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

I was just speaking about a constituent who was suffering from MS and who had been unable to obtain a wheelchair. The couple were informed that Disability SA did not have the resources to supply a suitable chair and that he may have to wait for some months. The gentleman was deteriorating and, quite simply, a number of months was far too long. I intervened, including pursuing options of contacting the man's friends, family and community to raise the required funds privately. To their credit, Disability SA came to the party and the chair was provided. Had I not become involved, who knows what would have happened? More importantly, it is simply not good enough for Disability SA to have such pressure on their resources.

Considering that members cannot force any organisation, government or private, to operate outside their rules, how is it that so often we as members of parliament can achieve a better outcome? Unfortunately, it can only be because the system that was supposed to help the individual has failed to perform. Only a very small percentage of people with a disability who have been failed by the current system would even think to elicit the support of their MP. Why is it that every assistance or system of support, whether from Disability SA, the aged care sector or the not-for-profit sector, was not able to fulfil its charter and use the maximum subsidised resources at their disposal without a push and a jab from a member of parliament?

However, we are all well aware of the limits of the current system, its inflexibility and its lack of total resources. Of course, it is those with serious disability who have exhausted every possible assistance available whom we cannot help, yet we know we should. That is what the National Disability Insurance Scheme must do. The failings of the current system are many, from Karen, a single mother struggling with part-time jobs, relying on the support of her parents, with a 16-year-old son who is severely intellectually challenged and physically impaired, unable to get enough assistance to even cover his needs for incontinence aids, through to Hazel, with a 40-year-old son with considerable impairment. After 40 years, Hazel is no longer able to care for her son herself and is unable to find accommodation. The only option is the aged-care system, and that is far from an ideal solution for all concerned. Unfortunately, in the regional centre where she lives she is unable to find a place.

This is a recurring nightmare right across Australia. We are faced daily with the inadequacies in support for the severely disabled. I have said in this place before that it does not matter what service we are talking about—the degree of difficulty in receiving the service grows exponentially with the distance the potential consumer of the service lives from the service centre. In South Australia at least, as the single most city-centric state in the Commonwealth, that service centre is often Adelaide.

It is obvious we cannot, for instance, have high-care disability housing in every small or even moderate centre in the nation. There is simply not enough critical mass to sustain such centres and the building of infrastructure. It is inevitable that, at the very best, we are unlikely to have locally based psychiatrists, audiologists or speech and language pathologists, for instance, even though there is a spread of allied health professionals such as physiotherapists, dietitians and occupational therapists that do at least visit the bigger centres on a regular basis.

For instance, I know well a young couple who have a child with an autism spectrum disorder and who work a large sheep station in the state's north. We know how important the first six or seven years of life are in the development of these children, and apart from city-based training available for the parents there is virtually no service that they can currently receive on the property. They are loving and caring parents who want the best possible for their child, and they have made the highly disruptive decision for the wife to move to the nearest major regional centre and for the husband to visit on weekends or when time allows—hardly perfect. Even there, the services available are nowhere near the level of service available in Adelaide.

Will the National Disability Insurance Scheme fix all these deficiencies? Probably not, but the extra resources should encourage more school leavers into these professions, and we must do whatever we must to ensure more comparable levels in the regional and rural areas, including preferencing students who either make a commitment to work in the country or at least are more disposed to the notion.

In my opening remarks I spoke of the coalescing of views across the political spectrum to make sure that the NDIS is delivered, and I am disappointed that the Leader of the Opposition's offers to participate in a bipartisan committee to ensure that the promises are delivered regardless of which party is in power following the next election have been rebuffed. I give credit to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Bill Shorten, for his previous role in helping elevate this issue in the conscience of both the public and parliament.

I am supportive of the National Disability Insurance Scheme—if a little bemused by the title. To me, an insurance scheme involves a policy where the insured or someone else pays a premium to a body which assesses the risk, averages the cost over the whole portfolio and takes a commission for doing so. The NDIS, of course, is nothing like this. It is instead a commitment from the parliament to devote a larger slice of resources to people suffering from disability. The greater resources will have to be found either by making savings within the current national budget or by raising extra taxes—decisions that must be made by the government of the day. So why it is called the National Disability Insurance Scheme is a little bit of a mystery to me. In reality, it is a commitment to fund the disability sector properly, and this is right, proper and overdue.

Australia is a wealthy nation and we must find the resources to fund the program. However, it is with some concern that I note that at this stage the government does not seem to have a coherent strategy to do so. It is all very well to promise the earth, but governments must explain how they are going to deliver. Otherwise it is just words and rhetoric. The people, particularly on this subject, are sick of hearing these types of commitments from government. They want action and they want the policy delivered on.

Richard Marles (Corio, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with great honour and pride that I rise today to speak in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, which is really one of the most significant pieces of legislation that I have had the privilege to speak on in my time in this place. That we are talking about the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill as a reality through the passage of this legislation is an enormous tribute to so many Australians who have worked tirelessly to bring this proposal to the point that it is at today—people like Rosemary Kayess, who is a human rights lawyer and a woman who, in a car accident at the end of her 20s, tragically became a quadriplegic. Her life changed dramatically. Rosemary is a friend of mine and had the opportunity of representing Australia in the General Assembly of the United Nations in the negotiations on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

It was a great honour for my family that my sister, Jenny Green, was able to travel with Rosemary to New York as her carer. To this day, my sister and Rosemary attend Sydney Swans matches together. It is a disappointment that it is the Sydney Swans, but it is a great thing that their relationship pursues that passion.

Rosemary is an inspiration. I had the opportunity to sit next to Rosemary at dinner. Her life has changed completely. Most people in the situation she finds herself in—trapped in a body which does not work and needing people to help her eat a meal—would find it easy to be bitter and negative and to complain. But Rosemary says that this was a moment which changed her life and, ultimately, changed it for the better—in that she would never have represented Australia in negotiating a convention of this kind and would never have reached the levels she has as an academic in humanitarian law but for what happened to her. That is an unbelievable thing for someone in her position to say. It says so much about the tremendous nature of Australians living with a disability and those who care for them and it says so much about how much we can learn from these people. Kurt Fearnley is another example of the kind of inspiration shown to the whole of our country by people with a disability. Both Rosemary and Kurt have been strong advocates for the bill we are discussing today.

I also acknowledge Bill Shorten, who played a very significant role in his former life as the Parliamentary Secretary for Disability and Children's Services in advocating on behalf of this community within Australia and advocating on behalf of this proposition; Jenny Macklin, who, as the minister, has carried this forward; Jan McLucas, who has worked tirelessly on it; and, of course, our Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, who has had the courage to push this through. All of this—which has been pursued in a bipartisan way—has seen a very important social reform being brought to this parliament on this day. It is, as I said, a great pleasure to be standing here today advocating for it.

All of us in this place—in our work and in our electorates—have met people with a disability. It is impossible not to be moved by the circumstances such people find themselves in and by the circumstances their carers find themselves in. You have to be moved by the time taken for the daily activities of life; by the effort required to live life with a disability and to care for people with a disability; by the philosophy you have to develop—Rosemary has taught me so much about that, about life—to live in these circumstances; and of course by the love, the acute, intense love you witness when you see people caring for someone with a disability. All of this is what you see when you meet with people who have a disability and with their carers.

The difficulty for people with a disability, up until now, has been that there is an enormous cost associated with living with a disability. Disability makes people poor. Often the financial legacy associated with living with a disability and caring for somebody with a disability can continue for generations—because of the enormous costs. That is why this bill is so important. This bill will change that reality. For the millions of Australians who are either living with a disability or caring for someone with a disability, this is a moment in time when everything changes. That is rare in this place—that we have the opportunity to be part of something that important.

This bill will provide certainty for people with a disability. It will change the very nature of the way people with a disability are cared for and how they manage their lives. It will change things from operating on the basis of just reacting to crises. There will be management plans to help avoid crisis and to help prepare people for a lifelong approach to dealing with their disability.

In the process, what we will do is enhance the productive capacity of the disabled community in this country and unlock the productive potential of that community, which in turn is going to be of such enormous value to this country. Rosemary Kayess stands as testimony to the contribution that people with a disability have to make to our society.

This bill implements the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and in the process establishes the National Disability Scheme Launch Transition Agency to run the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It has come here after much consultation with disability groups, with carer groups, with disability service providers and, of course, with the states. Principally, the bill establishes a scheme which defines eligible participants within the scheme. For eligible participants with a disability it sets up a program by which those individuals can determine an individual goal based, lifelong program based on the notion of what is reasonable and necessary for those people who are living with a disability. What that will do is provide those people with the care and the support that they need. It will ensure and empower people with a disability to have control over the programs, government services and private services which they are able to access as a result of the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

That empowering will end the current state of confusion, which sees people with a disability unsure of what they might be entitled to—even when they know what is possible out there—and unsure as to whether or not they will be successful in whatever application they are making to gain access to whatever the service is that they are seeking to obtain. The ignorance that goes with that, the confusion associated with that and the waiting that is associated with that all ends as a result of this bill. As a result of that and the certainty that is created by that, what we will see is a scheme which fosters innovation and excellence in the provision of disability services and providing that throughout the whole of a person's life. It will ensure that there is much better support for carers, and there will be a focus on early intervention.

The national agency will be independent of government. It will have the responsibility for delivering the scheme but it will also have the responsibility for the financial management of the scheme. It will consist of a board which will be representative of all of the stakeholders within the system, but will also have an advisory council which will add an added level of consultation to those stakeholders. There will be a ministerial council established to make sure that this is an agency which is responsive to the states, who have such an important stake in this. That agency will be established under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997.

Part of the way in which the National Disability Insurance Scheme is being established is through a number of launch sites, which will see 20,000 people with a disability able to access the National Disability Insurance Scheme from 1 July this year. One of those sites is in my electorate at Geelong. There is enormous anticipation and excitement in Geelong about the prospect of that. The disability service providers are, of course, at the coalface of this scheme. They will be charged with the responsibilities they have now, but with an added responsibility of providing the services to those people with a disability.

In Geelong, disability service providers are outstanding. They are outstanding in the scope and quality of their programs, the level of community integration and the level of cooperation between service providers. They are innovative. Examples of that innovation in Geelong include Back to Back Theatre, one of Australia's most successful theatre companies but with a point of difference because the actors are all people who are living with a disability. This theatre company based in Geelong tours extensively: more than 70 cities around the world. There are service providers such as Corio Bay Innovators who operate as the dal Gourmet Cafe and Catering. They were awarded the Australian Disability Enterprise Excellence Award in 2011 for excellence in training and employment opportunities for people with a disability, particularly young people. I had the pleasure of visiting that service with our Prime Minister last year. Then there is Pathways, who helped put people with multiple barriers into workforce participation. In the first 12 months of operation, MadCap Cafe in central Geelong, right next to my electoral office, employed more than 40 people with a mental illness, and the domestic property services division, Clearwater Business Services, employs 77 people with serious mental illnesses each week.

Karingal is our largest disability service provider in Geelong and throughout the western region. They help nearly 2,000 people with a disability on a day-to-day basis. They provide around 20 different services, including in-home support, supported accommodation, day services and mental health support. They provide supported and open employment for another 6,600 people with a disability each year through Matchworks and Commercial. Commercial now famously operates canteens at Alcoa, Shell and the Australian Animal Health Laboratory, as well as a catering kitchen. Those canteens are something to behold. Alcoa were managing their own canteen in years past, running it at a loss and serving pretty crummy food. That is now being run by Commercial. It makes money. It provides a fantastic service for the workers at Alcoa. And it provides a wonderful opportunity for those people working in it.

Karingal's CEO, Daryl Starkey, says that their mission is based on acceptance and inclusion. Karingal's programs are about getting people out into the community and about bringing the community to them. He said: 'We support the central plank of the NDIS, which is to give people more choice and control over the support services they want and need in their lives.'

Another major provider in Geelong is St Lawrence Community Services, which is a lead agency for providers in the launch area and which has already started working on a training program with the help of an $86,000 grant from the federal government. The plan is to have people with a disability among those who are doing the training to deliver the programs. St Lawrence is another major provider of disability services and employment within the Geelong region. Its employment services include garden and property management, an ironing service, a pickle factory, a nursery, an arts studio and a gallery.

Finally, Encompass is an organisation that runs the innovative program Encompass@Leopold, a small farm and horticultural enterprise where participants grow their own food, cook their own meals, gain life skills and job skills. When I was last there, they had the ambition of having a chocolate bar entirely grown, manufactured and produced at the facility, which warms my heart.

It is expected that disability service providers will have 130 new jobs created among their ranks as a result of Geelong being a launch site. That is in addition to the people directly employed through the National Disability Insurance Scheme in Geelong. Geelong is a city that hosts the TAC. It is a trial site and we have, as I have articulated, excellent and innovative disability service providers. It means that we as a city excel at supporting and celebrating people with a disability. We have a vibrant disability community, with such people as Kelly Cartwright, a famous Australia Paralympian, who are making an enormous contribution to our society. Being a centre of innovation and a centre for the support for and celebration of people with a disability is an aspiration of Geelong and a burgeoning part of Geelong's 21st century identity. It is a part of Geelong's story and we want that story to contribute to a new era for people with a disability and for carers of people with a disability in Australia.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to address the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. I am certainly pleased to associate myself, as all members in this parliament have been, with the comments that have preceded and no doubt will follow mine about the bipartisan spirit in which the National Disability Insurance Scheme has come about. I have been fortunate insofar as I and my family have not been personally touched by disability and certainly not in a profound way at any point. That notwithstanding, obviously as federal members of parliament each of us on occasion has the opportunity to move about our electorates to speak with people who face up to all sorts and manner of challenges throughout their daily lives. For me, a defining point in the decade or so that I have been a federal member was when I had the opportunity to visit the premises of Cerebral Palsy Queensland in Labrador on Gold Coast, the city in which I live.

The Gold Coast is Australia's sixth largest city, and many would say one of its more progressive cities. The chance to visit Cerebral Palsy Queensland to look at the work that they undertook and walk among the clients who were there in the respite centre afforded me a very real opportunity to gain, albeit for only a short period of time, some insight into the challenges that are faced by so many in our community. What struck me most significantly was that as I approached the building of Cerebral Palsy Queensland I saw that it was a converted garage in a fairly nondescript home in a northern suburb of the Gold Coast. I thought to myself that the fact that this was the case in a city of some 500,000 people underscores some of the challenges that we face.

I then went inside and had the chance to spend a couple of hours talking to the people who volunteer and those who are paid employees of Cerebral Palsy Queensland and spending time with the clients who were there. I talked to some of the parents of the children and young adults who were talking advantage of the respite afforded to them by the tremendous work done by Cerebral Palsy Queensland.

This was almost at the exact same time that the announcement had been made about the Building the Education Revolution. I thought to myself that perhaps successive governments in this country had had their priorities wrong. That was not a reflection on the BER in any way, shape or form. It was more about the juxtaposition between such a large amount of taxpayer funds being expended on a program like the BER—which no doubt members opposite would say was very worthwhile—and what lay before me in a renovated garage: eight or 10 clients of Cerebral Palsy Queensland, each of them wheelchair bound and each of them with significant motor skill disability, working with volunteers who were participating in a TAFE course that obliged them to spend time working with the disabled and in some instances people who were profoundly disabled. I thought to myself that this was happening in a country that is meant to be one of the best in the world and where we enjoy almost unparalleled wealth compared to the vast majority of the earth's population. At the time, I thought that there was something wrong with the priorities that we have as a nation.

Within the coalition, I have pushed on a number of occasions for more to be done to rectify the great imbalance. I have always been of the firm belief that the Public Service should be obliged to have a quota of people with disability working within it to set the benchmark. I have been a proponent of that. We can do that with the largesse of taxpayer funds—I use that word because it is an indulgence, frankly, to do that with taxpayer funds. But the benchmark needs to be set.

I celebrate the fact that we are now realising the NDIS. I congratulate the government for moving on it, and I am delighted that this is an initiative that both sides of the chamber can work to implement. It would be a grave mistake for the NDIS to be anything other than a bipartisan initiative. It would be a grave mistake for any one side of politics to claim that the NDIS in some way encapsulates values held only by that political party. The reality is that that would be shameful and cheap politics and should be rejected on every occasion. Nobody holds moral superiority on the issue of doing something for people who are so adversely affected and who overcome challenges that most of us will never have to face in our lifetimes.

In that respect, it is beholden upon all of us as a parliament to work so that the NDIS becomes the reality that it should be: a totem for what, as a developed nation, we can achieve. I am pleased that the NDIS is coming to fruition. There are going to be many challenges ahead. From a policy perspective, we have seen some of the politicking that unfortunately has taken place, but I firmly believe that in the eyes of every Australian, in the aspiration that beats within their hearts, the NDIS will show that we are all doing our bit to help our friends, our family or our colleagues who have to overcome challenges that, as I said, most of us will never know.

The impact of disability is not only on the person who is facing physical or mental challenges but also on their family. It is no coincidence that, regrettably, the rate of divorce is much higher in families where there is a disabled child. Again, I can only imagine the challenges that they must overcome. I know, from speaking with as many carers as I have done over the years, of the belief that the NDIS will in some way, shape or form bring some slight relief to the incessant pressures that go with being a carer and worrying about who is going to provide for their children or loved ones in future years.

I add my weight to the those in this chamber, including the Leader of the Opposition, who have asked: 'Why don't we have a bipartisan committee of the parliament that is chaired by both the government and the opposition, irrespective of political flavour, to ensure that support and forward momentum for the NDIS will continue unabated?' That, to me, would embrace the true value of all sides of politics coming together and would epitomise the way that that should be done. How often do we hear in the community the concern that as politicians we always seem to be at each other's throats? Well, let us celebrate these few opportunities we have to work in a genuinely united spirit to deliver the kinds of policy outcomes that could occur not just on occasion but on a regular basis.

As I have mentioned, there are no doubt going to be many challenges that the NDIS will have to face and overcome in order to be fully realised. That notwithstanding, this underscores the profound opportunity we have as a parliament to convey—on behalf of all Australians—our care, our concern and our compassion for those who have to overcome those challenges, as well as for the loved ones who care for them, be it in a paid capacity or in a volunteer capacity.

In addition, I am delighted that the NDIS will see realised across the country, in the long term, opportunities for care and for treatment and support programs to be built around the individual. In so many respects the NDIS represents the empowerment of individuals to develop plans that take into account their own unique circumstances and challenges and that provide opportunities for them to call upon the resources available to them in a way that is going to be cost-effective and productive for those individuals. I am delighted that the support that will be available through the NDIS will also include general support for people with disabilities who are not participants in the NDIS as well as opportunities for them to have referral services. It is envisaged, and it would certainly be my aspiration, that the NDIS will become a one-stop shop for them to draw upon the best available resources in a cost-effective way.

One of the concerns we have—and this is not said in a politicking way; it is said in a reality way—is that the Productivity Commission outlined that the first stage of the NDIS would cost an estimated $3.9 billion.

As a coalition, we supported the referral to the Productivity Commission; as a coalition, we supported the government's billion dollars that they put on the table in the last budget. But we believe it is prudent to say, 'Well, there's still $2.9 billion to go'. And that is not an attempt to be political; it is just a reality because, like any budget, we need to work out how it is going to be funded.

It would be an almost unforgiveable betrayal of people's hope if the NDIS is lauded in the way that it has been—and, indeed, in the way that I and others have in this debate—for that goal then not to be realised because of poor economic management. Fundamentally, that is the reason I believe that whether you are government or opposition there is a responsibility to look every Australian in the eye and be able to explain how the dream can be realised, because it is only through full funding that the dream can in fact be realised. Whilst a billion dollars on the table is a good start, the fact is that it requires $3.9 billion for the first stage of the NDIS alone.

So I look forward to the realisation of the dream; the realisation of the aspiration that those for whom disability services have been insufficient, or have been piecemeal or have had large gaps that they have had to endure can be brought together and realised under something like the NDIS.

Only yesterday I was speaking to a constituent—I had returned his call. He is a wheelchair-bound man who has lived with disability for 39 years. He was expressing his concern to me about the challenges that he had with ongoing and regular health appointments, and the changes that he encountered in moving from New South Wales to Queensland. That call yesterday, in the same way as my visit to the Cerebral Palsy League at Labrador, highlighted to me just how much the time for the NDIS has come. I am pleased that this parliament is certainly able to foreshadow it and, to a limited extent, deliver it. But my message is: let's make sure it is fully delivered, by putting to it the resources required to ensure that those who are faced with those challenges—be they families or be they individuals—are able to realise the dream that they have for what the NDIS can provide.

The NDIS is not going to be the panacea; they are still going to face difficult choices and challenges every single day. But each of us in good conscience, I would hope, would realise that through this piece of public policy something truly world class has been achieved. I think that is a wonderful aspiration that all of us as participants in this parliament can be proud of and can celebrate.

There is no doubt that those who face physical and mental disability want to be loved and contributing members of our society. We owe it to them to maximise their opportunity to do so, and I hope this is another tool in the arsenal.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For too long, people with disabilities and their families have been ignored. For too long, people with disabilities and their families have been left to fend for themselves. And for too long, people with disabilities and their families have struggled to survive. Now, with this National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, as a nation we are finally taking action for people with disabilities and their families. Finally, people with disabilities and their families will get the help they need and deserve.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme package, including this legislation, will ensure that people living with a disability will receive more comprehensive support to help them in their everyday lives. By giving much greater choice and control to the individual who requires the service, this legislation will help transform the way disability services are delivered in Australia. The support that will be provided by the NDIS focuses on meeting the aspirations of the individual by providing the necessary supports to help them live, work and participate in their own communities.

The Australian Greens believe the central role of government is to care for people and that is why we so strongly supported the Every Australian Counts campaign, which has also worked towards increasing the total funding available to deliver services, as well as ensuring national consistency and availability of those services. I want to congratulate everyone who has worked so hard to get national disability insurance on the agenda.

This legislation is the culmination of many years of campaigning by many, many people. Unfortunately the campaigning is not over. There is still some significant detail that has not yet been provided by the government on how the NDIS will operate. While the legislation sets out a framework for how the NDIS might operate, until we see the rules that sit underneath this legislative framework there will be a large amount of uncertainty about the operation of the scheme. We remain concerned about who is in and who is out under the eligibility criteria. We have already taken note of the uncertainty around hearing and vision services, as well as the management of the late onset of complex disabilities, particularly for those who do not begin to require care until after they turn 65. We hope that these and other concerns will be addressed through the release of specific eligibility criteria and would urge the government to resolve these matters quickly. Unless the NDIS is properly funded it will not deliver for people with disabilities and their families.

The government is yet to outline the funding arrangements for the NDIS. In particular, we are yet to know how block funding and service sustainability will occur in a funding model focused on self-directed care or where the savings will be found or the revenue raised to adequately fund the scheme. The Australian Greens share the concerns of organisations like Victoria Legal Aid, who have highlighted issues about where individuals who require additional support and advocacy services will be able to turn for that support, particularly given that Legal Aid is already overstretched in many places.

The Australian Greens recognise that the NDIS may not directly tackle discrimination and disadvantage, and there will be some groups who may struggle to access the NDIS. Those people living in the community who already face other significant personal barriers, such as homelessness which may limit their ability to participate in the NDIS, will require additional support to access entitlements. The Australian Greens also realise that the NDIS alone cannot possibly meet all the needs of all people living with a disability. Those who also require extra assistance to access health care, education and employment need to know that allocations will continue to be made for those services. People living with a disability are often among some of the poorest households in Australia, along with people living on Newstart. We need to continue to assist people with a disability to access employment, recognise that there are support costs associated with employment that must be accounted for and break down the barriers, including discrimination and lack of flexibility, that prevent them from accessing work.

I will support this bill on behalf of the Greens today so that the substantive issues, including possible amendments, can be dealt with in the Senate, following the conclusion of the current Senate inquiry into this bill. Already that inquiry has heard that the legislation needs stronger links to United Nations conventions and that there are concerns about the CEO's powers to press individuals to seek compensation from other parties before being allowed into the scheme. The committee has also heard significant information about workforce sustainability, a move towards greater casualisation and the OHS implications of individual contracts. This is an issue I am particularly keen to ensure is managed well. I have introduced a bill that addresses the issues of insecure work and workforce casualisation. We need to carefully balance the move towards self-directed funding with care for workers' rights, particularly for lower-skilled support workers who might be left vulnerable by individualised contracts. My colleague Senator Siewert will pursue these issues further in the Senate, and we reserve the right to move amendments to the bill. Nothing could more clearly highlight the importance of government than the measures in this bill, because if we are to achieve real equality we need government to act and extend a helping hand to those who are left behind. That is what this bill does, and that is why the Greens are right behind the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Bruce Billson (Dunkley, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to reaffirm the coalition's enthusiastic support for each of the milestones that have been part of the ongoing journey towards a National Disability Insurance Scheme. The coalition supported the initial work of the Productivity Commission—in fact, not only has our support for the recommendations been a key part of the coalition contribution to this debate but we are also concerned that the government is deviating quite significantly in some areas from the measured and assured pathway that the Productivity Commission mapped out. We have supported the commitment of $1 billion towards the NDIS, not only recognising that as a down payment but also underlining the need to be clear on where the additional resources to achieve the rollout will come from. We have supported the launch sites and we hope that the learning that arises from those launch sites is embedded in the ongoing approach to roll out the National Disability Insurance Scheme. We have supported agreements where they have been arrived at between Commonwealth and state jurisdictions, and we support this legislation. The coalition has consistently supported the need for greater support for those people with a disability and their carers, who give selflessly to the task of supporting and nurturing and adding to the quality of life of people with disability who are part of their family.

One of the first tasks that I embraced after being elected in 1996 was when the then Minister for Family Services, the Hon. Warwick Smith, asked me to chair and convene an unmet-needs working group in relation to disability services. It was an interesting initiative that Minister Smith instigated. It recognised that there was an enormous array of views within the disability community of what those unmet needs were and where you would start to tackle that desperate unmet need that was causing such enormous impacts on people's lives. I, along with the committee that I worked with, consulted widely. This was back in 1997. To try to identify what the priorities looked like, recognising that the task was so large, what came clear from that work was that the ageing carers in our community needed to be a crucial priority.

Let us think about the life journey they have experienced and continue to experience today. Many, at a time when they should be contemplating a more relaxed lifestyle and a tempo that sees them enjoy a quality of life well earned from a life of commitment and application, are still caring for mature-age family members who may have a profound intellectual disability—a person of my age, perhaps, where their intellectual disability accelerates their metabolic rate and, in some cases, their family member is old before their time, compounding the care tasks that ageing carers face.

I was pleased that that work saw the Howard government commit several hundred millions of dollars of additional funding to try to tackle that part of the picture, recognising the selfless contribution of ageing carers. So much has been asked of them, and so much has been given out of love, commitment and devotion. At some point there should be the confidence and certainty of knowing their loved one has accommodation and support suited to their needs available and that the carers can rest and reflect on a life of selfless contribution confident that the care is there.

That concern remains today. A decade and a half later in my own local community, even in responses to the consultation being undertaken as part of the NDIS, that concern remains. It continues to be a major issue for people living with a disability and those carers who are devoted to supporting and to ensuring that all of the care and commitment that is possibly available is brought to the task of the support for the person with a disability.

I am receiving material from local organisations that I have consulted with and continue to draw heavily from as this NDIS pathway is progressed. I have been reminded that in Victoria alone there are 1,100 people on a waiting list in urgent need for supported accommodation, and that this may well represent the tip of the iceberg.

It was reflected upon that if the person is not able to have accommodation because of a crisis in a carer's life, or—heaven forbid—a family needs to surrender their child to the state, or there are threats of the care task becoming all too much and the carer's own personal safety might be in question, or a client is simply left in respite and not collected, or it is just all too much, then some help comes perhaps. What was being communicated to me was that, for those families and carers doing all that could ever be asked of them, that selfless commitment might make them less likely to be able to look forward to supported accommodation.

I was reminded of the submission that Carers Victoria made to the Productivity Commission draft report in 2011, recognising that caring for people with profound needs is a shared community responsibility, yet 97.5 per cent of people under 65 with a severe or profound limitation live in the community and 2.5 per cent have some kind of supported or cared accommodation. In that picture, 84 per cent live with family. Yet I was being asked: 'Where is this pressing need in the rollout of the NDIS? Where is it reflected? How do local community groups communicate this desperate cry for help?' My encouragement is to be involved in the consultation process.

It was put to me that the decision of the government to move away from the time lines, pathways, consultation and engagement process that the Productivity Commission mapped out might see some of these priority cries for help overlooked or perhaps not given the full airing. I hope that is not the case, but in the feedback I have received from local community groups they remain bewildered as to why the years of work that went into the Productivity Commission's recommendations—the overview and the action agenda that they outlined—has been stepped away from. They are anxious to ensure that, in this case, that does not see the more than 400,000 people with significant disabilities not having their fundamental needs met because there has not been the opportunity for their daily lives to be improved through secure accommodation and proper support. There is almost a Maslow's needs hierarchy argument being brought forward by local community groups, talking about the crucial nature of shelter and a sense of security in their living circumstances being a fundamental precondition to achieve higher ambitions in relation to the NDIS. That is their view, and they have fed that into the consultation. I hope that is reflected in the rollout of the system.

As I say, the coalition has been an enthusiastic supporter along each of these milestones. I put out some information about where that is demonstrated in action today. In operationalising the NDIS idea—an idea whose time has come—this deviation from the Productivity Commission recommendation and the pathway they have mapped out is of some concern, but we will only know from experience from the launch sites whether the Productivity Commission's pathway has been too conservative, too cautious or too keen to reflect and learn, and where the trajectory will run now and whether that meets the needs. I hope it goes well, and I hope the insights that arise from those launch sites are well reflected in the broader rollout.

It is clear, though, that providers, their clients and caregivers have a great deal to offer in the design, rollout, implementation and evaluation of the early NDIS models and launch sites, and I hope that input is taken up and embraced. There is an extraordinary cry for those providing services to be heard, and I have highlighted previously what an important role local government plays in the provision of services for people with profound needs. My hope is that local government's input is also embraced and recognised as this work continues. Local government has not featured in the policy discussions to date, and certainly as the NDIS is rolled out there will be a need to reflect on how local councils do what they do. A previous speaker, the member representing the Greens party, talked about some of the other compensation arrangements and mechanisms that need to be interwoven into the ultimate NDIS model.

It is clear that there is a need to stay the course on this. The coalition has proposed a joint parliamentary committee, an important step and one that I urge the government to embrace because, to do this well and to see the NDIS ambition fulfilled, it will involve sustained commitment over a number of parliaments, involving all sides of the parliament. The coalition feels that a joint parliamentary committee will provide that continuity of engagement, a mechanism of bipartisan involvement and support that would not only serve the objectives well but also bring the best that all of us in the parliament have to offer to this once-in-a-generation reform task of successfully implementing the NDIS. It will unfold over the life of several parliaments, and we think there is a need to have some oversight infrastructure in place that reflects that and continues a certain and shared way forward in its rollout.

It does also reflect a concern that Labor has sought to try to claim this as their baby, trying to politicise the rollout of the NDIS. It is a very unbecoming political strategy but I have seen it pop up—

Dr Southcott interjecting—

Yes, I am being as generous as I can be in describing what I have seen, but it is certainly not the kind of conduct those people praying for the NDIS would look for from their parliamentary representatives. I would encourage the government in the spirit in which this whole journey has evolved and on the pathway that has been mapped out to not be quite shrill in its partisanship when it comes to the issues of the NDIS.

I also want to take a moment to talk about other issues that have been raised with me at the implementation level. I was pleased to convene an NDIS consultation in my own electorate, a round table discussion which I was very thrilled to host with my friend and colleague the shadow minister for disabilities, carers and the voluntary sector, Senator Mitch Fifield. At that discussion we did again hear about, and it was very encouraging to recognise, the terrific support for the NDIS. We had a long discussion about the level and types of care, the person-centred notion of managing the resources that are available and choosing wisely the care options that are within reach.

There was a sober contribution from the local providers. They talked to me about the difficulty a number of the current providers have in meeting current demand. Their concern was that some of the discussion around the NDIS seems to be inner-metro centric, where you have a vast array of service options just within reach and you can pick and choose and the person-centred, client-driven facilitative model would work just fine. It was put to me that that might be the case in the major capital cities, in the inner city areas, but for communities that I represent on the outskirts of the metropolitan area and beyond into the rural and regional communities of Australia that simple notion does not stack up. Services are stretched. The capacity to expand rapidly, if that is what the non-Productivity Commission timetable that the government is pursuing seems to expect, is a very difficult thing to achieve.

There was a discussion about how to build the capacity of a service system to deliver the services that people hold out as an expectation as the NDIS is rolled out. I think there is a need to look more carefully at the workforce available and at the service system infrastructure and the capacity but, more particularly, to look at what is available where across this vast continent of ours. What might be available in Port Melbourne or in some inner city area in the metropolis of Melbourne might be quite different from what is available on the Mornington Peninsula. Yet this ambition of certainty and confidence about the care that can be available, about it not being a raffle or a lottery in terms of the nature in which a disability was acquired, should not then be replaced by a new raffle which is 'Where do you live? What are the actual service provision options available within your reach?', creating a new segregation of the kinds of support that the NDIS can provide purely because of the location of your home.

So these are some thoughts that I put on the record. I am enthusiastic about what the NDIS can achieve and I am pleased to have been part of the support for these action steps taken to date. I look forward to a successful rollout of the NDIS. It is a generation-long endeavour and I am very optimistic that it will go well.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to support the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, and I do so as a very proud member of the Australian Labor Party. The measures in this bill establish the framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It sets out the scheme's objects and principles and it establishes the NDIS Transition Agency, which will oversee the launch of the scheme in our five initial trial sites. The NDIS is a very important reform for this nation—a reform that, in the years to come, will be seen as part of the foundation of our social safety net in this country, in the same way as those great reforms of Medicare and superannuation are today.

The bill before the House entrenches the framework for the NDIS into law. The framework reflects the principles agreed to by the Prime Minister and first ministers, including 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 it; and fostering innovative services that are delivered and coordinated locally. The framework also includes the principle of bringing long-term certainty to the resourcing of disability care and support so that people with disabilities can feel secure that they will get what they need over the course of their lifetime. It is also based on a whole-of-life approach in the context of people with a disability, so that it responds to each individual's goals and aspirations and how to strengthen the other informal and community supports that are important for the person with a disability.

The scheme is intended to 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. It is about working with families before they reach that point to make sure that the valuable informal care they provide can actually be sustained. The scheme takes a lifelong approach. There is also a focus on intensive early intervention, particularly where there is good evidence that it will substantially improve a person's functioning or slow or prevent progression of the disabilities over their lifetime. These are very crucial elements of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and a fundamental change to the way in which disability services are provided in this country.

At its heart, the NDIS is a simple scheme of entitlements. Eligible people with disabilities will be entitled to access a bundle of services from a provider or providers of their choice. The services will be available throughout a person's lifetime and will change as their needs change. But, despite the simplicity of the notion of the scheme, it is not simple to establish.

We know not just from the Productivity Commission but also from the many pleas from people with disabilities that have led to this scheme coming into place that our current system of service provision for people with disabilities does not work. It is patchy, and what you may be entitled to depends on how your disability came about, where you live, what funding happens to be available at any particular point in time, your age and what not-for-profit or other agencies may actually be in your area. In many instances, you may not be eligible for any services at all. There are multiple providers and multiple schemes of eligibility which differ from state to state and there are multiple and confusing points of access.

To try to pull all of this together, to unpick the current system, reach agreement with states and territories about a common funding pool, understand its interaction with the various modes of accident and workplace accident compensation schemes, establish a system of providers, establish a system to determine eligibility and for what and where and then to establish delivery mechanisms is incredibly complicated, but we have to start. That is what this bill is about—the start of an incredibly complex but fundamental reform.

I have spoken in this place many times about the strong history in my own region for supporting people with disabilities. There are a number of organisations who provide people with disabilities with access to education, to work opportunities and to independent accommodation. They have been working in this space for a very long time. Many, such as Pinarc, for example, have championed the principle of choice and self-directed services and individual choice for people with disabilities. It has been a hard fight to get people to move to that system.

These organisations are ready to embrace the change. They want to be part of it. I know for carers, for parents and for people with disabilities themselves how critical this reform is. I know many people in their roles as parliamentarians, and in previous lives before coming into this place, will have met with or know family members and people who have disabilities. They watch the awful struggle to access services, the bewilderment that is often confronted by people with disabilities about what they may be able to get and often finding that in fact they are not eligible for any services at all. I have seen many families, particularly young people with children who have received a diagnosis, desperately trying in what you know is going to be a very long and hard pathway to try and find services. Even where they may be eligible for services there is often not enough funding in that particular week, month or financial year for them to be even given services in the first place.

So we know this is a fundamental and critical reform. There has been a lot said about the ideals that are behind this reform. But ideals are not worth the paper they are written on, or the many speeches we will give in this place, if they are never actually implemented. To me that is the stark contrast between the Labor Party's commitment to the National Disability Insurance Scheme and what is happening on the other side of this chamber. It is very easy to say, 'I support the NDIS.' I suspect there would be very few members of parliament at all who do not support it with their whole hearts. But the test is: when are you prepared to actually make it real? When are you actually prepared to put pen to paper and agree, 'This is going to be implemented and this is how'? That is the hard work. The previous speaker talked about it being a generation of hard work, and it will be.

Stella Young is a very staunch advocate for people with disabilities. She highlighted the point I have just made in a terrific blog she wrote this month commenting on the Leader of the Opposition's Press Club speech and a question he was asked about NDIS and the opposition's commitment to it. She says:

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is one of those things that's been put on the—

opposition's—

"let's wait and see" list.

…   …   …   

Of course, elsewhere in the speech he—

Tony Abbott—

… said, "after all, the measure of a decent society is how it looks after its most vulnerable members."

Excuse me while I pause for an eye roll. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard that one, I could probably just fund the NDIS myself.

The thing is, Mr Abbott, fixing the broken disability system we have in this country isn't like saving all your pocket money until you could finally afford that CD player you desperately wanted when you were 12. It's not a luxury item that we can simply do without until there's some spare cash floating around. What you said yesterday—

talking about the Press Club speech—

made it very clear that you see improving the living conditions of people with disabilities and our families as an indulgence.

Stella does not let us off the hook, either, and nor should she. She says in that same blog:

The seven year timeline outlined by the Gillard government is already far too long for many people with disabilities …

Stella's comments, I think, point very starkly to what this debate today is actually about.

The clear message from people with disabilities is that they cannot wait. They should not be asked to. We have a lot of work to do, a huge amount of work to do, to ensure that we deliver a system that enables people with disabilities to fully participate in all aspects of community and economic life in this country. The bills before the House are a start. They are the start of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. We know that disability does not discriminate, and can and does affect families and individuals every single day. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a fundamental reform to ensure that, whilst disability does not discriminate, we do not continue to.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know the member for Ballarat has a good heart and I know her heart is in the right place, but I have just a word of caution for those opposite who seek to politicise this debate. This is above politics. This is needed. Not only is this good for those with disabilities and their families but it is the right thing to do now. The first stage of the National Disability Insurance Scheme will have a cost to the Commonwealth of $1 billion over four years from 2012-13. This was in the 2012-13 budget and was supported by the coalition. The Labor government has sought to claim the NDIS as its own, rejecting bipartisanship on several occasions, including the Leader of the Opposition's proposal for a cross-party parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the implementation of the NDIS. The sector has recognised publicly the support of the federal coalition and conservative states for the scheme. The NDIS is the property of all Australian governments. The introduction of an NDIS has cross-party support at both federal and state levels. So I have a word of caution for the Labor government: try to not politicise this. This is above politics, as I said. Any criticism of the coalition in this regard is unfair, not nice and totally unwarranted.

Australia is a world leader when it comes to health care, yet there is a serious failure, and we recognise that, in the delivery of services for people with disabilities. These people, along with their families and carers, struggle to receive the support and services they need and know that an NDIS will help to fill the cracks in the present system. I needed no convincing that an NDIS would be a good thing not just for those with disabilities but, indeed, for the nation. I was the first New South Wales federal parliamentarian to sign up to the Every Australian Counts campaign, which describes an NDIS as being revolutionary and says that it will change the lives of those living with a disability. The implementation of the scheme is a once-in-a-generation reform which will unfold over the life of several parliaments. It is vital that both sides of the parliament, Labor and the coalition, work together to get this right.

The Productivity Commission released the final report into disability care and support on 10 August 2011 and confirmed that the current system of support for people with disabilities is not functioning as it should. Indeed, it said it was broken. This legislation provides for the establishment of an NDIS. It is not about politics. As I said, it is not about getting credit; it is about doing what is right, proper and just for disabled persons—adults and children alike. The coalition believes the full implementation of an NDIS would be nothing short of a new deal for people with disabilities and their carers. As the Productivity Commission recognised, this will require a high level of consultation, bipartisan consultation, including with stakeholders, in its design.

The coalition has welcomed the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales governments for a full state-wide roll-out of the NDIS and congratulates Queensland for its persistence in seeking a deal on the NDIS with the Commonwealth in the face of constant misrepresentation by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Disability Reform. An NDIS is an investment in Australia's future and especially in the lives of those who will depend on the scheme. However, without a funding agreement from the government, the current implementation plan is just an empty gesture. The only mention of the NDIS in the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook last year was to say it was a government priority over the medium term. This must be a government priority over the long term and the government must say whether it is committed to achieving a full NDIS by the Productivity Commission's target date of 2018-19. It must rein in its spending and stop the borrowing to ensure that the NDIS gets the full support that it needs to start and secure its longevity. The coalition believes the Productivity Commission's timetable is achievable with prudent government and good economic management. We have supported the initial work of the Productivity Commission, the five launch sites and the introduction of legislation into this parliament. The introduction of an NDIS will mean so much to those living with disabilities and those who love or care for a disabled person. In my electorate I have met with many people and families who have highlighted their desperate desire to see an NDIS implemented.

The bill before us establishes the framework for the NDIS and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. This will enable the scheme to be launched and the agency to operate the launch at five sites across Australia from July 2013.

This stage will benefit more than 20,000 people with a disability, their families and carers living in South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria. The legislation sets out how the NDIS will run, with eligibility provisions described as 'becoming a participant' in the scheme requiring a person's impairment results in 'substantially reduced functional capacity' affecting their communication, social interaction, learning, mobility, self-care or self-management. Eligibility will include early intervention to mitigate, alleviate or prevent the deterioration of person's functional capacity.

However, people aged over 65 years at the time they request NDIS support will not be eligible, but future participants can choose to continue with the NDIS once they turn 65. Personal planning provisions will place emphasis on a person-centred and self-directed approach. A plan must include a statement of participant goals and aspirations prepared by the participant and a statement of participant supports to be approved by the agency. The plans will specify general support, not purchases with individualised funding; reasonable and necessary support; funding by the scheme; a review date; and how funds and other aspects of the plan will be managed.

It is important that support under the plan represents value for money in that costs are reasonably relative both to the benefit and alternative support. The plan must have regard for current good practice and take family and informal networks into account. It should not include support which is more appropriately funded or provided elsewhere.

The funding for supports can be managed by a registered plan management provider, nominees, the agency or the participants themselves. Plan management will involve purchasing supports; and receiving, managing and acquitting funds.

In regard to compensation, the agency may compel prospective participants to take action for it to obtain compensation for personal injury, and the agency is entitled to recover relevant portions of any compensation awarded to participants. These provisions have been designed to protect the NDIS from cost-shifting.

The review process information will be required to be given to participants when reviewable decisions are made. Reviewable decisions will cover eligibility, support plans, provider registration and nominee determinations. The legislation also provides a further avenue of review to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The agency will be governed by a board consisting of a chair and eight members who will collectively possess an appropriate balance of skills, experience or knowledge in the following fields: provision or use of disability services, operation of insurance, compensation or long-term liability schemes, financial management or corporate governance.

The chair will be appointed by the Commonwealth minister and must obtain the approval of the majority of jurisdictions before appointing members. The legislation also establishes an independent advisory council which will include at least four people with disabilities; at least two carers; at least one person with skills, experience or knowledge in the supply of equipment or provision of services; and up to five more members. There is also a provision in the legislation which provides for an independent review of the act after two years. The bill is currently being inquired into by the Senate Community Affairs Committee, which is due to report back on 13 March 2013.

A recurrent theme presented to date by witnesses is that it is hard to offer advice or pose questions or plan for the launch sites in the absence of the rules. These need to the released quickly and well before the passage of this bill before the parliament. The coalition is committed to the NDIS and we have called for the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics. This was reiterated by the Leader of the Opposition at his National Press Club speech on 31 January, where he said:

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

The government is yet to accept the offer but it should. The coalition will continue to place this issue above politics and we are prepared to work with state and Commonwealth governments towards a better deal for people with a disability.

There are some NDIS champions in my electorate of the Riverina, where the scheme has widespread support. Councillor Anne Napoli, of Griffith City Council, is a vocal supporter of NDIS. Mrs Napoli and her husband, Angelo, support their son Patrick, aged 37, who has cerebral palsy. Patrick is a gifted artist, but he suffers from this condition. Mrs Napoli is a wonderful and tireless worker on behalf of all disabled people in the Griffith community.

I attended the DisibiliTEA arranged by Anne at the Griffith City Library on 26 October last year to raise awareness of an NDIS.

I refer to the annual report of Kurrajong Waratah, a disability service provider in the Riverina-Murray area. The Chief Executive Officer, Steve Jaques, had some compelling remarks to make in his report last year:

Ahead I see exciting possibilities for all people with a disability and their families from the reforms and service opportunities that the NDIS will deliver.

  …   …   …

The NDIS reform is set to redress years of underfunding and neglect, and correct major weaknesses in our current disability service system in Australia to give all people with a disability the opportunity to be active and participating citizens in their communities regardless of their circumstances or geographic location.

You need to look no further than Kurrajong Waratah to realise the extent of the underfunding, neglect and unmet needs in our communities. Our five year old InterLink service which supports older parent carers who still have their son or daughter living at home with them is currently working with 382 eligible older parent carers across the Riverina Murray Regions.

So you can see how much this is absolutely needed. He went on:

Our Kurrajong Early Childhood Intervention Service works with babies and children under school age and is doing a mammoth job in managing extreme case loads due to demand. The Griffith arm of our service that is working in the Griffith and western Shires of the Riverina Region is at breaking point. … Our Wagga Wagga service is in a similar situation, funded to service 100 families it provides services to over 140 families each and every year.

  …   …   …

The trial sites for the NDIS were recently announced with the Hunter Region of NSW included. The commencement of the Scheme in the trial sites across Australia will help to ensure that the new NDIS system that is developed to support people with a lifelong disability and their parents/carers, is both sustainable over the longer term and is flexible.

Not since the International Year of People with a Disability in 1981 has the future looked so promising. The challenge for all stakeholders in the disability sector and our supporters in the community is to help ensure that the reforms deliver the dream.

The chairman, Michael Kennedy OAM, is also a life member of Kurrajong Waratah, and he had this to say in his report:

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) which will now commence with trial sites in 2013 is a positive investment towards a fairer, more equitable and caring Australian society. The scheme will function in a similar way to Medicare with the costs of disability in our communities shared by all Australians through the Commonwealth Government's consolidated revenue.

  …   …   …

The reform path ahead with the NDIS is exciting for people with a disability and their family and carers, but at the same time it will be full of change. Major change of this type will inevitably bring uncertainty, challenges and opportunities.

The proposed disability reform agenda from the NDIS has put a focus on the large exposure many disability service providers have to government funding and government decisions. Many of our colleague organisations are upwards of 80% plus and some 100% reliant on government funding for their service revenue. At Kurrajong Waratah we have always sought to establish as much independence from government funding as possible through our financially viable business models and strong community support. For Kurrajong Waratah our government business revenue is generally between 50% to 65% of our total revenue.

The ‘new world’ we are entering under an NDIS will be very person centred and customer driven. Such a move towards a market driven service approach, determined by the choices that people with a disability as customers will make, will challenge and confront many disability organisations.

Kurrajong Waratah in preparing for this reform will be consulting extensively with our current clients and their families and carers over the next twelve months to determine what types of services and supports are needed to make the difference to their lives. Part of the process will also be to review our existing policies and procedures, service structures, service delivery methods and philosophy.

There is no greater organisation in the Riverina than Kurrajong Waratah, and the level of business support and individual support that that organisation receives is marvellous. It is also warranted. We heard how many children and adults the organisation supports, and it works right throughout my electorate doing a tremendous job each and every day of the year. They are supportive of an NDIS. Anne Napoli at Griffith and her husband Angelo are supportive of an NDIS. Mrs Pat Thomas at Temora, who has a carers group there, is very supportive. Carol and Chris Harmer, who have two disabled children, are very supportive. I could go on. There are so many people—hundreds of them—right throughout the Riverina who are in need of an NDIS. May they get their dream before not too long. I urge again that this is above politics; this is the right thing to do, it is warranted and it is needed right now.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. What a great time to be in parliament. It is a time when we are speaking on a bill that will forever change the lives of those people living with a disability and of their families. This bill will change the lives of over 400,000 people who are currently living with a disability. This bill aims to support the independence of people living with a disability. It also aims to support the social and economic participation of those people. It will give people with a disability the right to have a say about the support they are given and how the support is delivered.

The bill sets out the role of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the launch of the transition agency to provide support to people with a disability and to their families. This may include funding to help people participate in economic and social life. It will detail the process for those who wish to be part of the NDIS, and it sets out how to develop a goal based plan.

This bill also sets out early intervention requirements, which allow support to be provided to minimise the impact of a disability from its earliest sign. This will aid in halting the deterioration in function over a person's lifetime. The scheme will provide the participant with what is needed to achieve their goals and ambitions. It will give them a quality of life that will allow them to fulfil their potential. The legislation will provide support and assistance under the scheme to ensure that it does not replace existing programs or come to be in competition with other programs. This bill provides a wholesome approach. It is aimed to complement and support the services already in place.

I am proud to be in parliament when changes are being made to support those who need an extra helping hand. In Tasmania, there are many programs which offer assistance to those living with a disability. Those programs do a wonderful service; however, there is always a feeling of 'we need more help'. Travelling around my electorate of Lyons, I get to meet many different people with many different stories. Caring for a person with a disability is a life commitment. I hold those carers in the highest regard. Whether you work in an industry of care or whether you are a parent, relative or friend of someone with a disability, you know that the work never ends; you never rest.

Part of caring for someone with a disability is to teach them about life and the challenges they may face along the way. You are often there to give them a voice, as they often feel left without choices about many of the aspects of their life. The NDIS will give someone who lives with a disability a new path. They, together with their families, will have the opportunity to have a say in what treatment they receive and how it is delivered.

Caring for people with a disability on any level is not a nine-to-five job—and we all know this. Even those who are in a paid position in the industry do far more work than what is within their working hours, or within their duty statements. I have spoken with many of my constituents who have told their stories about working with people with disabilities, and one common theme is that the work is never over and there is never enough support. The NDIS will provide support and stability for how the services are delivered.

The first pilot of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in Tasmania will cover young Tasmanians between the ages of 15 and 24. This program gives them choice and control over their lives. It enables their families flexibility and inclusion. The families will get extra support and it will be tailored to their child's needs. The families know best about what their child or relative needs in terms of support from the NDIS. It gives them this freedom.

It allows them to be able to have their individual needs catered for and slotted into, which is not the situation at present where everything has to fit into the box, and there are a lot of things that do not fit into the present system of the box. We offer those students tutors or have students in classes with children that are of a similar learning level. This means that the children in the class will be taught at a similar level.

The NDIS offers this service as all people with disabilities are different and often even two people with the same disability have different needs. It is time we recognised that. There may be certain days of the week or times of day that work better for a child. This is why a personalised approach is far more effective.

We have many organisations in Lyons that provide care in many different ways: Macquarie homes in Campbelltown, Giant Steps in Deloraine, Oak Tasmania, Star Tasmania and Eskleigh, to name a few. They each provide support for their patients and respite for the families. Eskleigh, which was founded in 1947, is a not-for-profit body providing support for people with a disability, their families and carers within Tasmania. It is located in Perth, not far from my electorate office. Eskleigh operates 42-bed accommodation with full-time nurses and support staff.

Their reach, however, does not just extend to those in Perth. They have residential homes and group home arrangements in Longford, Kings Meadows, Montrose and Mornington. Both Eskleigh and their residential homes support younger adults with various levels of intellectual and physical disabilities. Eskleigh believes in a real quality of life. They have six main values that they live by: empathy, integrity, accountability, community, happiness and flexibility. They detail their values with an explanation and each of these I feel fit what we are trying to achieve with the NDIS. The explanation of empathy really hit home with me and as to everything that I hope for with the NDIS. That is, we value the opinions and uphold the rights of people we support. Like Eskleigh, we identify with the people we support and treat everyone equally and with dignity, respect and compassion. I know that in Tasmania there will be families that will benefit from the NDIS and they will be given crucial support at a crucial time in their child's life. I hope that my constituents who are eligible will be involved with this and I believe it is a life-changing program.

I have had many opportunities in my life that I am thankful for. Serving in parliament is one of them and I think all of us want for our children the best life that can be offered, disability or not. We all want our children to be able to have the best opportunities this nation can offer. This is what the NDIS does. It allows every child and adult the support we can have, the same opportunities as any other person. It allows them to have a say in how their life path runs, how they travel down that path. Going back to the words mentioned before, it is vitally important that we support and treat everybody equally with dignity, respect and compassion. This is why I fully support the NDIS.

George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. In doing so I would like to note the bipartisan support the NDIS has in this parliament. I would also like to stress the importance of this issue across the nation and in my own electorate of Dawson, including the importance of getting the NDIS right. And I would also like to raise some concerns that I have about how the NDIS may be implemented.

On 20 August 2012, I introduced in this place a motion calling for the establishment of a joint select committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The motion was put forward in the spirit of bipartisanship because all members from all political parties in this place and in our state governments were supportive of the NDIS. In the words of the Leader of the Opposition, 'The NDIS is an idea whose time has come.' It is an idea that was conceived by John Walsh, a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers, and was first canvassed at the 2020 Summit in 2008. The Liberal-National coalition supported the government's referral to the Productivity Commission for an inquiry into an NDIS and has been strongly supportive of a bipartisan approach to the implementation of the scheme. Last year, the opposition leader, on behalf of the entire Liberal-National coalition, released a statement that said:

Right now, the treatment given to people with disabilities depends upon how the disability was incurred and which state it happened in. Most rely on state government-funded disability services where demand always outstrips supply. It's wrong that people's treatment should depend upon the litigation lottery or more upon what the system can afford than upon people's needs. The national disability scheme should be a new project that unites Australians. It has to be done responsibly but it does have to be done. The Coalition will do what we reasonably can to make the NDIS happen and would accept a government invitation to be jointly responsible for this vital national project.

On 13 April last year, the opposition leader sent a letter to the Prime Minister putting forward the concept of creating a parliamentary NDIS committee that would ensure policy stability for the proposal until the scheme's full implementation. But there was no written response to this request, merely a brush-off through the media. On 27 April, the opposition leader repeated that offer to the Prime Minister, but this time the offer was formally rejected. As we know, the implementation of the NDIS, as it is proposed by the Productivity Commission, will take seven years, which will span the lives of at least three parliaments and quite possibly different governments.

So the motion that I put to parliament last year put another formal offer on the table, an offer that should not—given the bipartisan support—be rejected. And yet it looks like it has been rejected. My motion, which was moved in August, has been debated but has still not been brought forward for a vote. My belief, and my concern, is that the Gillard Labor government have refused—for six months—to allow that vote to happen because they fear losing a vote on the floor of the House and, in a party-political fashion, a partisan fashion, they are trying to somehow 'own' the NDIS. That would be a very disappointing state of affairs for people who desperately want to see the NDIS implemented—and implemented well.

When introducing that motion in August, I spoke on the various reasons why this issue is very important to me. I grew up in a family where disabilities were actually a lived experienced. My mother was born with cerebral palsy. She is an epileptic. As a youngster I had to deal with the issues associated with that, including picking her up when she was unconscious on the floor and trying to revive her. In fact, my mother told me that her mother had related to her that when she was born the doctor said: 'Give her up. Just put her into government care and be done with it. She will never be any good.' That was the attitude back then. My father lost his leg to cancer when he was 19, so we really live with disabilities in our house. I am now the very proud godfather of James, who is on the autism spectrum but is a great little kid, and I love him dearly. For all of those reasons I know too well why a national disability insurance scheme is needed in this country.

There are many dedicated people and organisations right throughout the nation but particularly in my electorate that I want to mention because they know the importance of getting this scheme right because they deal with the disability issues every single day.

I am referring to organisations in my electorate such as Autism Queensland, and my godson is involved in some of the programs they have; Blue Care, and I particularly mention the director of nursing in Bowen, Helen Woodhouse; Compass Whitsundays, and I mention in particular Monica Laws and her team; the Burdekin Community Association, who do a great job throughout Ayr and Home Hill and surrounds; and the Cootharinga Society of North Queensland, and I mention especially Brett Edwards, who is the general manager of support and accommodation services there. In Bowen, at Bowen Flexi Care, Mandy Edwards and her team do a fantastic job, as does Mike Bolt, who is the manager of En Geti, which is another service provider in the Mackay region. There is Mackay Advocacy, where Nina Swara and her team provide advocacy services for people with disabilities. At MADEC there is Thomas Block and coordinator Karen Langtree, who provide a great service and who took me through their John E Smith respite centre, which, when it is fully complete, will be a fantastic facility for respite care in the Mackay region. There is the Life Stream Foundation in Mackay, of which Jodie Gairn is the area coordinator. There is Amy Williamson and her team; Amy is operations manager at Life without Barriers. There is Pioneer Employment, which does a fantastic job of getting people with disabilities into real, meaningful employment. I mention in particular operations manager Valerie Cummins and her team.

Last but certainly not least—in fact, it is probably at the top of the list—is the Endeavour Foundation. The Endeavour Foundation, as most people know, are a national organisation. But they have strong local teams, particularly in my North Queensland electorate. To celebrate the International Day of People with Disability, the Endeavour Foundation put on an art competition for which they sought entries that illustrated the theme of the day. The theme was removing barriers to create an inclusive and accessible society for all. All the entries were uploaded to their Facebook page.

A supported employee from Mackay, Ashley Burke, who is from the Mackay business centre of the Endeavour Foundation, received the most 'likes' on his drawing, and he won the people's choice vote for a dynamic little bit of art work which showed him doing a taekwondo kick. It won him an iPad. Ashley is really into taekwondo, and I had the pleasure of presenting Ashley with his prize at the end of last year alongside the senior business service manager at Endeavour, Sean McCauley. Ashley's work of art was entitled 'Once I started breaking boards, I started busting barriers'. He explained to me that he was knocked back a few times by different taekwondo instructors because they did not see his potential but that he kept pushing and that, despite the setbacks, he remained determined to pursue his goals. This talented young kid is now a red-belt/black-tip in taekwondo and is about to go for his black belt. He sees that, when he starts breaking those boards—and he assures me that he can break the boards; I did not try it out—he is busting the barriers that are put in front of him, and I think that is fantastic. Ashley is one of almost 60 supported employees who work at the Mackay business service centre for Endeavour. I have seen 38 other people with disabilities at Endeavour's learning and lifestyle centre in Shakespeare Street in Mackay, and they are also supported in accommodation services by Endeavour.

These are the organisations and people who the NDIS will help. National Disability Services, the peak body for non-government disability services, gave an apt definition of the NDIS. They said it will be:

… an entitlement-based funding mechanism, which will provide flexible, person-centred supports so that people can participate in ordinary, daily life.

But the benefits go beyond just people with disabilities and disability service providers; it will actually benefit the entire nation. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, one of the great things about the NDIS is that it will give people with disabilities and their carers more opportunities to be productive and more opportunities to participate in our economy. He went on to say words that aptly express my own feelings about the NDIS. He said:

That's why it's not just a cost. Over time, it is an investment in a better society and in a stronger economy. The NDIS is not about handouts, it is not about charity; it is an investment in our future. It will also give people greater freedom of choice.

The NDIS will provide people with a disability, their families and their carers with the ongoing care, support, therapy and equipment that they actually need. Most importantly, it will be individualised and person-centred, with support based on the personal choices of either the person with the disability or their family or carers.

That is fundamentally the great thing about the concept of the NDIS: empowerment. It lets individuals and families decide what services will best fit them, rather than having some bureaucrat in a state capital work it out on a desktop model. It opens up competition and opportunity within the disability services sector, which is good for the person with the disability, as they will have affordable choices for service provisions; but also it is good for the disability service providers, as they will have greater certainty in terms of long-term service demand. In my view, that is a key ingredient of the NDIS. There is a lot to look forward to about it.

But, in the back of my mind, I do have to say some alarm bells are ringing. The first warning bell, obviously, is funding. Where is the money going to come from? The second alarm bell is value for money. Much of the money that has been borrowed on the taxpayers' behalf right now, to fund the initial stages of the NDIS, will not actually be going to people with disabilities; it will be going to establishing and maintaining the systems and the administration or bureaucracy that goes around it.

The bill establishes the framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. And, while it is a necessary part of building the NDIS, we have to be aware that there is a danger that the NDIS could be hijacked and could be transformed into a bureaucratic quagmire. We cannot allow that to happen. The funds must flow through to the people who need the money and the improved services: people with disabilities and their carers. I am looking forward to seeing a well-constructed, cost-efficient NDIS being implemented in Queensland to make a difference in the lives of people who need it.

In Queensland, Premier Campbell Newman has just commenced cleaning up almost two decades of Labor finances, and the mess that was there. He has still managed to have a commitment of an additional $313 million in disability spending for the NDIS by 2018-19. An article from the Courier Mailon 13 December last year put his commitment in context:

Mr Newman faces a difficult battle after inheriting a government that spends less per capita on the disabled than other states.

Mr Newman said his government would kick-start the funding with a $50 million injection in 2014-15, when the budget is projected to return to surplus.

That will climb to $313 million extra by 2018-19, bringing the increase in five years to $868 million.

The state currently spends $959 million on its disabled.

So why is it that the Prime Minister and her government greeted a similar announcement in New South Wales with enthusiasm and merely scorned the Queensland government? It was very sad indeed that that happened. Fiona Anderson, on a blog on the Every Australian Counts website, offered a bit of an insight. She pointed out that the Queensland Premier denied the Prime Minister the opportunity of sharing the stage for that important announcement, unlike the New South Wales Premier. Whatever the reason, it is clear that the NDIS, with broad bipartisan support, is somehow still being used as a political tool. I have to say: the cause is above politics. And it is time the government placed the future success of the NDIS above politics and just got on with the job of delivering it. Thank you very much.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012. I am indeed pleased to see that this bill is currently before the House. The bill establishes the framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency. This will enable the scheme to be launched from July 2013.

The first stage of the scheme will benefit more than 20,000 people with a disability, their families and their carers living in South Australia, Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria. The bill sets out the objects and principles under which the National Disability Insurance Scheme will operate. It gives effect to the following principles: the National Disability Insurance Scheme should take an insurance approach that shares the costs of disability services and supports across the community, will fund reasonable and necessary services and supports directly related to an eligible person's individual ongoing disability and will enable people with a disability to exercise more choice and control in their lives through a person-centred, self-directed approach with individualised funding.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency will be set up as a body independent from government to deliver the scheme. In addition, 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 social contributors to disability.

When I was first elected to this place, one of the first public events which I hosted was a forum for people with a disability and their families so that they could come along and talk about their experiences, their struggles and their priorities for improved services that might be provided by government. The forum was held at Tyndale Christian School, which kindly made available the venue. Tyndale had already shown leadership in the provision of disability services through a special focus the school had for children with a disability. The Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services at the time, the Hon. Bill Shorten, was the keynote speaker and, importantly, was there to hear firsthand the stories and struggles raised. It was the first of three such forums that I have hosted, and at each forum the urgency for governments to act has become more and more evident.

Disability was not new to me. As Mayor of the City of Salisbury, I chaired the Disability Advisory Group, which the council set up to advise on how council could assist people with a disability through the provision of council services. Members of the reference group were all people with a disability, so their input was very insightful. As a result, the council embarked on an ambitious program of modifying buildings, footpaths, playgrounds and library services so that they could be more accessible to people with a disability. Furthermore, council employed a disability access officer to assist the advisory committee with its work and to establish a disability policy for the City of Salisbury. That person was Michael Taggart, a person born with vision impairment. Michael is now effectively legally blind. Michael has since been recognised here in Canberra by Minister Macklin—who is in the chamber today and who leads the government through this process—with a National Disability Award for his leadership and advocacy on behalf of people with a disability.

My association with disability does not end there. I have seen the struggles of family members and friends who have either been born with or later in life acquired a disability. I have visited the special schools for children with a disability, and I have worked with athletes with a disability. During my time in the fitness industry, I was involved in rehabilitation programs for people, many of whom would never go on to fully recover. I know only too well about the lifelong hardships and struggles faced by families where disability is present—struggles and hardship made worse by a lack of services available.

So, when the momentum for a national disability insurance scheme began to grow, I felt that finally, after years of neglect and avoidance, disability had become part of the national conversation. As a nation, for too long we had preferred to push disability aside and out of sight rather than confront our responsibilities. Disability has been put on the national agenda, and for hundreds of thousands of families around the country expectations have been raised. Finally, there is hope and optimism in their lives. It is now for the parliament and each member of this place to ensure that those expectations are met and that the hope becomes a reality.

Millions of Australians are counting on us. Let me make it very clear: I will continue to do all I can to ensure that the National Disability Insurance Scheme not only becomes a reality but also provides the level of support that makes a real difference for the better to people's lives. Delivery of a national disability insurance service is a complex challenge because of the range and nature of services required and the complexity about how those services can be best delivered. I have listened to many of the speakers in this debate, and I do not doubt for a moment the sincerity of each member who has spoken in support of this legislation. But words will not deliver the scheme; funding will. There will never be spare funds and there will always be competing demands on government revenue, so funding will always be a convenient excuse not to proceed. I hope that that is not the case, and I am sure that that is not the case when I speak as a member of this government.

It is also true that no single entity or level of government is responsible for delivery of an NDIS and that the term 'disability' has a broad definition. However, anyone who uses these matters as excuses to delay the implementation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme will be judged accordingly by the Australian people, particularly those for whom each day means another day of struggle. Delaying tactics will be seen for what they are. Just as universal health care was implemented by the Whitlam government, there is no reason why an NDIS cannot be similarly implemented. An initial scheme may not be perfect, but it can always be refined over time.

In speaking to this legislation, I pay tribute to those people and organisations who to date have shouldered the burden in our communities. I refer to the schools, the employers, the job search providers, the training organisations, the special industry sectors, the carers, the parents and even the young children who have become carers for their own parents. I have met with and spoken to so many of them in my local area. They are true heroes of our nation. I also refer to the economic contribution people with a disability can make to their local community and to the country. In my own electorate there are two of South Australia's largest employers of people with a disability. I refer to the Phoenix Society and to Bedford Industries. I know both organisations well. I have also visited their workplaces and seen firsthand the products and services they provide and the skills of their employees. Phoenix employs about 500 people across six work sites, I believe. Bedford Industries employs around 800.

Each year, as I did again on 23 December last year, I attend the Phoenix Society end-of-year employee award presentation event. I have in the past attended similar events at Bedford Industries. The camaraderie between employees, their work commitment, their sense of humour and the skills I have observed when I have visited their employment sites are a credit to all of them. Employees in these sectors can and do make an economic contribution to society. All that most of them ask is simply to be given an opportunity. I commend Phoenix CEO Ian Terry and his team for making the society's people with a disability feel valued by focusing on their abilities and not their disabilities.

Regrettably, there are not enough positions available to accommodate everyone that could work and is willing to work in a Phoenix Society or Bedford Industries workplace. I would urge any employers listening to consider, where an opportunity is available, employing a person with a disability, because in most cases it is their abilities that we should be focusing on, not their disability. Many of these people can fulfil and carry out jobs which they are quite often denied.

Of course the NDIS debate is complicated, because each disability is different, as is the level of ability. Nor is disability confined to a particular age group. For older members of our society, our aged-care structure provides a reasonable although not perfect support system. Again, how aged-care services will integrate into the NDIS is yet to be determined. Similar questions arise with respect to the provision of education services. I digress for a moment to commend those teachers and schools that have taken a special interest in ensuring that their schools provide appropriate education services for children with a disability.

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 2 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 97. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.