Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

This isn't about care—about whether or not people care about the disabled. This is about restoring sound governance. This is so that we can have disabled people getting good care. I will make One Nation's position very, very clear: disabled people deserve an insurance scheme for service—genuinely disabled people. We also want to stop exploitation of the disabled. That's right: stop exploitation.

I'm going to read from the terms of reference of Senator Hanson's motion:

That the following matter be referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by 3 September 2026—

nothing wrong with that. I will read item (f):

(f) the impact of waste, fraud and abuse on NDIS participants, including the diversion of resources away from Australians with genuine need;

I'm going to read that again:

(f) the impact of waste, fraud and abuse on NDIS participants, including the diversion of resources away from Australians with genuine need.

I'll go back to the start of the terms of reference:

(a) the scale, nature and drivers of waste, fraud and abuse within the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS);

(b) the adequacy of existing safeguards, compliance, auditing, investigative and enforcement mechanisms to detect, prevent and respond to waste, fraud and abuse;

My responsibility, our responsibility, is to the people of Australia—to the taxpayers of Australia and to the disabled of Australia. The third item in the terms of reference is:

(c) qualifications of workers under the scheme;

We know it is being rorted at the moment, with people who are not qualified. The fourth one is:

(d) the role of National Disability Insurance Agency processes, registered and unregistered providers, intermediaries, participants, nominee arrangements and any other relevant entities or persons in contributing to or preventing waste, fraud and abuse;

What is wrong with any one of these? Nothing. Nothing is wrong. They're needed to protect the disabled. The fifth one is:

(e) the financial impact of waste, fraud and abuse on the sustainability of the NDIS and on taxpayers;

If we don't do it, the NDIS will be heading for the largest line item by far on the budget. It'll go out of existence under its own weight. I've already talked about (f). The sixth and seventh ones say:

(f) the impact of waste, fraud and abuse on NDIS participants, including the diversion of resources away from Australians with genuine need;

(g) distortionary impacts of increased wages and fees for service under the scheme on the labour market and other industries;

Nurses and aged care service people are being dragged out of their professions and being put into the NDIS because of the higher wages, the distorted increased wages. This is causing problems for veterans. It is causing problems for people in hospitals and doctors' clinics. Its causing problems for people in aged care. The eighth one is:

(h) the impact of the scheme on the housing market and construction costs;

That's impacting so many more Australians. There's a serious impact there. This is about all Australians. This is about understanding the problem, and Senator Hanson has shown yet again that she understands the guts of the problem in the whole context. Who can disagree with any of these? The ninth one is:

(i) the appropriate scope, powers and priorities of a Royal Commission into waste, fraud and abuse within the NDIS;

Senator Hanson said it herself just a few moments ago. She'd prefer a royal commission, but this is the first step. The tenth one is:

(j) any legislative, administrative or governance reforms required to strengthen oversight, restore public confidence and protect the integrity of the NDIS; and

And restore trust as Senators Bell and Whitten have just spoken about. And the last one is:

(k) any other related matters.

This is what it is all about. I can't see anything there that anyone would object to if they genuinely cared for the disabled, unless they're rattling the tin to make someone a demon. All of these work to restore trust, service, care and accountability.

We need to go back to the start of the NDIS scheme. It was a bastard. Julia Gillard as Prime Minister needed a pre-election headline, so she cobbled up the NDIS—minimal research, minimal thought, minimal consideration. Just get that bloody headline. Then the Liberals came into power and they saw a dog with no details. But instead of canning it and sending it back to the states, they saw the vulnerabilities and they tried to stop the rorts. As a result it was overcomplicated, arbitrary and crooks kept stealing. The needy kept getting no service as a result of it being a bastard at birth thanks to the Labor party. I personally think, as a side issue, that the NDIS is best done at the state level because it restores competitive federalism and accountability. I'm in favour of sending it back to the states.

As I said, it is out of control. As Senator Hanson, Senator Bell and Senator Whitten said, it is out of control. It will soon be the biggest line item on the budget. This is important not only for the disabled where it's extremely important but also for the taxpayers because of the rorting and the fraud of taxpayer money. The fraud is heading into the billions. In fact, I was told in Senate estimates in an answer to one of my questions that the fraud investigation is stunned with how big the impact of fraud is. It is so big that it will eventually curtail services for people needing genuine care. It will curtail nurses, aged-care workers and other carers. It's not just affecting disabled who need care. It's affecting people right across Australia, even the housing market.

Every Friday I try to do a livestream, and I start with heroes who have been active in our democracy. I want to name two heroes—Drew Pavlou and Pete Zogoulas. They have exposed the rorts. We knew about them. We've been raising them, but they started the community with the depth and breadth of the rorts. Ultimately, what happens when we have an abusive government—that's what this is about. This is an abusive government abusing taxpayer money. There's no government money. There's only taxpayer money. There's an abuse of taxpayer money because very few citizens stand up and hold the government accountable. So Drew Pavlou and Pete Zogoulas deserve commendation for being active participants in democracy.

For democracy to succeed, we need active participants in democracy. What has happened in this country is we've had it too easy, and many citizens have fallen into passive democracy. Then, that falls into apathy, and that falls into tyranny. We saw signs of that tyranny in the way the COVID mismanagement corralled people, stomped on people and suppressed people, making them do some hideous things. And we've seen signs of that apathy in the way the Labor government is wanting to bring in and follow through on the former prime minister Scott Morrison's misinformation and disinformation censorship bill. They destroyed free speech and many other freedoms and basic rights during the COVID response, and now they want to bring in censorship. That's the essence of human progress: when we have passive democracy, it leads to apathy, and then it leads to tyranny, which, as I've just given you some examples, is coming in to this country. Eventually people get sick of the tyranny and they rise up, and we have anarchy. That's the cycle throughout history: active democracy becomes passive democracy becomes apathy becomes tyranny becomes anarchy. There's a way to avoid that, which is by having more citizens like Drew Pavlou and Pete Zogoulas.

We need an inquiry to get the facts. The Greens, being the Greens, introduced talk of an enemy and division. Where's the enemy? Can you see the enemy, Senator Bell? Where's the enemy? Why do they do this? They do it because they want to create victims and make those people dependent, and that's bloody cruel. Victims are in a permanent state of dependence. That's no way to go through life. I do not see Senator Steele-John as someone in a wheelchair. I respect his ability. I see him as an Australian with plenty to contribute. I don't agree with much of what he says, but at least he gives that other view. But shame on the Greens for yet again creating victimhood and dependence. It's cruel.

We need to clean up the NDIS for the improvement of services to the disabled. Those who really care will support this motion. And the Senate, as Senator Bell has said, is an entirely appropriate place to have this inquiry. The Senate, after all, is the house of review. Let me be very clear: One Nation wants to stop exploitation of the disabled. It wants to give the disabled confidence that they'll be getting good service, and to do that we need to restore sound responsible governance.