Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the motion put forward by the member for Lindsay and to strongly support the importance of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It was in fact the Labor Party who, in government, devised the NDIS. It was designed and funded to better meet the long-term needs of the hundreds of thousands of Australians with a disability. The aim was to ensure that these people, their families and their carers would have the support they need and deserve. We now have the NDIS being fully implemented and rolled out right across the nation. It means that nearly a quarter of a million of Australians under the age of 65, including thousands of children, should be benefiting from access to housing, health services, care, support, early intervention services and advocacy.

Whilst, for many, the rollout is meeting their needs and working effectively, there is still substantial work required to urgently address delays and inadequacies in the NDIS operations and rollout. These are issues the government must address, including things such as providers being able to access important transition funding. I do want to acknowledge all those people who deliver significant services to people with a disability, their families and their carers in my electorate who are providing that care and support in a timely, effective and efficient way. But I'm constantly being contacted by people who are desperate to make a smooth transition into this scheme.

The questions and issues are varied and numerous, and often include matters like inadequate funding and resourcing. Some particular concerns relate to appropriate housing arrangements and care. Indeed, many people with disabilities are facing homelessness or displacement because service providers are not able to deliver the care that is required and the housing required. I have seen instances of providers selling a building that was being used for specialised accommodation, leaving clients without the option of other available housing arrangements.

There are also issues about the provision of governance, oversight and accountability in regard to providers; who determines the effectiveness of providers in delivering what they've actually been contracted for; and who can advocate on behalf of clients to those providers. Many others have discovered that services they used to receive have tripled in price. The pricing structure must be addressed so that everyone can access the services they need, including group activities, which are also unfortunately under threat in the current model. There are discrepancies in the approval of services which see clients with similar or equivalent needs being approved very different hours of assistance. Further, it's unclear what parameters are used to define the terms 'reasonable' and 'necessary' in relation to a client's needs, because there are such variations.

There have also been a number of concerns raised by constituents in relation to the ongoing funding for children with level 1 and level 2 autism spectrum disorder. The uncertainty for these young people and their families has at times been quite frightening and unsettling, and the government needs to be very clear about its intentions and what it will be providing for these people.

One of the most significant issues is the timeliness of plans being drawn up, as well as, often, the lengthy delays in the delivery of the plan itself. Most recently, some of those who had their plans finalised then experienced problems with plan activation codes, with some receiving up to four separate codes in order to actually activate their plan.

There are also concerns for those waiting for reviews of their plans, with some being told the waiting time is up to one year. That is just way too long. Many people say they are quite hesitant about coming forward and asking for a review, for fear of being penalised. These people need security and assurances. They cannot wait up to a year to get the support and assistance they need and deserve, simply because the government is unwilling or unable to fix these problems. The Turnbull government must start listening and must address these many widespread concerns about the rollout of the NDIS.

I wrote to the minister urgently last Friday to raise my concerns about the very sudden collapse of a local NDIS service provider. FSG, which stands for Freedom, Social Justice and Growth, went into voluntary administration just last week.

Although FSG is based on the Gold Coast, just over the border in Queensland, they do provide extensive services throughout the Northern Rivers. I am seeking reassurances that all those affected will be offered immediate solutions to transition to other providers, because no-one should be falling through the cracks. We need the NDIA on the North Coast soon, on the ground, to ensure continuity of services to all those affected. They should be there today, right now, providing assistance. So I call on the Turnbull government to provide guarantees to affected participants and to provide extra resources on the ground to support participants and workers, face to face—not remotely, but actually on the ground, providing that support.

So, in conclusion, the Turnbull government needs to focus on fixing the problems with the NDIS. I am urging the government on behalf of all the people in my electorate, and indeed right across Australia, who have these problems, to provide adequate funding and adequate resources for the NDIS, because we keep hearing stories about people who can't access those services in a timely way. The fact is the NDIS must be successful to be able to effectively provide the support, care and dignity that people in our communities need and deserve.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have spoken in this place on many occasions about the NDIS and disabilities in general. I hope that when I do I'm reflecting the views of my community, which regrettably is overrepresented when it comes to people that live with disabilities. My family is one of the many that is all too familiar with the financial and emotional toll that is involved in caring for somebody living with a disability. I know this because my grandson Nathaniel is on the autism spectrum. I know that these families don't want lectures and they don't want our sympathy; they just want to know that they will get supported when they need it. I want my grandson and all Australians to grow up in a community that cares, a community that values them and a community that is committed to their inclusion so that they can achieve their full potential in life.

It was under this belief that the National Disability Insurance Scheme was made a reality under the Gillard Labor government. It is an initiative that we are all proud of, as we should be. It is a scheme that will provide about 460,000 Australians under the age of 65 with a permanent and significant disability with reasonable and necessary support they will need to live an ordinary life.

For the first time in history we have a scheme that is needs based and affords individuals living with a disability choice and dignity over their lives. The NDIS, as of September last year, had approximately 133,000 participants registered with an approved plan, with 9,500 children receiving support through the early intervention approach. All these statistics are certainly pleasing, but there is definitely more work that needs to be done. The government must urgently address some of the significant delays and inadequacies in the NDIS operation and rollout, which is occurring under their watch.

Families have approached my office on a regular basis desperate for help. It is clear that we are reaching a tipping point when it comes to providing support to people with disabilities. People with disabilities and their families are simply not receiving the services and support they need—and it is something that was promised to them.

Recently, I had a forum, which the member for Werriwa also attended, in partnership with 'united recovery'. The forum was attended by more than 150 people with disabilities, their family members, carers, local service providers and representatives from the NDIA itself. A number of issues were raised during the forum, with the main areas of concern revolving around accessibility, continuity of services, administrative errors, inadequate training of staff, misuse of funding, and the need for greater choice and control by participants.

Lucy Reggio, the program manager for Catena Programs and Services, provided some insight into the realities of the NDIS both as a mother of a son with a disability and as a professional working in the sector. She captured the heart of the problem faced by many families in my community when she said, 'The local area coordinators lack the time and capacity to adequately address the needs of participants and to coordinate, particularly in times of crisis'. She goes on to say that there is 'clearly no communication between health systems and the disability system'. She put it in perspective by citing an example of an individual who through an accident became a paraplegic and, on being discharged from hospital, was left with no information at all about the workings of the NDIS. These are just some of the alarming issues arising out of the government's mismanagement of the system, causing individuals and families much frustration and anxiety.

The NDIS was designed by Labor to introduce choice and control into the disability system. It was about implementing independence, autonomy and tailored solutions, and this is what must be reflected by the planners of NDIA. The government must address the issue of poor delivery, and provide choice and control that people with disabilities need and were rightly promised. The challenge of our generation is not just about the care that we afford people with disabilities; it is about their genuine inclusion in our modern society. They deserve better, and we can do better.

Anne Stanley (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Lindsay for proposing this motion about the NDIS. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is the biggest reform in this space and something which is really making a difference to the lives of Australians living with a disability. It's incumbent on us as lawmakers to make the scheme as user-friendly and cost-effective as possible.

I genuinely acknowledge the staff of the NDIA and Assistant Minister Prentice for help with issues that my office raises every day. We field calls from concerned caregivers, participants and providers, and their assistance allows us to find solutions. However, after over two years of NDIS packages in my part of south-west Sydney, we need to look at ways of improving the interaction and outcomes for people who are supported by the NDIS. Both providers and participants are raising issues about the bureaucratic nature of the plans. Those waiting for reviews of their plans are currently waiting up to six months or more without feedback or information about what is happening or the process being undertaken. Information would help them deal with the stress of waiting and not knowing what will happen next.

One of my constituents, Duncan, emailed last week with feedback about the NDIS. Duncan is an advocate for his son and has contacted my electorate office on many occasions for advice and support. Last year's package was too low. Although this has been remedied with an increase in his son's package this year, he is still finding navigation of the process difficult, especially around the way funding is allocated to subcategories without taking on the feedback of the recipient or their carer.

He recently contacted me again to provide feedback about experiences with two service providers. For the first service provider, the family used the NDIS website to obtain the details. After visiting them, it became obvious they had no experience with or insight into mentally disabled people like his son. When it became apparent they were not the right fit for Duncan's son, the service agreement was discontinued. However, the provider had already quarantined a large portion of his son's funds and it took months of negotiation to have it released. The next service provider had an hour meeting with Duncan and provided a report but used 11 hours of the sessions in the service agreement to write and research this report rather than seeing his son. As a consequence, all funds are now exhausted and nothing has helped his son. More importantly, this wasn't discussed with Duncan when the agreement was made. He wrote:

I doubt that I am alone in these types of incidents. I have a university degree and over 30 years in the education sector. I find it very difficult to understand the procedures rules and classifications of the NDIS. I have read many pages of information, rung many times, gone into the office and asked questions and still make mistakes with the NDIS. I can only try not to repeat them.

Duncan is certainly not alone in these types of incidents. I'm aware of another recipient who's been provided services, even though the service provider was well aware that the child had not been approved, and now has a $15,000 debt. Duncan has asked me to give the following suggestions to the minister responsible to improve the NDIS:

These are not only concerns from recipients and their caregivers about the operation of the NDIS. I've also had representations from many of the service providers in my electorate, especially Macarthur Disability Services, who are finding the system difficult to navigate plus it does not support advocacy or ways to help people, particularly those with mental illness, access their plans. They've raised concerns about realistic funding and transport costs and also about other issues too numerous for me to mention here.

The NDIS is a great reform and is certainly a bipartisan reform for our country, but now is the time to listen to the feedback and improve on the foundations that have been made. We have to ensure that we provide choice and support to those who are most vulnerable in our society—when and how they need it.

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the motion put by the member for Lindsay in regard to the NDIS. We heard a lot about aspiration last week, and today I want to speak about the aspirations of some 460,000 Australians who will be assisted by the National Disability Insurance Scheme. What could be a more important aspiration than to aspire to live life to the full? This is the aspiration that the Labor Party embraced when we launched the NDIS in 2013. The NDIS is expected to transform the lives of Australians under the age of 65 living with a permanent and significant disability by providing the reasonable and necessary supports they need to live an ordinary life, the kind of life that many of us can take for granted.

The NDIS became available on the Central Coast of New South Wales from July 2016. My electorate of Dobell spans roughly half the rollout area. According to the 2016 census, in my electorate there were just over 5,000 people aged under 65 who required assistance in one or more of the three core activity areas of self-care, mobility and communication.

The NDIS is bipartisan and overwhelmingly a positive change for our whole community, but for some the NDIS isn't working as well as it could. As a local member, you sometimes here more bad news stories than good. Even allowing for this, I have considerable concerns about the rollout locally. In just over 18 months, my office has received more than 180 individual complaints about the NDIS. I am told of delays in accessing the scheme or services, of excessive or lengthy reviews, of plans being developed with little or no input from participants, of proposals that aren't good value for money, of unnecessary and distressing review processes and of inconsistency in advice between agency planners and local area coordinators.

I would like to cite just a few examples of how these problems affect the day-to-day lives of my constituents and their families. Tom received funding for a new wheelchair in his NDIS plan and provided quotes and reports, as required. More than seven months passed before his request was processed. In the meantime, his wheelchair was being held together by tape and cable ties. The wheels were held on by cable ties. Taylah has multiple disabilities and was granted access based on her autism. However, when she reached the age of seven her level of funding was reduced. As a result, Taylah sees her psychologist less often, skips OT sessions and is being treated exclusively by student speech pathologists because it is cheaper. Her review is ongoing after five months. Martha is vision impaired. During her planning meeting she told her local area coordinator she relies on an iPad and an iPhone to photograph and enlarge images or objects for viewing and uses apps such as the bus timetable to stay independent. She had borrowed the iPad from a family member, and her iPhone battery was faulty and needed to be replaced. Her LAC suggested the equipment be included in her NDIS plan. Vision Australia supported the request with an OT's report—however, it was rejected as not meeting the 'reasonable' and 'necessary' criteria. Martha's request to self-fund a portion of the cost was also rejected. To make matters worse, the agency suggested funding could be provided for a magnifier at a cost nearly seven times that of the iPad. Martha said that she was made to feel like she was greedy and that she would not have lodged a request had it not been suggested by the LAC. Daniel is an NDIS participant who has recently completed his first annual review. He requested to self-manage his plan, but this was rejected based on the agency's risk assessment after his request for a new scooter last year. Daniel tells me that his LAC incorrectly listed funding as repairs instead of replacement, and it had also been incorrectly allocated as core supports. Fixing the mistakes caused delays and distress, and, because of his experience, he requested to self-manage. He was astonished that it's also because of his experience that this request was denied. These poor experiences mean that many of my constituents have continued to struggle to get the support they need, when they hoped that the NDIS would put these struggles behind them.

In conclusion, I call on the Turnbull government to urgently address delays and problems with the NDIS rollout and its operations. I urge the government to reaffirm its strong commitment to making sure all Australians with a disability get the support they need when they need it, to ensure a smooth transition for people with disability and support providers, and to ensure a properly funded and resourced NDIS. The NDIS was introduced by Labor to provide choice and control for people living with disability. The government needs to do better. Let's get it right.

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.