Kerrynne Liddle (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Hansard source

Today I rise to speak on the tabling of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme's annual report No. 1 of the 48th Parliament. The National Disability Insurance Scheme currently supports more than 760,000 Australians with disability, including over 65,000 participants in my home state of South Australia. It is a large and complex system that delivers a wide range of care and support services to people with disability and their families. Given the scale of the scheme and the public investment involved, it is essential that parliament continues to carefully scrutinise its performance to ensure it is operating effectively, remains sustainable and delivers safe, effective and appropriate services for participants.

The committee's report highlights areas of progress and where the system is clearly falling short, with recommendations aimed at strengthening oversight, improving participant safety and ensuring the scheme delivers the outcomes it was designed to achieve.

The National Disability Insurance Agency and the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission are required to provide an annual report on progress made on recommendations from previous parliaments. That's a sensible step to ensure that this parliamentary committee does not simply produce reports that gather dust on the shelf. The Albanese government, though, doesn't seem to have got that memo. This government is known to have already failed to respond to 50 parliamentary reports within the required six-month deadline even though, under parliamentary rules, the government must respond to House and joint committee reports within six months of the report's tabling. There are 80 additional Senate committee reports that are outstanding. That is woeful performance, by any measure, from the Labour government. Let's hope that this is responded to in the timeline that's required.

The report examines the development of the Instrument for the Classification and Assessment of Support Needs, otherwise referred to as I-CAN, which will form a key part of the new assessment framework for people aged 16 years and over. Two recommendations call for thorough testing of the tool across a broad range of disability types and intersectional groups, including Indigenous Australians and those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and for greater transparency about how that tool operates. There are significant concerns across the disability sector that the tool may be implemented before it has been properly tested or understood within the NDIS.

Many participants and peak bodies have warned that, if assessments are not undertaken by appropriately qualified health professionals, there is a risk of inaccurate planning decisions, inadequate supports and, ultimately, poorer health outcomes. In some cases, that may lead to more people having increased hospital representations or avoidable deterioration in a participant's condition. I focus now on recommendations that deal with the intersection of the NDIS and family and domestic violence. Recommendation 7 calls on the NDIA to develop a specific, safe and confidential process that allows victim-survivors of family and domestic violence to remove a perpetrator as their nominee without that individual having to be notified.

It's a recommendation that is both practical and sensible. The committee heard evidence that perpetrators may use their nominee status to control finances, restrict access to services or manipulate information within the system. This recommendation ensures that participants must have a safe and confidential pathway to remove a nominee without triggering retaliation or further harm. Recommendation 8 complements this by recommending that the Australian government include the NDIS in its broader audit of government systems that may be weaponised by perpetrators of family and domestic violence. It's an important safeguard. Systems designed to assist vulnerable Australians must never become tools of exploitation or abuse.

The report also raises broader concerns about the performance of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, which is responsible for regulating providers and protecting participants. The findings are concerning. The Australian National Audit Office found the commission was only partly effective in exercising its regulatory responsibilities. It did not have full visibility of the provider market it regulates and had only partly effective intelligence-gathering and information-sharing arrangements. That is of real concern. It lacked a risk based regulatory strategy and had not effectively implemented proportionate monitoring and enforcement activities.

These shortcomings have real consequences for the participants on the NDIS. Under the Labor government, the commission is struggling to meet its own targets. Of the seven performance measures outlined in its 2024-25 corporate plan, only four were achieved. One was partially achieved, and two were not achieved at all. The performance measure that assesses whether people with disability know their rights and trust the commission to support them when reporting abuse or neglect was not achieved. Trust among people with disability and their representatives fell from 64 per cent to 56 per cent in a single year. That decline should concern us all.

Issues of workforce and organisational culture were also raised. Another major concern was fraud and misuse within the scheme. The establishment of the Fraud Fusion Taskforce—involving 23 agencies, including the NDIA—is a welcome step and highlights the scale of the challenge that must be addressed. At a time when Australians are facing significant cost-of-living pressures, the government must ensure that public funding is being used responsibly across all areas of expenditure. Waste and misuse within the NDIS, including fraudulent activity, must be identified and addressed to ensure that resources are directed to the participants who genuinely rely on these supports. The structure of the provider market contributes to these risks. Currently, only around six per cent of providers delivering support to NDIS participants are registered providers. Stronger safeguards and smarter regulation will be required to ensure the scheme remains sustainable and participants remain protected.

The report also highlights performance challenges within the participant service guarantee. One key performance indicator, plan variations, is currently being met only 42 per cent of the time, with other KPIs sitting between 26 and 55 per cent. Those delays and inconsistencies can leave participants waiting for essential supports and create uncertainty for families.

The report also identifies systemic issues affecting service availability across the country. Nearly half of providers reported financial losses in the 2024-25 financial year, while 81 per cent indicated they cannot continue to deliver services at current pricing levels. It's a situation that's amplified if you're in a regional, rural or remote area. Your uncontrolled spending and inflation is impacting everything and everyone. For regional and remote communities, these challenges, as I mentioned earlier, are particularly acute. Changes to travel funding for providers, introduced from 1 July 2025, have capped travel claims and are already creating barriers to accessing allied health services and specialist support in regional areas. For participants in regional South Australia, including communities in the Mid North, Riverland, Eyre Peninsula and Yorke Peninsula, this can mean fewer services, longer wait times and reduced access to essential services. It's those kinds of things that were raised directly with me just a few weeks ago, in some of those towns.

This committee also considered progress in implementing the recommendations of the disability royal commission. Of the 172 recommendations for which the Commonwealth has responsibility, only eight have been completed so far, while 71 are in progress, 51 require further work, 36 remain under consideration and six are noted.

Finally, the report also highlights an ongoing gender imbalance in the scheme. Women and girls with disability are less likely to be eligible and to have plans approved, a disparity that must be addressed through better data collection and policy responses. Women with a disability make up only 38 per cent of participants accessing this scheme, and this figure has remained static since the NDIS rollout. The committee's recommendations on the NDIS gender strategy and data strategy are, therefore, important steps forward. A scheme of this size and importance must continually evolve, and it must be transparent, accountable and properly regulated. Getting this right is not optional; it is essential. I commend the report to the Senate, and I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.