Ben Small (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

We arguably have few duties in this place more serious than to support and care for our most vulnerable Australians. When the NDIS was established, built on a foundation of bipartisan support, it reflected a national commitment to ensure people living with a disability have the services and funding that they need to live their best possible lives. But today, under this government's stewardship, this vital scheme, the NDIS, is in disarray, no more so than in regional parts of Australia like Forrest.

The new pricing model and truly unacceptable cuts to travel funding for allied health services implemented by this government have created a crisis of uncertainty and risk in the regions, particularly for families living in seats like Forrest. For these families, the NDIS is far more than an item in the household budget; it is a lifeline for their children, and it is a promise that those children will receive the early intervention and essential therapies needed to develop and reach their full potential. Yet, every day, I speak with constituents locally who are overwhelmed with anxiety that this government's misguided reforms will cause their children to lose access to the services that they so desperately need.

This fear is not just limited to my community of Forrest; I empathise with the sentiments of my colleague the member for Herbert, a father whose five-year-old daughter lives with level 3 autism. He's worried about her future because he sees no clear plan—only cuts and uncertainty. This is not about a budget figure; it's about the future of our most vulnerable Australians. The fact is that these NDIS reforms have been applied with a broadbrush approach that is unsustainable and completely fails to understand that the realities of life are different outside the major metropolitan areas of our country.

When confronted with these concerns, the minister's response has been dismissive. The feedback is ignored, and the cuts are justified as coming from an independent board. Well, I can tell you what this so-called independent decision has done to the providers in my community. Take the case of a valued physiotherapist in the south-west of WA; we'll call her Kelly. She's a dedicated professional who has seen firsthand the direct impact on both participants and providers. She has written to me to advise that the cost-cutting efforts of the government in this space have devolved into stonewalling tactics: blaming participants and therapists whilst cutting their rates to the point of unviability. Kelly has warned me that, if this continues, ethical, high-quality providers will be forced to close, leading to worse health outcomes and placing a greater burden on the public health system. This is not a cost-saving measure; it is a crisis in the making, and this government is ignoring our cries to do things differently.

What about the small businesses and sole traders operating within the scheme? I've received a letter from Courtney at Bayside Independence in Busselton, who is also deeply concerned about the sustainability of service delivery in south-west WA. Courtney warns that the proposed reductions in the hourly rate for travel will make community based services—such as in-home therapy, functional assessments and home modifications—unsustainable. These are not lifestyle choices for participants; they are simply necessary measures to ensure their ongoing safety and wellbeing. Courtney highlights that the cuts to physiotherapy, podiatry and dietetics create a real risk to the continuity of care. The ongoing stagnation of pricing for other critical services like occupational therapy is also forcing providers to operate on the very edge of viability, with increasing costs and compliance burdens crippling their businesses. The risk of market failure in this space is both real and imminent.

Providers are already struggling, and these pricing recommendations from the government may well be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back. That will only cause an increase in hospital presentations of NDIS participants in crisis, and in service gaps, and there'll be an erosion of participant choice and control, which are fundamental to the design of the NDIS. This is a system whereby a person's support is determined by their postcode, and, for people in my electorate, we simply need to do better. So I back the calls for this government to immediately reverse the decision to slash these travel-funding arrangements for allied health services. We owe it to our most vulnerable.

See this speech in context