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

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

I'm going to reserve this document so as to probably make some further remarks on it, but I just want to give some initial reflections to the community and to the Senate. For context, last week, the Senate ordered the production of a couple of reports from the government. That's a reasonably non-controversial thing for this chamber to do.

We asked the government to release the report commissioned by them and undertaken by the independent health pricing authority for NDIS pricing in relation to allied health services, a report which has been on their desk since November of last year. We also asked them to release a copy of the independent review of art therapy undertaken by Professor Duckett. This is a report which, by the government's own admission, they've had in their possession for about four months now, having listed it on a website as a document that will be released in coming months. It's very fair for the Senate to have asked for them given that both of these questions—what the future of art therapy funding under the NDIS is, and what the independent health pricing authority said in relation to how much allied health professionals should be paid under the NDIS—are in the public interest. Both of these reports and reviews have been in the possession of the government for many months, and it's very reasonable for us to ask for their release.

On the issue of OPDs more generally, I have taken the view—and the Greens have taken the view many times—that if an OPD is lodged in the chamber and it is a request that requires the government to produce every correspondence for the last month or a large volume of information then it isn't reasonable to request that of the government in a short period of time. But, to make it very clear, the Senate asked for the release of two reports that the government have had in their possession for many months so that the community can understand what is being considered by this government in relation to these two key areas.

We've had a response from the minister tabled in which they say that they take their responsibility to the government very seriously, and, as they foreshadowed in their speeches, they will work to comply with the orders of the Senate. However, they have flagged a couple of reasons for not doing so by the date the Senate set them. First of all, they have flagged that they need further time because the NDIS is co-governed and that the states and territories have a strong tradition of co-design with the disability community in relation to the scheme and that the National Disability Insurance Scheme is an independent statutory agency governed by an independent board. That is totally irrelevant to the question of the order for the production of documents, either of them—totally an irrelevant statement. They have flagged: 'There are complex stakeholder and consultation responsibilities that the government would need to acquit before it is in a position to release either report. Additionally, there is a longstanding practice of not disclosing documents that relate to deliberations of cabinet.' They have set a compliance date for the orders of 12 September 2025, at 5 pm.

Let me state really, really clearly for the community this evening: the Greens in the Senate, along with the crossbench and other parties in this place, demanded that the government release these two documents because we know that the future of our therapy and allied health services matter to disabled people and our families. We know and we have heard that the community want to get to the bottom of what the government has been told in response to these reviews—reviews that were promised to deliver transparency so the community could understand. We have heard that the community prioritised having information over the government's desire to keep that information to themselves until it is convenient for them to release it. I am in no way satisfied by this response. It does not speak in any substantive way to the question of why the government could not simply attach these reports to an email and click 'send'. This is not the last you've heard of this.