Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

The National Disability Insurance Scheme, or NDIS, is one of the most significant social policy schemes introduced into Australia, and Centre Alliance remains committed to supporting this scheme and its aims to improve the lives of people with a disability. However, there are always teething issues with major policy initiatives, and it would be fair to say that the current mechanisms for governing the administration of the National Disability Insurance Agency are causing unreasonable delays. For example, we have one nomination to the NDIA board that took more than 18 months of negotiations because state and territories could not reach a unanimous decision, and this is not good governance.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Streamlined Governance) Bill 2019 seeks to simplify appointments to the two boards that advise the NDIA by changing the requirements around consultation and agreement with the states and territories. These changes are designed to improve efficient running of the NDIA, and it should be noted the states and territories have already agreed to each of these measures and some are already in operation, albeit informally. It should also be noted the NDIS minister still has, and always had, the power to appoint members to one of the boards, and state and territory governments must still be consulted about appointments to the other board. Broad consultation on internal administration remains in place.

There are many real issues that concern me about the treatment of NDIS participants, including the failure to provide draft plans and the inconsistent experience of participants because some planners do not have the appropriate skills and training. I have raised these issues in the past and I will continue to advocate on these important issues. Earlier this year, I called on the then Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme to intervene and allow clients of the NDIS to review their draft plans before they're submitted for final assessment. Too often errors and misunderstandings in the draft planning stage have led to woefully inadequate plans, months of delay and exclusion from services for people with disabilities. I was deeply concerned when the then minister told me that, to remedy these issues, people could just ask for an internal review if they had a problem. NDIS participants and their families are telling me that these reviews are taking weeks and often months to resolve. Withholding draft plans from participants has disempowered and frustrated a number of families, leaving them feeling betrayed and misled by a scheme that was designed to empower them to thrive in their community. However, I'm pleased to see that the government is making progress in this area, with the minister announcing a plan to ensure quality decision-making within the NDIS—specifically, the rollout of joint planning meetings and the provision of draft plan summaries from April next year.

In the meantime, the streamlined governance bill will enhance good governance in administrative bodies and prevent the farcical delays that have previously plagued the NDIA executive. The Productivity Commission gave evidence during a Senate inquiry into the legislation and found that the changes were administrative in nature and need not wait until the conclusion of the Tune review. The Tune review is an investigation being conducted by Mr David Tune, an independent expert in public administration. The review concerns the standards of the experience of NDIS participants with a view to preparing a participant service guarantee and is not concerned with the internal administrative arrangements of boards. I share the view that this legislation does not need to wait for Mr Tune to deliver his findings at the end of the year.

Finally, I want to draw attention to the challenges faced by older Australians who, purely because they have acquired their disability after the age of 65, are not able to access the NDIS—for example, individuals like the approximately 2,000 people in Australia living with motor neurone disease, who will gradually lose the ability to speak, swallow and breathe. While I'm a strong supporter of the NDIS, it is disappointing that the same level of individualised support will not be made available to a significant proportion of the population who acquire a disability that is not part of the ageing process. By way of example, the level 4 home care package provides an individual with a means test subsidy amount limited to approximately $50,000 per annum. The NDIS, on the other hand, is not means tested and is not limited to a prescribed maximum funding amount. This inequity prompted Mrs Bobbie English to begin a petition calling for an end to the discrimination against people over the age of 65. I congratulate Mrs English on her advocacy and the thousands of people who have already signed the petition. As we approach the International Day of People with Disability, I call on the government to explain how they intend to address the funding imbalance, given that the care and needs of older Australians are only likely to increase alongside our ageing population.

I think we are doing a lot of good for a lot of people. However, like so many public policy areas that we have, it is somewhat of a lottery and some people are missing out. I urge the government in particular to consider the needs of people that acquire a disability post the age of 65 and who are unable to access the NDIS. We are a country with a big enough heart and enough funding to make sure that they too can be included.

See this speech in context