One of the most important responsibilities we have as members of parliament is to listen to our communities, understand their challenges and ensure their concerns are heard here in parliament. My office receives a significant number of emails from Warringah constituents about issues directly affecting their families and lives. Whether it's changes to the NDIS, delays in aged care, concerns about artificial intelligence or keeping our beaches safe, people want clear information, guidance and accountability, and they want to be heard. I take this opportunity to raise some of those issues here today.

As we move into summer, the safety of beachgoers remains front of mind for my community in Warringah. Over the past year we've been reminded of just how vulnerable we can be in our waters. Late last year there was a tragic and fatal attack on Merc Psillakis at Long Reef Beach in Dee Why, and earlier this year there were two more attacks in Manly and Dee Why. That has shaken our community. I tried to address that earlier this month, because we know that it not only impacts obviously beach goers and safety in the water but also impacts our local businesses. It changes tourism, and it changes confidence. So, earlier this month, I convened a roundtable with our lifesaving clubs, local businesses, academics, industry groups and Surf Life Saving NSW to discuss these safety concerns and how we can best work with our natural environment and our local communities. We discussed shark safety, ocean education, emerging technologies and the growing responsibilities placed on local councils and lifesaving organisations. There were practical proposals ventilated and discussed, which are very much worth pursuing.

First and foremost, we need to review whether the current CASA drone regulations adequately support beach safety operations. What we heard was that drones are increasingly important for monitoring sharks and assisting lifesavers, yet the existing restrictions can limit their deployment in busy coastal areas. We heard from local businesses who are taking on the responsibility of having drones themselves to ensure their ongoing business models—for example, for learn-to-surf schools. But they identified the restrictions of the current regulations prohibiting or preventing them from being able to get drones in the air in a timely way and in a way that would be of assistance.

We also need stronger evidence to guide investment in prevention, education and shark risk management. Local councils and lifesaving organisations carry significant responsibilities, and the federal government has a role in supporting those consistent standards, research and funding across our nation to make sure that goes better. There were a number of further suggestions, and I will provide further information to the community. I want to assure local businesses and local stakeholders, neighbouring MPs and relevant ministers that we are going to all work together to progress these issues because they are so important.

Another issue that I'm often contacted about, as I'm sure many others are in this place, is the NDIS and Thriving Kids. Families need certainty. Families across Warringah are deeply concerned about the proposed changes to the NDIS and the uncertainty surrounding the rollout of Thriving Kids. Parents are worried about what changes to eligibility and support will mean for their children, particularly those who rely on early intervention services. There's considerable uncertainty about what services will be available, who will qualify and whether appropriate supports will be in place before changes are made. The community understands the objective of Thriving Kids. They understand that it's important. Every child deserves access to timely developmental support and families should be able to access early intervention before challenges escalate.

I support the principle of providing more accessible, community based services for children with developmental needs, but good intentions must be matched by clear implementation and services that families can actually access. I'm increasingly hearing from constituents who are worried about the growing gap between what has been announced by government and what is available on the ground in reality. Families are being told that new supports are available, while clinicians report uncertainty about whether to refer children who do not access NDIS but still require developmental intervention. That leaves parents in the middle, trying to navigate a system that is changing without clear information about what will replace existing supports. This is all whilst the development and the timeline for their children is very much at stake.

These are families who are already managing significant pressures and should not be left searching for answers about their child's care. The message from Warringah families, clinicians and community providers has been the same. They want assurance that children will not lose access to existing assistance before appropriate alternatives are available—or all those hard-won gains will be lost. The government must provide clear referral pathways, realistic implementation timelines and transparent information. Early intervention can make an enormous difference to a child's development, education and wellbeing, so we need to get these settings right.

Finally, another issue that is frequently raised is around aged care. There's a very real human cost to delays. We know there's enormous distress for constituents in Warringah around the issue of access to aged care. Too often, I am hearing that aged care plans are approved but that incredibly long delay in actually then accessing plans means that families are left incredibly vulnerable.

The new Aged Care Act commenced on 1 November 2025, introducing a rights based framework intended to put older people at the centre of their care, but the reality being experienced by far too many older Australians is deeply concerning and not consistent with that commitment by the government. Last year, around 6,400 older Australians died while waiting for home-care support. That was a 34 per cent increase on the previous year. Current estimates suggest that between 198,000 and 266,000 older Australians are waiting for assessments or approved funding. It's just not good enough. The government has made changes on how it reports on waiting lists, including those receiving interim funding, but changing how you describe or calculate a waiting list and how it's reported does not resolve the underlying problem of shortage of timely care.

In Warringah, I regularly hear from older residents and families struggling to access support. Some are waiting months for funding already approved, and they simply don't understand. If the government has been able to proceed with approving the requirements, surely that can then proceed to actual funding. Yet in reality they wait for months. Others rely on family members to fill gaps in essential services, often at enormous personal cost. So these delays can lead to loss of independence and increased pressure on family carers.,

The concerns go well beyond waiting times. Since the implementation of the new aged-care reforms, there's been an ongoing concern around AI decision-making built into the system, and I've continued to raise with the government the concern that the automated aged-care assessment system lacks adequate safeguards and produces unfair outcomes. My office continues to hear from constituents battling with this system that the automated funding system is unfair and not fit for purpose. Yesterday the Commonwealth Ombudsman released a deeply concerning report that agreed with that assessment. It found that decisions cannot be overridden by assessors even where those assessments are shown to be clinically inappropriate. That has to be a red flag for all members of the government.

There are real concerns about transparency and equity as well as oversight of the system. While the government has made steps by legislating an escalation pathway for exceptional cases and commissioning an independent review, we have to remember it's only exceptional cases, so it's not capturing all of these instances. It's not enough. The escalation pathway creates more questions about what the criteria will be for it to be deemed urgent, and another review means more lengthy delays to meaningful changes. We should have learnt the hard lessons from robodebt: automated government decisions require transparency, human oversight and clear rights of review. In June I met with Minister Rae to raise concerns about people in their 90s facing waits of up to nine to 12 months for approved funding. I thank the minister and his staff and the department for the engagement on tricky cases, but it's just crazy to think that a 90-year-old who has been assessed as needing care can reasonably be expected to wait another year.