Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to quickly acknowledge the incredible work of ministers Bill Shorten and Jenny Macklin, and Senator McLucas, in getting us to this stage. Minister Shorten originally floated this idea when he was parliamentary secretary. At the time I applauded him and his team for that move, because I saw it as an extension of the work and the advocacy and the passion he had brought to the industrial relations space. I knew that as a result of that passion and that strong sense of advocacy and commitment to the welfare of all Australians that he would do a good job in terms of introducing or bringing about a scheme along these lines.

I had the opportunity to work with the minister during the campaign and saw the wonderful work he did in improving building codes to provide greater access for people with disabilities to basic things like showers. There was a building code, apparently, stating that there had to be a lip on a shower. No-one knows why that building code still existed. He managed to get rid of the code to ensure that people would roll into a shower in their wheelchair, without this nonsense of having a lip around shower recesses. Those are the sorts of small things that are significant for those suffering a disability. I commend the minister, who was then a parliamentary secretary, for the work he did in this area. What appeared to be small initiatives in terms of these building codes have had a major impact on the lives of those with a disability.

The success of this scheme would not have come about without the ministers I have referred to, but also without having the states and territories on board with the NDIS, especially the ACT, which led the charge to sign up. The ACT will be one of the launch sites, and I know how important this is to people in my electorate. The ACT Chief Minister has been at the forefront of pursuing a launch site in Canberra and I know from meeting with local disability groups and carers that they particularly welcome this move.

Now, the minister and other members have discussed the details of this legislation, but basically this a scheme that lays the foundations for a substantial and important reform that fundamentally revolutionises the way we will provide disability care and support in Australia.

The scheme as laid out before us takes on board the principles agreed to by the Prime Minister and other COAG first ministers. It is important to have these principles on the public record. They include: giving people with disability individual care and support based on their needs; giving people real choice and control over these supports, meaning more control over their lives; ending a situation where people are not told what support is available, or how to access that support; and fostering innovative services that are delivered and coordinated locally. This means that we are on the pathway to providing long-term certainty to the resourcing of disability care and support so that people with disability can feel secure that they will get what they need over the course of their lifetime. That is a particularly important message to send: it will meet their varying needs over the course of their lifetime.

The other main element of this scheme is that it considers the holistic and whole-of-life environment of people with a disability. It factors in when they need high and low levels of care throughout the course of their lives. It is designed to be receptive to each person's goals and aspirations for their life. It is about individual care. It also includes looking at how to support carers to sustain their caring role and take account of their needs, their goals and their aspirations, which are quite often overlooked or just not factored in because people are just so swamped when caring for the needs of someone with a disability. In disability and mental health the carer is often overlooked or not considered in the care program or in the provision of services. Carers are often left to pick up the pieces and battle to navigate between disparate services. I found that with that young mother that I met in my electorate office last year, and I have conversations along these lines with so many Canberrans.

We can never do enough for carers. The life of a carer is incredibly difficult, and their physical and mental health often suffers. This is why carers welcome the NDIS. We all recognise that the situation for people with a disability and their carers has been unacceptable. When the Prime Minister released the Productivity Commission inquiry report Disability care and support, there was an acknowledgment that disability care and support in Australia was underfunded, unfair, fragmented and inefficient and that major reform was needed. We took the Productivity Commission report seriously. The Commonwealth and all state and territory governments work towards an agreement on the need for major reform in the form of an NDIS, which would take an insurance approach that shares the costs of disability services and support across the community. I am very pleased to see the outcome of this approach before the parliament today.

Just before I close, I just want to recount two experiences that I have had in the disability sector—just in the last few months—that again underscore the need for this NDIS and the need for lifetime care and for a person's different needs throughout their life to be factored into the support. Last Friday I had the great fortune of launching a program called Six Seeds. Six Seeds is a program that is supported by six community groups and private sector groups across Canberra, and it is essentially a social enterprise. It has a chair, who I call a CEO, and it works with young adults with a moderate to severe disability and gets them involved in small businesses. What I launched on Friday was a program where we actually incorporated two of my great passions—one of them being small business, the other being rocky road. This small enterprise was set up by this group who were making rocky road for Valentine's day, and so we launched this project where they sold the rocky road and we were encouraged to sell it on to our friends and family and others in the community—and it looks as if it is going to be a very good business proposition. From that will grow other business ideas: in the confectionary area, I understand, they are thinking about doing some Easter eggs for Easter, and possibly bilbies, and then venturing out to chocolates and other confection for Mother's Day and possibly Father's Day. Again, this idea was just a small kernel of an idea from someone in that private sector—and also the community sectors here in Canberra—and it has grown into this social enterprise that promises to be incredibly successful. The young adults that I met last Friday were incredibly excited about it. Some of them were still just finishing off their high school and others were working part time at a range of mail rooms around town, but they were all really excited about this venture because it not only brought together a whole team of people that they could work with but also was a creative type of initiative that they could engage in. That is just one area where, if you start thinking laterally and you start factoring in the needs of particular people at a particular stage in their life, you can really get a great deal of innovation and enterprise coming from all sorts of areas. I commend the Six Seeds program and all of those involved in it—particularly the private sector, who were supporting it, and particularly that wonderful CEO.

I contrast that with a conversation that I had at a Christmas party late last year. I had met this family at a number of functions at Koomarri, which is an organisation here in Canberra that looks after intellectually and physically disabled children and young adults, and they have a range of schemes where they get people working in the community. What was tragic about this circumstance—and it really underscored the need for carers to be supported—was the fact that they were a non-English-speaking background family with a child who was relatively severely intellectually disabled and they were finding it very hard to cope. The mother was really quite wrung out and in tears for most of the many conversations I have had with her, and what really affected me when I saw them at Christmas was the fact that they not only had lived through this difficult time with this daughter—grappling with Australia and a new language—but also had just found out that the father had a brain tumour. You just think, when your luck is down, it is really down. So, for them, I support this and I encourage everyone in the House to support them. (Time expired)

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be able to offer my support for the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. Many of my constituents have expressed their enthusiasm for the scheme and the new approach that aims to bring support to those with a disability. I know that many more will benefit from the scheme, including those caring for someone with a disability. I am pleased that the coalition not only has supported the recommendations of the Productivity Commission that gave rise to this scheme but also has already adopted a bipartisan approach to this legislation. It is clearly disappointing that the government has rejected the suggestion of a joint parliamentary committee to ensure that the scheme is implemented as quickly and as smoothly as possible, given that the process will stretch over several parliaments. The government has yet to commit to the Productivity Commission's target date of 2018-19 for full implementation and seems intent on playing politics with the issue rather than genuinely delivering a better deal for those with a disability.

To turn briefly to the background of the NDIS, we need to move to a system that provides consistency of care and support across the nation. Currently, the care and support received by a person with a disability will depend on where they live and how they acquired their disability. It should make no difference how the disability was acquired, whether it be congenital or caused by an accident. It should make no difference whether the disability was caused by a workplace accident or a motor vehicle accident. It should make no difference which state or territory you live in, but currently it does, and this cannot be right. As the Productivity Commission concluded, we need a system that will put people rather than circumstance first: a system that looks at the problems individuals are facing and the support they need, makes an accurate assessment of the level of support required and then leaves the final decision on a mix of services to the individual to determine. The NDIS would put the individual front and centre of the system of support, and the individual would be able to select the service provider of their choice. This would be both empowering and effective, not just for the person receiving the support but also for their families and carers. We will have a system of choice, rather than a prescriptive system of entitlement. This should result in more efficient and effective allocation of resources. As the Leader of the Opposition put it:

There are millions of Australians who are involved with this, not because they necessarily have a disability themselves, but because their loved ones do and they are rightly, rightly very interested in the outcome of this Productivity Commission inquiry and we won’t let them down

Carers for people with a disability climb mountains every day. They selflessly go without to deliver that care. In many cases they give up careers, a social life or many of the things that we take for granted so they can deliver that care. We as a community and as a parliament have an obligation to those carers and to people with a disability. Clearly, if we fail to get this right, it will be at our peril. Members will be aware that, regrettably, the reputation of this House is at a low ebb. Failure to properly implement this scheme will mean that we are even lower in the public's esteem.

Before I turn to the bill, I would like to commend the work of a volunteer organisation which operates in many coastal locations, and that is the Disabled Surfers Association—the DSA. The DSA is particularly active on the north coast of NSW. It provides the opportunity for people with a disability to enjoy the thrill of surfing. The unpredictable nature of the surf is a barrier to those with a disability participating in that sport, a pastime that so many of us take for granted. The DSA breaks down those barriers, providing an opportunity for people with a disability to enjoy surfing in a safe environment—safe because of the efforts of a legion of volunteers who make it possible. It is quite moving to watch a blind girl stand on a surfboard for the first time or to see a severely disabled person run down the face of a wave in safety. But it is more than just the participation in surfing itself, it sends a strong message to people with a disability and their carers that our community cares. I would like to commend the great work of all DSA volunteers; in particular, I commend Cliff and Lee-Ann Lloyd, Sue Kliedon, Liz Scholton and Wendy Sawley. They do a great job in providing a great outlet for people with a disability, and a great day at the beach for their carers as well.

Returning to the bill: as well as establishing the framework for the NDIS, this bill enables the NDIS Launch Transition Agency to set up five trial sites across Australia from July this year. More than 20,000 people will benefit in South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, the Hunter Valley in NSW, and the Barwon area of Victoria. Members will note that Queensland and Western Australia are missing from that list. The reason for this is that although the state premiers all support NDIS, they had serious concerns about the limited details they were being given in return for their support as current providers of disability services. There was also concern that the government had only allocated $1 billion of the $3.9 billion the Productivity Commission said was necessary over the forward estimates.

To this day, the Prime Minister has refused to confirm how the NDIS will be funded beyond the trial period. It is quite clear that the NDIS runs the risk of joining the long list of broken promises and bungled policies now trailing behind the Prime Minister and her government. The hopes of people with a disability and their carers run the risk of being dashed on the rocks of the Prime Minister's cold and cynical expediency. The Prime Minister is working to a political timetable that takes no account of the best interests of the people this policy is supposed to serve. The only interest that she has is her electoral timetable and hanging on to power grimly until 14 September.

The Productivity Commission came up with a scheme that was praised as making a major contribution to improving the lives of those with a disability and their carers, but the Prime Minister is ready to sacrifice that on the altar of short-term political gain. The Productivity Commission came up with a timetable for implementation, but the Prime Minister has ignored that in favour of her own election timetable. The Productivity Commission came up with detailed funding recommendations, but the Prime Minister ignored these because her government has lost control of the public finances. The Productivity Commission set a target date for full implementation by 2018-19, but the Prime Minister has failed to commit to that date because she has only one date in mind, and that is 14 September 2013.

No wonder the Prime Minister would not agree to the coalition's proposal for a joint parliamentary committee to oversee the implementation of the NDIS. If she had, she would have lost control of the process and would not have been able to wriggle out of her commitments to the disability community. Yet I have no doubt that in the coming months we will hear the Prime Minister describing her government as champions for introducing the NDIS. What a hollow claim that would be as, once again, this Labor government ignores the best advice and fails to work on the detail of the policy in its desperate rush for positive headlines as it tries to swim against the tide of sleaze and incompetence that threatens to sweep it out of power. Members will remember the bank deposit guarantee scheme. It was introduced without a cap despite the best advice, with the result that many self-funded retirees and others found their investments frozen. Remember the pink batts scheme. That resulted in deaths, fires, and the disruption of what would have been a stable insulation sector; it ended up with a bill costing the government billions—a problem of its own making. Then there was Building the Education Revolution, something that was supposed to deliver much needed infrastructure for schools. The schools found out they could not get the classrooms they wanted and the classrooms they did get were vastly overpriced. In these policies she ignored advice in a rush to achieve a political outcome. It is important that this does not occur in relation to the NDIS.

This is a very important issue. It is vital that the House succeed in implementing a system that is going to meet the needs of people with a disability and their carers. It is vitally important that we in this parliament move in a bipartisan manner to ensure that the current system is enhanced and improved so that people with a disability can enjoy the services they need and rightly deserve and that we can achieve that with least cost to taxpayers.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with great pleasure that I rise to speak on this historic piece of legislation. Indeed, today is a bad day for people who hate good news, as the member for Cowper just displayed in his contribution. Never has anyone found so much to oppose on their path to offering support. In my first speech to this parliament, I reflected upon the fact that before working here I spent many years working in the community sector. I spent many years working as a careworker for children with developmental disabilities . In that time I learnt firsthand at very close range the struggle that families engage in on a daily basis to provide some semblance of normality to their child with a disability, and their other children, when so much tugs in the other direction. I learnt so much from the young children themselves—perhaps more than I was ever able to teach them.

A little later in life I had the great pleasure of working as an advocate for what was then known as the Australian Quadriplegic Association—an organisation established to assist people who had, through one means or another, found themselves bound to a wheelchair because of a spinal cord injury. When I worked for the AQA I was always struck by the stark differences in circumstances that were enjoyed by those persons who acquired their disability through an accident that was perhaps their own fault or were perhaps born with a degenerative disease which over time confined them to a wheelchair and those who, with equal tragedy, had their disability because of the result of somebody else's negligence—a car accident, being struck by somebody else in a motor vehicle or some other form of negligence which tragically led them to be confined to a wheelchair. What I was able to see in advocating for both of these groups of people was that they were in completely different circumstances. One was completely reliant upon the wealth and support of their family, their community and charitable organisations while the other, equally finding difficulty in their day-to-day living, had some support through the money provided to them through a victims compensation scheme. From the perspective of the individual, however they acquired that disability, it must have seemed entirely unfair that one had the resources and support and the other quite simply did not.

When I was visited by the activists from the Every Australian Counts campaign, I was very keen to sign-up as an early supporter of this great idea: the establishment of a national no-fault insurance scheme for people with a severe disability. The philosophy which underpins the scheme and the legislation which is before the house today is that we should not discriminate. We should not discriminate between people who have acquired their disability through an accident of birth or through an accident that was nobody's fault and that other group of people who acquired their disability because of an accident that was somebody else's fault and they were in the position to sue that person and acquire some compensation. Quite simply, the scheme should not discriminate. The second principle is that there should be dignity for all. We should focus on a person's ability, not their disability. As a wealthy country with a first-rate health system and a first-rate community sector we should be able to have the capacity to provide dignity in live for all. Thirdly, in providing services, we should empower the individual so that they have the capacity to adapt their care packages and their arrangements to meet their life objectives in the same way that you or I arrange our lives so that we can further our goals and ambitions in ways that best suit us. Empowering the individual is an important principle at the heart of the NDIS.

We would not have reached this point and we would not be able to be standing here today welcoming the introduction of this bill had it not been for the work of committed individuals and powerful organisations such as the Every Australian Counts campaign. Before talking through some of the details of the bill, I do want to pay tribute to the individuals and organisations who participated in the Every Australian Counts campaign—the NDIS campaign. I was very pleased to be involved with the activist group in my own area in my electorate of Throsby even prior to becoming a member of this place. Fantastic organisations like Greenacres, Flagstaff, the Disability Trust, Interchange and Cram and motivated individuals—Neil Preston is one who comes to mind—deserve recognition. If I did not get a phone call or an email from Neil Preston about this every week then I knew he was probably out of the country on some urgent business or laid up ill somewhere. He is still incredibly motivated long after his retirement from Greenacres. He gives of his time to that and many other important causes around the region. They deserve some tribute and they deserve some credit for the fact that parliamentarians on all sides of the house are standing here today, some with less enthusiasm than others, welcoming the introduction of this bill, because it does create a national disability insurance scheme. It is a substantial and important reform that will fundamentally change the nature of how a person lives with a disability and how their care and support is provided for in Australia. Without any hyperbole, it is an historic reform for all Australians.

I speak in support of the bill on behalf of the disabled children and adults in my electorate of Throsby because they have been keen supporters of this and very active in the campaign. The bill will implement the NDIS and establish a national agency to administer the scheme. The Commonwealth is currently working with the states and territories on this reform because they are currently key in the providing and facilitation of service provision to the sector. The Commonwealth has already begun working closely with state and territory governments in the design, governance and funding of the NDIS. The bill's development has also been informed by people with a disability, their family, carers and other stakeholders who have been involved in an extensive consultation exercise. I know this first hand because I held three consultation sessions in my own electorate over the last 18 months, including one which was attended—it was a packed room—by the minister herself. We had an intense discussion with many important issues raised. I cannot help but think that some of the issues raised by those constituents in my electorate found their way into the thinking behind this legislation.

I also welcome the fact that the NDIS Advisory Group and NDIS expert groups have provided technical advice on the design of key elements of the scheme, including eligibility and assessment, quality safeguards and standards, a national approach to choice and control for people with disability, and workforce and sector capacity.

The government has also funded the National Disability and Carer Alliance to provide ongoing advocacy and to talk to people with a disability, their families and carers, and service providers about what they believe is important in the design and implementation of the NDIS. This consultation and the input of users of disability services are critical to the success of the scheme.

If there is one tinge of disappointment from organisations and individuals in my electorate of Throsby, it is that it was not one of the five sites chosen as a pilot site, a launch site, for the NDIS. But they understand that having a pilot is important in a historic reform such as this. The people of the Hunter in New South Wales, which is one of the trial regions, will be able to have the benefits of the scheme early. We know that having a pilot is important, because, even if we tried to implement the scheme today, we probably could not do it, because we simply do not have the available workforce, which is such an important part of the rollout of a scheme such as this, which has at its heart caring for people.

The framework set out in the legislation includes the approach the scheme will take to eligibility, reasonable and necessary supports, and goal based plans for participants. The framework will reflect the principles agreed to by the Prime Minister and other COAG first ministers, including giving people with a disability individual care and support based on their needs; giving people real choice and control over these supports, meaning more control over their lives; ending a situation where people are not told what support is available or how to access that support; and fostering innovative services that are delivered and coordinated locally. The framework will include the principle of bringing long-term certainty to the resourcing of disability care and support so that people with disability can feel secure that they will get what they need over their lifetime.

The scheme will consider the whole-of-life context of people with disability. It will respond to each individual's goals and aspirations for their life, and a plan with each person will take account of their individual circumstances. This will include looking at how to support carers to sustain their caring role and take account of their needs, goals and aspirations and how to strengthen the other informal and community supports that are important for the person with a disability.

The bill before the House today establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency as a body independent from government. In addition to delivering the scheme, the agency will perform a range of functions, including managing the financial sustainability of the scheme, building community awareness about disability, and undertaking research about disability and the social contributors to disability.

In accordance with the Productivity Commission's recommendations, the agency will be established as a body under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. It is important, for an insurance approach, to take care and support out of the cycle of budgets and elections, so this independence is important. The agency will be overseen by a board made up of people with extensive experience in the provision or use of disability services, and in financial management, governance and the operation of insurance schemes, as well as an advisory council made up of people with lived experience of disability and caring. To ensure the agency is accountable to government, a ministerial council will be established through COAG. All governments—state, territory and Commonwealth—will be represented on the ministerial council.

Finally, there is specific provision for an independent review of the new act. The purpose of this review will be to consider how the act has operated during the first two years of its operation. So, as the scheme rolls out nationally, you will have the benefit of the learnings of the two-year pilot of the operation of the scheme.

In conclusion, I would like to once again thank all of those in my electorate of Throsby, in the Illawarra and Southern Highlands, and right across the country who have advocated and campaigned tirelessly for this important reform, this great reform, this historic reform. The NDIS will end the personal lottery of compensation which until now has meant that some with disabilities had the resources to get the care and support they needed, while others did not. It will end the national lottery that meant that you could get all the support and care that you might need in one part of the country but be left without any care and support or medical attention in another part of the country.

As I have said before, I started my working life in the disability sector, and I have experienced firsthand the frustration and limitations of the existing system of support. I know that the resources that should be there, quite simply are not there right now. There is no shortage of demand. What we need to do as a government is to ensure that we provide the resources and the scheme to ensure that those supports are provided. This bill is about doing that. I commend the legislation to the House.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this evening to speak on the establishment of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It is a significant and necessary reform. This bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, has bipartisan support. I have been listening to the contributions of my colleagues on both sides of the House, and much has already been said. What I would like to concentrate on in my contribution is the difficulties of people dealing with a disability, or a family member with a disability, in remote and regional areas.

My concern, without wanting to be negative, is that we need to be very careful that we do not look at this scheme and measure its success, or indeed the commitment of everyone in this parliament to this, just in the amount of dollars that is going to it, because quite often it is not just the dollars that determine the success of the scheme. When you are in a smaller and remote community it is no good having access to a voucher or to money to put into a suitable program to help you if that program is not there. As anyone in this place would know, as a member of federal parliament, you get to know a lot of people that suffer from a disability. Quite often all the help that they are looking for is a little bit of respite so that the carer can have some time away or conduct some other sort of business.

Up until now, the way that disability funding has come out has been a lottery if you were injured, as was one of my constituents in my electorate. I am sure he will not mind me mentioning his name—Denzel Peters. Denzel was visiting family in South Africa, had an accident in a swimming pool and became a quadriplegic. It has been an enormous strain, both financially and emotionally, for Denzel and Karen, his wife. The Dubbo community has supported them quite well, but they have still suffered personal financial hardship. If he had suffered the same injury in a car accident, more than likely he would have got a much better level of care. So we do need to bring everybody onto the same page.

One of the issues I would like to speak about particularly concerns people with an intellectual disability. In a small community it is very difficult to find carers that can come in and help with respite. Or, if people are independent enough that they could live on their own, maybe in a group home situation, one of the problems in a small community is finding enough people with a similar level of disability—and a similar level of independence is probably more to the point—that can actually go together and live in a group home. Generally, the people in the community that do suffer from that disability are at different ends of the spectrum and so require individual care. In Dubbo, for instance, we have got quite a few people with the Westhaven organisation—they have been going for many, many years—in supported accommodation and supported employment. Many of the clients at Westhaven live in group homes quite independently and it is a wonderful thing to see how they operate in the city of Dubbo. But in a smaller community is much more difficult. I know the community of Narrabri is in the process of constructing a group home, and it has required a lot of work by the committee that are keen to have this happen. It has taken years and years, but finally their dream will come off, but it has been a long, long battle.

I have also spoken to people in remote areas and small villages who have a disabled child. When the child reaches an age where they need to go to school or some other thing outside the home, the whole family has to relocate because there are no services in that immediate area. That quite often means taking a change of career for the parents and it becomes quite a problem. The other issue that I deal with a lot, is older parents who are caring for their disabled children who are in now in their 30s, 40s and 50s. They are terribly concerned that if they cannot continue to care for them—if it becomes too troublesome as they get older—that they will not be able to access the required care for their adult children. This is quite a problem for several people that I know in my electorate.

So while I am very enthusiastic about this bill, and having spoken to people from the peak body for disability services, I understand the complexity of it. I think that the Australian people should know that this is not something that can be implemented overnight. Because of the complex nature, it is very important that this is done correctly. I know from my contacts that there is an expectation that it will take some years before the National Disability Insurance Scheme gets into full implementation.

Right across my patch people are experiencing similar problems. I was speaking to a constituent in Condobolin only a month or two back. They are raising their adult daughter who has a disorder that means she requires constant care. She is quite mobile and the family is having trouble accessing respite when they need it. Indeed, carers are driving a couple of hundred kilometres out from Dubbo to provide the care that this family needs on a respite basis. But unfortunately, due to the distances involved, much of the budget is taken up with travel time.

I think there is an opportunity, through this National Disability Insurance Scheme, to help boost the workforce in the disability sector on a local basis. And I think that there is a great opportunity to train carers in local communities that can take up the slack where the community is a long way removed from the more mainstream disability service organisation.

I support this scheme. I realise that it is going to take a long time to implement. I realise it is going to be a big call on the budget and I realise that it is going to be very difficult, considering the state of the finances of this country at the present time thanks to the management of this country over the last five years. But I am supporting it. I just have a word of warning: please, as we progress this National Disability Insurance Scheme we should take into account the needs of those that are disabled in the smaller and remote communities.

Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That we must do more—much more—to assist people living with a disability is self-evident. The lack of support available to a great many disabled Australians, in particular the lack of certainty and equity available to them is obviously a regrettable and avoidable situation in a country as rich, clever and fortunate as ours.

The list of problems with the current approach to supporting people in Australia with a disability is simply too long to explore properly here. For a start, many people with a disability have no control over their care plan, and are forced to fit into one or more broad categories as defined by the bureaucrats. Moreover, services are patently underfunded and provide much less support than what is clearly needed. In Queensland, for example, a person who has daily incontinence issues might only be entitled to three assisted showers per week, leaving these unfortunate people to make do the best they can for the rest of the week.

Disability services and agencies vary greatly from state to state, and the confusing maze of federal, state and local services mean that many people simply fall through the cracks and are unable to access even the most basic care. Often people must queue for years and in some cases even compete against each other to access basic support. No wonder this cruel system has been dubbed the 'misery Olympics'.

And it is no small problem. Some 4.5 million Australians have a disability of some kind: 760,000 Australians under the age of 65 have a severe or profound disability and always or sometimes need help with their day-to-day lives. Half a million Australians are primary carers of a person with a disability while another 2.4 million are non-primary carers. Significantly, the rate of depression amongst carers is estimated to be 50 per cent.

These are the sorts of reasons I have been, for a long time, one of the many Australians pressing for a National Disability Insurance Scheme, and I am proud supporter of the Every Australian Counts campaign. It is also why the establishment of an NDIS formed one of the 20 negotiating points I took to both Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott after the 2010 federal election.

The hardship resulting from Australia's lack of services in disability care must end. An NDIS would provide us with a unique opportunity to untangle the confusing mess of existing disability services and develop a new system which places the interests of people with a disability or disabilities at its centre and includes them in creating a flexible care plan suited to their individual needs.

No wonder, then, that I was absolutely thrilled to hear that the government had accepted the Productivity Commission's recommendation to implement and fund such a nation-changing reform, and just as thrilled to be here today talking about the bill that promises to start the process of establishing such a scheme. This bill is the vital first step towards that momentous goal because I think it genuinely does provide a framework for such a scheme to be implemented and outlines the next steps needed for progress to continue. For that reason I will support the bill and trust that it makes a successful and speedy passage through the parliament.

But I emphasise that this bill is indeed only the first step, and one that will amount to nothing, unless and until the broad framework of the scheme is quickly and competently fleshed out—and, I would add, unless and until the reform is fully funded, and shown to be so funded, starting with the federal budget to be brought down in three months' time.

I also want to see the many outstanding questions hanging over the NDIS answered, and the increasing number of emerging problems fully addressed. For instance, will the NDIS have the flexibility to deliver services for people in unusual or unique circumstances? What about little Lachlan from my electorate, who I have spoken about in this place before? He has severe global development disorders, but his condition is so unusual that no diagnosis is able to be made, and that means he is currently unable to access existing support services. And what about the young boy from my electorate with NKH?

In both cases Minister Macklin has assured me the NDIS will specifically cater to an individual's incapacity as opposed to his or her diagnosis, and that seems to be the case in the trial sites. But at this early stage the bill lacks the detail necessary to enshrine this approach and the boys' families would understandably be anxious about future access to care for their sons.

There has also been the concern that the NDIS would cater only to people younger than 65, meaning those with a disability turning 65 would have had to move across to the aged-care system where, despite plans for reform, money is also in short supply and the capacity of aged care providers to continue to care for people at the same level as the NDIS is very limited. But I note the talk in recent days that people already covered by the NDIS will now have the option of staying with the scheme when they turn 65. This would be good, although there remains the significant problem of the aged-care sector needing to serve at least some ex-NDIS beneficiaries, as well as all those developing a disability after they turn 65. The Australian Blindness Forum and its member bodies in my electorate are particularly concerned about this dimension of the NDIS conversation, because blindness is not only a major disability facing a lot of Australians—something like 75 per cent of all blind or vision impaired people are 65 years of age or older.

More broadly, Headway Tasmania and the Brain Injury Association of Tasmania have also raised with me a number of other concerns they want the government to address as they move into the implementation phase of the NDIS. In particular, they have referred me to the four-month national consultation conducted by Brain Injury Australia, which involved 20 consultation sessions in urban and rural locations around the country. During this process, the organisation identified serious shortcomings in the current methods used to determine the eligibility and support requirements of people with acquired brain injuries and found that the NDIS needs to remove or reform a wide range of planned or existing practices so as to ensure that a person with acquired brain injury has their needs assessed under the NDIS in a multidisciplinary consultation with all the people involved in their lives.

It found a range of things and I will quickly list them because it is relevant to the point I want to make afterwards. They found: that the NDIS assessment processes must consist of multiple tools that can be flexibly applied where needed; that the NDIS assessment for a person with acquired brain injury should take place over time—periodically, and in a range of different contexts and circumstances—to ensure that a holistic and accurate reflection of their needs can be developed; that the assessment process must be able to distinguish between acquired brain injury and mental health issues, which may or may not be related; that, crucially, NDIS assistance must be available within the criminal justice system; that the NDIS should consider the needs of carers of people with acquired brain injuries; that the NDIS assessment and support should adequately cater for the enhanced needs of Australians living rurally and remotely; that the NDIS assessment and support systems must be culturally appropriate for Indigenous Australians; and that every step of the NDIS should include a fair and transparent appeals process.

That is a lot to do just with the issue of brain injury and the NDIS, but I have quite deliberately dwelled on that issue in particular because I think it is a very good example of just how complex the needs are for just one of the many groups that will be affected by the NDIS. Unless all of these complex needs are in fact addressed, for all of the groups affected, the NDIS will ultimately be a missed opportunity—and that must not be allowed to happen. My thanks to Darren Osborn at Headway Tasmania and also to the Brain Injury Association of Tasmania for their ongoing advocacy and support of Tasmanians with acquired brain injury.

Another aspect of the NDIS to which I will be paying particular attention is how it helps people with autism. I will be doing so because I have met so many people living with the very significant challenges of autism spectrum disorder and am mindful that their needs are not nearly as obvious as those of people with physical disabilities. That ASD must be covered by the NDIS is beyond question, but just as important is that the assessment tools relevant to the NDIS be so designed that people with ASD can have confidence that the assessment instruments appropriately measure their impairments and in doing so release the support so necessary for many people with ASD to live as full lives as humanly possible.

That support, like the support provided to hundreds of thousands of Australians with other disabilities, depends—and with the NDIS will increasingly depend—on access to competent disability workers. But that is already problematic because of the low pay and high staff turnover in the disability sector. The problem is set to get a whole lot worse unless the NDIS is accompanied by effective workforce reform. Frankly, the government needs to pay careful attention to United Voice and its call for significant workplace reform for the disability sector, including wages that much better reflect the qualifications and dedication of people involved in what is often very difficult work. If we do not look after the workers then the best legislative reforms in the world will come to nothing because there simply will not be the right workforce to effectively deliver them.

In closing, I wish to show my sincere respect and admiration for the thousands of Australians who have campaigned tirelessly for an NDIS over many years, including people with a disability or disabilities, their families and carers, disability workers, and the countless other people not directly affected but just wanting to make this country a better place. Thank you. This is your bill as much as it is the government's bill. In particular, I say thank you to those with a disability or disabilities who fronted the Productivity Commission. The stories you told shamed a succession of governments and energised this parliament into action. Your evidence outlined the case for bold and meaningful reform and showed beyond doubt that the current system must be demolished and rebuilt urgently, whatever the cost.

The NDIS is massive in scope and will not be easy to implement, but we genuinely are one of the richest and smartest countries in the world, with the resources to do this and to do it well. This is nation-changing reform and I am very proud to finally be able to support it in this place.

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Roads and Regional Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also welcome the opportunity to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I concur with the member for Denison and his fine words. This is nation-building work that we are doing in this place. It is quite an historic occasion. It is particularly pleasing to see members on both sides of the House in furious agreement as they contribute to the debate. It has been a culmination of many years of campaigning by people with disabilities, their carers, family and friends, activists within the community, and members of parliament both in this place and in other jurisdictions throughout Australia on both sides of the political divide.

I recognise, as I have in the past, the member for Maribyrnong and former minister, Bill Shorten, who I believe helped give the issue the greater public recognition it needed to put this policy initiative on the government's agenda, and I give him credit for that. In doing so, I also thank members on both sides of the House who have been supportive, particularly the shadow minister, Mitch Fifield, who I think has also pursued this matter in a very responsible and bipartisan manner. And I include the Leader of the Opposition, who has made the issue of disability and support for carers a subject to which he has contributed enormously through his fundraising ride, the Pollie Pedal, which he has done for many years, and certainly over the next three years he will be raising money for Carers Australia. I think that by doing so he has helped raise the issue to greater prominence, both in the local media through the route the Pollie Pedal takes and in the national media.

I would also like to recognise the carers of people with disabilities who may be following this debate this afternoon—mainly family members, who have perhaps the greatest fear of all: that the person they care for, normally their own child, will not have good care once they are gone. That comes across time and time again when you talk to people in the community who are responsible for caring for people with disabilities. Their greatest fear is: who is going to look after my child when I am gone? So, I do recognise the enormous amount of unpaid work they do on behalf of our community to support people with disabilities.

I would like to take the opportunity tonight to congratulate a lady in my own electorate by the name of Jean Tops from the Gippsland Carers Association. Jean has been a formidable lobbyist and advocate on behalf of people with disabilities in the Gippsland region. The Gippsland Carers Association has been in existence for around 15 years, providing a voluntary support service to the families of carers throughout Gippsland. They have recognised a need in the community to support the carers, and they have worked diligently to provide information, education, support and the advocacy work I mentioned before to assist people with disabilities in the community.

Jean has been, as I said, a formidable advocate and lobbyist on behalf of carers and continues to do so, and I can assure you that her submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill is well worth reading. She makes several points about the current major stumbling blocks in relation to support for people with disabilities—including that perennial argument of the states, territories and the Commonwealth over who will be responsible for what part of the funding. She makes it very clear what she thinks about making sure there is not continued duplication and waste of effort and ensuring that the Commonwealth steps up to the mark with the NDIS. She does make one point that I think is worth further consideration by the government in relation to the need for a regional carer network. It is something that Jean has advocated very strongly for in the past to ensure that regional carers have a support network in place, particularly in the more remote parts of our community, where services are often hard to access and it is difficult for people to get up-to-date and accurate information. So, I recommend the submission Jean has made to the Senate legislation committee.

I also want to take the opportunity tonight to thank and congratulate the professional staff who work in our community on a daily basis, in the schools and other facilities, involved in caring for people with disabilities. Certainly in my electorate of Gippsland we are blessed to have some outstanding staff. Their professionalism and their commitment is extraordinary. I know it is a task that I myself would find very difficult to fulfil. You often visit the special schools or meet up with the students on excursions. I am not sure that I would have the patience that the staff have, or their determination and resilience. The healthy dose of love and compassion that they have for the people in their care is something that is quite remarkable and does them great credit. Without them in our community we would struggle to support people with disabilities in the Gippsland region.

It is pleasing that the parliament is united in its voice of support for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I believe disability services, above all other issues, is one that surely should not be a political issue. It does dishearten me whenever I hear any member try to make any political mileage out of this debate, because it should be an issue that we can find a way to work through in a bipartisan manner. It will take several parliaments to fulfil the implementation of the NDIS. The first steps may be taken today by a Labor government, and I give all due credit to the Prime Minister and her cabinet for making those first steps. But it may well be that future steps are made by Liberals or Nationals in a coalition or by some other form of minority government, if we find ourselves in that position again. In any case, it is going to require a major funding commitment from not only this government but also successive governments. There is a concern that in our discussion here today we do not really know how we are going to fully pay for the future stage of the implementation. I do not make that comment to score any political point whatsoever; it is just a statement of fact: we really have not figured out yet in this place, through the budgetary process—as far as I am aware—how we are going to pay for the full implementation of the NDIS. That challenge will need to be overcome by members on both sides of the House, and I encourage all members to continue to work in the most bipartisan way we can as we try to address that issue.

The NDIS should not be seen as a holy grail. It is not going to solve all the problems of people with disabilities or their carers. It is not offering any cure for the ailments they may suffer. But it is going to make their lives just a bit easier, and I think that is an admirable ambition for this chamber to have. By putting this framework in place I am very confident that once we work through some very difficult issues—and it is going to be difficult and complex to introduce—we are going to be able to make a direct and practical improvement in the lives of people with disabilities and their carers in Australia.

I have had the opportunity, as I am sure many members have, to speak to people in the electorate about issues facing people with disabilities and their carers. It is one of the most frustrating things to try to deal with—to work your way through a system that is crisis driven and largely unresponsive to your needs. I draw your attention to the example of one lady in my electorate, by the name of Anita Bennell. She has twin daughters, both in their early 30s, who are profoundly disabled. They require full-time care, and there is no cure or any likelihood of improvement as they grow older. It has been very frustrating for Anita and her husband, Ken, to try to work their way through the system and provide the care the girls need. It seems like there is an obstacle almost every step of the way as they try to navigate their way through the system.

A classic example: the couple bought a property and renovated it to try to suit the girls' living requirements and facilities for carers, planning for the future, for when they are not able to care for their daughters anymore. This was all done at their own cost. Their aim was to try to transition the girls into this accommodation while they were still able to do their share of the caring, if you like. But there is no funding at all to assist them in terms of trying to make a permanent move. And there were actually some tax implications for them that were quite unfortunate as well, which were extraordinarily frustrating. They were exposed to a tax liability when they were trying to do the right thing by providing for the care of their own children.

Their other great issue is the minimal amount of funding that is available through the state government at the moment for respite care. When we are talking about two 30-year-old girls with profound disabilities it does start to wear the parents out and they need some respite on an occasional basis. It has been a frustrating time for Anita and her husband, Ken, and I congratulate them for their extraordinary resilience not only as they continue to work in support of their own children but also as they advocate on behalf of other people who have loved ones with disabilities. Her tireless efforts are something that she should be congratulated for.

Because the opportunity presents itself this evening, I would like also to read from a letter from another lady in my electorate, Pam George from Bairnsdale. It is easy sometimes in this place to talk in the abstract, and we talk about schemes and projects and forums and terms like that, but sometimes it is important to get right back to the people we are talking about. This is a letter from Pam who describes a typical day. She did not write this to me seeking sympathy, she just wanted to help us understand exactly what a day looks like for her, so I will take this opportunity to quote from this letter that she wrote to me: 'I am writing you this letter just to inform you in more detail my reasons for requesting exceptional circumstances, basically about my day with Nathan,' her son. 'I could be up at night anything from two to a dozen times. If Nathan sets his mind to not sleeping, he will just climb out of bed constantly. Also, the seizures he is now having occur when he is sleeping. From the minute he is up for the day he is noisy and wanting to bang his back on anything and everything: doors, windows, furniture et cetera. When I am trying to do anything I am constantly having to attend to Nathan because of this. I have to do everything for Nathan, finely cut up his food, as he won't chew, and feed him. He will not hold a lidded cup with a straw to drink from. Wash him, shower him, shave him, dress him, change nappies—he is fully incontinent—clean his teeth and give him his medication. Everything that you would do for yourself has to be done for Nathan. As I write this, he has just sneezed and cannot wipe or blow his nose, so that is another thing that needs to be done. Nathan can crawl, which is good for him. But over the length of time taken to shower, dress, shave et cetera, he is constantly moving and wants to crawl away. He doesn't understand when asked to keep still until I'm finished. If he wants to go, that's it, he's off.'

And it goes on in terms of the lack of support for people like Pam under the current system: 'There are lots of appointments, meetings and organising for the last 12 months searching for a suitable wheelchair. His current one is falling to pieces as he rocks, bangs back and forth in it extremely hard, so he requires something very strong but not heavy to push. I have to make sure we get the right one for him and the cost is between $7,000 and $17,000. This is a snapshot of life with Nathan. I am not complaining about it, just stating facts. I want him to stay at home as long as possible. Sometimes things just get on top of me and don't get done or done on time in this case. Time goes by too quickly. This situation is causing some stress as well which doesn't help my health issues. I'm not asking for anything more than I'm entitled to, just a bit of compassion to achieve a positive outcome to the situation.'

The situation that Pam was referring to was the fact that she was 12 days late in applying for her Renewable Energy Certificate Registry. Unfortunately, we could not accommodate her. Pam is doing all of this, saving our government a fortune in terms of the care she provides for her young son Nathan, but because she was 12 days late in making a submission for her Small-scale Technology Certificates under the photovoltaic system that she installed, we have not been able to help her out. She was not expecting any charity, she was just making the point that sometimes things get just a little bit away from her. If we can find ways not just in this piece of legislation, but also in other things we do in this place to accommodate people like Pam and her family I think we will be doing a very good thing for our community.

It is with some sense of relief that I read the Productivity Commission's final report into disability care and support, which agreed with people like Anita and Pam that the current system of disability care and the support that it offers are unsustainable; they are underfunded and they are unfair and do not deliver appropriate levels of care and support to Australians with a disability. If one thing has been made very clear over the past five years in discussions in this place, it is that the current system of disability support services is broken and that a wealthy nation like Australia can certainly do better; we can give this issue a higher priority in future budgetary rounds.

In my first speech in this place, nearly five years ago, I spoke about the need for increased funding, particularly in regional areas, for support services for children with a disability and their carers, and I have worked in the most bipartisan way that I can to support efforts from both sides of the chamber for this better system which we are debating here this evening.

The difficulty for people working in the current system right now is that they feel that every aspect of the current system for them is a struggle. It is confusing, there is duplication across different jurisdictions, there are no consistent rules across state borders and we cannot even agree on what a disability is across different state borders. We do not have a consistent definition for people who move from state to state. They often feel alone, they feel like they are outcasts in our community and they often feel that they are the problem that is just too hard for anyone to deal with. I congratulate the government for the steps it is taking here this evening.

The letter I quoted from previously makes it clear that even what we consider to be pretty simple tasks can be extraordinarily time consuming and labour intensive, and the best laid plans can certainly run off track for people caring for a person with a disability.

With that in mind I support the bill that is before the House this evening and I urge the government to continue to work in the most bipartisan way it can and to keep the politics out of this debate. I am disappointed that we have not gone down the path of supporting the motion that was put forward by the member for Dawson earlier last year to establish a joint parliamentary committee, to be chaired by both sides of politics, to oversee the establishment and implementation of the NDIS. I think that is a mistake and we can probably do better than that in the future. It will take men and women of good faith on both sides of parliament to deliver this reform and to commit to the funding that is so desperately required. I support this bill and I urge the Prime Minister to perhaps reconsider her position regarding the joint parliamentary committee, because if we provide a non-partisan environment for the full development of the NDIS people with disabilities and their carers throughout Australia will be thankful for it.

Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. The bill represents a historic reform in the great Labor traditions of equity, fairness and social justice—traditions and a reform that I am particularly proud to be part of. I say that because, in coming to this place, I left a job as a school principal at a school with many special-needs students. You work hard as a principal, an education leader, with young people with very complex needs. You see the difficulties and you do everything that you can to assist them in that role. But now, nearly 12 years later, to be able to improve as someone in this place the lot of all people with complex and special disability needs is a very heartening experience.

As the Prime Minister has said, the National Disability Insurance Scheme is the greatest social reform since Medicare. She has said—and I agree—that it will stand 'alongside the minimum wage, the age pension and universal superannuation as one of the great Labor pillars of social justice and opportunity for all Australians'. A previous Labor PM, Gough Whitlam, endeavoured to introduce a national scheme similar to this one 40 years ago. Finally, in this parliament we are getting the job done. Former Prime Minister Rudd started the Productivity Commission inquiry into this scheme. I guess this is a real Labor legacy. Each person has contributed.

The NDIS will transform the lives of those living with a disability, their families and their carers. It will assist people regardless of how they acquired their disability, whether they were born with that disability or whether they acquired it through tragedy, illness or misadventure. Today, more than 400,000 people around Australia are living with a significant disability. These people do not all necessarily have the quality of life that able bodied people take for granted. They may face poverty, mental health issues, social isolation, stress, limited opportunities, discrimination in employment, all because they currently do not have what is necessary to enable them to lead a life equal to someone in the rest of society—a life that would be reasonable for any individual.

Under the NDIS, their needs will be met on a case by case basis and their care tailored to individual and specific needs. I guess that that is something that all here champion. Once you have been here for any length of time, you realise that flexibility might be the curse of bureaucracies but it is certainly what ordinary everyday citizens in this country want. They want some sort of recognition that diversity and individual circumstances are real. The scheme gives people with a disability choice of and control over the care and support that they receive. If a person has a permanent disability that impairs their functions, they will likely be supported through the scheme through either an individual plan or a range of supports, such as education support or a community group that provides the support that they need. Needs change and we need to be able to respond to those changing needs and circumstances.

This bill establishes both the framework of the NDIS and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency, which will operate the five national launch sites, which are in South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, the Barwon area of Victoria and the Hunter region in New South Wales, centred on my electorate of Newcastle.

I want to divert from my speech for a moment. I noticed a media release that came out today saying that people are running a scam to do with the NDIS, asking people for fees to be paid so that they can participate in the NDIS. It is just horrific to think that anyone would exploit what is a wonderful opportunity for people with disabilities and try to take advantage of people with disabilities. We urge anyone who is approached about agency fees and the NDIS to please at least contact their federal member of parliament so that we can do everything that we can to stop that happening.

The bill gives effect to obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and provides for a review of the operation of the act after a two-year period. It outlines how to participate in the scheme and the ways in which to develop personal goal based plans with the agency in order to receive tailored support. According to the World Health Organisation, 70 million people worldwide require a wheelchair yet just 15 per cent of them have access to one. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities affirms that people with disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms. Unfortunately, in a very wealthy and privileged country like Australia many disabled Australians have been left behind. At more than double the OECD average, a startling 45 per cent of Australians with disabilities live in or near poverty.

Australia is also ranked just 21st out of 29 OECD nations on employment participation by people with disabilities. A broad economic contribution can be made by people with disabilities if we employ them. It is quite a great economic loss to our communities and to our nation. The 2011 report from Deloitte Access Economics into the economic benefits of increasing employment for people with disabilities commissioned by the Australian Network on Disability suggests that 'closing the gap between labour market participation rates and unemployed rates for people with and without disabilities by one-third would result in a cumulative $43 billion increase in Australia's GDP over the next decade in real dollar terms'. Sadly, today only half of working age Australians with disabilities are employed in the workforce compared to 80 per cent of those without disabilities.

The federal government has released its National Disability Strategy 2010-2020, which sets out a 10-year policy framework designed to improve the lives of those with a disability and their community. This was developed in partnership with COAG and it is pleasing that, with respect to the NDIS, a number states, including New South Wales, have come to the table in good faith. I have heard other members say how important it is to have a non-partisan approach. This is something that they whole nation can take great pride in. I love those policies and pieces of legislation that are big enough for everyone to take some pride in, and this is one of those.

The strategy identified the need to remove barriers faced by disabled Australians that prevent them from gaining employment. Extensive community consultation found that misunderstanding and naivety about and negativity towards people with disabilities exist within the community. Such attitudes have presented employment participation barriers for too long. These barriers have included concern about risks in employing people with disabilities, associated employer costs with hiring and retaining a person with a disability and the lack of information and support networks designed to assist employers. This misinformation is in many respects a prejudice towards those with a disability, one that we hope will be alleviated and relegated to the past with the beginning of the NDIS. Already a major central hub for disability services and facilities, the Hunter region is one of five NDIS launch sites around the nation. The secretary of Disability Network Hunter, Karen Stace, has stated that the Hunter region has a greater proportion of people requiring care than anywhere else in the state. That has been the case for some time. As a major regional capital, we attract many people who come and live in our city to access disability services.

The Hunter NDIS site is the largest of all the launch sites and will assist 10,000 local people with disability—this is actually half of all people around the nation who will participate—their families and carers. Of the $1 billion funding allocated by the federal Labor government, $300 million of additional funds is being directed towards the Hunter NDIS launch site. The Commonwealth has agreed to cover 51.4 per cent of the costs associated with the NDIS in New South Wales. It is pleasing that through the Council of Australian Governments the New South Wales government has come to the table with funding, and that the entire state of New South Wales will be covered by 2018-19—ultimately benefiting around 140,000 people with disabilities in New South Wales. I congratulate that state government, as it was the right thing for the New South Wales government to do. It took some time as New South Wales had to agree with the government on certain things, but thank goodness it came to this agreement. This rollout will take time, but it must be a gradual transition to ensure the least amount of disruption and that it is in line with the Productivity Commission's recommendations.

It was a pleasure to host the Minister for Disability Reform, Jenny Macklin, in Newcastle in January, visiting service providers and local people with a disability at ConnectAbility, a service provider in Newcastle. ConnectAbility is a not-for-profit service supporting those with high to very high support needs. I thank the organisation's general manager, Karen Stace, the chair, the board members, all the family members who were there on the day and the participants themselves for warmly inviting us into that organisation. I congratulate Karen Stace and her team on the fabulous work that ConnectAbility is doing. There the minister and I heard firsthand the challenges and aspirations of those with a disability, their families and carers and what they would like to see out of the NDIS.

A recurring theme was that the current system does not treat people on a case-by-case basis, and in many cases people fall through the cracks. One local woman we met, who does not have an intellectual disability but is confined to a wheelchair and has high complex needs, told us of her difficult experience in gaining care and support because she does not tick the boxes and does not fit some sort of model. She is reliant on the care of her family, like her sister who has young children. These are very difficult situations and people want some independence and they want their needs to be catered for in a way that does not put people like this very intelligent woman in a care place or a respite place with people that she cannot even relate to. It was very good to hear firsthand from her. It is always the parents and carers who feel totally overwhelmed, and our hearts go out to them because their lives are often changed at such short notice on a whim. We really understand that we have to make this model work, so that everyone can sustain the good relationships and good support partnerships that develop in families and with friends around care situations.

At the Newcastle National Disability Insurance Scheme Forum with Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers, Jan McLucas, last year, we certainly heard the same sorts of stories from our community. We had great interest and lots of questions from service providers who are very keen to be able to make this transition well. I thank Senator McLucas for listening to the concerns and aspirations of our community.

At this forum, we heard the stories and the experiences of local disability advocates such as Melanie Schlager and Linda Hughes and her son Jacob who participate in Mind the Gap, a local advocacy and support network who, as the name suggests, seeks to bridge the gap that currently exists for people with disabilities. I must say that each one of us owes a huge debt to the advocacy groups and the work they have done. It may stem from a personal experience and personal need, but they have been the real champions for people with disabilities for so long. Theirs and many other personal stories have directly informed those building the NDIS, and I certainly do thank them.

Already in Newcastle this great social reform is underway. The Launch Transition Agency are on the ground—they do not have a home base yet, so if you are looking for them, it is not possible to find them in an absolute site yet—and they are recruiting right now. They will employ approximately 65 people overseeing the launch in the Hunter region. The agency will ensure that those with a disability, their families and carers are working with people who know and understand the local community services and support networks. The transition agency's regional offices will include qualified planners who will work with people to develop the individual support statement. It will include local area coordinators who will assist those with disability to participate in their community, financial managers, technical staff and administrators. Major changes will occur in the way we work with people with disabilities and it is important that we get this reform right—step by step, so that we are able to build a sustainable system. In addition to establishing the NDIS, the Launch Transition Agency will ensure the scheme is financially sustainable and play a vital role within the community, building awareness and conducting research surrounding disabilities.

Four-time Paralympian and world champion Kurt Fearnley OAM said in his inspirational 2013 Australia Day address that:

Growing up with a disability does not bring with it a sense of shame or self-doubt. It's only when we learn to interpret the faces of the people around us, or when our environment offers no chance of interacting to an acceptable level, that we realise this.

That is a rather sad observation, but a very true one. We hope the NDIS will bring equity to lives otherwise overlooked. As the Prime Minister has stated, rather than patching up the existing system, our government is building an entirely new system with the current funding model replaced by an insurance approach based on the need of actual and future costs. Local organisations have already received substantial funding to assist with the preparation of the NDIS. Life Without Barriers received $26,000 just recently and $160,000 has been allocated to Hunter TAFE's Disability Employment Broker project. I know that people are preparing for the NDIS with great enthusiasm. I congratulate the Prime Minister and Minister Macklin, particularly, and thank them for their work. (Time expired)

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If we were designing governments from a blank sheet of paper today and determining what should be our priorities to fund from the taxes collected from Australians, I think support for people with disabilities would be among the highest. Supporting people who, through no fault of their own, are born with or acquire profound disabilities must surely be one of the central reasons for having a government. It must surely be a mark of a modern and compassionate society to be able to support such people. We do not collect taxes to put pink batts in people's roofs or to initiative gimmicks such as Fuelwatch or Grocery Watch. Rather, we collect taxes to do the things that cannot be done by individuals or by civil society, such as public infrastructure, defence and environmental protection. I believe that support for those with disabilities, particularly profound disabilities, falls into the category where frequently their needs cannot easily be met by family or by civil society.

This is a fundamental reason why I so strongly support the concept of a national disability insurance scheme, and it is one of the reasons why Tony Abbott says so strongly that the NDIS is an idea whose time has come. The concept at least is to provide adequate support for people with disabilities, regardless of how or when they acquired the disability. This will be the breakthrough of the scheme if it is properly funded and executed.

In the time I have available today I would like to cover three points: firstly, the state of disability support presently, and how an NDIS could overcome some of its problems; secondly, what this particular bill in front of us proposes and the challenges that will confront us, particularly financial ones; and, thirdly, I would like to touch on a quibble I have with the government regarding their insisting on sometimes politicising the matter, despite everyone's desire to put this issue beyond partisanship.

Let me start with the first item: the present state of disability support. I think everybody in this chamber knows that the system of support for Australians with disabilities is broken. The level of support a person with a disability receives can depend on numerous factors, such as what state they live in and whether the disability is congenital or was acquired, and, if acquired, whether it was in the workplace, in a motor vehicle accident or in some other context. Workers compensation and motor vehicle accident insurance provide coverage in some states, but not all. But if you were born with a disability or acquired a disability later in life it can be a completely different story. What that often means is incredibly long waiting lists and queues to try to get some of the services you need. The result is that many people with a disability are left without the assistance they need.

Many people from my electorate have come to see me about the proposal for a national disability insurance scheme to discuss how it potentially would impact on them and their family. One such person was Adam Holleran, a 17-year-old man who came with his 22-year-old sister, Gemma Holleran, to speak to me about the disability insurance scheme. Adam is a person with quite profound intellectual disabilities but is still physically quite capable. He enjoys doing things such as horse riding and recreational activities such as swimming and things like that. But, because of the lack of support the family get presently, they have great difficulty in being able to provide Adam with any of those recreational facilities to provide the social inclusion they are seeking. They have been placed on a waiting list for an individual support package. It could take them up to two years to get some additional assistance. Gemma Holleran said:

We need help now, not in two years, when the stress and strain has skyrocketed. Much more needs to be done so that families get what they need and when they need it, and not after they reach the breaking point.

I think the key point she raises there is that it is not just the key support for the individual with the disability but, importantly, it is the support for the families, as well, who are often desperately trying to do their absolute best to care for their loved one. I am often told by older parents: 'I am not going to be around forever, and my son or daughter I am caring for will probably outlive us. Who is going to look out for our child after that?' It is a very important question for them and one that they are greatly concerned about.

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

The bill in front of us does not itself deliver the vision of a national disability insurance scheme as outlined in the Productivity Commission report. I think it is important to state this clearly, because I sometimes fear that expectations are being set by the government that cannot be met in the near future. I think that is not a desirable thing to do. We need to be very clear about what we are doing, what we can achieve and the pace at which we can achieve it.

The bill establishes the framework for the NDIS and for the NDIS Launch Transition Agency. This will enable the scheme to be properly launched and the agency to operate the launch in five trial sites across Australia, from July 2013. The first stage of the scheme hopefully will benefit 20,000 people with a disability, and their families and carers, living in South Australia, the ACT, Tasmania, the Hunter in NSW and in the Barwon area, near Geelong, in Victoria. The trials will provide funding to individuals or organisations to help people with disability participate more fully in economic or social life through provision of an entitlement, enabling things such as aids, equipment, supported accommodation or personal attendant care. An initial $1 billion has been set aside for these trials.

While there is very strong support across the chamber for the desirability and concept of the NDIS, the complexities of the scheme arise in the detail. For example, the core mechanics of the scheme will be outlined in what are called the NDIS Rules, and these rules will specify and establish things such as the eligibility and assessment criteria. The NDIS Rules consultation paper was released late on Friday, 1 February, this year and feedback closes on 1 March. I am concerned that this is a remarkably short time period to discuss what is a critical feature of the entire NDIS—that is, the eligibility and assessment criteria for who will be able to access the scheme. The bill itself is very broad, defining eligibility as someone with a permanent impairment which results in substantially reduced functional capacity. How this is specifically defined will determine whether people can access the scheme, and the rules consultation paper asks questions but does not at this stage make any suggestions.

The second challenge lies in marrying the existing state schemes with the new federal schemes. Most disability support, as you would be aware, currently operates through state schemes, and so it is critically important to have state governments working cooperatively with the federal government as the details are worked out—and that just adds an additional complexity when you, in essence, have nine governments having to work collectively and cooperatively together to get this national scheme in place.

The third complexity is the cost. The government has allocated $1 billion over the forward estimates for these initial trials, but the Productivity Commission says that $3.9 billion is required initially. So there is a shortfall financially, and we are assuming that, following the passage of this bill, the government will at least appropriate the additional funds in the upcoming May budget. The full implementation of the scheme, though, is likely to cost closer to about $10 billion per annum and, given the state of the budget presently—in large deficit and with a huge debt to pay off—funding this becomes so much more difficult. But we need to do it. The fourth challenge is implementation, and we need to ensure that we have a rigorous implementation process so that mistakes are not made along the way.

In the last few minutes, let me touch on the third area that I wanted to speak on—and that was some quibbles which I have with the government in terms of how it has approached the debate in relation to the NDIS. I understand that the government is proud to initiate the Productivity Commission report and to put this bill forward—and I commend Minister Shorten for the work that he has done to get to this stage. But I think it is a disservice to the disabilities community, and reflects poorly on the government, when it seeks to politicise the scheme. Quite often we hear Labor members, including the Prime Minister and the minister, say that this is 'all about Labor values'. Well, with due respect, this is all about human values and I do not think that anybody in this chamber can claim jurisdiction over compassion and care for those who are less fortunate than us. This scheme will probably take three to four terms to fully implement, and so we have a strong interest in ensuring that there is great bipartisan support—not only at the federal level, but also at the state and territory levels. To that end, the coalition has suggested that, in order to maintain that spirit of bipartisanship and get the cooperation of both the opposition and the government at the same time and into the future—regardless of who is in government and who is in opposition—we should establish an NDIS implementation committee, chaired by one person from the Labor Party and one person from the coalition. In that way, both sides will always be engaged in the process over what will probably be a decade-long implementation process. I must say, I am disappointed that the government has sought to not take up what I thought was a very constructive offer and an offer which would see us through the terms of parliament in front of us, when there may well be a different government in power.

Can I finally just congratulate a few people for getting to the position we are now with this scheme: firstly, all of those people who suffer from a disability, or who have a loved one who suffers from a disability, who have been such strong advocates over the last two years in pushing for this and getting it onto the agenda. Certainly the Every Australian Counts campaign, I think, has been very effective. There have been many individuals in this parliament who have been ardent supporters of it. I mentioned Bill Shorten. I should also mention the shadow minister, Mitch Fifield, who I think has also, like Bill, done very good work in this area in working with the disabilities community to ensure that we take their concerns on board.

The NDIS is an idea whose time has come. This is the first stage with this bill and there is still a lot of work in front of us. We still have to find considerable funds to make it happen, but this bill represents a very good first step.

Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting to sometimes take a step back and actually watch some of these debates and see the contributions by individuals who have a particular activity or life experience that relates to legislation. It was interesting to hear the member for Throsby, who actually worked in the sector and thereby became connected with some of the NGOs that assist people.

Equally, the member for Hughes, on the opposite side of parliament, talked about his own family life situation. I do not think he mentioned this today, but I will mention it: he plays a role in a particular organisation that straddles my own electorate, Fowler, and his electorate. In his own time, he serves on the committee there and he obviously has had firsthand experience of these issues.

I join with other speakers in congratulating Minister Shorten for putting this on the agenda. Also, I think that another person involved in Australian politics has played a significant role in this, and that is the former state minister in New South Wales, John Della Bosca, who mobilised national activity and campaigned around this issue. I think we all have to recognise that it might be an issue whose time has come, but it may not have come without activity by non-government organisations, carers, parents, disabled people themselves and their political sponsors. John Della Bosca has not had a five-minute commitment to this issue; he has always been a person in New South Wales politics who was respected.

I recall when I was the member for Reid: we had a very large disabled organisation called Cumberland Industries based in Lidcombe, next to the Western Suburbs rugby league ground of past years. Let us be as kind as we can: that organisation collapsed because of absolute and total mismanagement. We will not say that it collapsed for other reasons. But it was an organisation which employed hundreds of disabled people in a variety of work companies. One of the activities undertaken out there by John Della Bosca, the then state minister, was to work with Cumberland Industries—at that stage, people thought they were capable of selling a few raffle tickets or something, which proved to be incorrect in the end. But he established a situation over there—or tried to—whereby a variety of state disability organisations could share administrative and clerical staff et cetera to reduce their overheads; to have the one site and to utilise a variety of facilities out there. So he has had a long-term commitment. I have seen in my own electorate the way in which this organisation has pressed members of parliament and put the issue on the agenda.

We are here today after the government has undertaken a variety of measures: establishing a Select Council of Treasurers and Disability Service Ministers, appointing a four-expert group to work under the advisory group and making a national government commitment to support the technical work required in the laying down of the foundations to launch the NDIS. The government has also committed millions to projects that examine the what needs to be done so that service providers and their workers are able to deliver individual personalised care. So there has been a significant amount of work, and no-one is disputing that this is such a massive project that it will certainly require commitment from a number of governments into the future.

One of the things that struck me—and I have said this before in the House—in moving from the electorate of Reid that I represented out to Werriwa was that there was such a dramatic difference with regard to disability organisations and activity. In the old Reid electorate there were rarely any functions related to disability. There were not many organisations. Quite frankly, except for my own individual experience with a few people in the office and people I know locally, it was not an issue which took up much of my daily working life. But out in Werriwa there is such a plethora of organisations, many of them with paid, committed workers, and they each have very strong volunteer bases. I have put it down to, perhaps, being a more Anglo-Saxon electorate, where people are more prepared to talk about these issues. These disabilities are not regarded, perhaps, as given by God. Areas such as Claymore have a high number of housing department homes, and we all know the correlation between disabilities and the breakup of marriages. Usually, the female is left to care for the child. The male—and this is not always the case—predominantly cannot handle those tensions, and therefore you have a lot of single parents in public housing. That is why I think there is a predominance of these organisations and activity in my electorate.

In my electorate I have certainly been persuaded, pushed and cajoled into being involved in the activity around this. I want to cite a few organisations out in my region. One is Junction Works which is led by its CEO, Christopher Campbell. They concentrate on day programs for young adults. They also run a disability catering group which is quite widely used in the region. Recently, I used them for an event with Telstra. Tim Walton heads up AFFORD, a church-connected organisation. It has a factory which employs people in packaging and curtain manufacture. Grace Fava has been mentioned in this House before—she runs the organisation the member for Hughes is intimately involved with. This woman has created an organisation totally through volunteer action. It now has its own premises, it has a 24-hour national phone service and it provides support for children for transition into school. Disability South West has an emphasis on day programs. It operates a house in Lurnea and a drop-in centre for young disabled people. Macarthur Disability Services, headed by Anne Thorn, concentrates on respite and the whole age gamut from children to adulthood. Annamaria Wood is the head of Macarthur District Temporary Family Care at Minto, which provides respite and hosts holiday programs for families. Finally, I want to mention Northcott Disability Services—I say 'finally', but there are many others in the electorate. These are some of the organisations which stand out and which have been involved in pushing the political system to come to this point today.

We can quibble about the funding, but what we have here today is action after decades. It is all right for people to say that it is not properly funded—everyone opposite has been saying that—and this and that. But this is a crucial reform and it has not been put on the political agenda until now. It took the Prime Minister to bang a few heads together at state level to get a few areas for trials. That was a difficult process, but she accomplished it.

Through the NDIS, people will have more choice, they will have programs tailored to their particular needs, they will have a mix of services available to meet their individual requirements, and they will be able to access various levels of care. I join with other speakers in emphasising one particular aspect—the deep concern people in my electorate have about what will happen to their children after they depart. People are living longer and that creates a range of difficult situations. One is that sometimes you get older people being unable to manage because of the size of their child. Another is the fear people have that, after they go—because of the current mishmash of services and some of the rules about how you gain access to them—their children might fall between the cracks.

A number of speakers have mentioned the situation, which has become particularly noticeable in New South Wales. The service or help you get can depend on such things as whether your disability is from birth or not; whether, if it came from an accident, that accident took place in the workplace or not; or whether the disability was caused by another individual's negligence or not. Depending on those things, you get different standards of service and support. In New South Wales a lot more people are going to be falling into that worrying area because trips to work are no longer to be covered by workers compensation.

I commend the lack of partisanship in this debate. I also commend the legislation, which is very important for people in my electorate. It is the culmination of the work of the committed activists, paid workers—although often these people are paid well below what, based on their level of training, you would think they should be paid—parents and families who have thrown their weight into this campaign.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support the comments of the member for Werriwa and many of the other speakers on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. As the Leader of the Opposition said, it is an idea whose time as come. We on the coalition side have been very clear that we support the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the Productivity Commission recommendations which formed the basis for the creation of the scheme. It is great to have this opportunity to speak and to consider the position of many in our community who probably do not have the options in life that those of us in this House have. I think of people like Merv Cooper and Ross Kruger, parents of children that have disabilities. I have spoken to them many times over the last couple of years advocating for people in our community with disabilities. This is certainly an area that in the past has not been given the attention it has deserved, I think it is fair to say, from either side of politics.

This morning I watched an address by Dr Ben Carson. He was making reference to the US national emblem, the bald eagle. He made the comment that eagles are able to fly because they have two wings, a left wing and a right wing which work together. I think it is a very pertinent point that we in this House are debating the National Disability Insurance Scheme from the basis that both sides of politics are prepared to work together in a bipartisan way to achieve an outcome for the people with disabilities in our communities.

As I said earlier, more is needed to be done to assist the nearly four million Australian people living with disabilities so that they do not feel isolated, secluded and left out of the opportunities that many of us take for granted. We all have a basic need to live with dignity and to feel important, valued and respected. We want to have active roles in our family lives and our working lives and within our broader community. Support for people with disabilities is not welfare; it is support to assist those people in participation in the everyday life of our communities. I would like to praise those people involved in the grassroots campaigns for people living with disabilities—their families, their friends, their carers and support organisations—for the many years they have spent getting us to where we are today. More than 150,000 Australians have signed up to the Every Australian Counts campaign, which has given Australians a huge reality check in relation to the treatment of some people living with disabilities. We have many young people living in aged-care nursing homes. We have people with disabilities in some cases only getting two or three showers a week and children who are having to wait up to two years for a wheelchair. These are just some of the examples to highlight that we have been failing as a nation to appropriately support people with disabilities.

There is much support for the NDIS in my electorate of Forde. However, there have been concerns in that the scheme's implementation will continue to face hurdles in terms of funding and how the final make-up of the scheme is put together. The disability and carers sectors also have concerns in relation to the current drafting of those bills. It has been noted that some of the concerns that have been raised are about the lack of detail in the bill and the impact of the bill on small service providers. In addition, further questions raised by the bill include how the full version of the NDIS will be financed, whether there will be sufficient monitoring and other protections in place for participants, who specifically will receive support and what specific supports they will receive, and whether people over 65 should be able to become participants. The rollout of the NDIS, as has been pointed out by previous speakers, will span several parliaments and will continue to require the support of both sides of parliament to ensure that it is successfully implemented. As proposed by the Productivity Commission, the NDIS will take some seven years to reach its full implementation.

I have already had many discussions with constituents in the electorate around needs for the NDIS and, in particular, with a constituent who suffered an accident at work and whose life has been forever changed as a result. This gentleman is the father of two young boys and now spends his life in a motorised wheelchair as a full quadriplegic. After meeting with him at his home, I discovered that it costs him around $200,000 per year just to stay alive. His carers are working around the clock, and he is spending a considerable amount of money making changes to his family home to make it disability-friendly. The cost of hiring carers and the cost of medications, which are often not covered by any kind of concession, readily add up to a vast sum of money. The saddest part of this story is that he was a young man in the prime of his life and that it was an accident at work—he was not doing anything untoward or anything silly. It was, unfortunately, an accident. Yet his two children suffer the burden of seeing their father now as a quadriplegic for life. The things that they may have done with him as they grew up—kicking a football around, throwing a cricket ball around the backyard—are pleasures that they will never get to enjoy. So it has not only cost him his mobility but also brought about a massive change in life for him. Unfortunately, it has also cost him his marriage. This is just one example of how tough it can be for people living with a disability, not only in my electorate but in electorates all around the country.

In addition to the requests for financial assistance from families with young children struggling to afford life's basic essentials, I regularly receive inquiries in my office around the necessary aids and medications for those children with special needs and disabilities. I have also been alerted to the concerns of parents of disabled children, who worry about what will happen when they become old and pass away. Their concern is, 'Who will look after my child then?' Something needs to be done to ensure that these people are given the support that they need to live a comfortable, dignified life and to assure them that their children whom they love dearly will be looked after when they pass away.

In order to make this a reality, we need to hear how the NDIS will be funded into the future. The NDIS could already be being funded, if it was a priority. Now that the reality has sunk in about the shortfall in the mining tax revenue, where does that place the funding for the NDIS? Does this government have the funding to ensure the NDIS becomes a reality? These questions are asked in a constructive spirit, as we on the coalition side stand ready to work with the government to see the NDIS delivered as soon as possible. To be able to deliver good social policies such as the NDIS, a strong economy is required. That is why we need to live within our means and to ensure a strong and growing economy. As I said at the outset, we support the NDIS for the benefits it will bring not only to those in my community of Forde but also to the broader Australian public. I commend the bill to the House.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Higher Education and Skills) 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 and enables the launch of a scheme that takes an insurance approach to the provision of funding for and support of people with disability. The bill will enable the launch of the NDIS in five sites across Australia from July 2013, benefiting more than 20,000 people with a disability, their families and carers. The bill provides for the launch of a scheme that will support the independence and social and economic participation of those people with a disability who are participating in the launch, and will ensure that individuals with a disability have their reasonable and necessary support needs met. The launch of the scheme is a very important step on the road to Australians having a disability support system that is nationally consistent and easy to navigate. It is intended to ensure that no members of our community fall through the cracks because their specific needs do not fit into existing programs. To manage the scheme, the bill establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency, an independent body responsible for the provision of support to people with a disability during the launch of the scheme.

The bill also provides the criteria that individuals must meet in order to participate in the scheme, and ensures that eligible individuals are entitled to funding for the reasonable and necessary care and support they require. The bill also ensures, however, that participants have control over and choice in relation to the support they receive and that that support is tailored to their specific needs.

Participants in the scheme will work with the agency to develop a statement of their own goals and aspirations and to describe their particular circumstances and arrangements. As part of their participant plan, participants will then work with the agency to set out the necessary and reasonable support and care required to achieve their goals and aspirations.

Under the scheme, people with a disability will be able to make their own decisions about how to manage their support through the mechanism of person-centred and goal based plans. To the extent that a participant chooses to, under the scheme participants can manage the funding they are provided with under their plan and the purchasing of their supports. The bill also provides that the participant can choose to have all or part of their plan managed by a nominee or a registered provider of support.

In addition to direct care, the bill provides that the NDIS agency can provide funding to organisations to provide the support and to enable participation for the individual in economic and social life. Funding can also be provided for activities, such as counselling for young people with a disability on the transition from school to university or to TAFE or, indeed, to work. I was particularly pleased with this provision, given my involvement in the tertiary education portfolio and my keen interest in equitable access to higher education and skills training. The bill also sets up the administrative structure of the scheme, including rules to protect personal information, the right to review of decisions, and how to and who can act on behalf of a participant in the management of their plan.

Support under the NDIS is not intended to replace current insurance and compensation schemes for personal injury such as those for workplace and motor vehicle accidents. The bill deals with the interaction of the NDIS with existing schemes and allows the NDIS agency to ensure that reasonable action has been taken to recover costs under those insurance and compensation schemes.

The bill establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. The agency will deliver the scheme, managing the financial sustainability of the scheme as a whole, and it will undertake research and activities to build community awareness of disability issues. The agency will be overseen by a board with experience in disability services and will be advised by an independent advisory council to provide ongoing advice to the board. Importantly, the advisory council will include members who have a disability and members who are carers of people with a disability, bringing real experience of disability to planning and decision-making processes.

Indeed, community and disability services in the Illawarra have welcomed the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. In October the Minister for Disability Reform, Jenny Macklin, joined me and my colleague Stephen Jones, the member for Throsby, and other community leaders to host a community forum in Dapto to discuss the progress towards a national disability insurance scheme. Local people with a disability and their families and carers, as well as local service providers, all joined together to attend the forum to hear how an NDIS will work for people with a disability and of the work underway to launch the scheme.

Residents in the Illawarra turned up in numbers to show strong support for an NDIS. They reflected to us that they know we need fundamental change in the way we deliver care and support for people with disability and, in particular, that they are pleased the government is leading the way in making this change. Locals will continue to have a voice, as our government has set up a series of advisory groups to help us make sure that we are getting these very vital elements of the NDIS right. Indeed, as many in this House have reflected in the debate, my colleagues and I will continue to talk to people, talk to our local communities, to make sure we are getting their feedback.

People with a disability and their advocates in the Illawarra have told us loud and clear that they want an NDIS and that is what we are working hard to build. Once again, on 26 October last year, hundreds of people with a disability, their families, carers and supporters came together at Kembla Grange, to support the government's funding injection into the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

I, along with many of my colleagues, went along and supported this rally, which was attended by several hundred people. I had the opportunity, along with my colleague the member for Throsby and some of my state colleagues, to speak to many of the people who came along for the day. They were all decked out in red, holding slogans and balloons. It was a fantastic sight to see. They were all of the same view: this funding structure would be extremely beneficial to each and every one of them.

Greenacres Disability Services chief executive, Stephen Beard, welcomed the Prime Minister's commitment to a National Disability Insurance Scheme. Indeed, he said in the Greenacres Disability Services newsletter:

It's great; it's the next step …

There's been bipartisan support for an NDIS but getting the funding commitment was [vital].

At this point I would like to acknowledge the long years of hard work put in by Neil Preston, the former chief of Greenacres Disability Services. He is now retired but never retired from advocating on disability issues. He has been working with Stephen Jones and me for many years on these sorts of issues.

Indeed, Greenacres Disability Services has been providing services for people with a developmental disability in the Illawarra for more than 50 years. Illawarra Disability Trust Executive Manager for Organisational Development, Matthew Martin, reported in the University of Wollongong's The Current magazine:

I think our view from the disability sector at this stage is that any commitment is a good one … at this stage there is commitment and there appears to be bipartisan support.

He added:

From a service provider point of view, if you look at the roll-out of the funding that has occurred after the last couple of years particularly at a state level, this is unprecedented.

I would say that you need to pay credit where it is due.

All acknowledge the important role that this scheme is playing. Mr David Bowen, a local resident of the Illawarra, has been hand-picked by the federal government and appointed as the CEO of the body coordinating the launch of the NDIS. This group will be responsible for steering government to a position where we will be able to launch the NDIS by 1 July this year. Mr Bowen is currently chair of the National Injury Insurance Scheme Advisory Committee and was one of the architects of the New South Wales Lifetime Care and Support Scheme. He brings a wealth of experience to the field.

Interchange Illawarra, another very important local disability service, is also supporting and campaigning for the NDIS. At a meeting on 7 October 2011, the Treasurer of Interchange Illawarra, Susan Wallis, joined me in my office where I, along with her and some other representatives and their children, signed the 'I count' pledge. This campaign has had huge support in the Illawarra and carers such as Melanie Language and Jill Coleman were also present to support the event. I was very pleased to be able to sign that pledge, as I know many in this House were.

The family-managed allocations given by Interchange to carers and people with a disability allow them to use the funding to best suit their needs, which is the focus of the NDIS. Mr Kirkwood, a father of a child suffering autism, said he is all for the proposed scheme, as it means carers will not lose respite service funding when waiting to change from one disability organisation to the other. He as a carer is supporting the introduction of the NDIS. The general manager of Interchange, Glenda Pearce, said on the Interchange website:

… through family allocations and NDIS, people with a disability and their families can access help from trusted personal services, as well as from different support facilities.

…      …   …

Both NDIS and family allocations are person-centred and can be very cost-effective models of support.

The Flagstaff Group is an Illawarra social enterprise, operating businesses in the Illawarra, which employs people with a disability. Indeed, the group recently presented the New South Wales NDIS Campaign Director, Mr John Della Bosca, with a $10,000 cheque as part of its commitment to the National Disability Insurance Scheme. CEO Roy Rogers said that Flagstaff is committed to supporting people with a disability. He told WIN TV:

Flagstaff is proud to be a part of any initiative that promotes greater participation within the community and opportunities for people with disabilities.

Our organisation is all about improving our employees’ quality of life by enhancing their skills and independence while providing meaningful mainstream employment.

Mr John Della Bosca said that the federal government has stated it shares the vision for an NDIS and it has taken the first step, but we need to make sure the government takes the next step and the one after that. After such hard work together, we are so close to achieving this landmark reform. We cannot allow an NDIS to be swept under the carpet. Indeed, this federal government is working to make sure that does not happen. People across the Illawarra and the nation support this major reform that will stand in significance with other generational Labor reforms such as Medicare and superannuation. This bill is a very important contribution to the critical tasks involved in establishing the scheme and I therefore encourage the House to support its passage.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to start by acknowledging the years and years of hard work by those at the grassroots level, the campaign by carers, and those who do work with Australians with disabilities, as well as the organisations that support them. I want to acknowledge their efforts that have assisted in bringing us here before the House tonight.

As has often been quoted from diverse speakers such as Ghandi, Hubert Humphries and Jimmy Carter: 'Any society, any nation, is judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members,' and that is why we are here. This holds true for those with a disability in our communities. It is a message that has been very profoundly and directly delivered, continually and certainly, to the Productivity Commission. It is a message that is very well understood by the coalition. It is why the Leader of the Opposition has said very clearly that the NDIS is an idea whose time has come. How we make that happen within this place is what is before us tonight.

We all know that the current system is not adequate. In my electorate, as with other members, I constantly meet people who are so dedicated and they are often the carers, the individuals with the disabilities and they are often families who are quite desperately in need of respite. They are all desperately in need of a system that can assist them in a simple and practical way. In a rural and regional electorate like my own, there are so many challenges in relation to accessing support and services. Many people live in isolated areas, and I meet the extended families and friends who are often required to help out with the care. There are small community groups of volunteers who provide support even for just offering exercise.

I would like to thank the Country Women's Association that worked tirelessly to provide a pool for young Nathan Simpson in Capel. Every small step for Nathan is a major achievement. Unlike other children Nathan cannot run, skip, hop or jump. He cannot climb or walk. Instead he crawls or walks with aids and assistance. Swimming is the only way Nathan can experience freedom of movement which eliminates his physical disabilities. I watched him in his pool—the pool that the CWA and the community worked so hard to provide for Nathan. I am sure that this is a story that is repeated right around Australia, particularly in rural and regional areas.

We see those who are of a mature age and who worry constantly about what will happen to their loved ones when they are too old to care for them or are no longer here. This bill is a next step. There is a massive amount of work yet to be done. I do not think anybody in this chamber underestimates the amount of work ahead and the fact that it is going to take, possibly, a decade to get the NDIS to the point it needs to be at.

This work is above party politics. The parliament needs to get the design and the implementation of the NDIS as right as it can possibly make it, because those with a disability, their carers and those who service those needs are counting on us to do that. We stand ready to work with the government right now. We have repeatedly made bipartisan offers to the government to work with them. The NDIS has cross-party support at state and federal levels. And at the state level—this is one of the complexities that the federal government are going to need to deal with—in Western Australia, the Liberal government has been very active in the disability services sector. In my own electorate of the Forrest, the state member for Bunbury, John Castrilli, has successfully delivered what I believe is one of the greatest achievements in high-care support and respite accommodation in Western Australia.

Treendale Gardens was designed specifically for young adults who are disabled by multiple sclerosis and similar neurological conditions. According to the MS Society of WA, which runs it, Treendale Gardens is:

… a modern complex of 11 purpose built, one bedroom, high-support accommodation units where young people with disabilities due to MS or other neurological conditions can receive 24 hour care.

…      …      …

The model provides residents with a true sense of home—

something so important—

with the additional reassurance of 24-hour on-site support and security.

It also has a six-bed respite house and three-bedroom family respite unit. You can only imagine how useful this is going to be and how much comfort this is going to bring to families in my electorate. It is the only facility of its type outside Perth in Western Australia. Its function is to keep young people with a disability out of aged-care and nursing homes. This is something that has been an absolute passion for John Castrilli. I really do congratulate him on what is I believe an outstanding achievement that brings so much benefit to our community. He has been passionate about this for a long time.

We know that the WA state government's investment in disability across the board is considerable, which is part of what the government will be needing to take into account. The 2011-12 WA budget invested a massive $600 million in social services, including unparalleled investment in the not-for-profit sector, which provides so many of those services that are required by those with a disability. It was designed to support around 400,000 Western Australians including the 116,000 who have profound or multiple disabilities. I know that the WA government has written to the Prime Minister proposing a joint WA-Commonwealth NDIS. This is just one example of the complexity that is still ahead and that is going to need to be worked through.

The NDIS needs to be very carefully structured. There are some key areas that people have a great concern about—and we will get to the rules—such as eligibility and assessment in the criteria. Those are areas that I see as needing to be very carefully structured and ones that will perhaps create some serious consideration from all sides of politics. Agreement has been reached with five states and territories to host the launch sites with services to be delivered to 20,000 people—which we all know is merely a fraction of the defined need.

Further expansion of the NDIS will depend on the Commonwealth negotiating and concluding further bilateral agreements with each jurisdiction. The most critical question is how the NDIS will be funded. We in the coalition have supported the government's commitment of $1 billion in the federal budget. However, we also note that this comes nowhere near the $3.9 billion the Productivity Commission said would be necessary over the forward estimates period for what is just the first phase of the NDIS. There have been a number of figures expressed over time in the discussions about the NDIS. We have heard that perhaps $10 million per annum will be the cost when the NDIS is running in the way that we might want it to: $10 million has to be found to manage this scheme in the longer term. The current shortfall that we know exists from the $3.9 billion has to be accounted for and I will be looking to see if that is in this year's budget and forward estimates.

The NDIS needs to be delivered in the time frame recommended by the Productivity Commission. It could be delivered in that time frame by a prudent government that can manage the economy and the delivery of the NDIS. The coalition has strongly supported each milestone along the road, including the initial work by the Productivity Commission, the $1 billion in the last budget, the five launch sites, the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales for a full statewide rollout after the Hunter launch, and this legislation.

The bill itself provides for the establishment of the framework for the NDIS and the launch transition agency that will initially manage it. The ultimate aim of any disability scheme is to develop and actually be able to deliver on the ground, where it is needed, the services and supports and the personalised plans for Australians with a disability. I note that most of the funding is to be targeted at individual support packages. Personal planning provisions should ensure that the NDIS offers a person-centred and self-directed approach—very important. Each person has specific needs. There may not be the supports and services that the individual needs in each of the communities, so the individual clients must be front and centre and in charge. They must be able to decide on the supports, the aids, the equipment and the services from the providers of their choice. Under this system, a plan must include a statement of participant goals and aspirations, prepared by the participant, and a statement of participant support, to be approved by the agency. The plans will specify the general support and the reasonable and necessary individual support to be provided.

We in this place need for the support under the plan to represent true value for money such that the costs are reasonable relative both to the benefit and to alternative support. The plan must have regard for current good practice and must certainly take family and informal networks into account. As I said at the beginning of my speech, when you are out in the rural and regional areas in my electorate, frequently these are the support networks for people with disabilities. We all know that it is the family; it is the extended family; it is friends—quite often there is a vast disability network surrounding the person and the family. That is what has been required just to provide even a basic level of support. The agency may also provide general support for people with disability who are not participants of the NDIS, often through information. Where do I find details of the scheme? Where are the coordination and referrals? That is part of the information that will be supplied.

The level of support a person with a disability currently receives can actually depend on what state they live in, whether the disability is congenital or was acquired, and whether it was the result of an accident. In each case, as we know, there is a variation on the level of support provided. The result is that many people with a disability are left without the assistance they need.

These are core issues that a well-designed and well-managed NDIS needs to address. The delivery of a well-managed NDIS will depend heavily on the rules—and we have not seen the rules. The actual mechanics of the agency are part of this. As I said earlier, one of the key issues will be the rules around eligibility and assessment. The bill is essentially a framework that establishes the transition agency, the board, the CEO and a general definition of eligibility, but it certainly does not deal with the issue of eligibility and assessment. The real delivery mechanism will be established by the rules, and to date they have not been adequately defined. On 1 February, the government released a discussion paper on the rules, but it contained little information of substance. This area is going to require a significant focus and the rules will need to be very carefully crafted in the coming months. The rules certainly do need to be released quickly. I am told that at the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee there was recurrent evidence presented by witnesses who said it was really difficult for them to provide advice, pose questions or plan for the launch sites in the absence of the rules. So we can understand very clearly why the rules are so important both to the legislators and the community. We have called for the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the establishment and implementation of the NDIS. It is incumbent on all of us in this place to get this right. It is a very complex issue and process and it will be a complex design. I encourage the government in its deliberations to consider the needs in particular of people with disability in rural and regional areas in relation to support and services and how the NDIS is designed

Alan Griffin (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why are we here? We are here to debate an incredibly important piece of legislation that is the first step in the establishment of a system that will deal with the needs of people in our community with disabilities. We stand here to do this because our nation and our political parties have not been prepared to do this before. All of us have experience dealing with people with disability in the community, some very closely, as has been highlighted by some members of parliament with members of their own family, sometimes their own children. Others members have experience with relatives of a more distant nature, and many of us—in fact all us—have experience with the needs of constituents who come to our offices in search of help, in need of help and most deserving of help. The fact that we as a nation have not previously got to the stage, in a coordinated and efficient manner, to dealing holistically with the needs of people with disability is something that we as a country cannot be proud of—but we now have an opportunity to do something about it.

People with disability and their families are one of the most disadvantaged groups in Australia, with substandard outcomes on most indicators of community participation and social and economic wellbeing. For example, 50 per cent progress past year 10 at school, compared with 80 per cent in the general population; 31 per cent participation in the labour force compared with 83 per cent of people without disability. Two-thirds earn less than $320 a week, compared with one-third of the general population. Furthermore, a 2007 study by the Australian Centre on Quality of Life and the School of Psychology at Deakin University found that family carers have the lowest level of wellbeing of any group. Australia also has the lowest rates of employment of people with disability of any OECD nation.

The Productivity Commission's Disability Care and Support report concluded that:

The current disability support system is underfunded, unfair, fragmented, and inefficient. It gives people with a disability little choice, no certainty of access to appropriate supports and little scope to participate in the community

In short, it concluded that the current system is:

…marked by invisible deprivation and lost opportunities.

The commission's recommendation was to establish a new disability care and support scheme in which all Australians with a significant and ongoing disability—around 410,000 people—would get long-term care and support.

An NDIS will ensure people are no longer shut out from opportunities and from independence by providing the appropriate and necessary supports that allow people with disability to reach their full potential. It aims to support the independence and social and economic participation of people with disability. It will take a lifelong approach and a focus on early intervention, which will substantially improve functioning or delay decline. It will promote innovation in the provision of supports. The NDIS is essentially about choice—it puts people with disability in control of the care and support they receive, based on their individual needs. As the Prime Minister explained in her second reading speech:

The scheme will move away from the crisis model, where families only receive support if they are unable to continue in their caring role and there are no other options. Instead, it will work with families before they reach crisis to make sure that the valuable informal care they provide is sustainable.

The NDIS will be a cooperative venture with the Commonwealth, the states and territories operating as partners under the umbrella of COAG. The scheme will be implemented progressively. Five launch sites are planned for 2013-14 in five different host jurisdictions. Under this bill, support for participants of the scheme will be provided as a part of an individual goal-based plan. Each participant will work with the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency to identify their goals and aspirations and their individual circumstances, including living arrangements, informal care and environmental and personal factors. This will help guide the development of their individually-funded support package. Each participant's plan will be in two parts: the first, developed by the participant, will set out the goals, aspirations and individual circumstances; the second, developed jointly by the participant and the agency, will include details about how the participant has decided to manage their plan and when it will be reviewed. Plans are to be approved by the CEO in accordance with prescribed rules and will remain in effect until they are replaced by another plan or are revoked. The legislation provides for the provision and funding of reasonable and necessary support for participants. Plans may be managed by the participant, by a registered plan management service provider, by the agency or by a plan nominee. There are some circumstances where the participant may not manage their own plan—for example, where the participant is insolvent or under administration or where the CEO is satisfied that management of the plan would present an unreasonable risk to the participant. Payments will be made to the participant or the person managing the participant's plan. These payments must be spent in accordance with the participant's plan and records of payments and receipts retained.

The Productivity Commission found that ageing carers are left desperately worried about what will happen to their child once they are no longer able to care for them, and those they care for also feel the pressure of uncertainty, worrying about what the future holds for them. This legislation aims to establish a system that is also sensitive to carers' circumstances and takes into account the sustainability of each person's caring arrangements. Adam Cope, a person with disability, wrote his story in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme:

Living each day is full of stress for my parents and myself. Not knowing if tomorrow my mum and dad would still be here to continue to support me is the worst feeling. The fact that this will at some time occur is really driving me fearful with worry and anger. The current system provides minimum support and relies on parents, family and charity models to enable me to have a life. The NDIS would give me a means to have hope and be supported to do what I want to do. It would also let mum and dad off the hook and they could then have a life. After 39 years I think they deserve it.

He goes on to outline potential economic benefits:

The NDIS will assist a great number into work. This will, in time, have many more people paying taxes and putting back into the economy. Parents who have had to give up work to support their adult children will also be able to remain in the workforce and continue paying taxes. Equipment design and innovative ways of creating new devices will make Australia a world leader in a whole new approach for disability. This in itself has great potential for the country's economy.

Carer Bronwyn Brown cares for her 19-year-old daughter, Tamesia. Mrs Brown said:

We literally do everything for her. If she sneezes, we are there to wipe her nose and we are up all night because we have to turn her, it is as constant as having an extra arm on your body and it is getting harder as we get older. I now suffer with a back condition from all the years of lifting...We are OK for equipment under the medical aid disability scheme but it is when it comes to respite care that we struggle because she is now at home. Especially when I'm sick or there is a crisis, that is what I worry about most...I went to the rally in the city to fight for this so I am happy about the decision but I fear that a change in government might change the plans.

A large range of disability service providers and sector representatives have openly supported the NDIS. Vision Australia have written:

During 2011-12 Vision Australia provided services to 33,577 Australians who are blind or have low vision, including their families and carers, on a regular basis. We strongly support the NDIS and believe that no person who is blind or has low vision, or who acquires vision loss, should be left without access to government funded service support and assistance.

Cerebral Palsy Australia President Glenn Rappensberg has said that disability services—support and care—must be personalised, caring and specialised. He said:

Funding must be equitable across the nation, balanced by the desirability of having local assessments, community support and flexible responses, which are critical for people living with disability.

The Health and Community Services Workforce Council said:

The NDIS is a much needed reform which will dramatically change the landscape of the disability sector in Australia. This reshaping will undoubtedly improve the access and choice of care available to our communities, but also has the potential to lead to significant changes to the disability workforce's existing work roles and job design.

It is clear that there is bipartisan support; this initiative needs bipartisan support, but the question of the way forward will be full of challenges. As has been mentioned earlier, this is a complex change and a very large change. There will be problems, and that is why there is Senate inquiry, why there needs to be trials and why we can expect that this will take years to implement in full. We need to take that time to make sure that we do get it right. It has been mentioned by many speakers, particularly on the other side, that there are financial issues here, and of course there are. Major changes often do require financial commitment. Needs that have been neglected or that have been left to family members, friends and charities to deal with over time will in fact require financial commitment. It is incumbent on this parliament and the parliaments in the future at both a national and a state and territory level to ensure that that funding is provided. That funding must be provided because the need is there. That need has, as I have said, been ignored often as many of us have, frankly, just turned away because it was all too hard.

Those who have been committed to something like the NDIS for years and who have worked hard to develop models and ensure that politicians and the broader community understand the nature of the unmet need should be congratulated. I will not try and name names because there are probably too many to name. I hope that they see in the initiatives here before the parliament today that the work that they have done and the commitment that they have had is being met by this parliament on a very necessary road forward. This is one step along the way, and it will be one step at a time, but the fact is they are steps that must be taken. It has been said by some speakers on this side of the house—and I agree—that this is a Labor reform, but it needs to be a national reform. It is a reform that is about dealing with those in society with a disability with care and compassion, providing them with the opportunity to be all that they can be and providing real assistance to their families and loved ones. We must do it and we must do it now.

I commend this legislation as a very important step forward on a road that will hopefully lead to a situation where those with disability in our community will receive the support that they need to give them the opportunity to be what they can be. We as a society will be better for it.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. Like most, many or indeed all in this place and the other place, all of our lives have been touched by the issue of disability one way or the other either directly or through our family and friends. As an able-bodied person who has been very fortunate—and indeed my family has been very fortunate in these things—I cannot pretend to know what it is like for people to live with a disability. I also cannot pretend to know personally what it is like to care and be the primary carer for someone in that situation and the burden that places on them. Like everyone in this place, I seek to empathise and to understand, but there is a constraint on truly understanding this for those of us who thankfully have not had that terrible misfortune. That misfortune can come through accident at birth or through accident itself, as many disabilities do—and, in that regard, it is very important that we do all we can to ensure that we keep Australians safe. There are so many great initiatives out there—public, private and in the not-for-profit sector—that are designed to teach children, particularly, how to ensure that they can live safely and do not find themselves in the position of receiving a serious injury.

I say that at the outset because I think there could be nothing more offensive to someone who suffers from a disability or cares for someone with a disability than for us to somehow think that we truly get it or understand it. That is why I provide that qualifier. But, coming from that position of disadvantage, let me say to everyone outside this place that, in this House and in the other place, there is strong support for the intentions and measures that are put forward in this bill. This scheme is long overdue and it is something that we all hope to see achieved in our lifetimes. I sincerely hope it is and I sincerely hope that the momentum that has been created over a very long period of time will continue. I hope that the advocates of many, many years ago are encouraged by what they see taking place here, with equal measures of support across this chamber.

The coalition supports the recommendations of the Productivity Commission, and we have pledged to work constructively with the government to implement these measures in the most timely and effective manner. We do live in the lucky country, and most Australians assume that, because we are an advanced and wealthy nation, there is adequate support and resourcing provided for people with disabilities and their carers. There is not. For such a long time, that burden has fallen—and, sadly, for a time it will continue to fall—on individuals, families, friends and communities, who will be the primary support for those who suffer.

The Productivity Commission identified $6½ billion in unmet disability care and support—money that could have been spent on Australians in need, to support those with disabilities and those who work tirelessly alongside them. That has been the subject of other political debates.

As my colleagues have outlined in this place, the coalition will look to engage constructively to take this important issue forward. When this legislation before us was first introduced into the parliament last year, the coalition, in agreement with the government, referred the bill to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee to systematically work through the detail and inquire into these matters in a spirit of bipartisanship. That report will be presented to the Senate next month, and we look forward to receiving its findings and actioning them accordingly, where appropriate.

In that spirit of goodwill, the coalition also propose the establishment of an ongoing joint parliamentary committee, chaired by both sides, to oversee the implementation of the NDIS. As well as providing a formal tool to facilitate that bipartisanship, the committee would provide an opportunity to sound out questions about design, implementation and eligibility and put together a potential timetable. Regrettably, to date the Prime Minister has not adopted our suggestion. Disappointingly, the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers has gone so far as to say it was a bad idea. This is disappointing. The coalition, if there should be a change of government, will make the same offer again, because the NDIS is something that should go forward with practical cooperation, regardless of where you sit in this place.

We support the introduction of this legislation into the parliament. It establishes a framework for the NDIS and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. But we must be careful in this place that we do not raise expectations about what is to be delivered by this bill, particularly in the short to medium term. I can think of nothing more cruel than to raise the expectations of people who are living with this challenge on a day-to-day basis. We should be honest about the progress and we should be clear about our resolve, but we should not pretend that things are going to change quickly, certainly not overnight. To that end, making statements about having 'delivered' the NDIS and things of that nature are not helpful. I look forward to the NDIS being delivered, but it certainly has not been delivered yet, and it will be some years before it has. It will certainly be some years before the benefits of such a scheme, enjoying the support of the entire parliament, are actually experienced by those who are intended to receive them.

The bill would enable stage 1 of the scheme to be launched in five sites across the country from July, to the benefit of more than 20,000 people with a disability, their families and their carers. The scheme would provide funding to individuals or organisations to help people with a disability engage and participate in economic and social life. This could be through the provision of an entitlement enabling aids or equipment, or personal attendant care and supported accommodation.

The NDIS in principle is person centred, operating on a self-directed funding model. At its heart, the bill is about empowering those with disabilities to reach their full potential and encouraging them to embrace opportunities, set goals and live a full life. But it is important to note that, without funding, this is nothing more than a hollow gesture, a hollow promise. Where the money is to fund the NDIS is not clear. The government has allocated $1 billion of $3.9 billion required over the forward estimates for stage 1. The detail of where this funding is to come from to give reality to what we are discussing in this place is still to be revealed, if it will be revealed at all.

Labor have brought forward the launch sites by one year ahead of the Productivity Commission's plan. They are still yet to explain how they intend to fund a full national rollout. We believe the Productivity Commission's timetable is achievable, with prudent government and good economic management. The coalition has supported the initial work of the Productivity Commission, including the five launch sites and the introduction of the legislation into this parliament. We will continue to support milestones on the road to the NDIS.

Much has been said in this place today about how the NDIS is an opportunity for once-in-a-generation reform, and this is true. Admittedly, it will be a work in progress, as I have mentioned, for many years, but it is important that reforms of this nature, which will touch so many lives, are carefully worked through. We have a responsibility to work in this place constructively and collaboratively to ensure we get the detail and the blueprint right. We cannot afford for this policy to be rushed in implementation and catastrophically bungled, like the project delivery we have seen across this government in so many other portfolios.

In reflecting on the promises of this bill before us, it is also appropriate that, in this place, we recognise the work that is already being done in this space—quietly, behind the scenes, in homes and organisations around the country—because the burden will continue to fall on them for many, many years to come. We cannot allow the NDIS to—

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Mr Champion interjecting—

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I note the interjections from the members opposite. I do not think this is the sort of debate that encourages those sorts of interjections.

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

Order! The member for Wakefield will cease interjecting.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If he wishes to make this debate partisan, he will have the opportunity to do that in his own remarks. I was trying to acknowledge the good work of people in our own communities and, I am sure, the member's communities who are actually out there doing it every day, and the carers and parents and families who are doing this job. We should endeavour to do all we can over the years in which this scheme will come into being to ensure that we can assist them in the meantime. I would not have thought that was something inviting an interjection, but I suppose that reflects more on the member opposite.

In my electorate of Cook there are two particular organisations I would like to pay tribute to. They do this work every day of the week, and I would like to recognise in this place the work that they do. Civic Disability Services have served the shire for more than 50 years. Their commitment to providing care and purpose for those with disabilities in our local area is commendable, and they continue to provide those services today in spite of the pressures and costs of operating in a very difficult economic environment. I have had the opportunity to be part of many of their programs and see their work firsthand. They provide people with intellectual disabilities with a job, with real work, which they are paid for as part of a functioning business that is out there making its own way. One of the most inspiring things about Civic Disability Services is to meet the people who have had those jobs for decades. They have had this as a focus of their lives for such a long period of time. It is important that they continue the work that they are engaged with, and it is important that they can continue to be commercially successful and deal with the many challenges that come their way which small businesses understand and face all around this country. They employ more than 100 people. They provide meaningful employment and give purpose to the lives of people with disabilities in the shire because they can provide a commercial service to real commercial clients who expect high standards at an affordable cost, and that is what they deliver.

There is also the Sylvanvale Foundation. It has provided support to people with an intellectual disability not only in the shire but also in greater Sydney for more than 60 years. The foundation provides a wide range of support services and they are dedicated to serving people under the guidance of their now chief executive Jill Deering. Their vision is to touch lives, awaken potential and work in partnership with people that they support. It is the words 'work in partnership' that ring most true in my association with them. We should be taking that attitude of a partnership forward in the way we engage with the detail of this bill and implementing this scheme in this place. This is not about politics; this is all about a partnership between all Australians. The Sylvanvale mission is to enable people with an intellectual disability to achieve their full potential by providing exceptional services that support, inspire and enable people to reach their goals. Sylvanvale provides a wide range of services and initiatives including accommodation designed to help those with disabilities to live as independently as possible, gain confidence in themselves, acquire skills and expand life experiences. They also offer day programs specialising in lifestyle and social skills, in addition to post-school options and community participation initiatives designed to enable people to gain their independence and look after their health and wellbeing. The Transition to Work Program assists young adults with an intellectual disability to prepare them for work once they have finished school by equipping them with the vital life skills to help them in a home and workplace setting. In Jill Deering's own words, 'It is important for people with a disability to have a choice and have control over the services they need.' Sylvanvale provides that partnership, allowing each individual to take an active role in determining their future.

The level of community support for the initiatives before us in this bill is the reason it has been so well received. The expectations, ambitions and aspirations that the people of Australia have for this have been great, and that is why those aspirations and expectations have to be managed carefully. I noticed this when last year, in response to some changes in funding arrangements, Sylvanvale was out of pocket for some $7,800 to continue an out-of-school-hours care program for children with disabilities. The response from our community to this was simply incredible. Not only was that money raised directly from the community, but it was raised many times over. I particularly want to commend the member for Barton who joined with me to raise much of those funds. Around $20,000 was raised in a Pollie Paddle that we conducted on the Port Hacking River together.

That event demonstrated the spirit in which members of this House, in the main, try to work together in their local communities to address the needs of disabled people and the services that they depend on. With great support from organisations like Ace Gutters, TCQ Construction, Crown and Virgin, and Caringbah Rotary this initiative was a great fillip. It was a great encouragement to those at Sylvanvale, because it said to them that their community cared. I hope in the future that this parliament will be able to demonstrate that it cares through the realisation of the intentions of this bill.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great privilege and honour to speak on this bill. In 2006 I did about 71 or so street corner meetings as well as meetings in towns and suburbs in my electorate. The striking thing about those meetings was that I could probably say that at every one of them was a parent or carer of a person with a disability. Parents came to talk about their adult children who had lived with a disability and who relied on their care. There were parents who were often very worried about what would happen to their child once they had passed off this mortal coil or grew too old to care for them. There were also parents of young children with severe autism or with other disabilities who were worried about what the future would hold for their son or daughter. And, of course, there were the pleas of carers.

We know that there was nothing new in the issues, demands and concerns brought up by these parents. This was a crisis which had been decades in the making. And we know that state governments had, by and large, done a pretty poor job of providing a safety net, much less a life of dignity for people with a disability, for their carers or for parents of children with a disability.

And credit should go to the member for Maribyrnong, because he was one of the first politicians to realise that this group of people were out there and that they were a constituency whose needs needed to be met and acknowledged. I remember him doing a disability forum with the member for Makin and me. A huge number of people turned out at my old university—it is now a school in Tony Zappia's electorate—and there was a huge outcry from them. They had very reasonable demands of government about giving people with disabilities some dignity.

In August 2011, the Prime Minister released the Productivity Commission inquiry report, Disability care and support. That was a watershed moment. The one thing I will agree on with the member for Cook is that we need to be careful about setting up this scheme. We need to make sure that it is set up for the long term. The Productivity Commission found that the state of care in Australia at that time was underfunded, unfair, fragmented and inefficient. We probably did not need the Productivity Commission to tell us that. Any one of those people who turned up at my street corner meetings could have told you that. And anybody who took more than a passing interest in disability issues could have told you that. But it is important for government to hear it from the Productivity Commission—this advisory body.

The Productivity Commission is known for its economic efficiency and not, normally, for its social care. So when you hear it from the Productivity Commission you know things are pretty bad. Some of the things that have been agreed to since the release of the report are that major reform is needed, that that reform should come in the form of a national disability insurance scheme and that we should take an insurance approach to the cost of disability services and support across the community.

That is a very important concept, because disability can affect anybody at any time. It can affect you at birth or you can be the subject of a car accident. There can be some misfortune in life that means that you or a member of your family can acquire a disability, and that disability can literally change the course of your life overnight. It can affect your earnings, the earnings of your family, your quality of life, and your ability to participate in the community.

So it is reasonable that we should take an insurance approach. If it can happen to anybody then we should all take some common approach to making sure that there is a level of protection that is provided by the community so that it is not left to an individual or to a family to meet those demands themselves.

We want to see reasonable and necessary services and supports provided to make sure that a person's individual ongoing disability support needs are met. And we want to make sure that those people with a disability can exercise more control and choice in their lives by having those services tailored to them. And that is very important, because one of the constant criticisms was not just that there was not enough funding, but that the funding was haphazard. Some people got really great packages; other people got packages that were not suited to their needs.

Having a system that has a person at the centre of its thinking or conceptual analysis is a particularly important thing. This bill reflects work that has been done with the states and territories. It reflects work done with those with a disability, their families, their carers, the workers in the sector, the service providers, and the advocates of the design, funding and governance of an NDIS. This engagement process has been done carefully and methodically but with the haste that is needed because, after decades and decades of delay or neglect, there is a great demand in the community for the creation of the NDIS. So there has been engagement but we want to press forward with the creation of the NDIS, and this bill is a particularly important part of that.

This bill establishes the national agency to administer the scheme. One of the things we want to make sure of is that the NDIS agency provides the overall framework to put in place the full scheme. We want to make sure that, when we have the launch sites, we learn the lessons from them so we can make sure that this agency is independent from government to set the NDIS up.

It will perform a range of functions, including managing the financial sustainability of the scheme, building community awareness about disability, which is particularly important, and undertaking research about disability and social contributors to disability. We want to make sure that this agency is set up appropriately so that it can take the insurance approach and take into account the care and support that needs to be provided to people with a disability outside the cycle of budgets, elections and the whims of politicians. The agency will be overseen by a board made up of people with extensive experience in the provision and use of disability services, financial management, governance and the operation of an insurance schemes, as well as an advisory council made up of people with lived experience of disability and caring. To make sure that this agency is accountable to government, a ministerial council will be established through COAG, and all governments—state, territory and Commonwealth—will be represented on that ministerial council.

We want to make sure the supports that are provided not just are person centric but also look at giving long-term certainty for resourcing disability care and support, and making sure people have got a lifetime of support. In South Australia, the launch site is designed with this in mind. It is looking at covering all children in stages. The first stage is about 5,000 children up to the age of 14, including children who are already receiving support. The launch site will be rolled out from 1 July 2013. The first year of that launch is designed to focus on children from birth to five years of age who have permanent and significant disability or who would benefit from early intervention regardless of where they live in a state. In the first year, it is from birth to five years of age; from 2014, it will be available for children from birth to 13 years of age; and in 2015, it will be for all children with a disability up to the age of 14.

The reason that we focus on children is obviously because this launch site will give valuable experience and inform the national scheme. It is something the South Australian government has willingly signed up to. It is an important trial. We will learn much from it. Early intervention is key to dealing with disability, and this launch site, which will cover people in my electorate, will help provide that.

This is particularly important legislation. For those people who have approached me over the years about the state of disability services in this country, I know it cannot come too soon. I am conscious that we not build up expectations, but I am equally conscious that we do not want to unnecessarily disparage people's legitimate hopes, demands and expectations of government. It is not good enough that people who are born with a disability or who acquire a disability are left to their own devices, or to their family's capacity to take care of them, to make sure that they live a full and supported life within the community. As far as we can, we should make sure that people have access to employment, to the sorts of support that they need to gain that employment and to the sorts of support that they need to get about in the community with dignity. That is a very important expectation. It is an expectation that we should not put off for the future. It is an expectation that we should encourage and foster, because all of the people who are currently providing services or taking care of someone have that in their minds. They have that expectation of a full life in the community. Being employed and involved in the community—they have that in mind for those with a disability.

That is my expectation. I cannot praise the government and the Prime Minister more for putting this on the fast track and making sure that it gets done. I think that it is an important thing for the community and I think that it is an especially important thing for those with a disability. We should do all we can to make sure that they live with dignity and that they live full lives within our community. I commenced the bill the House.

Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A friend of mine once told me, when speaking of opportunity and politics, that every now and then the little duckies all line up and you just have to go for it. He was right. For a National Disability Insurance Scheme, the little duckies have almost all aligned. Perhaps there are still a couple of them hesitating under shrouds, but this is probably about as good as it is going to get and Australia should simply go for it. As the member for Warringah and the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, says: 'It is an idea whose time has come.'

Every Australian has friends, family or near knowledge of people who, through no fault of their own, are dealing with the added burden of coping with severe and debilitating disability. One of the great privileges of this job, of being a member of parliament, is that we get to meet a far higher percentage of these people and their families because, when the system has failed to provide and they need help, their members of parliament are the last port of call for these desperate people.

I say it is a privilege not because I find any pleasure in watching constituents deal with what most of us would consider to be a pretty poor hand but because to meet many of these people is to come face to face with tremendous courage, persistence, commitment and—above all—the unrestrained love of the family. Many of us who have been more fortunate could learn much from these people. Mostly families and individuals come to meet their members of parliament when all else has failed, when they are sick to death of waiting on the end of the phone, when they just want to speak to a human instead of a prompting device and plastic music and when they have exhausted the limits of the system which was supposed to support them. Paradoxically, I have been frustrated the number of times I have actually been able to help some of these people with disability desperately needing services, not because I could not but often because I could.

Not that long ago I intervened on behalf of a constituent suffering from advanced MS, cared for in the home for more than 10 years by a wonderfully supportive and devoted wife. That woman alone saved the nation hundreds of thousands of dollars. But when the gentleman needed a wheelchair with sophisticated head support to stop his head flopping forward and cutting off his ability to breathe—his wife felt it was unsafe to leave the room when her husband was in the chair, which was most of the day—he was unable to obtain that wheelchair that he and his wife both so desperately needed. They were informed by disability SA— (Time expired)

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

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 34. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.