Hollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Hansard source

Well, happy anniversary. It's one year that this government has now refused to provide the sustainability framework. For one year this government has continued to hide behind the most ridiculous excuses—excuses that are now completely expired because we saw the passing of the NDIS legislation during the last sitting period.

Minister Farrell has had to come in here and we've heard him again say that they will not release the sustainability framework because they believe it may jeopardise their relationships with the states. Let me give a little bit of an overview of what your relationship with the states is like now. While we were in the committee inquiry stage of the NDIS bill, we had five-and-half days of hearings very generously allowed by the government—absolutely pathetic! The fact is they keep quoting the review. Yes, the review's been handed down, but there's no government response to it. There's no government response to the review of the NDIS. Anyway, the states were crying out for the legislation to be put on hold because they don't know what they're expected to do. They don't know what foundational supports are and they don't know what they're expected to provide to those people who will no longer be eligible for the NDIS. I would suggest there has been some damage to the relationship with the states.

This has probably been compounded—just a guess—by one of the amendments that we put through. The government asked the Senate to support the amendment that category A supports would no longer require unanimous support of the state, just majority support of the states. So states will now be at a higher risk of being bulldozed by the Commonwealth government to produce and provide foundational supports that the states, but the states will have no concept of what they are, how much they're going to cost and what they're required to do. It is an absolute furphy that this government continues to hide behind in its reluctance to reveal the financial sustainability model that they say they are working to.

I note Senator Steele-John talked about the autism community. I'm also going to talk about it a little bit today, but we might have some different views here. I want to apologise to those in the autism community, the parents and carers in particular, who had young children diagnosed with autism level 3 before the DSM-5 made almost every condition part of the autism spectrum. Kids that would have been diagnosed with classic autism, kids who also have an intellectual disability, are having their plans cut in the most dramatic of ways. It is absolutely appalling. This is an insurance scheme. The whole thing about an insurance scheme is investing early and getting better outcomes, yet we are seeing ideologically driven, anti-intensive, good-quality early intervention refused to be paid for by the NDIA via the NDIS, who are now stipulating they won't find programs and particular services at particular clinics. This is absolutely outrageous.

I would particularly like to congratulate those self-diagnosed autistic adults or the later-in-life diagnosed autistic adults—diagnosed in their 40s, 50s, 60s, and we saw them during the autism Senate select committee—who have had long careers. A lot of them were university professors in particular areas of interest. One of the traits for autism is having a very strong focus in a particular area. These were people who were in relationships, had families, owned property. There was zero acknowledgement of the impacts that profound autism has on some people and that their disability is significant, that their disability will impair their way of life.

So I just want to say well done to those autistic adults who've gone out on the 'autism is awesome' bandwagon and who, because they're diagnosed later in life, say that kids don't need intensive early intervention. Applied behaviour analysis, which is seen worldwide as best practice, is demonised in this country because these autistic adults have said autism is awesome and they don't need this therapy. Well, you are now putting at risk and jeopardising a whole generation of young children with profound autism and intellectual disability from achieving their potential because you've done what you wanted to do and you've demonised intensive early intervention, so the NDIS isn't funding it now.

On one hand, we've got parent groups out there with self-diagnosed parents, attacking people like me and Nicole Rogerson and referring to us as 'clearly autistic, rich white women'. I can tell you that I'm white; I can tell you that I'm a woman; I'm certainly not rich, and the fact that they have referred to me as clearly autistic—I don't know, maybe I am. Maybe I should go and get a diagnosis so I can stand here as an autistic person and say that kids with profound autism need intensive early intervention and should be funded properly, and the autistic adults who have demonised this early intervention have fed into the government's hands. Well done!