Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators, the second reading amendments moved by Senators Hughes, McKim and Ghosh that seek to refer this bill to a committee have been overtaken by events and should be regarded as spent. We will now return to debate on the question that this bill be read a second time.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I begin, I want to recognise the work done by my colleague Senator Jordon Steele-John in representing members of the disability community. Along with Senator Steele-John, I met with over 200 people on the weekend with lived experience of disability. I want to recognise the work that they and their advocacy groups have been doing, and I also want to acknowledge the high levels of distress in the disability community as a consequence of this bill. I move the amendment on sheet 2759 that has been circulated in my name:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate calls on the Government to ensure that any methods developed as a part of the implementation of the bill must:

(a) include transparency to participants on the inputs, detail of the method, and outputs;

(b) include transparency to participants and the general public on the procedures, calculations and any other workings of the methods; and

(c) be subject to both internal and external appeal by participants".

The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 is a very significant piece of legislation that will make huge changes to the NDIS, resulting in harm for the people who rely on it. One in five Australians now live with a disability. The National Disability Insurance Scheme changes people's lives for the better; however, the getting the NDIS back on track bill before us threatens to derail the NDIS for good. This bill will cut services for disabled people just so that Labor can claim a surplus in a cost-of-living crisis.

The NDIS stands alongside Medicare as some of the most significant health reforms for the community that we have. They are monuments of public good. In tandem, these programs have enabled so many Australians to live healthy and happy lives. Labor's decision to cut the NDIS, to restrict access and to remove people from it should be subjected to the highest degree of scrutiny because the consequences of this are profound. It will be profound for the people who rely on the NDIS.

Choice and control are core concepts of the NDIS, putting disabled people in charge of decisions about their lives. However, Labor's bill flips this relationship, giving the government the power to decide when, where, how and what supports are delivered. The minister can categorise disabled people into groups and classes and then make and apply rules to them. The bill also sets up the framework for moving people off the NDIS to supports provided by states and territories—supports which don't exist. Not only would booting people off a national plan be inconsistent with what the NDIS is designed to protect against; it would inevitably guarantee that disabled people would be worse off in some areas than in others.

The culture that has driven this reform has been paternalistic from the outset. Reforms that empower the minister to classify disabled people into classes are emblematic of this. At every step, we are seeing the fractures that created a royal commission in the first place. As my colleague Senator Shoebridge said earlier, this bill before us has been shrouded in secrecy, from some stakeholders pressured into signing confidentiality agreements to focus groups establishing the best way to launder the cuts. Advocates have raised concerns throughout the inquiry process about the ad hoc and rushed nature of such major reforms. Dr George Taleporos of Every Australian Counts told the inquiry:

What's happened in this situation is that we've been given legislation that says, 'We're going to take away what you've got now and we're going to put in place something different.' But that other thing doesn't exist yet. So it's impossible for us to feel confident that that solution will work for us. The legislation raises many concerns that we have not seen the answers to, and we need to see the answers. This is about our lives. This is about our survival. This is so important to us and we need to be treated in a way that respects how serious this is for our lives, and I don't feel that that has happened, in this case.

The Labor government is treating the community with contempt. By courting the Liberal Party, the party of service slashing, they are stating outright that their interest is not with the disability community.

The expansion of the government's ability to pursue debts against disabled people, their families or guardians is also of significant concern. Throughout the inquiry, legal representatives stated that debts raised under the NDIS Act will not be subject to review, meaning there is no opportunity to dispute an incorrect decision or explain the situation that led to the debt. This arises even in cases where disabled people or their families make a mistake, receive bad advice or are coerced into spending funding incorrectly. A foundational change like this locks in issues of natural justice. The power imbalance between a participant and the government is significant, and all it takes is another minister desperate to drum up savings to recreate a culture of debt recovery at all costs, including human ones.

It is unacceptable for this Labor government to push ahead with legislation that will cause disabled people harm. Instead of engaging properly with the disability community, Labor has attempted to manipulate public sentiment and to undermine the scheme by talking about fraud and noncompliance. Governments of all persuasions are fond of loudly proclaiming that they are constrained by economic reality and forced to make tough choices. Let's be clear about what Labor is choosing to do with this bill. Labor is choosing to cut $14.4 billion out of the NDIS by booting as many people off their NDIS supports as possible. Labor's bill will make disabled people's lives and the lives of their families immediately more difficult. That is why the Greens won't support it in its current form.

It is a deep shame of this government to be pursuing such reckless and heartless slashing of the NDIS just weeks after their response to the disability royal commission. After making the community wait over 11 months for a response, the Labor government declared no intention to end the cycles of segregation that lead to abuse, violence, neglect and exploitation which thousands of disabled people had the courage to share with the commission. No wonder they are devastated. Labor accepted 13 out of 222 recommendations. I'll say that again: 13 out of 222. That's less than six per cent of the recommendations. What a slap in the face. What a gut punch for the disability community. What a sham—after disabled people and their families gave so much to the commission, week after week, month after month.

The only work that Labor is pursuing in disability now is cutting $14.4 billion out of the NDIS. Labor has chosen to allow injustice to fester just so they can claim a balanced budget. The consequences of carve-outs and cuts to the NDIS negatively affect students and parents in our school systems too. The NDIS is meant to foster inclusion, empowerment and self-determination, and yet education has been excluded from the NDIS. This has real-world impacts on students with disabilities and their families—something that we saw clearly in the Senate's inquiry into school refusal.

The Greens established an inquiry into school refusal, or 'school can't', which showed how students are left behind without adequate support. Given the exclusion of education from the NDIS, the government cannot vacate the field for neurodivergent students, who are disproportionately affected by school refusal. School refusal, and a lack of support for families, is causing serious financial stress for households. Responses to a School Can't Australia survey showed that one-third of respondents were coping, for now, but believed their long-term financial security would be impacted by school refusal. Another 15 per cent of respondents were struggling to afford essentials, such as food, housing, transport, health and basic needs. Labor has taken every opportunity to carve groups out and to restrict access to the NDIS, and it is having profound consequences for schoolkids and their families.

As a state school teacher for decades, I saw how inadequate support for students with disabilities rippled out through families and the school community. The financial stress, social isolation and educational outcomes are all linked to inadequate government funding to support students with disabilities.

But, every chance it gets, Labor looks to cut costs by excluding those who need support the most. We've seen it with refusing to raise the rate of JobSeeker and we're seeing it now with cuts to the NDIS. This government has chosen to abandon disabled people, to abandon NDIS workers and to pass the buck to the millions of Australians who undertake informal carer roles. The Labor government has made clear that there is not an essential service that it won't cut in order to fund nuclear submarines and fossil-fuel handouts. Those in this government have betrayed the disability community and should be ashamed of themselves.

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

I don't have a strong record of supporting bills from the Albanese Labor government, but in this case I'm pleased to say that I will. The government has finally taken a big step towards securing the future of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. That is exactly what's at stake here. We must rein in the cost of the scheme if it's going to survive and help to provide for the needs of Australians living with a disability. The Australian people believe in making reasonable and necessary disability support availability for people who need it. If we don't make it sustainable, if we don't stop the rorting, if we don't stop it paying for things that aren't direct disability care, the goodwill towards the scheme will disappear. One Nation supports a more sustainable NDIS, and that's why we'll support this bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024.

The NDIS is not remotely sustainable at the moment. It already costs taxpayers $45 billion a year, and, without substantial reform, this figure will double to $90 billion by the year 2030. NDIS spending has gotten out of control. That's what usually happens with every big government scheme flush with taxpayers' money: some people always find ways to take advantage of them and always disadvantage the people who really need them. There are many people on the NDIS who really need it, but it's also paying for many things that are completely unrelated to their disability care. I'm confident that most Australians do not support the NDIS paying for things like donations to political parties; rent; court fines; alcohol; cigarettes and vapes; jewellery; fuel; computer game consoles; takeaway food; home deposits and standard renovations; gambling; prostitutes; saunas; standard cars and motorbikes; sport, concert and movie tickets; luxury cruises and holiday packages; makeup and cosmetics; pet funerals; school and university fees; music lessons; sex toys; weddings and honeymoons; standard sports equipment; standard appliances; standard furniture; insurance; legal fees; child support; tarot card readings and clairvoyance; business costs; trampolines; IVF treatments; cuddle therapy; hypnotherapy; crystal therapy; aromatherapy; roleplay game therapy; nail salons; and hair appointments. These are exactly what the Greens want to keep and support. Can you believe it? They want you, the taxpayer, to be able to pay for this to give people with disability a better life. Forget about the people out there who are doing it tough and living on the streets. There's one rule for some and one rule for others.

None of these are related to genuine disability care, but the NDIS is paying for all of these things and a lot more. This is not the reasonable and necessary assistance Australians were told the NDIS was created for. There's absolutely nothing wrong with disabled people going to concerts, getting takeaway food delivered or even having crystal therapy, but Australian taxpayers should not be funding it through the NDIS. It will not be enough to simply write to providers and participants about these changes. They will need to be enforced with substantial penalties. I hope the Labor Party, this government, will actually follow that one up.

I'm pleased to say that this bill will make nearly all of these things ineligible for NDIS money. I say 'nearly all'. One Nation will be moving an amendment to add sex workers to the list of services no longer eligible for NDIS money. If a disabled adult wants to pay a sex worker where it's legal, that's their business, but Australian taxpayers should not be funding it through the NDIS. If we allow the NDIS to keep paying for these things, there soon won't be enough money to pay for the critical things disabled Australians really need. That's what we must prioritise.

When dealing with the NDIS, I often think back to the group of mothers who visited parliament to help secure support for its establishment. These were mothers with kids living with severe disabilities requiring constant around-the-clock care. I will never forget their desperate concern for the future of their children when they could no longer provide that care. They weren't asking for handouts. They weren't asking for luxury holiday packages, cuddle therapy or tarot card readings; they asked only that their country provide for their children's needs when they no longer could. For that, we need a sustainable NDIS.

Another important step we must take is to bring NDIS pay rates for various workers back into line with other health sectors. Aged care, for example, is desperate for workers. For relatively unqualified support workers, jobs in aged care are being advertised at around $30 an hour. Under the NDIS, the going rate is $67 an hour. It can go up to $218 an hour on weekends in rural and remote areas. This is for basic jobs like driving patients to appointments or even folding laundry or mowing a lawn. There are people who actually finance their new cars under this system. In June this year, the Australian newspaper said, 'An analysis of Australian Bureau of Statistics data showed one-third of all new jobs created in Australia over the past year were for the NDIS.' It's no wonder, with unsustainable pay rates like that.

These rates not only contribute heavily to NDIS spending going up around 20 per cent every year but they also contribute to a shortage of workers in other sectors—not just critical health sectors but virtually every sector in the economy. A registered nurse can make about $50 an hour in public health but more than $190 an hour under the NDIS. Psychologists providing counselling to an NDIS patient receive a minimum rate of $214 an hour but only $153 an hour to counsel a veteran. We know that our veterans are having a lot of trouble accessing the mental health services and support that they need and richly deserve. One of the reasons is that those practitioners are prioritising NDIS patients due to the higher rate of pay. These unsustainable rates need to be brought into parity with other sectors or those sectors will run out of the workers they need. The government has acknowledged that this is a problem so I have to ask why it hasn't been addressed in this bill. It cannot come soon enough if we are to have a sustainable NDIS as well as sustainable workforces in other sectors.

Another flaw in the NDIS that must be addressed is the lack of means testing. Like pensions and other taxpayer supports, participation in the scheme should be means tested. It makes no sense for multimillionaires to be able to access NDIS participation, but they can because the scheme isn't means tested. I understand that neither of the major parties support means testing in the NDIS. Peter Dutton told me they don't support it because public health isn't means tested either and is available to everyone. If the coalition thinks the NDIS should also be available to everyone, why is eligibility for the NDIS denied to people over the age of 67? One Nation will be moving an amendment to introduce means-tested supports to take more pressure off the NDIS. Some participants' plans are getting out of hand, loaded with things they don't need or services provided at astronomical rates. In 2020 it was revealed that about 450 participants had NDIS plans costing more than a million dollars. Another 5,100 participants were on plans costing between $500,000 and $1 million. Who knows how many are on these expensive plans now? The government won't tell us.

Another major issue that we must deal with is NDIS fraud. We must recall the warning from Michael Fallon in 2022 when he was chief of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission. He said that about 20 per cent of NDIS funding was being abused by organised crime groups. Mr Fallon is now acting head of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, and back in May he said he may have underestimated the involvement of organised crime. These criminals have made billions of dollars from the NDIS. I acknowledge the $160 million in this year's budget to improve the capabilities of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission so it can crack down on this abuse of taxpayers' money. There is no place for organised crime in the NDIS. Once again, this is another rushed policy that criminals have taken advantage of, and taxpayers are being ripped off.

One other major change needs to be implemented, and I hope to see it in the next tranche of reforms. Eligibility for participation in the scheme needs to be tightened to supporting those whose disability has a significant impact on their life. When NDIS was created, it was supposed to provide support for people with a disability, not mild autism or attention deficit disorder. I acknowledge that, in severe cases of autism, NDIS support may be necessary. We even hear about an autism diagnosis being used to access NDIS funding packages and that this could even be behind rising rates of autism in Australia. However, it's the real impact of autism on an individual, not just a diagnosis of autism, that should determine the support they receive.

In principle, One Nation supports the new scheme jointly funded by the Commonwealth and the states to support children with mild autism or development issues through schools and childcare centres. They shouldn't be on the NDIS. It remains our policy to establish specialist schools with qualified staff to provide parents with the opportunity to choose the care, support and education their children need.

I look forward to these first reforms being implemented as soon as possible. I say, again, they represent a substantial step on the path to a sustainable NDIS. It makes my blood boil to see the Greens with their grandstanding here, ripping over $14 billion from taxpayers in their true form of supporting issues that are unsustainable in the long run. Their actions are only, as I said, grandstanding, purely for the vote. That's what they're about. If they ever get control of the purse strings of this country, we will be a Third World country in no time, because, 'Everyone should receive this, get this, give that,' and who's going to pay for it all? If you want this NDIS to be sustainable, it has to be paid for, and you have to do it on the basis that it's true and fair to all Australians, not just hand over taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. One Nation will be supporting this bill, and I urge all senators to get on board so that we can make sure this scheme survives and supports Australians with a disability well into the future.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I'd just like to echo the statements that have been made here today by my colleagues in the Australian Greens. They have spoken in great detail. Senator Steele-John, who is our spokesperson on behalf of disabled people across Australia, has done a fantastic job in his work—and Senator Allman-Payne has also, in her contribution.

There has been significant community backlash in relation to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024, with many organisations and disabled people and their families sharing concerns with our spokesperson Senator Steele-John and with our individual officers here at the Australian Greens. They've been sharing their concerns with the government, and the government, again, have not made a good enough effort to engage with people in the disabled peoples community, who are most affected.

This is affecting everybody. The government concentrated on exactly the issues that Senator Hanson just spoke about; they're focusing on fraud and noncompliance, which are important issues, but they're using them more like cover. There is no doubt that there have been issues with some suppliers. I'm not negating that. But the government have emphasised these points—again, I want to reiterate—as cover. They are taking that as cover to retreat from what the NDIS is supposed to be all about. It's supposed to be centred on the people who have the lived experiences of disability, the people that need the most support to navigate all of the complex systems that we, in this place, have set up.

If this government really does cut $74.3 billion from the NDIS over the next 10 years, we will all feel the consequences of that at some time. Everyone in this country has a relative with a disability or, in fact, is disabled themselves. We cannot consciously sit in this place and do that to people—and we are doing this to them. This decision has been rushed in every single way. It has been rushed through its decision-making processes. It has been rushed past the Australian public before people could even realise what was happening. The government are rushing it through the parliament, downplaying it in their budget announcements, hoping that no-one will notice that this is what they are going to do to disabled people in this country.

Just like I have done many times before in this chamber, I also want to talk about the double disadvantage experienced by First Nations people with a disability. The First Peoples Disability Network Australia have done an amazing lot of work in this space, fighting for the NDIS to better support First Nations people across Australia, and they continue to do this work on an absolute shoestring. The amazing advocates, the people working in policy, the people working alongside frontline programs and services—it's a real testament to their resilience. They have estimated that there are 60,000 First Nations people who are participating in the NDIS, but, in reality, there are actually fewer than that. Not only are they not participating in the NDIS, because they've been excluded, but also they don't recognise or have not been diagnosed for their disability, so we continue to see this disparity in the double disadvantage that exists for First Nations people.

There are many, many reasons why this is happening, and they include the year-long waitlists to access the NDIS assessment and also the disparity in the geographical challenges that we have. Most First Nations people live in rural and remote areas in Australia. Sometimes these services are not accessible, not only in terms of being able to get there but also in terms of centres being open at the particular times when people are reaching out. So it's about having the means, capacity and access to travel hundreds of kilometres to actually get an NDIS assessment in the first place. Sometimes people don't have a car. They potentially have to drive themselves depending on what their disability is. They've got to pay for fuel. They have to have the time to drive the distances across regional and remote Australia and potentially pay for accommodation, particularly if they can't make that trip in one day. That, in fact, is the reality for lots of First Nations people. Some of them have to go town by town, stopping and relying on family and relying on trust that they may be able to have access to money to get to NDIS assessments in this country. These costs all add up very, very quickly. We are in a cost-of-living crisis, and that this government are taking this approach to make this simply unfeasible for many people is just appalling.

As I said, Australia is a huge place. It's very spread out for a lot of First Nations people who work and live on country. I also have lived in regional Western Australia. In fact, I lived in the Goldfields. The nearest service centre to Kalgoorlie would be approximately 600 kilometres away. To make that trip in one day is exhausting. To make that trip if you had a disability, if you had to stop at several places in order to access food or drinks or take a break—all of those things are really important.

Then there is the fact that there are simply not enough First-Nations-specific services across this country to provide culturally appropriate care to the some 60,000 people who, in fact, should be accessing care but are not because this government has failed to see that. When they talk about intersectionality, how about they talk about the fact that there aren't many First-Nations-specific, culturally appropriate services that are accessible to those 60,000 people? A well-funded disability support system is crucial for us in order to close the gap in this country and to uphold the rights and the dignity of First Nations people.

Not only is this bill a slap in the face for disabled people; this government refuses to answer reasonable questions from members of this chamber and members of the public who want to put to the government the reality of the situation of the lived experience of people with a disability and what it means to support someone who is living with a disability. They are the people most affected and will be most affected when you tear the money out of this type of bill and these types of services that are so important for the disabled community.

Labor went to the election and promised that they would make no big changes without 'co-design'. It's not just some fluffy weasel word that you can throw around that looks great in your policy documents. Co-design is sitting down with people and saying: 'Tell us what the lived reality is. Tell us what that means and we will help co-design our approach, our needs based funding, to make sure that we are hitting the mark and we have a bill that caters to that.' But Labor broke that promise. It broke the promise to co-design alongside the NDIS community.

Let's think again about the proposed cuts and what they mean to the NDIS. Labor has chosen, instead, to pump big money into things like submarines. Here they are, wonderfully clapping their hands together today, talking about AUKUS—$368 billion—and handing out money to fossil fuels. They continue to hand out outrageous amounts of money to everybody except the NDIS community. It's appalling. That money could and should be spent on helping the most vulnerable people in our communities.

It continues to be a travesty. Even as late as last week, I was on a flight from Perth to Darwin and was sitting next to a middle-aged lady who talked to me about her experience with the NDIS. I asked her if I could share this story in the Senate, because everything she told me about her health care was so important,. She was travelling from Darwin to Perth to go to Fiona Stanley Hospital, because the services at Royal Darwin Hospital couldn't cater to her health needs. She needed to administer to herself sterile needles because of her medical condition. The machine she had to purchase cost $10,000, yet the NDIS, because it did haven't the same product number, would not cover it.

This is what people are dealing with. She hit the jackpot sitting next to an MP on her flight to talk about her experience, because the government are not listening. This woman has made complaint after complaint about the NDIS. When I asked her, 'What do we do to help you?' She threw her hands in the air because she was so defeated about her story, about the fact that the Labor government are continuing without co-design, without engagement, without conversation and without empathy for people living with disability in our communities.

This lady also talked about her experience in patient assisted travel. It's NDIS related, yes, but it's also a broader issue around how the health system is broken for people. Her NDIS experience has made her so much more determined, but her resilience and her strength in sharing her story is something I really treasure because she wanted to speak about her experience. She wanted to talk about how the NDIS fails. It lets people down. She wanted me to convey that message here today to the government and those in this chamber who I know also feel so strongly and passionately about how disability affects all of us.

I foreshadow that I will bring a second reading amendment to this bill in my name on behalf of the Australian Greens. I want to urge this government to think seriously about what power it has to make a difference, what power it can ensure, as part of its legacy in this place, to look after the most vulnerable in our community. I heard many stories from those in the government and opposite around how disability affects all of us. As a First Nations woman—two children who also have a disability—it is critical that we stand up and continue to enable the voices of those in the NDIS community to be heard. We continue to advocate strongly, and, through Senator Steele-John's wonderful leadership, we continue to ask and demand that this government listen, that this government stop putting money into things that are to the detriment of the disabled community. People with lived experience of disability want to, should be, heard. They continue to ask the government to consider making changes to this bill.

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

I seek to speak to the second reading amendment on sheet 2759 moved by my colleague Senator Allman-Payne. It is so important to disabled people, our families, our communities, those who work with us and those who advocate alongside us that the systems within the NDIS are built on transparency and trust. The processes that the agency uses to determine what kinds of supports disabled people receive, the amount of funding they are provided with, to those without a disability, perhaps to those in the Labor Party, it would seem, are just pieces of material on an excel spreadsheet somewhere in a computer; the job of a bureaucrat to implement, the job of a comms director to advise on and, ultimately, the job of a minister to deliver a report to cabinet with the No. 1 metric of success being: How much did we cut today? How much closer did we get to the $14.4 billion that we have pledged to rip out of the scheme? For disabled people and our families, for our community, these processes and how they work are the factors that determine whether we are able to get out of bed in the morning, to have a job, to eat, to be able to drink water. The result of these processes affects our lives.

'The minister shall determine the method' is one of the most frequently used passages within the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. The methods proposed in this bill—that's the term used, 'method'—shape our lives. Transparency is vital. From transparency there can be trust. Without transparency, there is rightly distrust, particularly given the way in which we as disabled people have been treated at the hands of federal governments, Liberal and Labor alike. Whether it be the disgraceful way in which the Liberal government sought to implement, and successfully implemented, changes to the disability support pension that chucked over 200,000 people on the DSP onto what was then called Newstart and into poverty, or whether it was the Gillard government beginning the changes to the impairment table process that then enabled those people to be chucked off, or whether it be this government's shameful response to the Disability Royal Commission report, we have good reason to distrust federal governments of any political persuasion when it comes to the processes and procedures used by the National Disability Insurance Scheme to shape our lives, our funding and our support.

It is in that context that the Greens offer this amendment, which calls for any method that may come out of this bill to be subject to basic transparency and the right of appeal. The right of appeal is a basic expectation that any citizen should have in relation to a government program. If a decision has been made that affects your life and you believe that the decision has been made in error, you should be able to appeal—that is a basic expectation. Yet this bill, in its current form, denies that right of appeal—denies that foundation stone of procedural justice—to the over 660,000 participants who rely on the NDIS for basic supports and to their families.

An example of one of these foreshadowed methods is the method which will be used to translate the so-called 'needs assessment report' into a participant's budget. All we know about this method, all the parliament has been told about this method—and we are about to be asked to vote for a bill that will be the foundation of these methods, that will give the minister of the day the power to create these methods and implement them—is that this method will be some kind of tool that will be developed and approved by the minister for the purpose of translating the result of a needs assessment into a total budget amount. That is all that we know, and yet we are being asked to vote for this piece of legislation.

Now, the methods developed under this bill, if it is to pass, must not, cannot, be developed in secrecy. They cannot be implemented in secrecy. There must be transparency so that there can be trust. Details about any calculations, algorithms or other components of these methods must be made available to the public so that there is a common understanding of how important decisions in relation to funding and plans are being made.

This government came to office on a promise of ending the black-box systems that the previous Liberal government implemented. Yet this bill, in its current form, empowers the minister of the day, empowers a politician, to make whatever kind of black box they may choose. When I read that section of this bill, my jaw nearly fell off! The hypocrisy, the double standards, the broken promises and the betrayal that the Labor government are perpetrating upon disabled people and their families—breathtaking!

This amendment would call on the government to ensure that methods are developed transparently and implemented transparently so that there can be a basic level of trust. The workings and outcomes of these methods also should be subject to appeal by participants and their families, especially where the outcomes are primarily determined by algorithmic methods. We cannot allow a future government—we cannot allow this government—to have the ability to craft algorithms and input systems that seek to reduce the complex individualised nature of a disabled person's needs down into a series of data points and then spit out some number, without the way in which that information translated from the result to the amount being a process that can be examined, challenged and reviewed. It is no good to say, 'Oh, well, the outcome at the end of it will be reviewable,' if the thing you have at the end of the process is the result of the flawed determination method, because you will rerun the process and you will again come out with an insufficient amount of support.

We cannot allow a bill to be passed by this parliament that creates an opportunity for the second coming of robodebt, where methods were kept secret and mysterious debts arose as the result of calculations that weren't visible or able to be understood by the key people affected. We know that these processes lead to harm. We know that these processes can lead to death. That is what robodebt did—it killed people. It was the product of a political and bureaucratic culture created by both sides of this parliament, who have given decision-makers one key indicator: reduce the cost, bring the funding down and meet your budgetary expectations—because, in the name of all that is holy, we have a nuclear submarine to fund. That is the culture that created robodebt, and that culture remains. That culture is at the heart of these methods.

Unless this Senate takes the opportunity to send a clear message to the government that, should this bill pass, it expects them to develop these methods with transparency and implement them with transparency, this Senate will be culpable for the damage done by these methods and processes, for the funding that gets removed from people and, yes, for the lives of those who are pushed to the brink by these bureaucratic processes which they cannot challenge or ask for a review of. This amendment sits alongside a number of amendments that will be moved and debated by the Greens which seek to ensure that these basic elements of transparency, accountability and proportionality are addressed and introduced into this piece of legislation. Each will give the government the opportunity to side with the disability community to ensure that their appointed CEO of the agency has their powers effectively and appropriately constrained—and there are many others which I will go into detail on as the debate progresses.

But I urge the Senate: this amendment gives you the opportunity to agree with the basic proposition of procedural fairness, procedural justice and basic transparency. Give the families, give the disabled folks and give the community the opportunity to understand exactly how their funding, their supports and the decisions that shape their lives were landed on. Give disabled people the basic opportunity. Respond to the demand of the disability community that this parliament ensure that nothing is done about us without us.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will respond to the second reading amendment and then offer a response in relation to the rest of the debate. The government's position will be to oppose the second reading amendment. It is not a serious amendment in terms of its relationship with the scheme and of the rest of the bill. It is indeed, in my view, just shallow partisanship.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 is the first legislative step in relation to reform of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The approach of the government in relation to the bill but also to the second reading amendment is to make it sustainable, to do it fairly for participants and to do it for the long term. There has been deep consideration given to all of the issues not just that Senator Steele-John has raised but that have been raised in exhaustive consultation with the disability community and practitioners in this area to ensure that very thorough checks and balances are included in the act in a way that provides protection for participants, and the kind of hyperbole that has been engaged in over the course of this morning has been incoherent, irresponsible and incorrect—a deliberate catastrophising done in the knowledge that it does social harm itself. That's the truth of the matter, because that's what happens when you approach things through such a shallow partisan lens.

The bill seeks to implement the key recommendations made by the NDIS review focusing on access to the NDIS, how NDIS budgets are set and better safeguards for participants. The changes implement key recommendations of the independent NDIS review and put participants back at the centre of the NDIS, restore the scheme to its original intent and ensure the scheme's sustainability for future generations of Australians. The bill was first introduced to the parliament on 27 March this year, and in the months intervening this government has sought feedback on the bill from people with disabilities and their families, the disability sector and other key stakeholders to ensure that the proposed changes deliver on our intent to improve this life-changing scheme. From this consultation came a number of amendments developed to strengthen the bill which were accepted in the House on 5 June. Because we've listened to the disability community and to our parliamentary colleagues, the government has moved almost 50 amendments to the bill.

The bill has gone through two separate hearings of the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee. On 20 June, the committee presented its first report, made three recommendations and agreed that the bill be passed. The bill was introduced to the Senate on 24 June. I'd like to take a moment to acknowledge the hard work of the chair of the committee, Senator Marielle Smith, who, over two inquiries, presided over five and a half days of hearings and the examination of more than 300 submissions. Senator Smith is a passionate supporter of the NDIS and said in her second reading speech on the bill:

The NDIS is a proud Labor legacy. I'm proud of it. I'm proud of everything it has done to support over half a million adults and children with disability today. I'm proud that for a long time it has enjoyed bipartisan support. It is something we as Australians believe in, it's something we in this chamber have believed in and it has been a godsend for so many Australians living with disability and for their families, friends and carers …

The government has proposed 18 amendments that address the recommendations of the committee in the first inquiry and further amendments to strengthen the bill including: firstly, on governance, that first ministers are also to be recognised as ministers for the purpose of category A rule making; secondly, on consultation, that a consultation statement be tabled, accompanying the legislative instrument that sets out consultations undertaken on the instrument; thirdly, on safeguards, that the government clarifies the circumstances under which the additional powers granted to the NDIA CEO through the bill will be used; and fourthly, on budget setting, clarifying that the needs assessments will be holistic and consider all of a person's disability support needs. It also ensures that participants are notified of what impairments or which impairment they need access to the NDIS for. Finally, on integrity, they also include a series of amendments that strengthen the integrity of the scheme.

A further final amendment addresses concerns about the section 10 list for some participants who, in often unique circumstances, could get a better and more cost-effective outcome from using a support that is otherwise not able to be funded by the NDIS. This amendment will allow participants to seek an exception where this is the case.

The bill has not yet passed, because it was referred back to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee in June. The committee publicly released its report last Friday, 9 August. That report has one recommendation, which is that the committee recommend that the bill be passed as soon as practical. This is consistent with the committee's original report but reflects the committee's sense of urgency about the need to get on with this piece of reform as an important and necessary step for making the NDIS sustainable, for making the NDIS fair and for modernising the approach of the agency to its work with agency participants.

Now it is the time for this Senate to discharge its responsibility to NDIS participants and to Australians broadly and to move forward with the bill in a way that commits us to delivering better outcomes for people with disability who engage with the NDIS. I'm confident that the opposition will now work with the government to pass the bill, because, despite our inevitable disagreements about form and process here in Canberra, there is universal agreement amongst Australians that we have to get the NDIS back on track and make this scheme sustainable so it's here for future generations of Australians. Those here in the Senate acting in good faith will see that this bill is done with the best interests of people with a disability, their families and the disability workforce and providers in mind.

I agree with the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, Mr Shorten, when he said that our system is not so broken that common sense and compassion will not prevail in this instance. It is the right thing to do. We and the whole Australian community know that a significant and permanent disability can happen to any one of us at any time. If it does, whether it is us or someone we love, we have in this country a scheme that will be there for all of us and that gives peace of mind to everyone, knowing that we or our loved one will be supported by Australia's world-leading disability scheme. But, even more, our entire community benefits from building a more inclusive and accessible society. I should say as well that the benefits of building a more inclusive and accessible society go beyond the social benefits; they got to workforce participation and productivity broadly in the economy.

In this bill we propose a framework for broader reform that not only restores the NDIS to its original intent but creates an ecosystem of disability supports and more inclusive foundational mainstream supports and services. The government recommits to the design and implementation of these changes, including extensive consultation and co-design with the disability community—a fact demonstrated by the many amendments to the bill. The government will also continue to work with state and territory partners, and across the political divide, to deliver a fairer and more sustainable NDIS. States and territories and the Commonwealth have a common interest and a shared responsibility to support these reforms, to secure a future of lasting and meaningful outcomes.

The independent NDIS review, which was released on 7 December 2023, was commissioned by this government to work with the disability community to tell us what is working and what is not and, importantly, to tell us how the scheme could be changed to achieve the goal that the disability community envisaged when it was first established in 2013. The significant time the disability community spent responding to, and engaging with, the independent review panel is helping to shape the plan for how the government intends to put people with disability back at the centre of the NDIS, restore trust, confidence and pride in the NDIS, and ensure the sustainability of the scheme for future generations.

The decision to bring forward legislative changes and associated rules was made by National Cabinet in December 2023. This bill provides the framework required for the NDIS to deliver on its full potential, including improved experiences and better outcomes for participants, and restoring trust and confidence in a scheme that has changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Australians with a disability. This bill will secure the future of the NDIS as a fair and sustainable source of world-class, life-changing support, delivering for the next generation and the generations to follow of Australians who will need it.

This bill is primarily enabling in nature, establishing the necessary scaffolding within the current legislative framework, to be supported by new and amended instruments and rule-making powers. The majority of changes in the bill will not take effect until activated by future changes to NDIS rules. These will be developed in deep consultation and engagement with the disability community, and the majority of legislative instruments will need to be agreed by all states and territories, consistent with existing shared governance arrangements.

To progress this important work, we've worked closely with the Independent Advisory Council and disability representative and care organisations to establish co-design working groups across six key reform areas. The bill includes some measures that commence immediately, including a greater emphasis on spending within the allocation in a participant's plan, where there is no change of circumstances, which will assist in ensuring the scheme's sustainability. This reflects the reasonable expectation that participants should spend up to the limit specified in their plan, unless their needs specifically change, and requires appropriate safeguards to stop others who may seek to exploit or coerce the participant to use their package in a way that is not in their best interests.

The government is working closely with states and territories and the disability community around broader disability reforms, including the foundational supports agreed to by National Cabinet, to commence in the middle of 2025. While it is important to ensure there is careful sequencing of other key recommendations from the NDIS review and the disability royal commission, the bill establishes the framework to allow the time it will take to carefully co-design and develop the detail in subordinate legislation. The government will continue to work with the disability community, state and territory partners and everybody across this parliament, to deliver a fairer and more sustainable NDIS.

The bill is about supporting participants and their families to live a rich and fulfilling life and lays the foundations of a future connected ecosystem of support for all Australians with a disability and, ultimately, a more inclusive and accessible society. In closing, I thank senators for their contributions to this bill and I commend the bill to the Senate.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm aware, Senator Cox, that you have foreshadowed a second reading amendment, but I will deal with Senator Allman-Payne's second reading amendment first. The question before the Senate is that the second reading amendment on sheet 2759 as moved by Senator Allman-Payne to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 be agreed to.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move the Australian Greens amendment on sheet 2766:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate calls on the Government to ensure that any decision that may be made by the CEO of the National Disability Insurance Agency, or their delegate, under the bill must:

(a) be approved by a second decision maker within the Agency;

(b) be subject to both internal and external appeal; and

(c) provide transparency around the considerations, reasons and outcomes of the decision".

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

I seek leave to make a very short statement.

Leave not granted.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the second reading amendment as moved by Senator Cox be agreed to.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question before the Senate is that the bill now be read a second time.