Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be speaking on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Quality and Safeguards Commission and Other Measures) Bill 2017. This is a very important piece of legislation. Labor does support the development of a strong quality and safeguards framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. This type of framework is required if we are to see the proper protection of people with disability. We of course want to see people with disability prevented from experiencing harm that arises from poor quality or unsafe supports or services under the National Disability Insurance Scheme. This will be vital to the long-term success of the NDIS.

The NDIS, of course, was created by Labor in 2013. It represents a really dramatic shift from services delivered largely under block-funded contractual relationships between providers and Commonwealth, state and territory governments, as the funders, to a situation where people with disability are the purchasers and consumers of services from a diverse market, to better meet—and this is the important thing—the needs and choices of people with disability. This bill is an acknowledgement that the existing governance arrangements will not be adequate by the time the NDIS reaches full rollout in 2019-20. It is the case that the current arrangements will remain in place during the transition years.

The bill establishes an independent national commission to protect and prevent people with disability from experiencing harm arising from poor quality or unsafe supports or services under the NDIS. At full scheme of the NDIS, the commission will be responsible for overseeing quality supports and services for people with disability who are receiving those NDIS supports and services. The bill's explanatory memorandum states that the primary focus of the commission will be regulating NDIS service providers to make sure that NDIS participants—that is, people with disability—receive the standard of service that they deserve.

Schedule 1 of the bill relates to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. Specifically it will establish the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission as an independent statutory body with the following integrated regulatory functions: registration and regulation of NDIS providers, including practice standards and a code of conduct; compliance monitoring; investigation and enforcement action; responding to complaints and reportable incidents, including abuse and neglect of a person with disability; national policy-setting for the screening of workers; national oversight and policy-setting in relation to behaviour support; monitoring the use of restrictive practices—a very important issue—within the NDIS, with the aim of reducing and eliminating such practices; and facilitating information-sharing arrangements between the commission, the National Disability Insurance Agency and state and territory and other Commonwealth regulatory bodies.

Schedule 2 makes a number of amendments to the act to improve the operation of the act following the independent review conducted for the purposes of section 208 of the act.

The establishment of the commission is expected to cost around $209 million over the forward estimates. This is a very large and complex bill, but, at its core, it is about helping to empower and support NDIS participants to exercise choice and control at the same time as ensuring appropriate safeguards are in place and establishing expectations of providers and their staff to deliver high-quality supports. As I say, it is a very complex bill, but it is fundamental to the successful rollout of the NDIS. It does need thorough examination and it needs to be made subject to extensive consultation with the disability community.

In February 2017, the Disability Reform Council released the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework. This framework included measures targeted at individuals, the workforce and providers to strengthen their capacity to prevent harm and ensure quality services and to resolve problems, enable improvements and provide oversight. There has been a series of recent inquiries and reports that have documented the weaknesses of the current safeguarding arrangements for disability services, many of which result from a disconnection between quality assurance and oversight regulatory functions. We have seen the Senate inquiry into violence, abuse and neglect against people with a disability in institutional and residential settings, Victorian government inquiries and, of course, the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. These inquiries have found failures to uncover, report and respond to abuse and inadequate screening of workers. They called for many changes, including nationally consistent provider accreditation and the use of behavioural support strategies that do not involve restrictive practices to reduce challenging behaviours. Labor will continue to consider this legislation carefully in consultation with people with disability and also with providers, unions and other stakeholders. The bill has already been referred to a Senate inquiry to allow for further consultation and scrutiny. The Senate inquiry is due to report in early September.

A number of concerns have been raised about the legislation by states, unions and other stakeholders, and I want to touch on a few of those today. Concerns have been raised that the legislation will provide too much discretionary power to the Commonwealth minister to make regulations relating to the framework which will not require consensus from the states and territories, undermining the consistency of the national scheme. Other concerns are that it does not establish a national system of workforce screening and that there will be conflict between the commission's role as regulator and policymaker and in the delivery of financial assistance grants. Specifically, there is concern that the Commonwealth minister's power over the commission could be seen as compromising its ability to act independently. The proposed model raises the potential for perception of a conflict of interest, particularly as it relates to the handling of complaints. These are genuine concerns.

I am aware that the Victorian government has indicated the need for greater state involvement and review of arrangements. Specifically, the Victorian government has suggested that there be a separate statutory NDIS complaints commissioner. It suggested the need for agreement of all jurisdictions on rules that are fundamental to the detail, design and implementation of key components of the framework, at least during the implementation phase of the frameworks operation. It also suggested that the operation of the quality and safeguard provisions of the NDIS Act and whether it is delivering on the objectives of the framework be subject to an independent review in July 2020, with the reviewer and terms of reference agreed by the Disability Reform Council. I ask that the minister give consideration to these suggestions. Other states and territories also have their own proposed amendments. I understand and appreciate that the Minister for Social Services wants to get going with this legislation. It is very important. There are agreed time frames that need to be met to make sure that the commission is established by 1 July 2018. Nonetheless, given the importance of this legislation, we need to take a deliberative and consultative approach.

The Leader of the Opposition, the shadow minister for disability and carers, Senator Brown, the shadow minister for employment, Brendan O'Connor, who is with me here today, and I, attended a forum hosted by several unions last Friday to discuss NDIS workforce issues, including this framework. It was a very productive forum. We received very valuable feedback about the workforce issues in the NDIS. I thank the ASU, the HSU and United Voice for organising the forum.

Issues raised included the proper training and remuneration of the NDIS workforce. I think we would all agree that high-quality care and support for people with disability relies on staff being well trained, with decent wages and conditions. Significantly, there were concerns expressed that current prices in the NDIS do not account for what is required to deliver high-quality services and arrangements are not fully enabling disability support workers to deliver services which are personalised, coordinated or safe. These are very serious issues that need to be examined thoroughly.

Currently, the Productivity Commission are undertaking a five-yearly review into the NDIS. The final report is due in September, and we all look forward to seeing its recommendations. Their position paper, which was released just last week, makes clear that increased regulatory consistency across jurisdictions through the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework should mean lower costs for some providers. The Productivity Commission report also notes that the time frame for implementing the framework is important in ensuring quality and safety for scheme participants and to provide clarity and reducing regulatory burdens for all concerned.

Just last month, the federal Labor Party announced that, should we win the next election, we will establish a royal commission into violence and abuse against people with disability. The continued abuse of Australians with a disability by people who are meant to care for them demands a royal commission. People with disability experience much higher rates of violence than the rest of the community, and in many cases this violence occurs in places where they are meant to be receiving support. Children with disability are at least three times more likely to experience abuse than other children. People with disability and their families have—as I think everyone in the House knows—been campaigning for a royal commission for years. Only a royal commission has the weight, authority and investigative powers to examine these horrific accounts of abuse and violence against people with disability.

The day that we made the announcement in Melbourne was very emotional. We made the announcement alongside many survivors of abuse. As one of the survivors said to me:

Enough is enough. It is our time to be heard. Here is our time for justice, now.

Another woman, Paula, shared a very emotional story, and she said:

Our son is autistic and our son has been physically and sexually abused. What you need to understand is autistic people don't lie. So when they tell these stories, you need to listen, you need to really listen and make sure that these people know that they're being heard. They need to be heard and they need to be reassured that they're going to be safe telling their stories.

These accounts really underscored to me the importance of having a royal commission.

For so long, the abuse that people with disability have suffered has been ignored or, in many cases, not believed. The scale and severity of abuse against people with disability in institutional care was outlined by an ABC TV Four Corners program in 2014. It became the catalyst for the Senate inquiry in 2015, which made 30 recommendations, including the establishment of a royal commission. Unfortunately, it took the Turnbull government 16 months to respond. The government has rejected the calls for a royal commission and accepted only one of the inquiry's 30 recommendations.

In March this year, Four Corners again revealed further cases of sexual and physical abuse inflicted on people with disability and that perpetrators have not been prosecuted. Worse, they may still be working in the disability sector. As I said, it is very disappointing that this government has so far rejected the call to establish a royal commission. The reason the government has given for rejecting this call is that they claim that the legislation we are debating today will address all of these issues. I am sorry to say that is simply not true. The framework that we are debating today will apply to approximately 10 per cent of people with disability who will be NDIS participants. Of course, this legislation will not address the abuse that has occurred in the past. So once again, I call on the government to establish a royal commission into the abuse of people with disability—now.

I want to take a moment to address some of the claims that have been made by those opposite that somehow Labor is not fully committed to the full rollout and full funding of the NDIS. This is utter rubbish. It is simply wrong, and the government knows it is wrong. For the sake of people with disability, it really must stop. No-one is more committed to the successful rollout of the NDIS than Labor. We established the NDIS. It took years of campaigning and years of work alongside the disability community. We are 100 per cent committed to the NDIS and 100 per cent committed to fully funding it.

I want to address the issue of special accounts, and the way in which the government misleads people with its suggestion that, somehow, the only way to guarantee the future of the NDIS is to establish a special account. We do not seem to need that for submarines or other defence funding, or for anything else in the budget, but for some reason, the government seems to think we need a special account for the funding of the NDIS. But these special accounts are not special at all. They do not actually hold any funds. Peter Martin, the economics editor for The Age, wrote recently about the government holding the NDIS to ransom. He wrote:

…there are no locked boxes.

  …   …

There are no separate jam jars.

The account—this special disability account—will sit inside consolidated revenue. Section 81 of the Constitution sets out that consolidated revenue is all of the taxes that the Commonwealth raises—including the Medicare levy, personal income tax, company tax, excise, the petroleum resource rent tax, the new bank levy—we could go on. And on the expenditure side, we have many different demand-driven programs, like Medicare and the age pension—all using money appropriated by the government through this parliament from consolidated revenue to pay for these services. Just like other government services, the NDIS will have its money appropriated annually through the parliament. A special account is just another way of appropriating these funds.

In the last four years, we have seen this government say that the only way to fund the NDIS was to make cuts to people with disability. They said they wanted to see people knocked off the disability support pension, or new people losing the energy supplement, including people with disability. We have seen this government trying to hold the NDIS, and people with disability, to ransom over the last four years. Labor, of course, opposes the government's cuts to people with disability. We oppose the idea of holding people with disability to ransom. I just want to reiterate—particularly to reassure people with disability—that Labor will always fully fund the NDIS.

In summary, we support a strong quality and safeguards framework. It is required to protect and prevent people with disability from experiencing harm arising from poor-quality or unsafe supports or services under the NDIS. We will not oppose this bill in the House. We look forward to it being scrutinised through the Senate inquiry, and look forward to the input of the disability community as the discussions proceed. I move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes that people with disability experience much higher rates of violence than the rest of the community, and in many cases, this violence occurs in places where they are meant to be receiving support;

(2) notes that children with disability are at least three times more likely to experience abuse than other children;

(3) condemns the Government's decision to reject a Royal Commission into Violence and Abuse against People with disability;

(4) notes that, contrary to the Government's claims, NDIS Quality and Safeguards will not negate the need for a Royal Commission into abuse of people with disability; and

(5) calls on the Turnbull Government to establish a Royal Commission so that people with disability, their families and carers can tell their stories to the highest level of judicial inquiry and seek justice".

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the amendment seconded?

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Jagajaga has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services and Disability Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Quality and Safeguards Commission and Other Measures) Bill 2017. As the previous speaker said, this is important legislation. The NDIS is the biggest reform of disability services in Australia's history. It is also a reform that will be life-changing for so many Australians with disability, their carers and their families. At full scheme, approximately 460,000 people living with permanent and significant disability will have individually tailored and funded packages. The scheme provides participants with the support they need to undertake everyday activities, so they can participate in their communities and in social and economic life. The NDIS is not just transforming the lives of participants; it also has opportunities and challenges for providers. As assistant minister, I have had discussions with many providers and stakeholders as I travel throughout Australia, and I am conscious of the impact of such a large reform.

The scheme also increases demand for tens of thousands of new jobs across Australia, creating opportunities for workers and the businesses that will employ them. Given the coalition's 2017 budget focus on more and better-paying jobs, the disability employment sector presents a real opportunity for growth. With a developing market and such a large increase in workers, we need to ensure there is sound regulation underpinning the NDIS to ensure the scheme can achieve everything it is designed to deliver for people with disability and their families. The Quality and Safeguards Commission and the supporting framework will work to ensure that supports and services are delivered safely and to a high standard for participants. We have heard the reports over the past few weeks of a gentleman with physical and intellectual disability being dragged along the carpet by staff members at his group home, and receiving second-degree burns. The incident was never reported. Mr Deputy Speaker, can I say that this is simply not good enough. Under the Quality and Safeguards Commission, providers will be required to report incidents of abuse and neglect. The commission will ensure that the provider takes appropriate action with respect to individuals they support and makes the required changes to prevent these sorts of incidents ever happening again.

This bill will see the establishment of a commission that will replace the various quality and safeguard arrangements currently operating in each state and territory. It will bring together the different functions—complaints, reportable incidents, provider registration—into one organisation to deliver effective regulatory intervention and integration. This bill puts into effect the NDIS quality and safeguards framework which has been developed through extensive stakeholder consultations across three years, and reflects the commitment of all governments to address the weaknesses in the current safeguarding arrangements. We have had extensive consultation from all stakeholders to make sure that we get this bill right. For participants, this means greater protection and prevention from unsafe or poor supports or services. Recent public inquiries and reviews have highlighted the importance of a strong regulatory framework, particularly for people in residential settings, and this is what the commission will provide. For NDIS participants, the establishment of the commission will mean the quality of registered providers delivering services and supports to participants will be monitored. It will also mean the reduction, and hopefully the elimination, of practices or interventions that restrict the rights or freedom of movement of a person with disability. To balance this, the commission will also promote strategies to reduce challenging behaviours. The commission will ensure that registered NDIS providers have appropriate complaint and incident management systems, and this will be supported by the commission's own complaints mechanism to receive, manage and respond to complaints regarding NDIS providers and workers.

Establishment of an independent commission will support market growth by providing a national accreditation process for providers. This means providers will have a single registration point at full scheme regardless of the number of jurisdictions in which they operate, thereby reducing duplication and providing national consistency. The regulatory requirements for workers and providers will be risk based, dependent on the type of services and supports they provide. Higher-risk supports and services will have stricter regulatory requirements. Providers will also need to comply with the NDIS Code of Conduct regardless of whether they are registered or not. The code will reflect the National Standards for Disability Services and the National Standards in Mental Health Services together with the objectives of the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework.

For registered providers, there will be NDIS practice standards to be met for the supports and services they provide. This means an overall reduction in red tape for providers, something I am focused on and consider very important, but it still gives the right balance between providing protections for NDIS participants and not restricting their capacity to exercise choice and control. The commission will monitor the NDIS market for emerging risks, including unplanned provider exits. It will identify trends in provider practice which may contribute to provider failure or indicate issues with the quality or safety of supports. Monitoring changes to the market will be underpinned by information gathering and sharing provisions across the commission and with other regulators, such as state and territory governments, who will be responsible for worker screening for the NDIS.

I support the extensive compliance and enforcement powers that this bill gives the commission to ensure our most vulnerable participants are protected. The bill introduces an NDIS code of conduct for all providers and workers delivering services under the NDIS and actively ensures that restrictive practices are only used as a last resort, and only when authorised by the state or territory in which the participant lives.

Protecting our most vulnerable people must be our priority. However, we need to do this in a cohesive way so it does not unnecessarily constrain the growth of the market or impose unnecessary levels of accreditation or training for workers as a gut reaction to recent inquiries. We need to ensure that the level of training and accreditation is fit for purpose. As we heard yesterday from the young carers, their 12, 15 or 20 years experience as a carer for family or a relative often makes them much more equipped than someone with a 2½-week course or accreditation. We must acknowledge the work and experience gained by young carers in the support they give to their family members. We also need to ensure the commission has the appropriate authority and investigative powers to undertake their role without an administrative framework that prevents them from fulfilling this role. As with any organisation of this type, they will report to the minister and respond to issues raised.

The commission will complement the role of the NDIA and, together, they will have overall responsibility for NDIS participants and the provider market. This will invest $209 million over four years to implement comprehensive safeguards for NDIS participants, which further supports them in exercising choice and control over who delivers their supports and services. This is yet a further commitment by the coalition government to a fully funded NDIS that ensures certainty for Australians living with permanent and significant disability, their carers and their families.

I also support the amendments to the NDIS Act that arose from the independent review of how the act operated. The review identified areas where greater clarification could be provided without altering the design or eligibility of the scheme. These changes will help deliver an NDIS that is for all Australians, and include strengthening the act to include stronger references to carers; providing a clearer definition of information linkages and capacity building, which expands the general supports which can be provided; and addressing inadequacies of the legislation, such as enabling the CEO to gather information about prospective participants to help the transition into the NDIS.

The passage of this bill is crucial to providing the necessary safeguard for NDIS participants and their families and to allowing the NDIS to be delivered effectively. This bill ensures that services are delivered to a minimum standard and, where this does not occur, there is a clear process to address these issues. This bill also gives greater recognition to carers and the important role they play. As I often mention, I appreciate the opportunity to meet many people with disability and their service providers and to hear their stories. I continue to be impressed when I hear stories about how the NDIS is making a difference to people's lives. I need not explain the importance that the coalition government places on the success of the NDIS. However, unlike those opposite, we recognise the criticality of making sure the scheme is properly funded. I am pleased to be part of a strong coalition team who want to ensure people with disability are protected and supported in achieving their goals. I commend this bill to the House.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with the experiences of Canberrans in mind that I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Quality and Safeguards Commission and Other Measures) Bill 2017. Labor supports the development of a strong quality and safeguards framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme so that we can protect and prevent people with disability from experiencing harm from poor quality or unsafe supports or services under the NDIS. It is vitally important that we protect those who are vulnerable and living with disability from dodgy practitioners and people who are out to exploit them.

We know that this bill is extensive and complex. It is very important legislation for the Australian community not just for those living with disability but also for those who are carers. We need to have this discussion about frameworks and protecting those with disability because one of the drivers behind the NDIS is the fact that it will empower those with disability. It will give them the opportunity to have choice in the services and supports that they need. It will give them the opportunity to tailor those supports and services to the needs of their lifestyle. Rather than just receiving an institutional approach, it is a broad based approach that will allow them to pick and choose what they need that will best benefit their specific needs. That is the beauty of the NDIS.

The NDIS will allow people living with disability to have choice. It will give them autonomy. It will give them independence. It will provide them that opportunity they have never had before to tailor the supports and services to what they need rather than to what is being provided or what an institution deems is appropriate—it is what they need. Through that process, it will empower those living with disability. That said, that can be threatening. When you are brand new to having to make a choice—you have always had choices made for you or the system made the choices for you—having the opportunity to tailor those supports and services and choose those supports and services can be threatening. It can be scary.

In the early days here in Canberra we were at the vanguard of the rollout of the NDIS; we were a trial site. I met with a number of parents who embraced the spirit of the NDIS and that sense of empowerment. They saw it for the opportunities that it would provide for their children. I met with parents who relished the fact that they could get a carer for their teenage daughter or son, or their daughter or son in their 20s, and take them out to the movies on a Saturday night or to the bowling club on a Saturday night, or take them out for a nice meal so they had a companion. It meant that the parents could go out on a date for the first time in a very long time. Some marriages and relationships were rekindled, so to speak, because their son or daughter had the opportunity to go out and do their own thing rather than having to go out with mum and dad. Mum and dad could then go out and do their own thing and be with their friends or be with each other and have a lovely time together on a date. There were those parents who really relished the liberation—in many ways, the empowerment—that the NDIS provided.

That said, I also spoke to parents who felt overwhelmed by it. They were overwhelmed by the options and the choice. They did not know how to navigate their way through the system. One of them had a profoundly intellectually disabled daughter and felt, and rightly so, that that was enough. Their life was focused on their daughter, and rightly so. They did not have the energy to choose what services and support they needed. They were just exhausted. This is why it is so important that we provide the supports and services to those parents, particularly the carers, who do feel overwhelmed by the NDIS. The whole idea is empowerment, liberation and choice. They are tailor-made systems. We do not want people being overwhelmed by this; we want people being empowered and freed up by this program. With choice and options comes a need for quality control, quality standards and quality frameworks.

As I said, the ACT was one of the eight initial trial sites for the NDIS and the first state or territory to be fully operational under the NDIS rollout. We have had our fair share of experiences and in particular where the client, the person with a disability, was not being listened to. I will give some examples. I spoke back in February about Elise's experience with the NDIA. Unfortunately, four months on, the issue with her plan still has not been resolved. In February Elise had been waiting months for approval from the NDIA's technical advisory committee for a medical bed. She needed a very specific bed. It was not a cheap bed. Since then the funding provided has been insufficient to meet her needs, as identified by her occupational therapist, and other services have been removed from her plan without consultation.

I am sure there are many in this chamber who are getting the same feedback from their electorates. There are real problems getting management plans approved. Unilateral decisions are being made on what is included and what is excluded from the plan. There is no consultation on what is being included and what is being excluded. As I said, I am sure I as a member of parliament or senator am not alone in having constituents come and discuss these challenges.

The other example I have had is from Wayne. Wayne is an exceptional man. He is exceptional in many ways, and I will explain why in just a moment. Wayne came to me late last year I think it was. Wayne has cerebral palsy. He was updating his management plan and was told that he needed only one pair of shoes for a whole year. There were some restrictions and there was only one pair of shoes per individual. Why? He did not know. He said: 'Why is it that I can have only one pair of shoes for an entire year? I do wear out my shoes.' He was told it is essentially one pair of shoes or no shoes. Wayne came to me basically to discuss a range of issues relating to the NDIS and his plan and also to explain to me that he was a man who needed more than one pair of shoes. I do not think that that is a huge ask.

The NDIS has been designed to be tailored to the specific needs of specific individuals living with a disability; therefore, we need to have some thinking that embraces that and actually acknowledges that tailoring means that there is not one size that fits all. That is vitally important for the NDIA, so that we do not get Elise's experience, where there is partial funding for the specific bed she needs according to an occupational therapist, or get the experience of dear Wayne, who can have only one pair of shoes a year to wear. I do want to discuss Wayne, because, as I said, he is a particularly exceptional individual. Even though Wayne is only allowed to have one pair of shoes funded by the NDIS, he is an extraordinary young man. I recently took part in the Share the Dignity campaign, where I did a call-out for people to provide sanitary napkins and tampons for homeless women. The evidence shows that homeless women, in particular, or those fleeing domestic violence, often forgo a meal once a month so that they can buy sanitary items. I did the call-out for people to take part in the Share the Dignity campaign and, as a result of the overwhelming—as always—generosity of Canberrans, it means that 140 homeless women, who are fleeing domestic violence, now do not have to make that monthly choice between a meal and sanitary items.

Wayne is a legend who actually donated $300 worth of items. He came along to my office with all these tubs, because he recently wrote a book called Anecdotes of a Disabled Gay. The book is partly tongue-in-cheek, but it also talks about the way he is treated in so many different ways because of his disability. The book went on sale earlier this year and has had a great response, and Wayne was able to donate $300 from the sale of his book to the Share the Dignity campaign. Wayne, as I said, is a legend, even though he is only allowed to buy one pair of shoes under the NDIS.

A number of recent inquiries and reports have documented the weaknesses of the current safeguarding arrangements for disability services, many of which result from a disconnect between quality assurance and oversight regulatory functions. This bill establishes an independent national commission that will essentially implement the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework and give effect to the government's regulatory responsibilities under the framework. This framework is vital to the success of the NDIS and it represents a significant shift in the way the NDIS operates. As the explanatory memorandum to the bill says, it means that the commission will be a fit-for-purpose, evidence based, risk-responsive regulator of the new and emerging NDIS provider market.

Concerns have been raised about this bill by states, unions and stakeholders, and they have suggested the bill provides too much discretionary power to the minister to make regulations relating to the framework, which will not require consensus from the states or territories and which will undermine the consistency of the national scheme. They have suggested it will only cover NDIS funded supports, leaving people using services outside the NDIS uncovered by the provisions of the bill. That is why we welcome the fact that this bill has been referred to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry, and I look forward to reviewing the submissions from 28 July and the report that is scheduled to be tabled in September.

We want the NDIS to work and we want the government to get it right. That is why, last month, Labor announced that, should we win the next election, we will establish a royal commission into violence and abuse against people with disability. The continued abuse of Australians with disability by people who are meant to care for them demands a royal commission. I do not know whether you have heard stories, Deputy Speaker Kelly, but since I have been the member for Canberra I have heard some absolutely horrific stories of abuse of people living with a disability.

People with disabilities are a marginalised group in Australia. People with disabilities experience 29 per cent less participation in the workforce; 2½ times the rate of poverty in the general population; lower levels of education; and stigma and stereotyping. They also experience isolation and social exclusion. They experience violence in all its shapes and forms, such as withholding essential disability aids or supports, or being pushed out of wheelchairs. I have heard of women being pushed out of wheelchairs and left stranded and defenceless in their own homes. People living with disability have their fears or their paranoia incited. People with disability are being left in uncomfortable or humiliating situations, being victims of chemical restraint and subject to sexual violence.

Seventy per cent of women with disabilities have experienced sexual violence; 90 per cent of women with intellectual disabilities have experienced rape or sexual assault; and 25 per cent of rapes are of women with disabilities. In Canberra, 46 per cent of women who reported violence were women with disabilities, and that is an alarming rate, given only 17 per cent of women in the ACT have disabilities.

That is why it is vital that for these reasons—the sexual abuse, the chemical restraint, the physical restraint, the withholding, the inciting of fear and paranoia—and many more, and there are many, many more stories, that we need a royal commission into the abuse and sexual assault of those Australians living with a disability.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Fisher will have until 1.30. You will be interrupted at 1.30 but have time to continue after.

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

Thank you. I remember one of the most challenging days in my life was the day when I found out that our fourth daughter was going to be born with disabilities, if she was going to survive the pregnancy at all. I remember sitting in that doctor's room when the scans were being done and watching all of the frowns. We knew something was up, and it was very, very sad day. When our daughter was born, that was great—and she survived the pregnancy, survived the birth—but there was a realisation that this was going to be a challenging upbringing.

As time went on and as she grew older, I became aware of the challenges and struggles that many families face that have children with a disability. In the broader scheme of things—and I hesitate to say it this way—we were let off lightly. There are many, many families that look after children with disabilities where the parents live in anguish as to who will look after their children when they pass and there are many families that will look after their children until they pass. Most parents look forward to getting their children off their hands as they reach adulthood or thereabouts—perhaps when they finish uni—but there are many families in our community who will never enjoy this opportunity and they will have to look after their disabled children forever and a day. I thank my lucky stars that I do not think my wife and I will be in that cohort.

This government is committed absolutely 100 per cent rolled gold, lock, stock and barrel, to delivering a fully functional, fully funded NDIS. This bill that is being put forward today is another stark example of the difference between this government and Labor when it comes to operating the NDIS.

This government, as I said, is fully committed to implementing the NDIS, because we understand what a huge undertaking it is. It is one of the largest social and economic reforms in the history of this country from the 22,000 people who were assisted in trial sites at the end of 2015 to 460,000 people in 2019 to 2020, including thousands of children through early childhood and early intervention approaches. I only wish that we had had access to the NDIS when my youngest daughter Sarah was in her infancy because I am sure that it would have helped her no end.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order. The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the member for Fisher will be given an opportunity at that time to complete his contribution.