Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Thanks, Minister. I understand, and I hear what you're saying. I'm trying to clarify for the Senate: you've moved a series of amendments to the needs assessment process and to what a needs assessment is required to capture. You've purposely inserted, in various sections, the statement 'participant's needs for NDIS supports arising from impairments in relation to which the participant meets the requirements'. The key thing that has been altered by the government is the insertion of the idea of 'arising from', whereas the previous language very tightly stuck to a concept of needs that are the direct result of the particular impairment for which the participant gained access to the scheme.

That modification that you've made in the requirement around needs assessment is partially in response to the feedback the government received from the community during the inquiry—that the language in relation to the assessment did not enable the assessment to capture the whole-of-person impact of a disability. That has been modified. What remains the same, however, is the subsequent clauses of the bill, which then determine the way in which the needs assessment is translated into a budget. Because there have been no amendments from the government in relation to the budget method also taking account of the various impacts that arise from a participant's impairments, the concern from the community is that, while the assessment may be whole-of-person, the method created and then implemented to translate that into a quanta of funding or a statement of supports remains tied to the specific individual impairment for which the participant gained access.