Wyatt Roy (Longman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, the precursor to surely what will be one of the most important pieces of legislation in this place. Why is it so significant? Because a system of support for people with a disability is far more than just a simple system of support. At the core of Liberal philosophy is the tenet of freedom of choice. When people with a disability are properly supported, you open up their choices and possibilities, from the possibility of simply looking after themselves adequately to the possibility of finding greater fulfilment in life, including, perhaps, employment. So the long-term dividend of a fully resourced, universal National Disability Insurance Scheme is economic as much as social. If enough people with a disability are even somewhat freed from their daily emotional, mental and physical constraints, confidence grows and potential can be realised. Their families and carers, too, feel an easing in the burden of self-sacrifice Where possible, they, too, are free to explore wider options in the workforce or at leisure. They feel a sense of renewal and hope. They are free, perhaps for the first time, to accomplish something for themselves. And so such a scheme as the NDIS, quite aside from providing an effective safety net, actually ends up paying for itself in the long term.

As I have said in this place before, improving disability policy was one of my motivations for entering politics. One of my close mates suffers from spinal muscular atrophy. I worked as Pat's participation assistant at university, helping him attend classes. I have seen firsthand the numerous obstacles and roadblocks stemming from an overly bureaucratic disability system, a system focused on process instead of outcomes. As Australians, we like to believe that we are easygoing, accepting and all-inclusive. But the reality for many people living with disability is that it is like living in an exclusion zone, a place where there is minimal assistance and security apart from that provided by friends and family, where there are ignorance, stares and whispers and, too often, unkind remarks and treatment. The isolation and loneliness can be devastating.

In a country such as ours, with our traditions rooted in democracy and freedoms, it is our duty to wear our social conscience like a beacon. Australia's late, great and longest-serving Prime Minister, Sir Robert Menzies, founded the modern Liberal Party on this very principle. Menzies was a stronger believer in the virtues of initiative and enterprise. But his picture of society was of a free market system made all the richer by its obligations to the most vulnerable. For Menzies, social justice was an issue of rights before charity. 'The purpose of all measures of social security,' he said, 'is not only to provide citizens with some reasonable protection against misfortune but also to reconcile that provision with their proud independence and dignity as democratic citizens. The time has gone when social justice should even appear to take the form of social charity.' This is what a National Disability Insurance Scheme is all about—ensuring that every Australian has the best opportunity of a bright future, regardless of the obstacles seemingly in their way. A well-implemented NDIS should ensure that everyone with a disability will have not only the support they need for today but the support they need for a better, more dignified, and more productive life.

It would seem that members on both sides of this place agree that the need for a National Disability Insurance Scheme is inarguable. And yet, sadly, despite this cross-party support, the politicking has persisted.

The coalition is right behind the Productivity Commission recommendations for an NDIS and has pledged to work constructively with the government to implement them as soon as possible. This is a new deal and a new dawn for people with disabilities and their carers. Recognising this, the Productivity Commission states that the scheme will require a high level of consultation in its shaping. All Australians have a stake in the outcome, for it is not only our most vulnerable people today who will benefit. None of us know what disabilities could be visited upon us or our loved ones tomorrow. But the Labor Government has sought to claim the NDIS as its own, rejecting bipartisanship on a number of occasions, including the proposal by the opposition leader for a cross-party parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the scheme's implementation across what will be several terms of parliament.

The scheme is set to be launched in five sites across Australia in July this year. Stage one will impact 20,000 people with a disability, and their families and carers, in South Australia, the ACT, Tasmania, the Hunter Valley in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria. Funding to individuals and organisations will support a broadly described range of assistance, from aids and equipment to the provision of supported accommodation or personal attendant care.

Late last year, the New South Wales state government and the Commonwealth struck an intergovernmental agreement for a full rollout of the NDIS in New South Wales beyond the launch site. However, expansion of the NDIS will be dependent on the federal government negotiating and concluding further bilateral agreements with each jurisdiction in the Commonwealth. And here there remains much uncertainty. In my home state, the Commonwealth has yet to reach an agreement with the Queensland government on how the NDIS will be funded in the long term. The Queensland Liberal-National government has submitted a proposal and is to be congratulated on its persistence in seeking a deal in spite of constant misrepresentation and politicking from the Labor Party and the Prime Minister.

Indeed, Queensland is a prime example of the Prime Minister's hedging on one of the Productivity Commission's key recommendations, and that is that the federal government alone come up with the additional funding for the NDIS as a supplement to the disability funding already supplied by the states and territories. The Prime Minister has indicated an intent, in defiance of the Productivity Commission, that the states and territories should part-sponsor the extra funding required for the NDIS. In doing this, she has also failed to recognise that last year, for example, the contribution by the state government in Queensland to disability services was already $920 million. That is compared to the assistance provided by the federal government of just $255 million.

While the coalition supported the government's budget commitment of $1 billion over four years for the first stage of the NDIS, the funding once again reveals a gulf between the Productivity Commission's objectives and the Prime Minister's actions. The amount fell almost $3 billion short of what the Productivity Commission estimated would be needed in those first critical four years. The states and territories should not be strongarmed into picking up the balance. This federal Labor government has short-changed the NDIS in those four years by $3 billion. To date, there also has been little from the government in terms of how individuals will be assessed, who will be eligible and the fine detail regarding the supports and services to be delivered.

The NDIS is a once-in-a-generation reform that will unfold over the life of several parliaments. We need to work together to get this right. It demands absolute cooperation between the Commonwealth, the states and politicians of all persuasions In fact, the politics needs to be left at the door. If we do not get the implementation right we stand to lose this opportunity not only for years but quite possibly for generations. But still the Prime Minister is not forthcoming on what will happen after the trials and the real NDIS begins. The coalition, on the other hand, is committed to the Productivity Commission's target date of a full NDIS by 2018-19.

Meantime, in my electorate alone there are many examples of waste of taxpayer moneys by the Prime Minister and her federal Labor government. The interest repayment on the more than $200 billion of debt incurred by this government since 2007 is about $7 billion a year. That is almost enough to fund the NDIS. If I could choose between providing an effective safety net for our most vulnerable people and school hall rip-offs or pink batts in homes, I know which road I would take. I do not want to see this incredibly important policy, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, compromised simply because those opposite could not rein in their addiction to wasteful spending on failed programs.

Government, at the end of the day, is always about priorities. In difficult economic circumstances brought on by the mismanagement of the Labor government, it remains important that we prioritise the NDIS and work together to make it the best that it can be. Any fair-minded Australian would agree with us.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last month, I received a letter from Denise Reid, one of my constituents. Ms Reid wrote to me about her son Tim, a 21-year-old man with Down syndrome. She has given me permission to share the contents of that letter with the House today, so I want to begin by reading part of it to the House. She writes:

I receive a part payment, sixty-five dollars and fourteen cents per fortnight, with the remainder paid to my ex-husband. We share care of our son, who is 21. He has Down syndrome. From time to time, Centrelink reviews eligibility for this payment. I find this extremely frustrating. My son has an intellectual disability. There is no cure and he will never grow out of it.

She goes on to speak about him. She writes: 'Tim is a helpful, sensitive, caring and observant young man with a great sense of humour. He enjoys swimming.' She speaks about his enjoyment of rock and roll music. But then she writes:

The payment is small and sometimes I feel like giving up the bureaucratic battle. But I don't. I fill out the form and visit the GP to complete another form and wait to hear if I've been able to prove disability. That makes me sad.

The story of parents whose children have disabilities that are lifelong having to again and again prove that their children's conditions have not changed is one that you hear so often in discussions around the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

It is a particular frustration because parents of children with disabilities work as hard as any other parent in Australia, if not harder. They are constantly dealing with night wakes. They are often having to do hard, physical work. What they do not need is a system that requires them to again and again prove disability, as Ms Reid puts it.

It is with that spirit and with a recognition that past governments have not provided adequate support to people with disabilities and their carers that this government is putting in place a National Disability Insurance Scheme. It is a nation-changing reform. Today is a significant moment for the almost one in five Australians who have a disability, have a family member with a disability or are a carer for someone with a disability. The first stage of the NDIS will benefit more than 20,000 Australians later this year.

I wrote a piece for the local Canberra Chronicle newspaper just over a year ago and noted that if you feel like you have had a tough week just try chatting with a parent who is caring for a child with a profound disability. Not only will they be bleary eyed and bone tired but they might be struggling to make ends meet, sometimes contending with their own health issues. Parents of children with a disability can find themselves caring for a 40-year-old who has the mental abilities of a toddler.

Like every parent they love their children, but it is because of that love that many of them face a searing fear from that awful question: what will happen to my child when I am no longer here? The National Disability Insurance Scheme, by providing better care to people with a disability, may hopefully allay that fear. In so doing it will resolve some of the indefensible anomalies in the current system. For example, if you become a paraplegic in a car accident you are more likely to get a payout than if you fall off your roof while cleaning the gutters. If you rent a car in one state and have an accident which causes a disability then you will receive different treatment than if your car is registered in a different state. That is true even if you are renting from the same car company. 'Check the number plates,' people with a disability will sometimes say. That is how much of a patchwork our current system is.

A National Disability Insurance Scheme system will not be cheap. Its path forward will not be straightforward because we need to bundle in many of the current supports that are provided. But thanks to the leadership of the then parliamentary secretary Bill Shorten, the government commissioned a report on the National Disability Insurance Scheme from the Productivity Commission. They came back with a strong recommendation that we go ahead. That is why we are working with the states and territories to build the foundations of a National Disability Insurance Scheme.

I am really proud that under the leadership of Chief Minister Katy Gallagher, herself a former support worker for people with disabilities, the ACT did not skip a beat before signing up. Around 5,000 Canberrans with a disability will benefit when the ACT becomes one of the launch sites later this year.

I am a strong advocate of the NDIS. My parliamentary window has one thing in it—a Count Me In poster, put together by the Every Australian Counts campaign. I have spoken before in this place on the issue of disability and the importance of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. In my own electorate of Fraser, I have held two community forums on the NDIS, seeking input from Canberrans about the scheme.

In August last year, one of the forums was held with Senator Jan McLucas and the member for Canberra. We held a forum in the Griffin Centre and heard many accounts from people with disabilities and their carers. Before that, in October 2011, I held a forum in Belconnen with Daniel Kyriacou from the Every Australian Counts campaign and members of the ACT Labor Party's Community Services and Social Justice Committee. That was, again, an important conversation about what the NDIS means and how people can work with the campaign to bring about an NDIS. Those forums were well attended by carers, people with disabilities and Canberrans of goodwill, keen to see this important social reform become a reality.

Earlier that same month, I met with a group of people with disabilities and their carers at a morning tea roundtable in my electorate office to talk about what an NDIS will mean for people with disabilities and for organisations that are supporting people with disabilities. I want to thank Simon Rosenberg, Luke Jones, Bob Buckley, Kerry Bargas, Trish and Glenn Mowbray, Susan Healy, Mary Webb, Kerrie Langford, Robert Altamore, Fiona May, Eileen Jerga, Adrian Nicholls, Christina Ryan, Brooke McKail, Sally Richards and others for sharing their stories and concerns with me. They helped me to better understand the issues around a National Disability Insurance Scheme and why Australians with disabilities and their carers need this scheme so much.

I appreciated a visit to the 1RPH print handicapped radio station in the ACT. Again, they are providing an important support to people with disabilities. I have visited agencies that support people with disabilities who have spoken about the charges that they will face in adapting to an NDIS.

The Every Australian Counts website asks this simple question: which developed country would expect someone to live with two showers a week?' At the moment, the answer is Australia. We heard at the forum in the Griffin Centre with Senator McLucas the story of a Queensland woman who has to reapply every 15 days for emergency care. We heard stories about mothers of children with Down syndrome who have to constantly prove that their child's chromosomes have not changed, stories like the one with which I began my speech.

We heard a story about a child in the Northern Territory who has to hand in his hearing aids when he leaves school at the end of each day. The hearing aids have to stay at school and he has to go home without them. You cannot hear these stories in a prosperous nation like ours without feeling a sense that there is something profoundly wrong with our nation's social contract, that we need to put in place a system which shares the cost of disability support services across the community. Yes, member for Longman, that involves states and territories doing more. That is not playing politics. That is the simple reality of building a national disability insurance scheme—an NDIS that will enable people with a disability to exercise more choice and control over their lives.

This reform is on par with Labor's legacy reforms of Medicare, universal superannuation and native title. But, as the NDIS rolls out, we need to keep on asking those whom it supports: 'What do you want and how can we deliver it?' The message that I have heard in the regular forums that I have conducted is that assessments under the NDIS need to be done no more frequently than is necessary and that over-frequent assessments are enormously frustrating and at their extreme can cost carers their jobs.

As I have noted, the ACT is one of the sites leading the way in improving care for people with disabilities. In July last year, I was pleased to join the Prime Minister and Chief Minister Gallagher at Black Mountain School to discuss the issues facing people with a disability. I pay tribute to Black Mountain School for the hard work that they do. In Hackett, my own suburb, Ross Walker Lodge is a supported accommodation facility for six people with intellectual disabilities. Ross Walker preached the social gospel and was a strong advocate for the most disadvantaged people in our community. By coincidence, his life followed a similar trajectory to that of my paternal grandfather, Keith Leigh, who was also born in the 1920s and came to the Methodist ministry after World War II.

In Holt, I attended an event at Sharing Places for what is known as a DisabiliTEA morning tea. That was part of a campaign for a national disability insurance scheme. Sharing Places focuses on providing day services to adults with an intellectual disability, and I appreciated meeting with the clients and carers alike. Some of them had been working in the sector for decades and they told me it was the most rewarding work they had ever done.

In December last year, I joined the member for Canberra in announcing the three ACT based organisations that received Commonwealth funding to help people with a disability, their carers and families adjust to the options available under an NDIS. The National Rural Health Alliance, Disability Advocacy Network of Australia and ACT Disability, Aged and Carer Advocacy received nearly $300,000 in funding to get ready for the introduction of an NDIS.

Last week, the Prime Minister gave an address at the National Press Club in which she spoke about how the NDIS is part of the government's vision for a fairer nation. She noted that in July we will launch the NDIS in five locations around Australia and pointed out how the NDIS is in the Labor tradition of knowing that it is smart policy to make us a fairer nation. The Prime Minister said:

… risk is shared as well, where those hit with life's cruellest blows get the help they need.

That is what this bill will do. It sets out the framework for an NDIS and establishes important principles for a person becoming a participant in the scheme, how participants will develop personal, goal-based plans, and how reasonable and necessary supports will be guaranteed. The framework sets out how people will be able to choose how they manage their care and support.

The first stage of the scheme will, apart from the ACT, also be launched in South Australia, Tasmania, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria. I acknowledge the work of the leaders in those jurisdictions in making this happen. The principles of the framework are based on giving people with a disability individual care and support that is based on their needs, giving them real choice and control over these supports, fostering innovative services that are delivered and coordinated locally, and bringing long-term certainty to the resourcing of disability care and support. We want to give people with a disability the security that they will get what they need over their lifetime.

I want to thank and acknowledge the advocates, those working in the sector, the family members and the people with a disability who have fought for a fair system that is based on their needs and that empowers them with more choice and control. As I have acknowledged before, it was Minister Shorten who initiated much of this reform but I also want to recognise the hard work of Minister Macklin, the Prime Minister and Senator McLucas, who have worked together to make Australia's social contract a little stronger, to make us a little fairer as a nation and, hopefully, to improve the lives of thousands of Australians with a disability and their families and carers.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support the NDIS. I have always supported the NDIS. During the 2010 campaign, the only time all four candidates came together was in a forum for the disability sector. To hear stories of people who have lived their lives with a disability is one thing, to hear stories of people who have had disability thrust upon them is another and to hear stories of family members who care for people with a disability is another level of commitment that I am positive I could never emulate. For all those reasons I support the NDIS. For all those people I support the NDIS.

As Tony Abbott has often said, it is an idea whose time has come. Like the member for Fraser, I congratulate the former parliamentary secretary, Bill Shorten, for making this an issue once again. But, if we miss it this time and do not implement a strategy which is (a) effective and (b) sustainable, we will be letting down our country and future generations of all Australians.

For me, we seem to have centred the debate on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012 on the people who already know what goes on in the system. We have centred the debate on the people who are already in the system, and we seem to be trying to convince them that the NDIS is a good thing. Come on people: stop wasting time! If we do anything at all for people with a disability they will lap it up—especially in rural and regional areas. What they want is for all of us to get the plan together and get it started.

I was contacted by disability campaigner Scott Stidston towards the end of last year. He told me he wanted me to support the introduction of legislation for the NDIS. I said I would look at what the government was proposing and would support the meritorious parts. Scott gave me such a hard time and told me in no uncertain terms what he thought of that statement. I had to tell him I would support the NDIS if it was, as I said earlier, effective and sustainable. I would not and could not support something which would leave people, already in a bad situation, in a worse position.

I may be paraphrasing Scott, but he said to me that there was no way he could be in a worse position. He is in a wheelchair in Ayr, 85 kilometres south of Townsville. His body hurts every day. His wife's body hurts every day as she has to do everything for him and lift him all the time. His heart hurts every day because she never signed up to do this for him. He wants to take some pressure off her. He has the disability, but he wants the NDIS for her. He wants the NDIS for all the people who live with a disability in a regional or rural area. We need to be proud that we can provide a service to people with a disability whether they live in Chatswood or Charters Towers, Toorak or Townsville. We need to treat people with equality across the country.

I have a mate who lives in Townsville. He is a good bloke with a good sense of humour. But he has a disability and, when you talk about support for disability, he gets serious. He told me that his mum still has to wash him every day. He is a man—a strong man who has his mum see and wash his whole body every day. He wants the NDIS so he can have some support which is very personal to him. These are the things the NDIS should do.

I say again: I will not support anything which leaves the very people in most need worse off. At the moment, the legislation before us is powder-puff light. The government has politicised the NDIS, first by flat-out refusing the coalition's numerous offers of bipartisanship on an NDIS development and implementation committee, and then by preaching that the NDIS is the embodiment of, in some way, quintessentially Labor values. We need to step away from this sort of language and these sorts of actions. We need to roll up our sleeves and get this done. If we try to make this a political football, we will end up with nothing. I have often said back home in Townsville that my worst fear for the NDIS is that one day I will be walking down my street and see a bloke mowing his lawn in an NDIS polo shirt and no-one will know what it stood for. We have this opportunity and we must work cooperatively.

Kevin Andrews visited my electorate last year. The member for Menzies was there to hold a series of forums around families and the NDIS. At our disability forum, Garth Brimelow took the microphone and asked everyone in the room to stand up. He then asked us to look at those still sitting. His message was very simple: get the thing done and get it done quickly. He has on more than one occasion offered to come to Canberra, wheel in here and address us all. I am not sure if this chamber is ready for the language he may use, but none would dispute his passion for this cause.

Garth was hurt in a work accident. He has been in a wheelchair ever since. He has been in pain ever since. But he is more active than most people in my community. Quite apart from making an absolute nuisance of himself in my office, he can be seen at every North Queensland Cowboys home game, selling doubles or cooking a barbecue as part of the Cowboys Supporters Team and community fund. He is a mentor to just about every new entrant to the disability sector. He has a way about him which is both engaging and challenging to people. He will spend time with the injured person and their family. He will walk the family through the system with which they are about to do battle—and I do not use that word lightly. He will talk to the injured person about the life they can lead, if they want. He is on the phone all the time. When he is not, he is driving around in his big red Jeep going to another fundraiser or to help another person or to smack another politician around the back of the head.

I use Garth as an example of many people in my community. Indeed, Garth is in all our communities. He exists in different forms and different genders, but he is there in every community. We all have these people who tell us what should be done. Because there are problems ahead, we must have the best advice we can get, not just from academics but from people already dealing with the system.

It is very tough for any person inside the disability sector, and we all know that. To get the support you need, you have to prove how badly hurt the person is. The current system forces parents and carers to give away jobs and put their own lives aside to help the people they love so much, so they paint the picture of their circumstances negatively. I love my children and I will tell anyone who will listen just how wonderful they are. It is natural for any parent. But to get support from the disability sector, carers must put down in writing just how hard it is for them to cope with someone with a disability, how badly their child or loved one is disabled and how much inconvenience they suffer because of that disability. If they do not, they will miss out on that support. As the member for McMillan said earlier, they will miss out on those extra hours. And they have to make the person they love complicit in this process. As a parent of three healthy and happy people, that is the most upsetting thing I have encountered. It must stop.

We must have the conversations that matter. We have to decide who is in and who is not. At the moment, the boundaries are, probably by necessity, broad and vague, but there will come a time when we will have to draw a line in the sand. We have to have the conversation as to where that line will be drawn. We have to have the conversation about what we say to people who are just on the wrong side of that line. As with the current disability system, there are going to be cracks through which people will fall. Currently the cracks are very large and high in number. We have to reduce the number of cracks and we have to narrow the remaining cracks down. But we have to continually acknowledge that there will always be exceptions to the rules. There will always be grey areas. There will always be people, real people with real problems, coming to us with another example of something we might have missed. We have to have, as part of the NDIS, quick responses to these situations. We need to have the discussion about who qualifies.

I have a mate who suffers terribly with agoraphobia, depression and chronic pain. But he can walk, so is he covered? We heard the member for Fraser talk about people with Down syndrome. Are they covered? I have had someone actually say to me that they were wondering if their spectacles would be covered, 'because partial blindness could be considered a disability'. Now, while that is an extreme example, it does illustrate that we have a long way to go here.

We cannot talk about the NDIS without talking about funding, and you cannot talk about funding without talking about sustainable funding. I was pleased and proud to hear Andrew Robb state, on behalf of the coalition, that the NDIS is a priority for the coalition. Government is about priorities. If you want to afford something, you will. With that statement, the shadow finance minister stated that we would make this work, and I will do everything I can to ensure that this is a reality in line with the timetable.

I was disappointed that the trial announced by the government was not funded to the amount recommended by the Productivity Commission. I was disappointed with the way the Prime Minister brought it to a head with the state premiers. I could go on about debt and deficit, but I would be falling into the trap of making political points, and I will be belted by the likes of Scott and Garth and everyone in North Queensland when I go back home, for saying such things.

We need to decide how this will be funded in perpetuity. I was invited to an Every Australian Counts morning tea just after I was elected. I was there with members of the Townsville City Council and then state members of parliament. We were asked to sign our pledge of support for the NDIS. All the councillors signed away and put their names up on the board, as did the local state member. I put my name up on the board and said I supported it, but I made the point that no decision on how it was to be funded had been made. I posed the question that if it was to be funded by a levy on the council rates, would the councillors be so supportive? I asked, if it was to be funded through a levy collected on car registrations, would the state members be so supportive? I doubt very much that either of these are an option but, again, it does illustrate that we have to be clear, concise, and very much up-front about the cost and how it will be sustained. And it must be stated that it is our job to come up with this and to sell it to the people who will be paying for it.

If there was ever a chance to show the people of Australia that the Federation model is not broken, it is this NDIS. If there was ever a chance for the states to show that they still matter, it is this NDIS. If there was ever a chance for the federal government to show it can lead the country in things that matter, it is the NDIS. I understand that the way the PM put it to the state premiers was an open invitation to be defensive. I understand that the way the PM put it to the states was almost diametrically opposed to what the Productivity Commission proposed and recommended. I understand that the states are by far and away the largest providers of services to the disability sector. But I do not think I would be alone in saying that this whole thing could have been better handled. It would seem to many to be another example of politics getting in the way of good policy. Try making political points using the NDIS to Garth Brimelow or Scott Stidson; I dare anyone.

We need to get the NDIS agreed to by all Australians. Too many Australians do not know just how close they are to being a part of this system. Too many Australians think that disability is only for those born that way. Too many Australians do not understand that you are only one accident away from having you mum or wife wipe your backside for the rest of your life. We need to make them understand that this is for all Australians. The NDIS matters to all of us. The sooner we get that message out to football clubs, athletics clubs, netball clubs, swimming clubs, BMX and motor bike clubs, chess clubs and art societies, the better off we will be—not just to hospitals and the people already in the system; we need all Australians to understand that every Australian counts.

Last year I did the Chatterbox Challenge for a series of charities. For a day, I had to be quiet; I could not speak. I raised over $3,000. People were just happy for the peace! At any time, I could have spoken, and I could have stood up. So what does it actually prove? Yes, it raises some valuable money. Yes, it might raise some awareness. But at any stage you can stand up. Garth Brimelow would do anything, and Scott Stidson would do anything, to be able to walk again and to take care of themselves. So all that stuff must be there.

We can do this. To be a member of a nation's parliament that delivers the world's first National Disability Insurance Scheme would be a great personal achievement, but it would pale into insignificance compared with what it means to someone who lives their life inside the disability system. We have a chance to make a difference, and I think what we all have to do is take a step back and work together. We can make this happen, and we can make it happen now. I thank the House.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. I commend the member for Herbert, particularly for the passion in his speech, although I did not hear all of the speech. But I do want to point out two things to him. The first—and this might have been a slip of the tongue—is that he said that the states are the largest providers for people with disabilities. Obviously, as a local member he would recognise that it is actually the NGOs who provide the services; the states merely pass on the money, primarily. And I am sure some of the NGOs he mentioned are actually looking after the people with disabilities. That is why, as he said, this is a great opportunity. The local NGOs, the states and the federal government have the ability to work together.

The second is that, as he rightly pointed out, good government is about making sure you have the right priorities, and I would ask him to ask the Premier of Queensland, Campbell Newman, to make this much more of a priority. And perhaps the member for Herbert could revisit the state member who signed the NDIS pledge and say, 'Perhaps it might be a time to look at some of the priorities; rather than building a new tower of offices for politicians down in the middle of Brisbane, perhaps we could look at the NDIS scheme, which will benefit all of Queensland.' I would ask him to do that, because obviously Queensland is the odd state out in that it does not have a trial site, and I would suggest that that is an opportunity missed. I do not like to praise our Victorians—and I do not think there are any in the chamber, apart from Deputy Speaker Vamvakinou!—but the reality is that Victoria gets it much better. They spend $10 on someone with a disability, compared with a Queenslander's $7. And that is under Labor, Liberal and National Party governments, so I am not making a political point. It is an empirical fact that Queensland needs to lift its game more than any other state, especially compared with Victoria, which does it so much better.

In 2011 the Productivity Commission reported on the disability supports available in Australia for the federal government, as touched on by the previous speaker. That report revealed that the needs of people across Australia with disability, as well as the needs of their families and carers, were unmet. The Gillard Labor government knew immediately that widespread action had to be taken to remedy this distressing situation. So, on 3 December 2012 I, like many politicians around Australia, had the pleasure of going out to local community workers to talk about the International Day of People with Disability. The NDIS was a topic on everybody's lips. Luckily for me I went out to the Endeavour Foundation to look at some of the great work they do. Endeavour is one of Australia's largest non-government disability service providers, supporting more than 3,350 people with a disability across 230 locations in Australia. It is just one of the many disability service organisations I am proud to have in my electorate, and I will mention some of the others later.

The Endeavour Foundation is a great supporter of giving people with disability a right to have control over the decisions that affect their lives. It might have started with a different brief, as so many of these charities did—more of a nanny-state sort of brief—but now it has much more of a partnership with people who have disabilities and their carers. They support funding for those who provide assistance to people with disability, their families and their carers. It was a great opportunity for me to tour the factory that the Endeavour Foundation members work in and to look at the individual jobs the people do, and the pride they have in doing them. It is an assembly-line process, basically. Some people with severe intellectual disabilities are able to contribute to the production line. Others, with disabilities that do not hamper them as much, supervise. It is a great process.

It was great to see the dignity and the joy that came with people working together in a team, contributing and making money. Obviously, they were being paid at different rates depending on what they contributed. It was great to see the dignity that pervaded the room. I thank the Endeavour Foundation for the great work they do. That model is basically what the National Disability Insurance Scheme is about. It is about making sure that people have dignity and have as much control as possible in their lives to make sure that they have control over the decisions that affect their lives.

Just last week I met with Deaf Services Queensland in Moorooka to discuss future opportunities and some of the challenges that their members face. Like many other disability service organisations, sadly, they are struggling to fund their services. They have taken a few hits in terms of cuts from the state government, and the important services that Deaf Services Queensland provide and the skills that they have acquired over the years might get lost or left behind. My electorate of Moreton is home to many peak disability bodies, including Multicap, which I am proud to say is actually doing some work in the NDIS pilot project in Eight Mile Plains. There is also Westside Community Services and the Kyabra Community Association. The Moreton electorate is also serviced by other great organisations that include Montrose Access, Contact Inc., Huntingtons Queensland, Spinal Injuries Association and many, many others. They are groups that passionately advocate for the people with disability they represent.

The Gillard government is determined to provide support for those who need it most and is working hard in some tough discussions with the state and territory governments to achieve the level of care that Australians need. In my home state of Queensland, members of my community are struggling to make ends meet under the current disability support legislation and arrangements as are those of my colleagues. As I said, it is $7 that every person with a disability receives in Queensland, compared with the $10 that someone in Victoria receives. Sadly, at the moment, Premier Newman is leaving fellow Australians behind and falling short by $300 million of funding for the NDIS that would have been available.

Raising awareness about the rights of people with disability has grown significantly since the United Nations introduced its Declaration of the Rights of Disabled Persons in 1974. How much things have changed since then. I am proud to be part of the government that, in 2008, sanctioned with 111 other countries the convention recognising the equal rights of all people with disabilities to live in the community, to have access to a range of in-home, residential and other community support services necessary to support living and, importantly, inclusion in the community and to prevent isolation or segregation from the community. I am proud to be standing on this side of the House that will recognise these opportunities for people with disability by supporting and delivering the NDIS, which will slowly become a reality for thousands of Australians.

The major reforms in the NDIS will give people with disability more control and choice over their care and support irrespective of where they live in Australia, which at the moment is a bit of a lottery, or the other lottery associated with how they acquired their disability. This important legislative reform is about developing innovative services that are delivered on a local level, and I know the local disability service organisations are looking forward to the process and will be proud to implement this historic legislation.

I am going to finish by touching on the word 'dignity' and I want to mention a gentleman by the name of Kevin Cox who comes from my home town. I see that there is an article in Mamamia today saying, 'We need to talk about Kevin'. I am going to mention two Kevins who I was lucky enough to go to dinner with at the convention centre in Queensland a few years back. It was when former Prime Minister Rudd was kind enough to take me to the ACTU dinner one night—although, you can tell the ACTU is a Victorian organisation, because they organised the dinner to be on the night of a state of origin event! Only Victorians would do that in Queensland! But we were proud to have the dinner there, so I flew up on the government jet with former Prime Minister Rudd and went to the convention centre. We came in from the airport in the government car.

I sat down at my table and turned around, and right behind me was a gentleman by the name of Kevin Cox. He is in a wheelchair, because he had a Rugby League accident, which I remember seeing in my home town of St George. Kevin had been a shearer, and I think he was working in the banking industry when the accident occurred. I remember where I was standing—I think it was in 1979—and seeing the accident. He was a simple country bloke from St George, and he ended up in a wheelchair and became more and more active in disability rights. In fact, when Wayne Goss was premier and Kevin Rudd was one of his major advisors, the government decided to build a convention centre. So, they built this fantastic convention centre, which I would commend to anyone—but the only thing is, they did not put in access for people with disabilities. They said, 'Well, we've got all these fantastic steps; you can just go around the back and go up in the service entrance.' And Kevin Cox, this country bloke from St George, said: 'In the 1980s, that's not right. We should do something more. We don't need to go in through the kitchen entrance; we're the same as everybody else.' He took on the government and won.

So there I was at that dinner with my Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and right next to me was Kevin Cox. So there were these two Kevins. Here was me, this bloke from St George, and there was Kevin Cox, this other bloke from St George. We had ended up there, and we were talking to each other, saying: 'How did this happen? How did we end up here at the convention centre?'—the very convention centre which Kevin made sure had improved access. It was a tale of two Kevins! I am proud to say that now Kevin Cox, the shearer and bank worker from St George, is the anti-discrimination commissioner in Queensland, standing up for all Queenslanders with disabilities.

I just think of what the NDIS will do to make sure that every Kevin Cox has an opportunity to take control of their life, because not everyone will have the courage of Kevin Cox to stand up to a state government—a Labor government—and say, 'That's not right'. But the NDIS will hopefully set up a scheme that will promote such opportunities. I commend the legislation to the House.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. This bill establishes the framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. I emphatically support the rollout of the NDIS and today's bills, should they receive appropriate scrutiny through the committee process. However, I do note that there remain concerns with the timetable of the rollout of the NDIS.

At present, approximately four million Australians have a disability. The NDIS truly is a once-in-a-generation reform to deliver a better deal for people with a disability, their carers and their families. In fact, since this bill's introduction, an agreement between the New South Wales and federal governments has been reached for a full statewide rollout by 2018, and the Queensland government has put forward a constructive plan to begin the rollout in Queensland. I welcome the progress that has been made so far, which continues with the introduction of this bill.

In setting up the agency, the NDIS will be able to be launched and operated by the agency at five sites across Australia from July 2013. Legislative requirements will be required to establish the mechanics of this agency, such as eligibility criteria and assessment tools. I understand that, practically speaking, most funding for NDIS participants will be in the form of individual support packages, but there may also be block funding for some entities to support people with a disability. In addition, the agency may provide general support for people with a disability who are not participants in the NDIS, through information, coordination and referral activities. There will also be personal planning provisions to emphasise a person-centred and self-directed approach. A plan must include a statement of participant goals and aspirations prepared by the participant, and a statement of participant supports to be approved by the agency.

These details are mostly vague at this stage, and I want to make sure that the implementation of the NDIS is done properly and efficiently. In total, there are three components: this NDIS bill, the NDIS rules, and the specific operating guidelines for the NDIS Launch Transition Agency.

Although the government did release a discussion paper late last year, neither the NDIS nor the operating guidelines of the agency have been released. The full details of how the NDIS will operate in practice will be further examined by the Senate Community Affairs Committee, which will report on 12 March 2013. I note that so far there have been approximately 613 submissions from organisations and individuals to the inquiry, which reflects the genuine and serious interest in making sure we get this right.

This is the first legislative step in providing funding to help people with disabilities participate more fully in social and economic life in Australia. It is a step in the right direction, and I know it is one that is wholeheartedly supported by the constituents of Ryan. Parents of the Glenleighden School, which caters for children with primary language disorder, had their support taken away by this federal government, and despite continuing representations they keep being knocked back. There are currently more than 80 students at the Glenleighden School, who suffer from primary language disorder, autism and other learning disorders, or a combination thereof.

The parents and medical specialists involved with primary language disorder have spent decades trying to gain recognition of even the correct terminology for the disorder in the medical community, let alone trying to get the government to recognise the severity with which it affects children and the symptoms that manifest. What we do know is that the families and children face great uncertainties and vagaries due to the obscure nature of PLD and that therefore there can be great difficulty in reaching a diagnosis of their child's disability. Unfortunately, misdiagnosis of a child with primary language disorder can even preclude parents investigating further and finding out about the great work and support the Glenleighden School provides, further adding to the pain of trying to help their children.

Children with PLD have the best chance in life if they receive treatment for their condition as early as possible. Without intervention there are profound long-term implications for affected individuals in terms of gaining an education and employment, leaving them feeling isolated and despondent and at a high risk of developing depressive and anxiety disorders.

In December 2012 I attended the Glenleighden School Showcase, which was a celebration of the work of the staff, parents and children and their continued success throughout the year. Parents have told me of the difficulties they face every day with their children—communication problems and the associated frustration and isolation—and how they are trying to overcome their challenges as best they can.

With the rollout of the NDIS, my sincere hope is that as a society we can shine a spotlight on the problems that families and children with disabilities face—and shine a spotlight on primary language disorder and other paediatric and adolescent disorders.

Of course, primary language disorder is but one challenge that can strike Australians. I have previously mentioned in this House constituents telling me how tough it is to live with multiple sclerosis, to have a wife with polio or a child with cerebral palsy, autism or speech-language impairment, to name just some examples.

Karyn and Gerard Reardon of Toowong have a son, Flyn, who has a rare chromosome mutation disorder with symptomatic effects similar to trisomy-21 and Turner syndrome. Flyn has been required to see a variety of specialists since birth, including paediatric physiotherapists, speech pathologists and occupational therapists. The services they can currently access are scattered across federal and state programs, or through state education. This creates unnecessary confusion for Karyn and Gerard and means that Australian children with disabilities do not receive the support they deserve. The Reardon family sees hope in the rollout of the NDIS for the future ongoing treatment of their child.

In education, it remains the case that there are no consistent eligibility criteria across Australian states and territories for children to access specialised educational resources. At the last election, the coalition proposed a $20,000 education card that could be used across state and territory jurisdictions to ensure that children at the outset have access to educational resources if they have a disability, and to ensure that if families have to or choose to move interstate there will not be a disruption to their education.

For all young people, when a disability such as paraplegia or quadriplegia strikes, they are often left with minimal support, relying on whatever community organisation is able to help. Youngcare has estimated that 7,500 young Australians with full-time care needs are currently living in aged care facilities due to the lack of alternatives, with more than 700,000 young Australians being cared for at home by family and friends.

For Youngcare, the NDIS does offer hope. However, they want to ensure that the NDIS is 'not just an injection of more money into a thoroughly broken, fragmented, unfair, inefficient and useless system'. In particular, young people in aged care accommodation are there simply because the resources do not exist to build alternative centres. It is a concern that, owing to the very large costs involved in infrastructure, as opposed to specific services that are also required, it will be difficult for any disability insurance scheme to truly assist the 7,500 young Australians currently in care.

Furthermore, Australians with disabilities face the very frightening situation that when they turn 65 the access they have to appropriate support through a Home and Community Care package will be reduced. This is because funding and management of the HACC package changes from their state government to the federal Department of Health and Ageing, and there is not necessarily consistency between the two. These problems further illustrate that no two states provide the same services. If you have a disability and you cross a state border there is no certainty about whether you will be better or worse off.

This highlights the crucial importance of the NDIS being a national program. The NDIS legislation does address this problem insofar as participants can be eligible if they have acquired their disability prior to the age of 65. However, those who acquire a disability after the age of 65 are left out and responsibility falls to the aged care sector. This issue is currently being examined through the Senate Community Affairs Committee inquiry into this bill. The committee has received submissions from many groups, all very concerned about not including people who acquire a disability over the age of 65.

Vision 2020 Australia, which represents over 60 organisations, particularly is concerned about this provision and say in their submission:

Vision 2020 Australia rejects the exclusion to the NDIS for people aged 65 years or over … and seeks guarantees that mechanisms will be established ensuring that all people who are blind or have functional vision loss will have access to equitable disability services and support and will not be disadvantaged on the basis of their age.

Vision 2020 Australia is rightly concerned that over 70 per cent of people who experience vision loss are aged 70 and above, based on figures from Access Economics. They therefore believe that the cut-off at age 65 does meet the equity and fairness test in the National Disability Strategy, and I share those concerns.

One of the major roadblocks to implementing the NDIS is the debt and deficit that successive Labor governments have run since 2008. The total debt of $172 billion accumulated so far has already compromised the ability of the Labor government to fund the NDIS scheme as the Productivity Commission would have liked. The coalition emphatically supported the government's commitment of $1 billion in the last federal budget; however, it is lamentable that this funding falls short of the Productivity Commission's estimates by $2.9 billion.

In Mitchelton, Peta Pitcher runs a childcare centre that, above and beyond its normal long-day-care program, offers support programs for families with disabilities, including children with autism. The childcare centre was previously able to provide inclusion support programs, but even with government subsidies Peta provides these programs at a loss of approximately $8,000 per child each year.

Previously, the Mitchelton Childcare Centre and others in Ryan have included children with a disability in the 'main' room and not just as stand-alone extra care. In December, that centre and others were told that if they included a child with a disability in the 'main' room they would no longer be eligible for funding under the Inclusion and Professional Support Program, funding that was available since 2008. I was told of one centre that might have to cut places for five children with a disability.

This story highlights the two-steps-forward, one-step-back approach of this current government. While they have highlighted the $1 billion they have given to NDIS so far, other programs like the Inclusion Support Subsidy have been affected by budget cuts. This apparent confusion arises partly because the federal government at this stage does not know which disability policies are working and which are not, according to the Council of Australian Government Reform Council's 2009-10 performance report into the National Disability Agreement.

Consequently, this budget shortfall has already impacted on the delivery timetable, as indicated by the Productivity Commission. The budget shortfall has the potential to compromise the ability of future governments to improve support for Australians with a disability and their carers.

The coalition has maintained its support for the NDIS and it is important we all work together to get this right. The coalition has proposed the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee chaired by both sides of politics to oversee its implementation. This would not only provide a mechanism for bipartisanship but would also serve as a forum where questions of design, implementation timetable, eligibility and funding model could be raised and worked through. To date, the Prime Minister has rejected our suggestion and, disappointingly, in the Senate in June the government and the Greens voted against the establishment of the committee. Unfortunately, to date there has been little detail provided by the government as to how individuals will be assessed, who will be eligible and what supports and services will be provided.

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 critical and it is to be hoped that they have the benefit of the NDIS rules and the operating guidelines for the agency before they conclude their work.

In the absence of these other two elements it is difficult to determine if further amendments will be required to this legislation.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a program supported widely across my electorate in Ryan, and indeed across Australia. It has laudable aims to truly make a difference for the most vulnerable in our community, and everyone in this House wants to ensure that we roll out the NDIS appropriately and efficiently to give hope to Australians with disability and their families. I look forward to the Senate committee's inquiry to sort out any issues with this bill and I support today's bill as one step further along the road towards a full rollout of the NDIS.

I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the wonderful volunteers in our community who act as carers to a family member or to a family friend. They are the unsung heroes in this story. They are the ones who volunteer 24/7—around the clock. They do not get special statues built for them. They do not get special recognition but they are the ones who devote their lives, and I pay tribute to all those volunteers in this sector.

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

I am very pleased today to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. All Australians should have the opportunity to realise their potential, including those who live with a disability. All Australians should have a choice and control over their own lives. And all Australians should have the opportunity to live with dignity and with as much independence as possible. However, sadly, that has not been the experience for many of our citizens living with a profound disability.

In a modern society such as Australia, built on the idea of a fair go, we cannot and should not tolerate that those living with a disability continue to be second-class citizens. It is for this reason that the government has sought to reform the way disability services are provided in this country. The current system of disability care and support is not doing enough for Australians with disabilities, their families or their carers. The government is committed to delivering an NDIS because it will mean more choice and more control, more independence and more opportunities for people with a disability to be involved in school, work and community life.

The reality is that we never know what challenges life will throw at us or at our loved ones. But we do know that on average an Australian is diagnosed with a significant disability every 30 minutes. An NDIS will give all Australian families peace of mind to know that if they or a loved one is born with, or acquires, a disability through illness, injury or accident, they will get the helping hand they need to live the life they want.

The NDIS is our government's response to the Productivity Commission 2011 report, Disability care and support, which found the current system to be unfair, unfunded, fragmented and inefficient. As a government we knew that this commission's findings could not be ignored. We have been working towards the delivery of the NDIS and a fairer go for all Australians ever since.

The bill outlines how the NDIS will operate. It covers key areas, including principles, becoming an NDIS participant, personal planning for support, earlier intervention requirements and administration. The NDIS Advisory Group and NDIS expert groups have provided valuable technical advice on the design of key elements of the scheme, including eligibility and assessment, quality safeguards and standards, and a national approach to choice.

The government recognises that nobody knows what people with a disability have to go through more than carers, families and those living with a disability. Therefore, we have funded the National Disability and Carer Alliance so that we can directly communicate with the key stakeholders—the people living with a disability and their families—to ensure that they have valuable input into the design and implementation of the NDIS.

This is just one of the many avenues the government has pursued in order to make the consultation around this bill very wide and very sound. Indeed, in November last year I had the pleasure of hosting a forum in my electorate that was attended by Minister Macklin. It was great to hear feedback from local residents with a disability and their families, friends and carers about their current experiences. It also gave us the opportunity to discuss how the NDIS will work—how it will deliver services on the ground. Many local residents in my electorate have been calling out for an NDIS and look forward to having an ongoing dialogue.

One of the participants who has been a long-term advocate for the NDIS is Linda McGarvey. Linda has been working extremely hard to make sure those with a disability are treated equitably. Linda has previously worked in special education and saw how these issues with service delivery were affecting those most in need, especially our young children. But she said it was not until she was directly affected after losing her leg through infection that disability reform became personal. Linda said she is looking forward to the NDIS giving people with a disability and their carers more control over services available to them and creating equity in services no matter how a disability was attained. Linda said it is not a charitable handout but rather insurance for issues that are often out of the control of the person. She said people with a disability have great things to offer the community and the NDIS will make sure that those with a disability are being treated equitably and, indeed, can achieve their potential.

The bill also establishes the framework for the NDIS and the NDIS Launch Transition Agency and will allow for the scheme to be launched in five trial sites across the country in July of this year, a year ahead of the timetable set down by the Productivity Commission. The reason we are doing this is that this government knows that this reform is too important to wait. The trial is being implemented because the government wants to make sure that we get this reform right so that we can build an NDIS that is sustainable over the long term for people with a disability and their families and carers. Launching the scheme in selected locations will provide us with valuable experience and evidence to inform its further implementation.

Importantly, I am pleased that our government is working through COAG with the states and territories to deliver a full NDIS around the country, because currently the states and territories are responsible for disability care and support. The Commonwealth welcomes the commitment and contributions already made by the state and territory governments, and we will continue to work together to share the responsibility for this important reform. I am particularly pleased about the current cooperation between the federal government and the South Australian government, which will see the NDIS brought to around 4,600 South Australian children by mid-2014.

In addition to delivering the scheme, the agency will perform a range of important functions across a range of areas. It will be responsible for managing the financial sustainability of the scheme, building community awareness about disability and undertaking key research about disability and social contributors to disability. The government has also followed through on the Productivity Commission's recommendation that the agency be established as a body under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997, because we recognise the need to take an insurance approach to this scheme. It is important that this insurance approach to disability care and support will not be subject to the cycle of budgets and elections, which could undermine its continued effectiveness. An insurance approach will also mean that we invest in activities that will give the best possible outcomes for people with disability over their whole life, and early intervention is one of those critical areas.

Our government recognises the need for excellent governance and accountability in this scheme. That is why the agency will be overseen by a board of experts with extensive experience in the provision or use of disability services, financial management, governance and the operation of insurance schemes. Importantly, there will also be an advisory council made up of people with real, lived experience of disability and caring to make sure the scheme is delivering the change that it was designed to deliver. To ensure accountability to governments, a ministerial council will be established, representing all state and territory governments. We have also included special provisions for the independent review of the new act to examine its operation during its first two years.

Once the trial period has ended, the government will be ready to deliver an NDIS that truly is national, covering people with disability all around the country. The NDIS has at its core a focus on the people and ensuring that support that is delivered is designed to meet the needs of individuals and their families. Personalised plans mean that we can ensure that people with a disability can live a fulfilling life and reach their potential.

This plan may be to support them in the present, but individual support could also be to improve one's life in the future.

This would include early intervention that could improve functioning, for example, for people with autism, acquired brain injury, cerebral palsy or sensory impairments and those for whom early intervention could delay or lessen a decline in functioning, like those with multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's disease. This concept of early intervention is an important principle—that is, an NDIS is not just about helping those with a disability today but helping those who have that disability well into the future.

Early intervention services have already begun to be rolled out for some disabilities, and I have to say the Australian government's Better Start for Children with Disability has been welcomed in my electorate. That scheme enables children under the age of six who have been diagnosed with a range of impairments—such as autism, cerebral palsy, Down syndrome and a number of other disabilities—to have access to early-intervention services. This has been welcomed by so many of my constituents who have used this program. But, if we are going to ensure that all Australians with disabilities get the efficient, personalised care they need, and the early intervention they require, then we need the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Importantly, it means that we are not just helping people to receive medical care. It is also important that the NDIS will deliver tools and services that individuals need to participate in economic and social life to the best of their ability.

Any meaningful reform to disability services must also consider support for carers. The NDIS does recognise the crucial role that families play in the day-to-day lives of people with a disability. The government knows we need to ensure that we support carers and recognise the important role they play—to really nurture carers is incredibly important.

An NDIS will move away from the crisis model where families only receive support if they are unable to continue in their capacity as carers. The government does not want carers to have to wait until there are no other options. Instead, the new system will work with families before they reach crisis point to make sure that invaluable care is provided and can be sustained.

The long-term nature of the support provided by the NDIS is also an important part of giving carers peace of mind. I could not say how many times I have had this conversation with carers in my electorate, who are never complaining about the work they do as carers but are saying that they are worried about what will happen if they are no longer there and able to provide care for their loved one. I have seen the anxiety that this creates so many times. It is of real concern to so many of my constituents. I believe that is another reason why the NDIS is just so important: to give peace of mind to carers out there and for them to know that, if they are no longer able to care for their loved ones, they will be supported and cared for.

I need to make the point here that carers do an amazing job. I see it in my electorate every day. I was pleased to visit the Southern Carers Conference in late November last year, where I got to talk directly to so many different carers and hear firsthand about their concerns and about some of the problems they are currently experiencing. We also heard of some of the things that are going well. We also talked about a number of things they would like to see when it comes to an NDIS. I am very pleased that this government has developed a National Carers Strategy, and we need to continue this to support carers and to really provide the opportunity for them to also enjoy all aspects of their lives, including the chance to fully participate in work, in their communities and in family life.

In conclusion, we have seen under this government an increase in funding support to people with disabilities. I have heard from the other side a lot of criticism. I might just note for the House that, while the coalition were in government, they indexed money for disability services by only 1.8 per cent, which was a lot less than the CPI. I think that is important to note. This government has provided increased funding to disability services, particularly to improve specialist disability services, supported accommodation, and targeted support and respite; but the NDIS is the game-changer when it comes to disability support.

Labor has always been involved in giving people the opportunity to get ahead and in making sure no one gets left behind. That is what we did when we introduced the age pension, Medicare, superannuation and paid parental leave and that is what we are doing now with the National Disability Insurance Scheme. This is a critical piece of legislation that will go a long way towards ensuring that people with a disability and their families really get what they deserve, get the support they deserve and get to live a fulfilling life. I commend the bill to the House.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, which sets out the framework of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. In the brief time available to me I want to make three points: firstly, that the impact of disability on the lives of many Australians and their families is powerful and pervasive; secondly, that the National Disability Insurance Scheme is an idea which is supported by the coalition; and, thirdly, there is a huge gulf between concept and execution. Based upon this government's track record, there are serious grounds to be concerned about how this gulf is going to be filled.

Let me turn firstly to the proposition that the impact of disability on the lives of many Australian families is a powerful and pervasive one. As a member of parliament, your eyes get opened very quickly to this impact and to the number of people who are living with disability. Indeed, within weeks of being preselected as the Liberal candidate for Bradfield in 2009, I was approached by an energetic group of parents from the wonderful St Lucy's School in Wahroonga led by Karen and Peter Hickmott, who came to talk to me about their children and the impact on them and their families of the disabilities that their children suffer from. They also spoke to me about the outstanding work done by St Lucy's School in Wahroonga—until recently under the very capable leadership Jo Karaolis. I have visited that school on a number of occasions and have been extremely impressed by the work they do for children with disabilities and the focus they have not on the disabilities of those children but on their capacities and their potential. I could say similar things about the many other fine schools in my electorate which serve children with disabilities such as St Edmund's School in Wahroonga, which serves high school aged children; Sir Eric Woodward School in St Ives; and Cromehurst School in Lindfield. It has been a privilege to visit each of these schools and to learn something about the work they do.

I have also had the privilege of spending some time with another wonderful organisation in my electorate, Studio ARTES in Hornsby. This organisation has a focus on adults with disabilities. The very dynamic convenor of this organisation, Wendy Escort, explained to me that what she learnt, as many people discover, is that while there are extensive services for children with disabilities, once you get to the age of 18 it becomes a lot more ad hoc and there is a real gap. Wendy and other caring people set out to fill that gap and have created this wonderful service for adults with disabilities. Some of the clients of Studio ARTES include Daniel Bodimeade, Julia Francis, Matthew Elliot and Oliver House, and Studio ARTES convenors and clients came to parliament House just last year to explain to a range of parliamentarians and parliamentary advisers the work that is done by that service and the impact on the lives of the clients of Studio ARTES and their families of the disabilities they face.

I also want to mention Adam Johnson, who was a member of the Liberal Party locally and who suffers from a disability which confines him to a wheelchair. Adam has done excellent work in this area and indeed has made many submissions drawing on his legal skills and training. I would like to mention organisations like Sunshine Home, which held an NDIS related function at its facility in St Ives, and Ability Options in Hornsby, which also held an NDIS related function.

I would like to mention a significant number of my constituents who have come to meet with me to explain to me and to educate me just a little bit about the impact on them of having a disabled child. I want to mention Heather and Roger Parkes and their daughter Georgina; Katrina Clarke, Heike Fabig and Bill Craig; and Margaret Colbeck, who met with me regarding services to the hearing impaired.

The many people I have been fortunate enough to meet involved with the issue of disability and involved with the reality of having a disability themselves or caring for somebody with a disability has allowed me to draw out a number of observations from the explanations that have been given to me. The first observation is the financial burden of caring for either a child or an adult with a disability—the costs of wheelchairs, of specially adapted vehicles, of getting specialist therapy and counselling and the many other expenses which come with caring for a person with a significant disability.

The second observation, which is by no means original, is the random and capricious nature of disability and the way that it hits without warning and can affect anyone of us be it a disability from birth or one incurred due to accident or disease. A third observation, again not an original one, is the random and capricious nature of the extent of assistance available to someone with a disability, which depends in an inconsistent and unfair way on a range of factors such as which state you happen to live in, whether the disability is congenital or acquired, and, if it was acquired, whether that occurred in the workplace, in a motor vehicle accident or in another context. The people who have come to see me have also explained to me the administrative burden and the advocacy burden they face in finding the services that are needed, in getting the benefit of those services and in dealing with the limitation and the number of places available, the long waiting lists and so on.

Another difficulty, which I know has been mentioned by a number of speakers in this debate, is the one repeatedly raised by adults who are caring for adult children with a disability, the concern and the worry they face about what will happen to their adult child with a disability after they die. Where will their child live, who will take care of him or her and how will this child cope with the traumatic realisation that their loved parent and carer is no longer there? The death of a parent is a difficult thing for anybody to experience, but if you are a person with a disability and deeply dependent upon the care being provided to you by a loving parent, the loss of that parent is obviously going to be particularly traumatic.

I want to reiterate the point, which has been made well by a number of my colleagues before, that the NDIS is an idea supported by the coalition. We supported the original referral to the Productivity Commission of an inquiry into the notion of a national disability insurance scheme and we have supported each milestone on the road to the NDIS, including the $1 billion allocation in the most recent Commonwealth budget, the five launch sites and the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales, and, as has been made crystal clear, we support the bill in front of the House today. There is much in the legislative scheme which reflects key coalition principles, including the notion of the person-centred and self-directed funding model, which is akin to a voucher allowing the person who needs the care to exercise choice in who is going to provide the care. It fits with the coalition's objectives of empowering individuals, of removing government from people's lives and reducing red tape. Indeed, so strong is our commitment to these principles that we have made the offer of a cross-parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the implementation of the NDIS. We do that because we believe that getting the scheme right will require bipartisanship. It is troubling that the present government has chosen to reject that approach.

There is a huge gulf between concept and execution. That is true in every policy area but it is certainly true in the case of the NDIS. We have in Australia today a government which tends to assume that announcing something is the same as delivering it. You could look at the multiple instances in which Labor members of parliament have sent newsletters to constituents claiming to have delivered a budget surplus in 2012-13, only to have Treasurer Swan come out in December last year and admit that in fact a surplus is not going to be delivered.

When it comes to the NDIS, good intentions are not enough. The nuts and bolts of detailed implementation are critically important. Good administration is just as much of a moral imperative as are good intentions. Sadly, the implementation record of this government in areas like the Julia Gillard memorial school halls program, the Home Insulation Program and the slow motion train smash that is the National Broadband Network does not leave the objective observer with any degree of confidence that this government is likely to effectively, speedily and in a cost-conscious way implement the NDIS.

Key design decisions have not yet been taken and we know that a lot of detail is missing. Indeed, the bill before the House today is nothing more than a broad framework which establishes the transition agency, the board and so on, but the mechanics will need to be established in the rules dealing with such matters as eligibility and assessment criteria. It is true that a discussion paper has been released but it contains very little information and, if anything, is more a series of questions than a series of detailed rules. We also know that agreements with many of the states have not been concluded; yet, if NDIS is to succeed, it will need to operate on a cooperative basis between the federal government and eight state and territory governments, bearing in mind that state and territory governments presently deliver a wide range of disability services and also have existing schemes covering, for example, those injured in motor vehicle accidents. There can be no full NDIS without an intergovernmental agreement with each state and territory.

It is unfortunate that the present federal government has engaged in political pointscoring directed at the premiers of some states over whether or not those states will host trial sites. That is particularly unfortunate when you consider that the Productivity Commission never suggested or envisaged that every state needed to host a trial site.

Another area where real concern must be raised about implementation is the very basic question of how the NDIS is going to be financed. It is hard to understand or have confidence in this government's program to finance the significant commitments that will be required for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The commitment in the federal budget most recently was $1 billion over four years from 2012-13. Yet the Productivity Commission said that $3.9 billion would be necessary over the forward estimates for the first phase of the NDIS. This is a gap the government needs to close if it is to be credible. But there is a further point.

According to a report issued by the Centre for Independent Studies, drawing on a review conducted by the Australian Government Actuary, which was obtained under freedom of information legislation, the cost of the NDIS by the projected first year of operation, 2018-19, is likely to be around $22 billion a year—substantially greater than the $15 billion figure usually quoted—and the costs are likely to rise each year.

To point out this simple fact is not to oppose the NDIS—far from it. It is simply to highlight that the full cost of this policy is likely to be very large, and it is vital to have a credible and comprehensive plan as to where the money will come from. Unfortunately the present government is not very good at delivering credible and comprehensive plans to do with public finances and it is even worse at living up to the plans that it does deliver.

I conclude by observing that the current arrangements for support to those with a disability are capricious and unsatisfactory and that, at base level, is why the concept of a national disability insurance scheme has bipartisan support. Today's bill goes some short distance down the road towards fleshing out the concept of a national disability insurance scheme. To that extent, is has the support of the coalition. The real challenge here is the gulf between concept and execution.    Given this government's very poor track record of implementation across a whole range of policy areas, it is extremely difficult to have any confidence in the capacity of the present government to turn the NDIS into a reality in an efficient and cost-effective way. Nevertheless, the coalition is committed to offering bipartisan support for the NDIS and, should we come to government, we are committed to pursuing this key initiative.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are not often placed in the position to be associated with something that will later be referred to as historic, but being a member of this parliament charged with ushering in the reality of the National Disability Insurance Bill and being able to bear witness to this is truly humbling. It is with great honour that I am able to rise in support of this bill, which takes us a step closer to something that so many in the community want to see happen—that is, the creation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the establishment, through this bill, of the agency that will be responsible for the provision of support for people with a disability and their families and their carers.

Disability is something that society has struggled to deal with for centuries. This takes nothing away from the millions of hours of love and devotion, dedicated care and support provided to people with a disability, their carers and families. People would acknowledge that society's past record of dealing with people with a disability is not necessarily something to be proud of, and we should always find ways to improve the level of care and support provided. We should not judge well-intentioned people for past policies, but, as I said, we should try and find ways in which we can improve the level of support and care and potentially alleviate the concern and the anxiety about how people with a disability will be cared for not only now but in the years and decades ahead. What we can be proud of is that it is a sign of maturity of this nation that we are finally moving towards the establishment of this scheme with a start date in sight.

I have had many opportunities in my short time as a member of this place to meet people and hear stories of people with a disability and their families. People have said that in many cases disability is described as a lottery because it is extraordinarily random; it can impact any family; and there is absolutely no formula for predicting when and where it will occur. As parents we naturally focus our attention on children who may be born with a disability, but there are as many people who acquire a disability through the course of their life, who are not prepared for that and who require a great deal of support and care. People who suffer medical conditions or injury at any stage of life can suffer disability, as the people from Polio New South Wales explained to me. They told me stories of how they missed out on those vaccinations that transformed lives and had to grapple with the after-effects of polio. They are among the people who hope the NDIS will be able to give them some sort of comfort.

In decades past society's approach to dealing with people with a disability was to have someone else look after them somewhere else, although this did not always occur and the quality of care was sometimes questionable. These days our approach is one of inclusion and participation. One only has to visit an Australian disability enterprise to see the enthusiasm that people with a disability bring to their workplace. These are people who enjoy the socialisation, the independence and the fulfilment that employment brings, together with the camaraderie. Nobody would question the merits of our modern approach to people with a disability but, as many parents tell me, it does come at a price. There are substantial costs involved in sending a child with a disability to school, providing them with a range of therapies, keeping them as active as their bodies allow them to be and providing them with the technology that aids their mobility and their communication. Without an insurance scheme, how do these families cope? How do they provide for their child? The simple answer is: they do what any parent does, and that is they sacrifice their holidays, shortcut on their purchases, buy used aids, take out loans. They would find any way to string things together to make life easier for their children.

This life's lottery is not one that any of us would wish for. Finally, we are going to address the crying needs of families who care for and want the best for their kids, who by chance find themselves living with a disability. Those people who, cruelly, experience an accident that fundamentally transforms their lives will have care and support. For me, in many respects, the NDIS represents liberation from anxiety for people who wonder what will happen to the people in their care when they pass on. So many of us in this place have heard that expressed to us, have felt the anxiety in our own way and have sought to ensure that we as members of parliament can be involved in ushering in a scheme will liberate people from that level of anxiety.

From 1 July this year the dream of an insurance scheme which provides for people with a disability, their families and carers will finally begin in a number of trial sites across the country, and that has been welcomed wholeheartedly and with a great degree of joy. Although the Chifley electorate is not a trial site for the NDIS, I can inform the House that parents and carers of children with a disability who live in my electorate are enormously relieved and excited to see that somewhere this scheme is starting to become a reality so quickly. There is acceptance that if we are going to get this reform right, our approach to the transition of this scheme is a prudent one. It is, however, not a reform that the federal government can shoulder on its own. There is a vital role to be played by the states and territories, and all of us would encourage each of the premiers and chief ministers to fully embrace the NDIS and to find ways to make it work in every corner of the country.

Australia, arguably, has one of the best universal medical insurance schemes in the world, Medicare. When one looks at what took place over in the US in trying to get universal health care and at what happens here, the appreciation we have of Medicare increases hugely. Medicare has become a blueprint for similar schemes throughout the world, but it is applied nowhere better than here. When a Labor government first envisaged Medicare, there was debate in the community about the merits of sharing the costs of medical services.

But few would argue that Medicare has achieved all it was intended to in terms of equity and affordability, so we have had to act in other ways to ensure that health needs are met. The NDIS will deliver equity and affordability to families.

But the introduction of the NDIS will do more than simply spread the cost burden faced by those living with a disability. It will, for the first time, provide choice and control to people with a disability, their families and their carers. It will do this through what is described as a 'person centred, self-directed approach with individualised funding'. It will also make it easier for people to find available support. It is rare for a public policy reform to have as big an impact on people's lives as will be the case with the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Over the course of the battle to get this scheme in place, I have had many opportunities to engage with local disability enterprises. In Chifley, for example, we are well serviced by enterprises such as AFFORD at Minchinbury and Endeavour Foundation Industries at Mount Druitt. Each of these enterprises has, on a number of occasions, welcomed me to events to raise awareness about disability and to call for the NDIS. I have even had the opportunity to work for a few hours in Endeavour's food packaging facility at Mount Druitt as part of their 'Walk a mile in their shoes' campaign. I had the pleasure of going back there last year as host to the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers, Senator McLucas, on a visit to that facility to meet with support staff and employees. We are both proud of the diversity of the work they do—we saw many products we use every day being packaged there. Senator McLucas took the opportunity to announce funding of $10,000 for each of the country's 197 ADEs to improve the training qualifications of their workers with disability and support staff.

I am very pleased to be able to say that, in 2011, the Endeavour Foundation were runners up in the Australian Disability Enterprise Excellence Awards for their work in supporting employees with a disability. These ADEs perform a great service by employing people with a disability who find it difficult to work or maintain employment in the open labour market and who choose to work in an ADE. In doing so, they also become a platform from which people can then move into employment in the broader community. So they play a special role. More recently, we have seen the advent of disability employment brokers like Nova Employment and Ability Options, both of whom operate in our area and do terrific work. They work collaboratively with employers and prospective workers with a disability. It is this type of participation choice which the NDIS will provide to countless people with a disability.

Fundamentally, NDIS will bring people together. It will ensure that we all shoulder the load equally—the task of liberating people from the anxiety which exists around long-term care. As I said, one of the truly great things about this country, exemplified by what we have been able to do with Medicare, is that we are all willing to chip in for the care of others.

This is not going to come cheaply. It will require a major contribution. Providing the level of support needed to ensure we liberate people from the anxiety of long-term care has a potential cost of $15 billion a year. In time, I think we will need to think laterally about the way we fund the NDIS. Certainly there is the option of funding it directly out of consolidated revenue, but I also think that Australians recognise that the NDIS is about everyone chipping in and working together. I therefore think that people will be open to the idea of funding the NDIS in part through the Medicare levy. In time, I think that people will accept that. If we as a nation are to reach out and ensure that all people who have a disability are looked after—and if we need to find that money in a challenging financial environment—we should consider that option.

My position—admittedly the position of just one backbencher—is that, in time, both side of politics will need to lay down their partisan approach and look cooperatively at ways to finance and support the NDIS. I hope that we have the maturity and the resolve to work together, without recourse to politicking, to find ways to fund something which will be truly transformative and which, as I said at the start of my contribution, will in time be labelled as historic. There will be pressures, no doubt, on state and territory governments to find ways to finance their part of the NDIS package. They will, like us, need to make savings. They will, like us, need to find the money. They will, like us, need to stump up and find different, smarter ways to do things—but while ensuring that we have uniform systems for care delivery across the country. In that challenging financial environment, we need to consider whether there are other ways to tap into the generosity of Australians. Australians do want to see people looked after and cared for. There is that level of financing support there.

We have seen revenues drop by about $130 billion as a result of global economic conditions—which will not change any time soon. So it no surprise to anyone in this chamber that we will all face pressures. We have certainly faced them on this side. Those opposite have faced it—they too are finding that they are not able to maintain their commitment to deliver a surplus in 12 months. So the reality is that we are all faced with pressures. This is not a partisan point. This is the reality all of us in this place are confronted with. We will be required to find sources of funding. In their absence, we need to work off the best elements of the nature of the people of this great country. In the interests of a fair go, the people of Australia will give a little to help alleviate the situation of people facing enormous pressures.

Again, I come back to the point that it is rare for a parliamentarian to get the opportunity to be associated with a piece of legislation which will later be seen as historic. As I indicated in my opening remarks, it is humbling for us to be able to start on this path today. I know there are a lot of people across both sides of this chamber who are looking forward to the day they can see the difference the NDIS has made to the lives of their constituents and can see, in the faces of those constituents, the sense of relief they have gained from it.

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

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.