand on heart that they would support a National Disability Insurance Scheme before the March 2012 election. The member for Hasluck can come to Queensland and see that not one person will be covered at a launch site. Not one Queenslander will be covered, because Campbell Newman and the LNP state government in Queensland could not put a dollar towards this. They could not find $5 million each year for four years. That was equivalent to about $62.50 for every Queenslander suffering from a disability—80,000 Queenslanders and they are not going to be covered at a launch site. He came up with a one-and-a-half page proposal for Gympie. There was no detailed proposal. To the credit of the coalition governments in New South Wales and Victoria, they came to the party. But Queensland did not. So do not come into this place from Western Australia and tell us that this is a bipartisan approach, when your government has not done it. Do not come into this place and tell Queenslanders on this side that this is a bipartisan approach. Look at what your premiers are doing in those two states. This is an important issue for people in my electorate. It is an important issue for people like Carmel and Tony James and their children Ben, Lauren and their adolescent son Andrew, who is profoundly disabled with medical and intellectual disabilities.

Carmel wrote to me and said this:

When our Andrew entered our lives, he opened our eyes to the silent, marginalised lives that those in the disabled lead. What his living in our family has done is raise awareness of the lack of therapy support, access to appropriate preschool options, respite support, the stress of a disabled family member on families and the impact on carers of twenty-four hour care.

Carmel and Tony's experiences caring for Andrew inspired them to tackle inclusivity issues and made them fierce advocates for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I saw Carmel in action. I heard her talk on numerous occasions, and I saw her buttonhole Bill Shorten when he was Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services. I saw what she did. For about 45 minutes in Ipswich, in the CBD, she got hold of him and gave him the rounds of the kitchen on this issue and really told him what needed to be done. I pay tribute to Minister Shorten in relation to this and also to Minister Macklin and Parliamentary Secretary McLucas, who have been fierce advocates. They have all come to my seat and talked about this issue.

This is not just a social justice issue, but Campbell Newman and the LNP government in Queensland do not realise this. It is also an economic issue. It is a matter of your choices, your priorities and your values—what you are prepared to put your money towards. That shows what you really believe. If the Queensland LNP government cannot put a dollar towards this currently, what does that say about them? They will build Taj Mahals in the Brisbane CBD to house themselves, but they will not support people with a disability. Queensland is spending far less than other states in relation to this issue.

Tell that to people like Debbie Chilton, in my electorate, who is one of the local participants in the federal government's Leaders for Tomorrow program, which supports people with a disability to become leaders in business, community and government. Debbie is a true inspiration and role model. She helps people with disability, despite the fact she is profoundly disabled herself. She is a youth worker involved in community, church and cultural endeavours. She is a true inspiration.

Debbie Chilton was present at the Brassall Shopping Centre in Ipswich on the International Day of People with Disability, when I relaunched Blair Disability Links. Five hundred people came to Blair Disability Links in the Brassall Shopping Centre in Ipswich. We got 48 local organisations to participate with this booklet. This is important because those organisations want the legislation that is before the chamber now to be passed. They want it passed and they want to see real dollars and cents on the table. This is important in relation to the economic development of this country. The Productivity Commission thinks that, by 2050, with a National Disability Insurance Scheme, we will see about $32 billion extra going into the Australian economy. It is important because participation in employment for people with disability employment is far lower.

Growth in funding for people with disability under the Howard coalition government was 1.8 per cent—less than inflation—every year. Those opposite say they are very supportive of helping those with disability, but the growth in funding was 1.8 per cent on average during the entire Howard coalition government. That is how much they were caring for people with disability.

Let us have a look at the participation rate. The Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 2009 showed that the rate of participation in employment by people with disability aged 15 to 64 was 54.3 per cent, compared to 82.8 per cent for people without disability. That participation rate had not changed one iota during the whole of the Howard coalition government. Yet those opposite come in and say how much they are supportive of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and how supportive they are of helping people with disability.

Deloitte Access Economics, in a report in 2011, talked about the economic benefits of employing more people with a disability, closing the gap in labour participation rates and helping people with disability to fulfil their potential. Deloitte Access Economics found that, if just one-third of the people who had a disability could fulfil their potential—get that job they so aspired to—it would result in a cumulative increase of $43 billion in the Australian GDP over the next decade in real dollar terms. Amongst the OECD, we rank 13th out of 19 in employment rates for people with a disability. We have got a lot of work to do, and it is not just about social justice and showing our love, care and affection and our decency and humanity towards people with a disability; it is about economics as well.

This legislation is important because it establishes the framework. It comes back to the days of the Productivity Commission inquiry report Disability care and support, back in August 2011. That was the genesis of it. I was pleased to see the Prime Minister, after that report, in November 2011, reaffirm the federal Labor government's commitment to a National Disability Insurance Scheme. She said then:

The decision I announced in August—

referring to Labor's commitment—

is not just a preliminary hint or an aspiration.

It is the green light for a National Disability Insurance Scheme in this country.

The time for words is over. The time for action is come. We will get this thing done.

I am pleased that locally we are seeing that, with local organisation Gitana Consulting and Training Services receiving $57,455 to support the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Kathy Rees of Gitana Consulting and Training Services, whom I have met, received that funding under the federal Labor government's $10 million Practical Design Fund, which identifies and supports innovative projects that help people with disability, their families and carers and the national disability sector transition to an NDIS. She talked about the programs to assist in that regard. This will be a consumer driven program. It will also be important because it assists with the business arrangements, paperwork and computer programming that are so important for people in the National Disability Insurance Scheme to get the benefits they deserve and the assistance they require.

On this point, I want to pay tribute also to Peter and Linda Tully, who are local champions and advocates in my electorate for a National Disability Insurance Scheme. They have attended various fora I have put on with Minister Macklin and Parliamentary Secretary Jan McLucas. They and Fran Vicary, of Queenslanders with Disability Network, have also been tremendous supporters of a National Disability Insurance Scheme. Peter once said to me that the attitude of Premier Campbell Newman and the LNP state government made him want to scream because he was so angry in relation to it. I support this legislation. I commend it to the House.