John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to contribute to this debate on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013. There are many reasons for people in Australia having disabilities. I was very grateful last night to get a text message announcing the arrival of my second grandchild, young Ryan Daniel Williams, born in Cairns last night.

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Sustainability and Urban Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Congratulations.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Senator Farrell.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many grandchildren have you got?

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is the second grandchild, a little brother to Finn. When the babies are due and coming along, parents, grandparents and all of us wish, hope and pray that the bub is born safe and healthy. Thank goodness for the great medical professionals we have in our country; these days there seems to be little problem with childbirth. It is not like in the old days. I could back to Yongala Cemetery, where my great- great-grandfather first settled in South Australia, and, sadly, when you walk through the cemetery you see the graves of infants and mothers. Things have come a long, long way—all for the good.

We have disabilities in Australia for many reasons. Some, sadly, are born with disabilities. The disabilities may be physical, they may be mental or they may be both. Sadly, we have many accidents in our country, such as motor accidents, where people can suffer serious physical or mental disabilities or both. We also have many work accidents. Spending most of my life on the farm, I know what a dangerous work environment the farm is. I have had my share of accidents, and I carry the battle scars as the result of motorbike accidents and ladders falling on my head in piggeries et cetera. For many reasons, there are Australians who carry disabilities.

I was quite amazed just recently to read about those who are working with disabilities: how they are such good workers; how they do not take the amount of sick leave that many of those in Australia who do not have any disability take; how their work ethic is so good; how they are so committed to their job; and how they are so proud to do their work for themselves, for their business and for their country.

We now have before us the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The coalition supports a national disability scheme, Mr Deputy President—a scheme that can help those with disabilities get work, get training, seek knowledge, have accommodation and have the opportunities in life that so many of us have, no doubt, taken for granted. As I said, the dedication and the commitment to work of those with disabilities is just amazing, and they deserve all the praise and support they can get.

The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee had an inquiry into this very important piece of legislation, and the coalition has enthusiastically supported each milestone on the road to the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The coalition supports the work of the Productivity Commission, who have certainly had a good look into this very important issue. The coalition supported the $1 billion in the last budget handed down by Treasurer Swan in May last year. The coalition has supported the five launch sites, the coalition supported the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales for a full state-wide rollout after the Hunter launch, and the coalition supports this legislation.

I want to talk about the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Tony Abbott, and what he has done in support of those with disabilities. Mr Abbott, I am proud to say, is a very generous man with his time. We know he is a surf-lifesaver and we know he is a very fit man. If I happened to be in trouble in the surf and I could see Mr Tony Abbott swimming my way, I would know that I had someone who could certainly get me back—the man is so fit and so strong. He has supported the bushfire brigade as a fire-fighter and he has demonstrated his personal commitment to Australians with disabilities and those who care for them by dedicating $540,000, raised by the 2012 Polly Pebble Charity Bike Ride, to Carers Australia. Along the 1,000 kilometre route Mr Abbott met with people with disabilities, carers and disability organisations. The next two Polly Pebbles will also be in partnership with, and will raise funds for, Carers Australia. That is a very generous fundraising scheme.

We are certainly no stranger to seeing Mr Abbott on his bike. As I said, he is a very fit man and he is a very generous man. I remember when he completed the Port Macquarie triathlon a couple of years ago. For anyone to complete that triathlon is a huge achievement in itself. It is a gruelling event that had Mr Abbott out early in the morning and coming in late that night, such was his determination. I have no doubt that that is the same determination and generosity that he will show if the people of Australia elect a coalition government and he becomes Prime Minister of this nation on 14 September this year. His history speaks for itself when it comes to helping those in need.

Because the NDIS is a once in a generation reform that will unfold over the life of several parliaments, it should be the property of the parliament as a whole, on behalf of the Australian people, rather than that of any particular political party. Getting this right will require a very high level of consultation and attention to detail, not just now—not just in the launch sites—but from now until full implementation. The National Disability Insurance Scheme should be beyond partisan politics. The coalition has been disappointed when some members of the government have claimed that, basically, the NDIS represents Labor values. It does not—not alone. The NDIS represents Australia's values—a fair go and helping those who face challenges for reasons beyond their control. No side of politics has a mortgage on this particular issue. We know that people have disadvantages for all sorts of reasons, as I stated at the commencement of this presentation. Whether it be by birth, through mental or physical disabilities, through accidents or whatever, we have people who face these challenges, and this is not a partisan political issue.

The coalition has called for the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of politics to oversee the establishment and implementation of the NDIS. A parliamentary oversight committee would lock in all parties and provide a nonpartisan environment where issues of design and eligibility could be worked through cooperatively. Mr George Christensen, the member for Dawson and a fine man, has had a motion in the House for some time to establish this committee. Regrettably, the motion has not been brought forward for a vote. Senators Fifield and Boyce moved a similar motion to establish the oversight committee on 27 June 2012. The government and the Australian Greens combined in the Senate to vote it down.

Why would you do that? When we want to make this bipartisan and leave the politics out of it, why would the Greens and the Australian Labor Party combine to vote down such a motion? Only time will tell. Getting this right must be a matter across all the political parties. As I said, it is not just something that we instigate today that is completed in a few months time. This will be ongoing for years and years until the whole program is completed. It will cost an enormous amount of money, but I believe it will be an investment in Australia's future that will pay good dividends. If those who have disabilities can get to work, can get a job, can receive the education and training required whatever their disadvantage may be, then they will actually contribute to the national wealth cake. Instead of being a person who needs to be supported by the taxpayers to keep a roof over their head and to provide the care they need and desire, many of them will be out there working, paying taxes and contributing to our GDP, putting their bit in for our nation. and that is a very, very good thing.

When the government has been offered the opportunity to embrace genuine bipartisanship, why don't they take it? This legislation gives the government another opportunity to correct this and to involve all those right across the political parties. That is the only way this can work well because, as I said, this will take many, many years to implement and complete. The coalition intends to give the government, the Australian Greens and the Independent members and senators an opportunity to accept the hand of cooperation in this piece of legislation.

It is a joint-venture of all Australian governments. It is important to note that every government in Australia and every opposition in Australia, state and federal, supports and wants to see an NDIS. It was disappointing that the Prime Minister did not treat all jurisdictions as partners at the COAG meeting in July 2012. It was to the credit of the Victorian and New South Wales governments that they continued to negotiate in the face of misrepresentation by the federal government and reached agreement to host launch sites. This is a case of working together. I fear that the Prime Minister is trying to politicise this whole program. This is not about politics. This is about helping your fellow Australians, and politics needs to be put aside in this legislation. Forget the political game; let us do what is right for those people in Australia who most desperately need assistance, need training and need a fair go and the opportunity. That is what it is about for the coalition: to work right through this legislation to get it right in the long term.

I am not going to speak for the full 20 minutes. I just want to say a few words about the community effort. This legislation to give effect to a National Disability Insurance Scheme is in the parliament due to a grassroots campaign by carers. Australians with disability and the organisations that support them came together and decided that enough was enough. They spoke with one voice. They declared, 'We're as mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore!' I congratulate those carers who do such a fine job, who work in difficult circumstances to help those around them who so desperately need the help. The two main intellectual drivers of the NDIS have been Mr John Walsh AM, a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers, and Mr Bruce Bonyhady AM, Chair of Yooralla and President of Philanthropy Australia. Without their determination, professional expertise and personal knowledge this legislation would not be before the parliament.

In conclusion, this legislation is not perfect. The NDIS is a very complex venture. Amendments after the introduction of the legislation to the parliament were inevitable. The Senate committee process has again proven its worth through this inquiry. The government has undertaken to carefully consider the work of the committee. However, in the time available, the committee was never going to be able to address all design issues. The onus remains on the government. The prime function of the committee in the compressed time frame was to seek to ventilate as many issues as possible.

As I said, this should be about support right around the chamber. This is about our fellow Australians who have had a setback in their life for one reason or another. We should support them and give them an opportunity in this nation. Australia is a land of opportunity. I was only talking to someone this morning whose father came out here from Croatia in 1948. What did they have as far as wealth goes? They had nothing. But they went to work. This particular person's father went cutting cane—hard work and toil. These immigrants saw that we were a nation of opportunity and they grasped that opportunity. They settled in to be fair dinkum Australians. They worked hard, married, reared their children, educated their children and gave them opportunities. We need to deal with this legislation right across this chamber to see that those Australians who have had some setback in their life for whatever reason get every opportunity possible. I am amazed by the work ethic and commitment of those with disabilities.

I have a personal friend, Caroline Cash, and she openly admits that she has a disability. I was so pleased to be a dinner with her last week at the Nationals' metropolitan branch in Sydney, where Caroline is so pleased that she is now getting extra work. She has had to battle, she has to work, she has had to keep a roof over her head, she has had to rent and she has to pay her way. She is such a good worker and a very decent young lady—a very decent Australian—who is proud to get out there and have a go. She is originally from a rural area—a tough area that has suffered a lot of droughts and hardships. I see this in Caroline Cash and the work she does. I am very proud to know Caroline and enjoy her company when we get to National Party functions.

That is what Australia is about: giving opportunity to those who need that hand up. When we give them that hand up, they then do not require the handout. Getting an education, getting some training and getting some sort of assistance to help them through their disability and get out to make their own life, I think, is most important. Their self-esteem and self-satisfaction are lifted and they know that they can go and put their head on a pillow at night knowing that they have done their bit for themselves, their community and their country. That is what this legislation is about.

Sadly, there has been some politics played where Ms Gillard, the Prime Minister, has claimed this as a wholly Australian Labor Party scheme. That is not the case. You know where the coalition come from on this. You know that we have pushed for many years, and I have given an example of Mr Tony Abbott with his personal fundraising to help carers. More than half a million dollars was raised by his Pollie Pedal. That is one huge achievement. It is not about words; it is about the deeds and actions that Mr Abbott has put into practice. We know he has care for the community as a volunteer firefighter, as a volunteer rescuer or now with his efforts in his Pollie Pedals to raise money for carers.

I look forward to the NDIS developing over many years. I think it will be money well and wisely invested to help those carers and those with disabilities to help build a better Australia, to help those people build their self-confidence and build their pride so they can go out and say: 'Well yes, I have a disability. Yes, it gave me a bit of a setback in life, but I overcame that. I learnt, I was trained, I was educated and I can work as well as anyone.'

As I said, the commitment these people have to their work is amazing. If you are employed with a disability, you have fewer sick days than if you do not have a disability. That is amazing in itself. We know there are plenty of Australians who put on a sickie, especially on a long weekend. There is no doubt it has probably been a part of our country for many years and will continue to be the case. But those with disabilities, who know that they are starting a bit behind the eight ball, make it up the race so well by working hard, being committed and putting their bit in for our wonderful nation.

As this goes along through the many years ahead of us, I hope and I know that this will be a successful scheme. I know that here on the coalition benches this has full support. We have to find the money—that is a problem. Where is the money? It is a hugely expensive scheme. When I look back at the Australian Labor Party in government since 2007, so much money was wasted. Expensive school buildings, covered outdoor learning areas, insulation batts—

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Come down to Tassie and talk to the schools.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will take your interjection, Senator Polley. I have never been to the opening of one of those school buildings. I refuse to go to one. I was not going to say that these were not expensive. I could take you out to Tottenham in the central west of New South Wales—literally in the centre of New South Wales—and show you the $600,000 school kiosk. I could take you to a little town called Kingstown, between Bundarra and Bendemeer, and show you the $330,000 building that is basically eight metres by 10 metres—$330,000 would build you a lovely four bedroom brick veneer home. It is a pity that this government has wasted so much money—not only taxpayers' money but borrowed money—on so many schemes. Imagine if they could have poured more of this money into the NDIS, into an investment of those people in Australia with a disadvantage of some sort, which would make their life so much better. Sadly, they did not, but the people will judge that come 14 September. I know how angry and annoyed they are, especially in rural areas, about the waste of money and the building of the $269 billion debt. If only we could have spent that money wisely. A lot of that money could have gone into the NDIS, and this scheme would have been up and running and be far more efficient than a lot of the money that has been wasted.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In making a contribution to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013, I start with a quote from French philosopher Simone Weil. She is a little known philosopher, but I think what she says in this regard is particularly important. She says:

Equality is the public recognition, effectively expressed in institutions and manners, of the principle that an equal degree of attention is due to the human needs of all human beings.

Indeed, I think that is what the NDIS is set to implement. It is about creating an institution that practically implements our nation's commitment to meeting the needs of all its citizens.

Samantha Jenkinson, an awarded disability advocate from WA, says something very similar. She says:

…people with disability want, and expect, the resources they need to participate as fully functioning members of their communities to be available and accessible, as and when they are needed. People with disability want to work with governments to deliver a support system that achieves this—a support system that values their contribution and encourages their independence.

I think that really embodies what the NDIS is all about. To my mind, the NDIS should include the most basic and complex of human needs for people to be to have their needs met. We have known for too long that too many people with disability and their families have lived without being able to get their basic needs met. This can include housing, it can include shelter and it can include adequate food and health care. But it also includes a family life, it includes a social life and it includes a working life. It includes friendship, social interaction and intimate personal relationships. These are things that we all legitimately aspire to.

Implementing the NDIS should mean that we can give support so people with disability can have full and free expression and get their needs met. We know that the Productivity Commission described disability services in Australia as inequitable, underfunded, fragmented and inefficient, giving people with disability little choice and utterly compromising their lives. This includes people in Western Australia.

In making a contribution to this debate, I would like to talk about some WA perspectives. I have heard firsthand that people with disabilities and their families and carers in WA want to be part of this national scheme. I note that Mr Barnett, the Premier of WA, has signed on at COAG to work towards a national scheme. He says he is keen for a launch site in WA. But WA has not yet put forward a proposal that meets the requirements of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I would really like to encourage the state of WA to keep taking steps forward to participate.

There are important parts of this debate that affect WA, because we have a quite well-operating Disability Services Commission. It is an agency that is there to meet the needs of Western Australian people with disabilities. It has some 70,000 Western Australians that rely on assistance for personal care, mobility and communication. It is recognised internationally because of its flexibility and because it allows for self-directed support. These are the kinds of things that are being adopted and embodied in the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Western Australia does need some improvement in that regard because the NDIS in fact envisages greater levels of autonomy than Western Australia's already lauded system allows for. Naturally there have been some groups in WA that have been protective. They want to make sure that when we do the NDIS, what the NDIS replaces in WA is equal if not better. I have every confidence that it will be, and I am here to encourage WA to get onboard.

From a WA perspective, it is equally important to look at who is missing out. I had a conversation with a couple of women, including Samantha Jenkinson and a friend of hers, about this. You look at the circumstances of people with disability and their needs. Their needs might be quite similar, but under the fragmented scheme we have at the moment the capacity to get their needs met is not similar. I will give you examples. Someone who has a car accident ends up with a compensation payout that they need to manage, and that then enables them to access the care and support they need. A second situation might be someone born with cerebral palsy, who would have an entitlement under the Western Australian Disabilities Services Commission for some care and support.

The third situation is someone with multiple sclerosis who, like the other two, cannot walk, and is unable to meet all of their personal care needs. They are ineligible for any kind of support, and they are the kind of people that very tragically end up in nursing homes in this country. This is a very real issue for a great many Western Australians who are currently excluded from getting the care and support they that need within disability services in Western Australia. This new scheme—should Western Australia come onboard—will help support those people. It is absolutely vital that however you acquire your disability, the quality of opportunity to access services and support is there for everybody.

I am really pleased that the NDIS puts at its heart self-directed services, allowing for opportunity for individuals, families and community to have a real say about how services are designed and delivered. At the heart of that should be people with disability. We need to break away from the traditional model of disability services by allowing flexibility for those who receive disability services—allowing people with disability to control the care they receive and the services they access.

Samantha Jenkinson gave a great example. She expressed her frustration and the frustration of other people with disability at their capacity to get the support and care they need when they want it. She gave a wonderful example of a service run by people with disability to be able to get after-hours care access to personal care and support to go out. It is a 6 pm to 6 am service run by people with disability, where you can call up at short notice and get access to a personal carer to take you out. You might want to go out for dinner, you might want to go to a concert, you might want to go nightclubbing or you might want to go visit family or friends, but you are able to define when and where you want to go out rather than needing to be at home by six o'clock when your carer has tucked you into bed. I know how I would prefer to live my life, with that flexibility and autonomy. This is what is embedded in this bill.

People with disabilities, their families and carers in WA want us to make good progress on this. They want WA to be part of this vital national scheme. There is some frustration amongst many that we are not yet making more progress in that regard, but I am pleased that the NDIS will take the great attributes of the WA system and apply them to citizens all over Australia.

I have to share a little bit of a personal story with you, and that is my experience of the Western Australian families that have experienced extreme stress because they cannot access services that meet their needs or at a high enough level of care.

There is a terrific program in WA that I would highly commend to senators, which is the Politician Adoption Scheme run by the Development Disability Council of WA. I have the great privilege of having been adopted into the Deery family, and I am sure that some of my Western Australian colleagues will have been adopted into families also. Aden in the Deery family is a young man with severe autism. I witnessed the trauma of his family when they were at absolute crisis point over many, many years because they were not coping with Aden living at home, and yet they could not find supported accommodation for him—he was not yet allocated a place. In order to get into disability services supported accommodation in WA, you pretty much first have to prove that you are at absolute breaking point, and at breaking point they were. Very fortunately, I was able to witness what a difference it made for Aden to be able to find supported accommodation and care. But it should be better than that. We should strive for people not to reach breaking point before their needs are met. I pay tribute to the Deery family in speaking to the NDIS bill this afternoon.

In closing, we need to stop the cruel lottery system that we have for disability services that I think the Deery family is a good example of. We need to look at the benefits of a long-term plan for people who we know will need ongoing care and support. There is no reason to lurch from crisis to crisis when we know that we will need a bucket of resources for each person with a disability and that we need to manage those resources over time.

Finally, this bill represents the kinds of values I want to be able to uphold as a citizen, as a senator and as an Australian. It brings with it the capacity to change lives; to change lives not just for people with disability but for their families—all of our families—for workplaces, for the community, for our relationships and friendships and, importantly, for our humanity, because we know that our needs and desires as human beings are all equally important.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is also my privilege and honour to make a contribution to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013. The introduction of a National Disability Insurance Scheme is the culmination of years of dedication and struggle by people with disabilities, their families, carers and friends. This outcome is not one that belongs to a particular side of politics, or even to this parliament.

This legislation is a tribute to those often unsung heroes in our community who look after disabled family members or friends and the incredible sacrifices that so many of them have made and continue to make so that those with disabilities can still enjoy lives of some comfort and dignity, and can still make a contribution to our society. However, the passage of this legislation is a beginning, not an end. The introduction of an NDIS will extend beyond the life of this parliament, and beyond the life of the next. It will involve all the state and territory governments across Australia.

What we do now in this parliament will allow the real work to begin, but we cannot allow these reforms to become bogged down in partisan sniping. As the Leader of the Opposition said in relation to this legislation during the debate in the other place:

… for this scheme to successfully come to fruition for the mighty benefit of people with disabilities throughout our country, it cannot simply reflect Labor values; it cannot simply reflect Liberal values. It must reflect national values. It must reflect the values that are held deep by members on both sides of this chamber, values that are common to members of all parliaments right around our country.

I think there is genuine goodwill from all parties on this issue, and all of us are keen to get on with the implementation, and start delivering real outcomes for people with disabilities and those who care for them.

My own side of politics has proposed a bipartisan committee to oversee the implementation of the NDIS. Given the length of time it will take—the remainder of this parliament and the two that follow us—it would be prudent to ensure involvement from all parties, so that there are not interruptions or delays in the event of a change of government.

There is much work still to be done on the NDIS. Despite the fact that we are on the cusp of passing the legislation, there is still much we do not know. We do not know who is and who is not eligible for coverage, we do not know precisely how the scheme will operate and arrangements of funding for the scheme have not yet been finalised. I am not saying this to pick holes in the scheme, but rather by way of making the point that the NDIS will take many years to bed down. It is a long-term reform, and given that, I would have thought it was eminently sensible to have both sides of politics working together on its implementation.

For whatever reason, the Prime Minister has not seen fit to take up this bipartisan approach. That is her prerogative, of course, and I am pleased that the leader of my own party has given a commitment to establish such a bipartisan group should the coalition win the next election. I think that will give some further certainty to the process and ensure that all of us in this place are focused on what is important, which is the delivery of real outcomes for people with disabilities.

As a member of the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, I participated in the committee inquiry into the NDIS legislation. I would like to acknowledge the hard work of the committee secretariat on this inquiry, which attracted over 1,600 submissions, and my appreciation to the chair, Senator Moore, and to the other members of the committee, including Senator Siewert, who is in the chamber at the moment, for the work and diligence that they demonstrated. I attended many of the hearings around Australia on the NDIS, and have been privileged to hear so many inspirational stories from those of our fellow Australians who each and every day make tremendous sacrifices to care for those in our community who cannot care for themselves.

I would just like to touch on a couple of the issues that came out of those considerations, because I think they are matters worthy of bearing in mind and drawing particular attention to as we move into the implementation phase of this initiative.

Earlier this month, the community affairs committee heard evidence from the Community Living Association, which is based in Albany in WA. The association was formed in 1991, at a time when those with a disability living in the Albany region were often forced to relocate to Perth to access support services. The association worked to enable those with disabilities to remain living in the community where they had grown up and felt most comfortable. The Community Living Association now provides services to around 75 people in Western Australia's great southern region who have varying levels of disability. The services provided help people to remain living in their own homes, develop their skills and access the amenities offered by their local community. That is very important for people living with a disability.

From the submissions the community affairs committee received it is clear that for a significant number of people living with a disability a sense of social isolation is perhaps the most difficult thing to deal with, along with a sense that in many ways they are not in charge of their own destinies. In addition to the challenges of having a disability, they are at the mercy of other people's decisions. Along with many other people, I hope the NDIS can go some way to addressing this. People are at their happiest and most productive when they feel they are in control of their own life, and that is really no different for those with a disability. The dignity that comes with still being able to live in one's home and to undertake some form of education or employment is very important for mental wellbeing. Organisations such as the Community Living Association play a crucial role in making this happen, ensuring that those with a disability are still the decision makers rather than simply having services foisted upon them that may not meet their individual needs. That is why I am particularly keen to take note of some of the concerns the association expressed.

Mr Iain Campbell, the Community Living Association's CEO, did express some concern to the committee that the introduction of the NDIS, if not properly managed, may have some negative impacts on the services his organisation provides. By way of example he advised the committee that the average cost of packages for people who have services provided by the Community Living Association is $95,000. A conference in Western Australia on the NDIS was addressed by Senator McLucas, who advised that the average package under the NDIS would be $15,000. Quite naturally, they worry about the gap. It may be that these concerns can be easily addressed. I certainly hope that that is the case because this is a sector that desperately needs some certainty.

Mr Campbell also expressed the concern that has been repeated by many service providers across Western Australia. By and large, service providers are happy with the relationship they have with the state's Disability Services Commission. They have built up relationships with that body and, being locally based, the commission understands some of the additional challenges posed when providing disability support services in regional and remote areas across Western Australia. The concern that many Western Australian providers have expressed—and this was reflected in Mr Campbell's own comments—is that a body with whom they have built trusting and understanding relationships could be usurped by a more remote one that will not be as understanding of some of the challenges particular to Western Australia and the vast geography it covers. These concerns were echoed by Mr Gordon Trewern, the CEO of the Nulsen Association, who attended the committee's hearing in Perth and focused on the evolution of disability support services in Western Australia over the last 30 years.

Something that perhaps escapes the attention of many commentators outside Western Australia is that the way the state's services have developed over the last three decades has been quite different to the experience in some other jurisdictions. The risk in moving to the NDIS is that some of the success and innovations from Western Australia may be lost in that transition. I think that would be an unfortunate development. From early on—certainly earlier than in some other jurisdictions—the state government worked with service providers to close down the large institutions and place more of a focus on supporting people to live in their own homes.

There is a strong record in Western Australia of the state government, service providers and families working together to build capacity and ensure better and more effectively targeted service delivery. I think this is a function of proximity—people living in Western Australia understand the challenges unique to our state. Again, the concern among WA providers and families is that the NDIS will be administered by a distant east coast body that will not understand those issues as well and some of those innovations and flexibilities will be lost. If that occurs we will lose some of the responsiveness in the disability services system. Of course it may be that some of those concerns can be allayed as more detail is provided by the government and following the ongoing discussions between the Prime Minister and Premier Barnett. However, I feel it is important to place these concerns publicly and clearly on the record.

I hope that in establishing the NDIS the government will give careful consideration to its impacts in regional and remote areas and will monitor those carefully. Some of those who provided evidence to the committee felt a working group focused on rural areas should be established as part of the NDIS. I endorse that view. This would be particularly important given that none of the launch sites really encompass rural or remote communities. We need to have some mechanism in place to ensure the needs of these communities, which are very different from metropolitan or even larger regional centres, are being properly met and addressed.

Again these comments are offered constructively. We on this side want to make sure that the NDIS is the best it can be, and for that to happen we need to ensure all these matters have been thoroughly considered. I must say that it has been a little disappointing to hear some of the commentary about the approach of the Western Australian state government in relation to the NDIS. Yes, there is no rollout in Western Australia. However, the Productivity Commission did not envisage every state hosting a launch site. Hosting a launch site was never a precondition for taking part in a full national rollout. I understand discussions with the WA government are continuing. Premier Barnett has written to the Prime Minister proposing a joint Western Australian-Commonwealth NDIS.

We have just been through a state election in Western Australia so perhaps it was inevitable, but some of the mischievous commentary designed to imply that the WA government is somehow not supportive of the NDIS not only is wrong but I feel disrespects the sterling contribution so many carers and service providers in my home state are making. Spreading inaccurate information about the WA government's position to create fear is in my view unnecessary and counterproductive.

The cooperation of the state and territory governments around Australia will be crucial in this and critical in the success of the NDIS. The scheme will only be national if we get all jurisdictions on board and issues properly addressed. It is a complex piece of policy and none of us should be under any illusions about the challenge of implementing it. Again, this is where I think the Leader of the Opposition's call for a bipartisan committee would prove invaluable. So I implore those on the other side who would like to see a genuinely united approach—and I know there are some; perhaps many—to make their views known to the Prime Minister.

The funding aspects of the NDIS will of course be significant. The opposition supported the $1 billion initial allocation in the last budget. I note that the Productivity Commission said that the first phase of the NDIS would require $3.9 billion, so no doubt further provisions will need to be made in this year's budget. I urge the government to provide certainty with regard to this critical aspect of the scheme for the sake of those carers and service providers who so desperately need it.

As we all know, this is not a reform that has come about quickly, nor is it a reform that has come about without a good deal of toil and, let us be honest, tears from those who have family members and friends with disabilities and those who work as service providers. I want to thank them, particularly those who took the time and trouble to share their stories with me and my colleagues on the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee. Thank you for broadening our understanding of the challenges you face each day and helping to bring into sharp focus the importance of establishing the NDIS and getting the implementation right.

The NDIS will not be the solution to every problem faced by disabled people, their families and carers but, along with my colleagues, I am confident that it will be of great assistance if we can get the implementation right. That is a responsibility that will fall to all of us in this place, whatever our party, over the years immediately ahead and I look forward to playing my part in that role. This is one group of Australians who we cannot afford to let down.

In conclusion, can I remark that I think the passage of the NDIS is a great statement in our democratic process. Reflecting on the comments of Senator Williams earlier, it does show the Senate committee process at its best. It gave many Australians an opportunity to share their stories and to make a contribution to this final piece of legislation. Thank you.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a short contribution to this debate on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013. This reform will go down as one of the great social policy achievements in our country. When fully implemented, it will provide an individual care and support package to all Australians living with a disability, and support that is tailored to their needs, no matter where they live or how they acquired their disability. It is going to be a major change to how our community works with people with a disability, their families and their carers. It is a change that will be implemented through comprehensive trials across the country.

Tasmania will participate in a trial for about 1,000 15-to-24 year olds, starting from July this year. This trial will target assisting people make the transition from school based support to work or higher education, while also keeping them engaged in their communities. It will work with young people and their families, to plan and arrange the supports needed that will help them in their everyday life. Importantly, at the heart of the trial is a recognition of the unique needs of each individual, their family and their community.

I have had the pleasure of meeting with many Tasmanians to discuss how the NDIS will benefit and impact their lives. One such occasion was at a DisabiliTEA at Devonfield Enterprises in Devonport last year. Across the country, the Every Australian Counts campaign organised these events to bring people together to support the campaign for the NDIS. I was lucky enough to be able to help serve the lunches at the Devonfield DisabiliTEA and speak with those gathered.

Many of those in the room were the parents of people with a disability who regularly use Devonfield's services. The parents displayed an overwhelming sense of relief at the prospect of the NDIS. They were getting old and knew that they would not be able to care for their children forever. In the eyes of a mother, your children are always 'your kids,' regardless of how old they get, and you love them and wish them every happiness in the world. The mums that I spoke to were also full of so much excitement about the opportunities that the NDIS package will provide for their child. Two emotions really encapsulate the purpose of the NDIS: relief that the government is stepping up to the plate; and excitement for the possibilities that this will unleash.

The support of organisations like Devonfield has been crucial for the progress of this reform. The services at Devonfield are wide and varied. They provide a range of training and employment services, as well as day-support services and accommodation for over 200 people with a wide range of disabilities. It is at places like Devonfield that people with a disability learn the skills and build the confidence they need to have fulfilling careers and make positive contributions to their community. They have recognised the potential for their organisation and for their clients through embracing the NDIS, as did the parents and people with a disability who I spoke to at the DisabiliTEA lunch.

The push for the NDIS has really united the Australian community, leading to bipartisan support in this place. However, I am deeply concerned by recent remarks by the conservative Institute of Public Affairs, which, in consultation with those opposite about potential budget cuts, have advocated that the first stage of the NDIS be cancelled and the public servants implementing the NDIS be sacked. They said that they had received positive support from senior members of the opposition. I hope not.

The Australian people expect the NDIS to be delivered from July this year. This reform has been many years in the making and Labor is committed to seeing it through. Australians should be very concerned by the IPA hit list. The case for this reform has been won. It has been led by tens of thousands of Australians and the Every Australian Counts campaign. Those people can be assured that Labor is fully committed to delivering the NDIS and I commend the bill to the Senate.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to comment and contribute to the debate on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013—a bill whose time has come and an issue that has been a blight right across our society, in how we as a community, as a nation, care for those within our communities with a disability.

The bill establishes the framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme—the NDIS—a new program for funding care and support for people with a disability, which is intended to commence in full right across Australia from 2018. The coalition very, very proudly supports and encourages this important reform across the disability sector and we have been a full and active participant in the inquiry process. Both Senator Boyce and our shadow minister in this area, Senator Fifield, in conjunction with other coalition senators, such as Senator Smith and me, have been examining this legislation in detail as part of the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into the bill, which I will tell you about a little bit later.

I also welcome the launch of the NDIS transition agency and the first stage of the scheme in five sites across Australia. I particularly welcome its launch in Victoria in July and commend the coalition government in Victoria for staying at the table and ensuring that the 4,000 people, their families and carers, in the Barwon region, including the local government areas—the city of Greater Geelong, Colac Otway Shire, the Borough of Queenscliffe and the Surf Coast Shire—will benefit under the launch in July. The first stage will cost the Commonwealth government $1 billion over four years from 2012-13 and $342 million over three years from July 2013 to provide up to 10,000 individually funded personalised care packages for people with significant and permanent disability in 2013-14 and for up to 20,000 people from 2014-15.

The introduction of the NDIS is a positive move, and these reforms are a continuation of the reform process that began under the Howard government in 2005. Providing help and support for people who have a disability should be the core business of government. And while I welcome the support of the not-for-profit organisations, it should not be the sole responsibility of the private sector and of organisations like Windara, near Bendigo, or BrainLink in the Latrobe Valley, or the many thousands of carers to coordinate an attempt to support disabled people and their families and carers across our nation.

The NDIS will be a complex scheme that will transform the disability care sector in Australia and has broad support through the disability sector, although concerns were raised throughout the inquiry about the lack of detail in the bill—some would say this is an endemic issue, nevertheless we will save that for another day—and the impact on small service providers. Further questions raised included how the full version of the NDIS will be financed, whether there will be sufficient monitoring and other protections in place for participants, who specifically will receive the support and what specific support they will be able to access under the framework, and whether people aged over 65 should be able to become participants in the NDIS. It will take an insurance approach that shares the cost of disability service and support right across the community, it will fund reasonable and necessary services and support directly related to an eligible person's individual ongoing disability support needs and it will enable people with disability to exercise more choice and control in their lives through a person-centred, self-directed approach with individual funding.

Most Australians have assumed that because Australia is an advanced, wealthy nation that adequate support has been provided for people with disabilities. It is a reasonable assumption, but it has been somewhat misguided. Governments have struggled to find a solution for how to support those with a disability and their families. People with a disability have experienced significant barriers to full participation in both the economic and the social lives of the Australian community. A person with a disability has a poverty risk around 2.7 times higher than a person without a disability, putting Australia twenty-seventh—or last—out of the 27 OECD countries on this measure.

The support for Australians with a disability has been a frayed patchwork characterised by piecemeal programs, inconsistent eligibility criteria and a lack of coordination, so it is definitely time to invest in the needs of people with a disability, their families and their carers and work to ensure they are supported to meet their goals, objectives and aspirations over a lifetime. The current system of support for people with disability has been broken, and until recently we have not adequately addressed the need to support those people. Finally people will be able to decide for themselves how to manage their care and support. I remember hearing from particular witnesses during the hearing how important it was for them to be able to decide how and what services they needed to assist them to live with their disability, and the range is wide. Obviously they will need to be able to access assistance from local coordinators should they wish.

I commend the community affairs secretariat also on the mammoth task to produce this report. As usual, it is a comprehensive piece of work. Obviously, I again commend the shadow minister, Senator Fifield, for his leadership in this area. And particularly I commend all of those on both sides of the Senate chamber for their strong bipartisan support for the NDIS.

My involvement in the Senate inquiry, though brief, centred around the Geelong and Melbourne hearings and it shaped my concerns relating to the specific needs of people who live outside metropolitan areas. I would like to particularly acknowledge the thousands of Victorians living with a disability outside metropolitan Melbourne, and their families, who have suffered for so long and have waited so patiently for this major national reform. There are 161,000 people in Victoria with a disability. Given that 28 per cent of Victorians live in rural and regional areas and that disability crosses all socioeconomic groups, there are around 46,000 people living with a disability outside Melbourne. That is 46,000 people with a disability and at least another 46,000 regional Victorian families and carers—enough to fill the MCG on grand final day, if only they could all get there.

The NDIS Productivity Commission report confirmed what these people already know and what many of us know—that is, there is significant regional disparity between the city and the country when it comes to disability service provision. There has been less regional support for those people with a disability in regional Australia, and I quote directly from the Productivity Commission's report:

… rural and remote areas face poorer provisions of support than would be available to cities and metropolitan areas.

The current system is fundamentally flawed, the availability of support has been limited by location, and many families in regional and rural Victoria have not been able to get access to funding or assistance as the system currently operates. Everyone has to compete for a limited pool of resources, and for many families it is a situation of crisis. As the Nationals senator for Victoria, I have met disabled people and their families from across my state, and they have all challenged my notion of hard work and sacrifice. These people have been so desperately in need of our support. To the families who have been required to sell the family farm and move to Melbourne because that is the only way they can get support for their child, to the elderly dairy farmers who are worried about how to care for their 55-year-old intellectually disabled son once they are gone, to the families whose children attending Windara near Bendigo are looking to set up a residential facility, to the people who are worried about their children having to leave home in order to receive the care they need, I say: this National Disability Insurance Scheme is long overdue. It is an idea whose time has come. Again, to the Productivity Commission report: Australia's disability support system is inequitable, fractured, underresourced and slowly collapsing under the weight of its own inadequacies while suboptimally consuming billions of dollars of taxpayers' money each year.

So I welcome a number of amendments to the legislation that have been proposed throughout our inquiry. Specifically, I would like to draw the Senate's attention to the coalition's additional comments. In these comments we reiterate our strong support for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Australia needs a new system of support, based on need rather than rationing. If we are going to do something, let us do it well and ensure that the role of government is for those in our communities least able to support themselves. We need to state once and for all on the record that this is an issue beyond partisanship. This is about empowering the individual, removing government from people's lives and reducing red tape. It is fantastic that both sides of the chamber are supportive of those types of measures, particularly around issues of disability.

But I have a number of concerns. One is the need to ensure that whilst this is a framework that outlines our intent and aspiration, we ensure that we monitor how this once-in-a-generation reform in the disability sector rolls out, because it is a bipartisan reform. We are proposing some amendments to assist parliament in ensuring that the rollout of the NDIS does fulfil the needs and the expectations of the community. The expectations are great. There are expectations to ensure service provision and to ensure adequate financial restraint so that money goes where it is needed rather than being rationed.

Other amendments are to subclause 35(4) that provides for rules to be made to deal with compensation payments when determining what is reasonable and necessary support that will be funded or provided and how to take this into account. The vast majority of people with disability have only ever received informal care, usually from family members. Nationally this is 66 per cent, but in regional centres, where less formal public support exists, we have heard anecdotal evidence that this figure is much higher. It is more likely that community support is strong in regional centres and smaller towns simply because it needs to be. Informal care is vital to the care needs of people with disability. This will continue to be the case in the future, regardless of improvements in the provision of NDIS support. Currently, the formal support provided by informal care is insufficient. This is most visible in the unmet need for supported accommodation and respite, particularly in regional centres. The need for more support care has been made strongly.

Similarly, I raise amendments to subclause 26(2) and (3). The proposed legislation has been adjusted so that a CEO is allowed to make requests for an extension of longer than 28 days for a person to meet the access criteria. This is particularly relevant for people in regional and remote areas of Australia, as a result of the availability of relevant and experienced medical professionals. Someone in regional Victoria, for example, might need more than 28 days to make the necessary medical appointments, drive to Melbourne or Adelaide to see a specialist, attend and have the report provided to the CEO in the previously required time frame. This is a sensible amendment; fantastic work again by the Community Affairs Legislation Committee.

Similarly under subclause 24(1) and (2) the NDIS will be a needs based rather than diagnosis or aged based scheme. Funding will be provided not because a person has a diagnosis but because they cannot function physically, intellectually or socially and need particular assistance. If they meet one or more of the intellectual, cognitive, neurological, sensory or physical impairments or psychiatric conditions, and the impairments are or are likely to be permanent then they will meet the criteria and be eligible. Given these changes, if the impairments result in substantially reduced functional capacity, including psychosocial functions, and they cannot communicate or interact socially, or if they have trouble learning with mobility, with self-care or self-management then they are eligible for NDIS support. This supports a key recommendation of the Productivity Commission inquiry report that assessments move from medical diagnosis to an assessment based on the capacity of the individual to work or undertake training.

Firstly, I have a number of concerns. Can we be sure that participant families who have actively supported their disabled adult or child will not be disadvantaged financially by the NDIS? How will the NDIS encourage, recognise and reward family participation? Secondly, some regional towns in Victoria have developed specific areas of expertise and have great specialists working specifically with the needs of people in their communities. While some disabilities might be better supported than others, providing for the specific needs of people in the regional areas is a particular concern of mine. The legislation is not perfect, and introducing an NDIS is complex, but whatever it looks like we need to make sure we capture existing services and add to them, not start from scratch. Some conditions might be better supported than others, and this is local knowledge in all country towns.

Finally, I have concerns about the capacity of this government to effectively implement this costly and complex reform. It is instructive that the unmet support needs of people with disability cost roughly $6.5 billion each year, roughly equivalent to the annual interest bill on the government debt the Gillard government has run up. While the coalition and other parties supported the NDIS and the broad architecture outlined by the Productivity Commission, the detailed design of the scheme, the legislative drafting and launch site implementation are the responsibility of the Gillard government. We wish them every success in ensuring that the high community expectation and the particular needs of our disabled communities are met through this legislation as outlined in the government's response. We wish them success, but we recognise that the implementation of the NDIS is solely in their court.

The coalition has offered to be partners with the government in the design of the scheme and the drafting of legislation through the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to oversee the implementation of the NDIS. Unfortunately, the government has not accepted our offer. Therefore the coalition has not had the benefit of the information and the opportunities such a committee would have provided to work with the government on this truly bipartisan, once-in-a-generation reform before us.

Debate interrupted.