Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I continue my remarks about the importance of making sure that the NDIS remains a sustainable and efficient manner of delivering adequate support to the people who need it. That's very, very important because, as I touched upon when I first started this speech two nights ago, unfortunately private equity has moved into this industry and there is very little as a public backstop to ensure that there is ethical competition in the industry. One of the things that I've learnt in my time as a senator—in my life, actually; not just in my time as a senator—is that things work best when we have a public-private structure whereby we have the private practice or industry out there always seeking better efficiency gains, cutting-edge technology et cetera, but we actually—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Rennick, I'm just going to ask those leaving the chamber to please do so quietly. It's difficult for others in the chamber to hear Senator Rennick's remarks and, indeed, for Senator Rennick to hear me as chair.

Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In having public and private, I think we really need to look at having better government support—public government support—within the NDIS system because, as we saw in the banking sector, when the CBA was privatised we let the private market rip, and 20 years later we ended up with a royal commission into misconduct in the financial system.

What privatisation has shown us is that you don't get greater competition; you get concentration of market power. When we look at our hospitals and our schools, I think they are structured the best, in that, for hospitals, we have private hospitals and public hospitals, and, in the school system, we have private schools and public schools. The private schools and the private hospitals are there so that, if people want to pay a little bit extra and get a little bit more of what they think is better service, then they can pay extra for that. But, given that the NDIS, like banking, health and education, is an essential service, we need to make sure that we have a government backstop.

There was a very good article in the weekend's Sunday Mail. It talked about private equity entering the NDIS system. We have now got millionaires moving in. They're looking at achieving a rate of over 10 per cent return. I'm sorry, but people with disabilities shouldn't be seen as a commodity to be traded. I find that completely and utterly offensive. I get that farming is a private industry. I get that, because it is better having farms in private hands. But, when we are talking about the lives, dignity and worth of every individual, we have to make sure they get adequate, correct care. This is why I really think we need better public systems in the NDIS system and, as I have said, to make sure that we don't let the private market rip, because we are dealing with people's lives.

I accept that this is never going to be easy. It's easy to criticise the current minister, but—I'm going to be honest here—when you have something like almost half a million people on the NDIS, with a range of disabilities, it is not going to be very easy to make a one-size-fits-all type of situation. I don't want to make too many overreaching generalisations. I know there are times to have a bit of a crack in the chamber, but I don't think that we should be doing that in this particular case when we're dealing with people's suffering and disability.

I will just conclude by saying I look forward to the amendments that the coalition are going to bring on, but I also would ask that we all work together to support those people who are most in need. I have three beautiful, healthy children. I cannot imagine what it would be like to have a child who needs the support of constant care. In fact, one of my old school friends who I talk with quite often is Toni Mitchell. Her son, Joshy, has needed a lifetime of support and care. She's a single mum. She is a true champion. I don't know if I could cope with the struggles that she has gone through. Toni, if you are listening, this one's for you. I look forward to hopefully this bill helping make life better for people who are disabled.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Senator Steele-John and others have said in this debate, the Australian Greens have significant concerns around this legislation, and that is for a range of reasons. It's important that people understand how we came to arrive at this juncture in regard to how the NDIS works and what the government is trying to do here to the NDIS.

This was legislation that was developed in secret. There was no exposure draft published for this legislation. Disability groups that wanted to engage with the government were forced to sign NDAs, non-disclosure agreements. That is not the way a government that is acting in good faith would conduct itself. Of course, the conclusion there is that this is not a government that is acting in good faith, this is not a piece of legislation that was drafted in good faith and this was not a policy framework that was established in good faith. Why wasn't it established in good faith? For the very simple reason that the government is trying to cut over $14 billion out of the NDIS.

We can talk about numbers all we like, but what does this actually mean for the people who the NDIS was originally designed to support—disabled people in this country? What it means for them is a loss of vital supports. This's what we are dealing with here. We are dealing with a government that has come in to cut the NDIS and to remove those vital supports that are so incredibly important for so many disabled people in this country to allow them to live a dignified life, to allow them to lead a life that many of us able-bodied people and able people take for granted.

I know I've been guilty in the past of taking my ability and the fact that I don't have a disability for granted. I don't reflect on it often enough. I have to say that it's the friendship I've developed with Senator Steele-John in the time he's been in this chamber that's actually forced me—and I thank Senator Steele-John for helping me to understand this—to reflect on my privilege. In doing that, I was determined to be a better ally for disabled people in this country, and I rise here today as a declared ally to disabled people. I say to disabled people: you are not alone in your struggles. You have a champion in this place in Senator Steele-John, but he is not alone in championing your rights, and he won't be alone into the future in championing your rights. I will do everything I can to champion the rights of disabled people in Australia and to oppose legislation that removes critical supports from disabled people. Much-needed therapies that help them in their day-to-day lives are under threat because of this legislation.

We know that the states oppose this legislation, and they are doing so for a lot of the very same reasons that the Australian Greens have expressed our concerns about this legislation. We need to make sure that we understand comprehensively what the amendments to this legislation actually will mean and, in particular, what they will mean for disabled people in Australia.

To that end, I move the amendment on sheet 2688 circulated in my name on behalf of the Australian Greens, which is an amendment to the second reading amendment moved by the opposition:

Omit all words and substitute:

"Omit all words after "That", substitute "the bill be referred to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for further inquiry, including examining any circulated amendments to the bill and the positions of state and territory governments, and report by 5 August 2024".

It is absolutely critical that we come to grips in detail with the views of state and territory governments. It is absolutely critical that we come to grips with any circulated amendments to this bill, because this bill, these amendments and the positions of state and territory governments do not exist in a vacuum; these are matters that pertain deeply and directly to the lived experience of massive numbers of disabled people in Australia—660,000 disabled people in this country. For them the Australian Greens move this amendment. For them and to them we say: you are not alone in your struggles. To them we say: we will not rest until your rights are respected and you have the vital supports that you need to support you through your lives. Those of us that are lucky enough and privileged enough not to be disabled should join together and say to the disabled people in this country: we will not let you down. Today, in moving this amendment, the Australian Greens are making it very clear: we will not let you down.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the recent Senate estimates hearings, the NDIS integrity chief, Mr John Dardo, admirably confirmed that 90 per cent of plan managers displayed significant indicators of fraud. The level of fraud it is now so high that there are dozens of examples of organised crime groups abusing the systems, with millions of dollars being rorted. The system is so out of control that 87 per cent of service providers are unregistered and unmonitored. I quote words that appeared in an article about Mr Dardo:

We have no idea of knowing what they do when they put in their invoices.

It's taxpayers' money, spent on something they have no idea of. He had the courage to admit that. He said that existing cases exceeded Australia's judicial capacity, without finding more.

NDIS funds must not be used to pay for sex workers, expensive holidays or new cars that other taxpayers cannot afford. Projections are for a blowout of NDIS spending to $90 billion within a decade; it must be prevented. Using the system to peddle drugs is happening extensively. The name of this bill says what we already know about the NDIS. It's broken and getting worse. It's a licence for criminals and fraudsters to print money. It's so far off track that the hope that this bill will get things back on track is a pigs-can-fly pipedream.

Since the Gillard Labor government's NDIS inception, there has never been a track. It was hatched with no meaningful metrics or plan. It was simply an election slogan to desperately buy votes in an election that Prime Minister Gillard lost. It was hatched as a headline grabber and a vote harvester. Typical of 'uniparty' initiatives—and of policies and legislation in our parliament over recent decades—it lacks the discipline of a system based on hard data and a focus on customer needs. It was done to look good, not to do good. A hastily cobbled together election policy, it had holes in it a mile wide that clearly enabled fraudulent claims to be made with little chance of being picked up and stopped.

As servants to the people of Queensland and Australia, Senator Pauline Hanson and I have been calling out the NDIS fraud model since 2016. A significant effort is now needed to remove dodgy plan managers and service providers and to protect capable and honest plan managers and providers, using stricter laws to prevent participants from being defrauded, to prevent unscrupulous service providers from abusing vulnerable people and to save NDIS for genuinely disabled people with real needs. If we really care, we'll clean up this mess. If we really care for disabled people, then we'll have to get tough and sort out the criminals and the rorters. Providers, managers and recipients who commit fraud under this NDIS scheme must be heavily penalised and banned from any involvement in the scheme again. Wasted money through overspending has cost taxpayers well in excess of $8 billion already, and it's essential to ensure that the current 150,000 unregistered care or service providers become registered and then are monitored for effective compliance.

The Gillard Labor government introduced the NDIS. In their election loss, they handed the incoming coalition government an illegitimate, loose and sloppy mishmash of slogans and empty titles, lacking discipline, coherence, focus and care, and lacking solid systems. If they'd cared, Labor would have put together a proper system, but they didn't. They should have put together a system to provide effective care and to protect taxpayers' hard-earned money. The Liberal and National parties tried to refine the monster, and now the NDIS is back in Labor hands for more mismanagement. The NDIS must be reconsidered and protections against mismanagement and abuse strengthened.

But who should be responsible for management? References to the non-constitutional National Cabinet are just a poor joke. National Cabinet is a mere grouping of state ministers responsible for similar portfolios, with no statutory authority or constitutional recognition of its existence or authority. It's toothless—all mouth and no accountability. There's no accountability in the current system. Right at the very top there's the bogus unconstitutional National Cabinet. In such cabinets the state and federal government ministers just go, 'They're responsible.' That means no-one is responsible. There is no accountability. It's fundamentally structurally flawed.

I suggest an inquiry to consider the alternative model: putting the responsibility for providing for the needs of people living with a disability back to the states and territories, where it was stolen from. Clearly, each state is responsible. The states would work to ensure that services were monitored, reasonable and meeting client needs under a model reflecting the proven benefits of competitive federalism, the foundation under which our Constitution and government is made.

This will provide the level of accountability that has been missing to date. Centralising doesn't work; decentralising closer to the surface does. One of the unintended consequences of Labor's mismanagement of NDIS funds is the shortage of aged-care and healthcare workers who migrated to work in the lucrative NDIS model. This is because NDIS wages are so overinflated that a worker can receive three times the rate of pay for the same work done in other sectors. This is not just hurting the NDIS. This rorting, mismanagement and waste of taxpayer funds is hurting aged-care and healthcare workers.

Labor wastes money in other areas, too. Look at the wasted $430 million plus that the doomed referendum cost Australians—just like the Gillard government's NDIS facade, which was based on slogans and empty promises lacking substance. Just think how that $430 million could have been spent directly to improve the lives of remote Australians living in need or spent on improving NDIS services and security for people who are disabled in some way. Then there are the follies of government cutbacks, such as when psychological services were cut from 20 appointments to a relatively useless 10 appointments for needy participants. Just think about what could have been supported with the wasted money—health, education and child protection are a few. Frontline staff are in short supply now, partly because of poor pay, inadequate training and lack of support and partly because of NDIS rorts and sloppiness. Many NDIS carers and support staff have little or no training in basic personal caring skills. Many recipients have physical health needs and their carers should have sound skills in lifting, mobility, feeding, toileting and showering. Expecting NDIS carers to do these things with no, or inadequate, training is unfair and dangerous for the recipient and the carer.

I have described a support system in crisis. This bill tinkers around the edges. As it is, this bill will not make significant positive differences, and who pays for all of this waste? Always, it's we the people. Instead of tinkering around the edges of a broken system, do the work! I call on the government to do the work to define disabled people's needs for service and taxpayers' needs for protection. Instead of the ubiquitous fraud under low levels of accountability, consider returning to the original system of state governance. One Nation knows what history repeatedly proves: administration and services are of higher quality when services are closer to recipients. That enables understanding of needs, which is core to effective service. Replacing centralisation with competitive federalism provides a marketplace in governance. That's what we all want. That's what we need because improved governance provides accountability, effective service and better care.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the 2019 federal election campaign, when the now member for Corangamite was a candidate, she, very regrettably, decided to run billboards around the electorate when I was the assistant minister for disability services. Those billboards said, 'Libby Coker: putting the heart back into the NDIS.' This was an example of the shabby way in which the Labor Party has a very dark history of politicising the NDIS—crass politicising of people with disabilities. And I say shame on the member for Corangamite for the way that she attempted to use my role as assistant minister to score cheap, crass political points.

We have a really proud history of caring for people with disability. But right now, in this chamber, I say, and the coalition says, putting the heart in these changes to the NDIS means ensuring there is proper consultation with the sector. We have seen a gross shortfall in that respect. The coalition will support sensible measures in this bill—measures which the coalition sought to implement when it was in government but which Labor actively campaigned against. That is the height of hypocrisy.

So, at the appropriate stage, the coalition will move amendments to improve this scheme, to preserve the scheme's integrity, to ensure the sustainability of the scheme, and to allow it to continue to improve the lives of some of the most vulnerable in our community. However, as we have made very clear, thorough consultation with the sector is absolutely vital. We recognise the critical need to put the NDIS back onto a sustainable footing. It was very much our focus when we were in government, and all that Labor and the now minister, Mr Shorten, could say then was that we didn't know what we were talking about.

It is very concerning that the Senate community affairs committee was not given the opportunity to consult the sector on government amendments tabled on the day of the public hearing. This, in itself, shows the need for further consultation. The 2½ days of hearings conducted by the committee pointed to significant concerns from the disability community about the lack of detail and the potential unintended consequences of the current legislation without significant amendment. There is broad consensus in the disability community about the need for greater consideration of this bill. While the coalition is willing to work constructively with the government—in stark contrast to the shabby politics we saw from Labor when we were in government—it is disappointing that the government has opted to reject a reasonable request for an extension to the reporting date for the committee, and for a meaningful hearing day, particularly with the National Disability Insurance Agency.

The NDIS is changing the lives of more than 660,000 Australians, and the coalition has a very strong record of support for the NDIS. The coalition was and is committed to a fully funded NDIS as a demand-driven scheme, and has always been clear that the NDIS needs to be sustainable to ensure it delivers for many generations to come. There is no doubt that Labor underinvested in the NDIS when it was established, failing to invest in the unmet needs of people with disability. In fact, just before the 2013 election, then Prime Minister Julia Gillard rushed the NDIS through, contrary to the recommendations that were made, because it was all about getting runs on the board rather than getting the legislation right.

We reflect on the shabby way in which the Labor Party stood in the way of the coalition's attempts to put the scheme on a sustainable footing when we were in government. Mr Shorten even accused the coalition of pearl-clutching Kabuki theatre, claiming the NDIS was tracking just as predicted, and that the coalition was hyping fictional cost blowouts. When Mr Shorten was the shadow minister for the NDIS, he said, 'You can't move around the corridors of parliament in Canberra without tripping over a coalition minister whispering, "The scheme is unsustainable".' I am here to tell you today that that is a lie. When the Labor Party were in opposition, they were grossly irresponsible, because, unless this scheme is sustainable, it will not survive. This scheme is incredibly important for tens and hundreds of thousands of Australians, but it has to be put back on track.

In the lead-up to the 2022 election, Mr Shorten tried to argue the former coalition government made cuts to the NDIS, even though the coalition rescued the NDIS by investing a record $157.8 billion over four years to support what was then more than 550,000 Australians living with disability. Mr Shorten went to the election promising that no plans would go backwards under his watch and the scheme was sustainable as it was. Now he claims the scheme is growing in its cost base too quickly. In government and mugged by the reality of a complex, growing scheme, Mr Shorten now not only questions the sustainability of the NDIS but blames young people with autism and those with psychosocial conditions for these cost pressures, which is completely unacceptable. What people with disability, NDIS participants and their families need is real honesty from this minister, not just to be used as part of a crass political campaign.

Under Labor we saw a very poorly designed scheme allowing the states to walk away from providing key services to those with disability. As I mentioned, when this was first implemented, it was rushed for purely political purposes and, in doing so, the scheme was botched. It was implemented in the dying days of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd fiasco of a government for purely political purposes, and we are now all praying the price for that.

Imagine implementing legislation which effectively imposes all the liability on the Commonwealth for cost increases while capping the liability for the states. That's all well and good, but, of course, any change in the legislation requires the consent of the states, more or less. From the very beginning, this was very flawed.

We've recently seen many media reports highlighting stories where serial sexual abusers, rapists and paedophiles are receiving substantial support from the National Disability Insurance Scheme, sometimes worth more than $1 million, to live under supervision in the community after they're released from detention. Urgent review is needed to disclose how many individuals with serious criminal convictions are receiving NDIS funding. How many of those people are on self-managed plans? During a Senate estimates spillover in March, we learned that you 2½ thousand NDIS participants have interacted with the justice system.

This NDIS minister, Mr Shorten, needs to come clean on how many NDIS participants have serious criminal convictions and how many of those are on self-managed plans. This is vitally important not just to protect the safety of carers and providers but also to preserve the integrity of the scheme.

There is no doubt that there is widespread abuse and there is widespread fraud. That includes giving NDIS participants seemingly unlimited rights to access a range of services, including sex therapy and the like. During February Senate estimates, we asked questions probing what specific criteria or guidelines the NDIS has for determining which animals qualify as support animals. Upon ongoing questioning about this, the NDIS officials could not and would not categorically rule out that a participant used NDIS funds for the cremation of their pet rat. We heard, 'We don't have personal details by which we're able to verify or validate that.'

Now, I don't want to reflect in any way on the incredible work that this scheme does. It is changing lives. It is profoundly providing support to those who most need the support. All Australians, including the families of those with disability, want to make sure that the very substantial investment that we are making in the NDIS is made for the right purposes—it gets to where it needs to go.

In looking at the bill itself, there have been a range of very serious concerns raised by the bill. It's not clear from the bill what a participant can do if they do not agree with the outcome of the needs assessment. NDIA decisions are notorious for being inconsistent and variable, and there does not appear to be any avenue for review. The new definition says the NDIS will only fund eight categories of supports, and these are based on selected elements United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. However, by leaving out other elements the bill also excludes some supports from NDIS funding. Insofar as the transparency of that decision-making, we have really very serious concerns.

The review's recommendations contain numerous contentious recommendations. The drafting of the bill lacked opportunity for consultation. Our position and those we represent is that without examination and scrutiny of the full and complete proposed changes, the bill would deliver results in the future that just look not only uncertain but provide essentially the scope to deliver injustice for people disability who really need support. So there is an enormous amount of work to do to make sure that this bill is fit for purpose.

We have raised deep concerns about the lack of a co-design approach to developing the bill. It's unclear who has been consulted in its development, and apparently, some disability representative groups were consulted and not others. That is just not good enough. If we are going to make these major changes to the way the NDIS operates, we need to make sure that we have properly consulted. There has not even been a formal government response to the disability royal commission or the NDIS review, so we're even surprised about the release of the bill at this point in time. There is much work to be done, and that is why the coalition is calling on further consultation rather than what we are seeing in recent days from the minister, which is a tantrum. He's having a tantrum because his hypocrisy is being exposed. He wants to try and bury this hypocrisy, and we will not cop it.

Kerrynne Liddle (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Child Protection and the Prevention of Family Violence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the Albanese government had been listening and fulfilling its promises of transparency and leaving no-one behind, there would been proper consultation with the sector and the community on this bill. The Prime Minister came to office vowing: 'We are going to be an open, transparent and accountable government. We are going to let the light shine in.' Wow. What has actually been delivered is that the shutters are down, the lights are out and they are not listening. For evidence, look no closer than the unwillingness of the government to extend scrutiny by the Community Affairs Legislation Committee and establish parliamentary process to interrogate issues associated with and informing this legislation. It is the job of the Senate; it is the job of senators. It is about bringing the diversity of Senate representation to propose legislation, but time is needed to do that properly.

The parliament and, indeed, the Senate should be a place where unintended consequences of legislation are exposed and rectified. An effective upper house is critical to democracy. A crucial part of the Senate succeeding as the house of review is it being respected by the government of the day. Sadly, the Albanese government lacks that respect. Even the sector has said there was insufficient time for proper consultation with them, the participants, their families and the community on this bill. With a lack of detail, it's little wonder there are widespread concerns about this legislation. Legislative instruments and rules are still under development.

The NDIS is a demand driven scheme. We know the NDIS has changed the lives of about 650,000 Australians for the better, including more than 55,000 recipients in my home state of South Australia. The coalition are proud of our strong record of accomplishment in supporting the NDIS, having taken it from fewer than 50,000 participants to more than half a million participants in our time in government.

Bill Shorten is a 17-year political veteran. He is the current NDIS minister and, as a member of the Labor government back then, was an architect of the NDIS. Yet, with all this commentary on the NDIS in opposition and with his two years as NDIS minister, we get, after much hand-wringing, only to this point and this bill. And now reports in the media are saying that Minister Shorten, just to avoid scrutiny, blames the committee for cost blowouts. How pathetic! Minister Shorten promised that the NDIS was a massive priority, and that promise included a promise of co-design.

The Australian disability community has been let down. Families have been let down. The opportunity for thorough consultation is important in bringing the NDIS back onto a sustainable footing, but in a manner that does not disadvantage or negatively impact participants who are most in need. Of all policies, amendments to the National Disability Insurance Scheme require the greatest of scrutiny. It is a scheme that affects the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of some of our most vulnerable Australians. Members of this place, regardless of where in the chamber they sit, are passionate about the NDIS, I have no doubt. This scheme is about delivering for the people it is intended to support.

My coalition colleagues in the Senate Committee Affairs Legislation Committee could not provide fully informed feedback and could not consult those most affected by these changes. Of course we are disappointed, so how must NDIS participants and their families feel? They have every right to feel let down. One look at emails to my office proves that Australians care about the NDIS working effectively and efficiently. Over the past month I have received many, many unique emails—they're not form emails—from individuals across the country, all with similar remarks. Their messages are simple and similar: the bill won't induce the positive change it was introduced to effect.

As my colleague Michael Sukkar said in the other place, it's as if this government and the minister have gone into the bunker and decided: 'We're going to reverse our position from the election. We're going to do the opposite of what we said before the election. So let's just put the flak jackets on, get into the bunker and do this—not consult intelligently, fairly, openly and transparently with the people whom these changes will most significantly impact.' It's an accurate analogy.

Let me provide some examples of emails to my office. I've changed the names for privacy, but their stories are real. Take Laura, who has been diagnosed with autism, complex post-traumatic stress disorder and multiple chronic health conditions. Since being diagnosed and gaining access to the correct supports via the NDIS, she has moved out of her parents' house, maintained steady employment as a face painter and balloon twister at kids parties, volunteered with her community at tree-planting events, established a regular exercise routine and participated in art classes to meet new people, and she's also been working on making new friends. It's about enjoying greater freedom, independence and agency. She says that the bill has the potential to severely limit choice and control. Laura said that the appeal and review mechanisms are unclear and that the bill limits creative and cost-effective support and access, and she is critical of the assessment process. She says it's just plain wrong. A Melbourne university academic shared that the proposed changes to the NDIS are terrifying for her friends, who report looking at losing control of their own destinies, dramatic cuts and losing the benefit of selecting and training their own support workers. This is a real issue for them. This is really important for them. Control and agency for people living with disability is just so important to every single individual and their family. It makes a huge difference to their quality of life.

Then there is the struggle of the 66,000 or so Indigenous Australians living with severe disability, many of whom do not access the NDIS, though there is a plan in place started under the coalition to address that. In September 2022 the NDIS was providing disability support to about 41,000 Indigenous Australians, a rise of 18 per cent on the previous year. It has been estimated that about 10 per cent live in remote and very remote communities, where service access is a significant challenge. The very real difficulty of being a wheelchair user or needing a mobility device in a remote community was among the issues raised during the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability in its hearings last year. The disability royal commission's research report found Indigenous Australians are 28 per cent less likely to receive care via the NDIS than their non-Indigenous counterparts. The research found some disability services could be described as unsafe, traumatising and inequitable. In fact, the report concluded that the lack of available, accessible and culturally appropriate services for Indigenous Australians with disability is a time-sensitive national crisis.

Where is the evidence to suggest that you're not leaving any Australian behind, as you promised when Labor came to office more than two years ago? Where's that evidence? It is clear that spending must be reined in. As NDIS spending blows out towards $50 billion a year, NDIS Minister Bill Shorten is not leading by example, demonstrating instead one rule for Labor and another for everyone else. I was in that Senate committee that heard that, while Bill Shorten says he is cutting costs, he's spending $620,000 on his speechwriter, despite having a communications team in the department of over 100 employees. As minister he has direct access to them. The waste, double standards and disappointment are symptomatic of the Albanese government.

This bill has got an interesting name. We've had a lot of bills come into this place with catchy little phrases that don't actually do what they say they're going to do. This bill is called 'Getting the NDIS back on track'. How about you get this bill back on track? This bill needs to be referred to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for proper consideration. It's a retrograde step, this bill. Its development has lacked sufficient consultation, and it is not only leaving vulnerable Australians out of its design but also leaving the most important people in this, those living with a disability, to live with the consequences of it. Send it to the committee as proposed by the coalition amendments. That's the right thing to do. That's what's required to get this bill back on track.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government is pleased to be introducing legislation into the Senate today aimed at securing the future of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I'd like to commence my remarks by adding some context to this bill because we've had an awful lot of information that I think needs some clarity. Before the National Disability Insurance Scheme was rolled out over a decade ago, Australians with disability were often unseen, unheard and living in the shadows. Australians with disability suffered what is called by some the 'misery lottery'—that is, disability support was patchy across the country. It depended on what state you lived in and what suburb you lived in. And so, depending on your postcode, you might be lucky enough to get some funding to help you and your family or, otherwise, you might live a life of uncertainty. Quite often, that would lead to significant disadvantage and poverty.

It was in 2009 that the then Labor government, under Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the minister for social services, Jenny Macklin, commissioned a report to help move the analysis and the debate about people with disability in this country. That report was titled Shut outan apt title. What was uncovered through the consultation phase was intensely moving and profoundly shocking. It painted a picture then of people with a disability isolated and alone and their lives a constant struggle for resources and support. An article written about the groundbreaking report at that time said:

Where once they were shut in, now people with a disability find themselves shut out. Shut out of housing, employment, education, health care, recreation and sport. Shut out of kindergartens, schools, shopping centres and community groups. Shut out of our way of life. This segregation is a national disgrace.

It was clear from that report that Australia needed a whole system of disability support and a scheme like the NDIS for people with the most complex support needs.

The nation and the parliament at that time made a decision that we would no longer let a person's postcode or financial situation dictate whether they got disability support or not. The National Disability Insurance Scheme has fundamentally changed Australia. The NDIS represents the best of our country. It fulfils a sense of collective responsibility and the essence of the fair go and it is integral to our national identity. Its value is measured in human terms, not just economic terms. People with a disability should have the support they need to participate in the community and lead an ordinary life. Every Australian deserves peace of mind knowing that they, or someone they love, should they acquire a significant disability, has the NDIS there for them. That is the essence of our country. We can never, and must never, return to the days before the NDIS. I know there are people in this chamber and in the other chamber like me who worked in the disability sector before the NDIS and saw firsthand how awful it was. Treating our fellow Australians who have a disability as second-class citizens—too hard, too costly and someone else's responsibility—reflects an image of ourselves that I don't believe we should ever recognise or accept.

However, despite its life-changing impact, the NDIS has been losing its way. It has not fully delivered on the original vision. While the NDIS has absolutely changed the lives of thousands of people, it's not working well for everyone. There is a variability out there in the system that we can't continue to accept. Participants have spoken about how every interaction with the NDIS can become a battle. That was not what it was designed for. That is not how the original design was constructed. Thousands of passionate champions for the cause tirelessly worked to try and help establish the scheme. Before our NDIS, people with disability were treated as second-class citizens—out of sight, out of mind. We have worked every day with the disability sector to do what we can to make life on the NDIS a better life for people with a disability in Australia. We promised to make the NDIS a priority and not penalise people with a disability for wanting to live fulfilled lives. We promised to put more people with disability on the NDIS board and conduct a root-and-branch review of the scheme. We've done that.

We promised to make the scheme sustainable so that future generations of Australians with a disability could rely upon it and have confidence in it. We now have more people with lived experience on the NDIS board than in the entire history of the scheme. We have our first Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander board member, and we are getting more people with a disability who are eligible for the NDIS and fit for discharge discharged from a hospital rather than waiting in bed when they are medically fit to go home. We've slashed the 4½ thousand legacy appeal cases that were languishing in long queues at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. We've established a partnership between the National Disability Insurance Agency and the First Peoples Disability Network to collaborate on the new First Nations NDIS strategy and action plan.

We've established the Inklings pilot with the Telethon Kids Institute in Western Australia to help families with children who are showing early signs of autism with evidence based interventions. Early intervention is one of the key principles of the NDIS, and the world-leading Inklings program takes us from a wait-and-see approach to an identify-and-act approach. Early intervention is crucial for a life with less reliance upon supports later on and a much, much better chance for a child to flourish.

We also promised to make the scheme safer for people with disability and to tackle fraud, waste and overcharging so that every dollar goes towards getting a better outcome. In its first year, the Fraud Fusion Taskforce that we established has investigated more than 100 cases, involving more than $1 billion of NDIS funding. Mr Michael Phelan, a former director of the Australian Institute of Criminology and a decorated former police officer, is now the Acting Commissioner of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. The commission is part of the taskforce, along with the ACCC and the NDIA, to weed out those charging more for equipment and services simply because you have an NDIS funding package. It is wrong, and it's a breach of federal law, but we've updated the rules of the NDIS so this won't happen. It's similar to the concept of a wedding tax. You rock up to a service provider and, as soon as you say you've got an NDIS package, they immediately ramp up the prices, in the same way they might if you were trying to book an event and you said it was a wedding. I say to service providers who are complaining about our campaign on price gouging: putting unfair treatment by, admittedly, a very small minority of service providers in the too-hard basket undermines the reputation of all of those other excellent service providers who are doing the right thing.

While an enormous amount has been achieved in a short period of time, there really is so much more to do. The independent NDIS review panel undertook some of the most extensive consultations with the Australian community in the history of the Commonwealth, with the aim of setting a new course for the NDIS. The review's final report was publicly released on 7 December 2023, with 26 recommendations and 139 supporting actions for government, all based on what the panel heard from over 10,000 people and disability organisations and what they read in over 4,000 submissions. National Cabinet considered the final report and, as part of the initial response, agreed that the Commonwealth should work with the state and territory governments to implement legislative changes in the first half of 2024.

I acknowledge the goodwill of the premiers of the states. The arguments around the NDIS and who is responsible for what have raged for a very long time, and the engagement with them has been exceptionally positive, with their commitment last December to fund additional disability services outside the NDIS program and the foundational supports that we speak of. I also acknowledge that they agreed to contribute more directly to the NDIS from July 2028.

Since the report was handed down, Minister Shorten has held no fewer than 10 town hall meetings around Australia, where thousands of people attended in person and online to share their views. The town halls were held to provide transparency, to listen and to reassure people. This is a cornerstone of this government's commitment to people with a disability. We have been on the front line with people with a disability and the sector always. The NDIS is testament to this, and we will not waver from this loyalty and this responsibility. We've had 10 years of delay on the NDIS progressing for Australians. Ten years—we hear that a lot in this chamber. Ten long years when those opposite didn't always do the right thing. Australians with an disability shouldn't wait a day longer than they have to for governments at all levels to work together with people with disabilities to improve the scheme.

The Albanese government is committed to engaging and consulting with people with disability, their families, carers, representative organisations, service providers, unions, and the broader community. We've made the promise to co-design with people with a disability as a fundamental tenet of what we are doing. Co-design is the only way forward to make sure we get this right. This bill provides the framework for a broader reform to the scheme, and we are committed to ensuring the design and implementation of these challenges will include extensive consultation to ensure that people's views are heard, that they know that they're being heard. The trust in the scheme is critical for its success and we will ensure that we provide that.

We want people to know that they have a seat at the table and that they will be listened to. We are committed to working with people, not doing things to people. Working alongside, working hand in hand, understanding the challenges and the differences and working together to make a difference. The powerful mantra that anyone who's been engaged in the disability sector will have heard over many, many years is 'nothing about us without us', and we are sticking to that. This bill will enable new and expanded rule- and instrument-making powers. This is why we have committed to co-design.

The debate on this bill has been raging. I get that people all have very different views, but, as a Senate and as a parliament, we need to come together. We need to chart the way forward. We need to find a way to ensure that the NDIS will provide the services and the supports that people in our community need, that they rely on, that enables them to live a full life, that gives them choice, that gives them opportunities, and that is what we will continue to fight for.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will start by outlining the purpose of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. It's designed to moderate the growth in the National Disability Insurance Scheme in the medium and longer term for the purposes of improving the sustainability of the scheme and to improve the experience of those using the scheme and to restore the original intent of the NDIS.

The bill was designed to do the necessary repair work in the NDIS in order to ensure that this vital scheme can be maintained for the long-term. There has been significant anxiety in the community around the passage of this bill, and we would acknowledge that. But the passage of this bill will offer some measure of certainty and begin that repair work that is necessary. It will also ensure that unscrupulous service providers do not take advantage of this vital system.

The opposition to the amendment in this context is based on the need for that certainty and the need to avoid further cost. A two-month delay in the passage of this bill—this vital bill—means approximately a $1.06 billion increase in NDIS expenditure across the budget forward estimates. Delays in the amendments to this legislation mean delays to the improvements that it will bring to the system, and delays in this legislation will delay the essential scaffolding that is needed to develop a new budget model with NDIS participants and the disability community that will result in a $730 million increase in NDIS expenditure across the forward estimates. A delay in implementing the new budget model could jeopardise the achievement of the eight per cent scheme growth target, with the result of lower estimated savings for 2026-27 and 2027-28. Also, the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee has conducted an extensive—

Debate interrupted.