Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to continue my remarks on this landmark piece of legislation, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013, on an issue that again has complete bipartisan support. When I was first elected and became a senator, a little over 18 months ago, one of the first people who came to see me in my new role was Milly Parker. Down in Victoria, she is a great local advocate for the NDIS. She was very passionate about ensuring its fruition. She got me on board very early. So I am very pleased to be here today speaking in support of this reform for those with disability.

It is a joint venture between governments state and federal—and obviously the territory governments, Senator Scullion. We want it to be a success. I would like to commend my own state government of Victoria, as the reforms that have been introduced in my home state by Minister Wooldridge in this area were highlighted right throughout the hearings as a way of moving forward and as a bit of a highlight in terms of how different states have gone about dealing with the issues of people with a disability. It is a joint venture between states. We want everyone to get on board and to ensure that their own communities are participating. We wish those who are hosting trial sites all the best in going forward.

One of the other issues that we had during the hearings was that, whilst this is the framework that outlines what we are going to do, there are a lot of draft rules that sit under this framework—on who is in, who is out, definitions, details et cetera—that will go to the functioning of this. For the committee to get a draft of those only on the final day of hearings, on Tuesday, 5 March, to have a bit of a look at prior to producing a report, was concerning. The government has indicated that potentially there is a lot more to come in terms of draft rules. It would have been nice, as a committee, to have been able to consider this issue as a whole. The coalition want the NDIS to be a success. We want the launch sites to go smoothly. We stand ready to work with the government in all jurisdictions to make the NDIS a reality. If we spend all this money, we need to be sure we end up with a better system.

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to start my contribution to the debate on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013by quoting from the Community Affairs Legislation Committee report into the bill:

The committee heard overwhelming support for the introduction of an NDIS. The committee did not hear from a single submitter, be that an organisation or an individual, that did not support the introduction of some form of structural and funding overhaul of the provision of disability services and support. … none thought the status quo provided adequate and equitable access to services.

I also would like to quote from the evidence provided by DANA, Disability Advocacy Network Australia, who said:

The significance of the NDIS cannot be overstated. It has the potential to be the most important change to the provision of support for people with disability to occur in any nation, at any time.

This is a historic day in the history of our nation. For the first time, we will see the establishment of a National Disability Insurance Scheme. As many in this debate have said, and as Senator McKenzie said in her contribution to the debate, this is a reform whose time has come. It is a reform the government is proud to be delivering. As has been commented on, and as Minister Macklin said in her contribution, it is rare that a proposed reform strikes such a chord with so many of us across party lines. The consensus in the parliament reflects the consensus in the Australian community. It is indeed a historic day.

This is a scheme that will transform the lives of people with disability, their families and carers. The NDIS will provide people with the care and support they need when they need it by giving them greater control over the services they require to lead fulfilling lives. For too long disability support services have failed those who need them most, which is why we are implementing the NDIS. Many people are born with or acquire a disability; in fact, on average in Australia, every 30 minutes someone is diagnosed with a significant disability. In a modern Australian society it is beholden upon us to deliver care and support to someone with a disability that affords them the dignity and the opportunity to lead a full life. We want to provide support for people with a disability so that they can live in society and have the same opportunities as those without a disability.

Before I get into the detail of the bill we are debating today I want to take the Senate back to how we got to where we are today. The government, through the then Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services, the Hon. Bill Shorten MP, asked the Productivity Commission to hold a public inquiry and report on a long-term disability care and support scheme. The Productivity Commission's report on disability care and support was released by the Prime Minister in August 2011, and all governments agreed with its recommendation to establish a national disability insurance scheme. In last year's budget the government set aside $1 billion over four years from 2012-13 to help roll out the launch sites in South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, the Hunter region in New South Wales and the Barwon area in Victoria. All together, the launch sites will make real the NDIS for around 26,000 people.

From July 2013 in South Australia the NDIS will be launched focusing on children aged from birth to five who have significant and permanent disability. From 2014 the age limit will be extended to 13. In the third year of the launch, children up to the age of 14 will be included. It is expected around 5,000 children will be covered under the first stage of the scheme.

In my home state of Tasmania the first stage of the scheme will cover young people aged 15 to 24 from 1 July 2013. This is expected to cover around 1,000 Tasmanians. I look forward to seeing the Tasmanian government reaching an agreement with the federal government so that people with disability across Tasmania can be supported by a full scheme. That age group has been selected as it is a highly important time in a young person's life as they are transitioning from high school into work and/or further studies. The NDIS will offer this age group the opportunity to receive greater levels of support and assistance to lead fulfilling lives as they leave school and are faced with options of work or further study.

I have to say that in Tasmania the news of the state being named as a launch site was met with significant optimism and excitement.People genuinely feel this scheme will change lives by providing a new way to care and support people with a disability. While I have this opportunity I also want to acknowledge the passionate advocates in my home state for tirelessly advocating for a NDIS not just since the Productivity Commission's report but for many, many years.5I believe this passionate grassroots campaign, supported by the strong commitment and work of the state Labor government, played a key role in helping Tasmania secure one of the launch sites.

In the ACT from July 2013 the government will deliver enhanced services and commence preparations for a full launch , and in July 2014 the NDIS will fully commence in the ACT. The NDIS launch site in the ACT is expected to cover up to 5,000 people , an increase from the 1,400 who currently receive specialised disability services. In N ew S outh W ales the Hunter region will be used as the launch site , and it w ill be phased in over three years across the local government areas of Newcastle, Lake Macquarie and Maitland. This is expected to benefit around 10,000 people with disability in N ew S outh W ales . I n Victoria the NDIS will commence from July 2013 in the Barwon area , covering the c ity of Greater Geelong, the Colac Otway s hire, the Surf Coast s hire and the b orough of Queenscliff e . These launch sites for the scheme are vital because th ey will play a key role in identifying what works well on the ground in practice and what we may have to look at tweaking to ensure that we get this highly a nticipated scheme working as it is intended.

The b ill will have two key purposes : to establish the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the associated framework for the s cheme's operation and also to establish the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency, which will operated the first stage of the scheme through the launch sites that I have just spoken about. The framework of the scheme will implement items such as eligibility, reasonable and necessary support s and goal based plans for participants.

This framework is reflective of the principles agreed at COAG between the Prime Minister and the s tates. It include s: g iving people with disability individual care and support s based on their needs ; g iving people real choice and control over these supports , meaning more control over their lives ; e nding a situation where people are not told what support is available, or how to access that support ; and f ostering innovative services that are delivered and coordinated locally. The scheme is designed to move away from the crisis model where families only receive support if they are unable to continue in their caring role and there are no other options. This scheme is designed to work with families before they reach this stage and make sure the valuable care they provide can be sustained by giving great er government support.

The scheme will also look at taking a lifelong approach to supporting someone with a disability by focusing on early intervention, particularly when there is good evidence that it will substantially improve a person's functioning. Of course , significant consultation and work was undertaken with states and territories and with people with disability, their families, carers, disability workers, service providers and advocates on the design, funding and governance of the scheme.

As I mentioned, the b ill also establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency as a body that is independent from the government. It will be the responsibility of the a gency to deliver the scheme as well as performing a range of functions , including managing the financial sustainability of the scheme, building community awareness about disability and undertaking research about disability and the social contributors to disability. The agency will be overseen by a board that is made up of people with extensive experience in the provision or use of disability services and in financial management, governance and the operation of insurance schemes, as well as an advisory council made up of people who have lived with the experience of disability and caring.

As a member of the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee I had the opportunity to be involved in the Senate inquiry into the NDIS Bill. The committee heard wide-ranging evidence on the benefits of the scheme and potential areas that required improvement. I am pleased that through this committee process and other means the government has made a number of amendments to improve the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill. I am pleased that the parliament has been able to come together, leave past partisanship at the door and deliver a piece of public policy that will improve the lives of so many Australians.

Before I finish I want to acknowledge the passionate community campaign that has been running for many years to see the implementation of the NDIS run by the disability and carer community, providers and unions. I believe that the momentum generated by the thousands of passionate advocates from around Australia ensured that governments from all levels worked together to see that the scheme was put in place and launched, because we know the current support system is underfunded and unfair. We are now faced with the launch sites and then proceeding to the full implementation of the scheme. This NDIS Bill, as Minister Macklin has stated, has the rights of people with disability, their families and carers at its heart and:

The bill will implement a nationwide, demand driven system of care tailored to the needs of each individual and established on a durable, long-term basis.

Failing is simply not an option. The eyes of people with a disability and their families and carers are upon us. It is now our job as elected representatives to ensure that this scheme improves the lives of people with a disability.

I also want to acknowledge in my contribution here today the significant work of the Minister for Disability Reform, Jenny Macklin MP, as well as the Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Carers, Senator Jan McLucas. They have both done an extraordinary amount of work as the driving forces behind ensuring this legislation has come to fruition. I am sure that this is an extremely proud day for Minister Macklin and Senator McLucas as this bill is debated and we see it progress into law.

As the Prime Minister said in her speech in the House on the NDIS Bill:

The NDIS will stand alongside the minimum wage, the age pension, Medicare and universal superannuation as one of the great Labor pillars of social justice and opportunity for all Australians. It will change our society in profound and lasting ways, enabling those who live with disability to fulfil their potential as valued and valuable members of our society.

I commend the National Disability Insurance Scheme to the Senate.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will start by joining Senator Brown in acknowledging the work that carers do in looking after their charges, those with disabilities, however they came by those disabilities. Indeed, those of us who do not have that duty and responsibility, I guess, can never quite fully understand the trials and tribulations—and, I guess, the joys—of those who spend their lifetimes looking after others. I want to acknowledge them.

I also want to pay tribute to Senator Mitch Fifield for the work that he has done over a long period of time with the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the way he has, in a quiet, non-political way, pushed to make sure that this bill—the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013—ended up where it is today. It is not a bill that we should be involving in the normal political discourse back and forward, and I was a bit disappointed in Senator Brown's speech—a good speech though it was right until the end, when she sought to make some political capital out of an issue which clearly has political support across the board.

I guess all of us in our lives have come across people who worry about their offspring who have a disability—people who worry about what will happen when they pass on. Indeed, some of the best friends of my wife and me had a disabled child. They were very good friends of ours and we were quite close to them, but at times—be it in sober moments or not so sober moments, and there were many of those—there was always this underlying concern in their otherwise quite happy lives about what would happen to the young fellow if something happened to them. It was something that I learnt in those days about the anguish that people, particularly parents, suffer. In fact, in my own family and my wife's family, there is a similar situation where people growing old wonder what will happen to the disabled people once they themselves pass on. I know that an uncle of Lesley's never quite knew exactly how to deal with that situation but left a lot of money to try and ensure that there was someone there to look after the disabled person when he passed on. So it has certainly been a traumatic issue for many families from time immemorial. In my practice as a country solicitor for many years before I came into this place, often people would come to me and talk about these issues when drawing up their wills; they would try to work out the best way to handle things. Indeed, you could again see the anguish and concern that they experienced in trying to work out what needed to be done.

The one good thing—in fact, the only good thing—that I can see that came out of the 2020 Summit in 2008 was this proposal for a national disability insurance scheme. You might recall that that was the summit that was to have all these great ideas for Australia but which turned into nothing more than a talkfest, it having faded into insignificance and into the backs of everyone's memory since 2008. But there was one proposal that came out of that and that was this proposal for a national disability insurance scheme. It was a concept that was conceived by Mr John Walsh and Mr Bruce Bonyhady, who talked about it at that 2020 Summit in 2008.

The introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme that we are dealing with today does have cross-party support at both federal and state level. Again, regrettably, some people have attempted to make some political capital out of it by accusing the states of not doing this or not doing that. That is regrettable, because I know that all of the state governments, be they of whatever political persuasion, support across the board an insurance scheme for the disabled that we are dealing with today. As my leader, Tony Abbott, said quite clearly and unequivocally: 'The NDIS is an idea whose time has come.'

The level of support that a person with a disability receives can depend on many factors. It might depend on where they live, whether that disability is congenital or whether it was acquired and, if acquired, that it was at the workplace or due a motor vehicle accident or in some other context. Workers compensation and motor vehicle accident insurance provides coverage in some states, but if you are born with a disability or acquire disability later in life, it can be a different story, and we can see long waiting lists and queues. The result is that many people with a disability are left without the assistance they need. As I said at the beginning of my speech, the instance of parents worrying about the assistance that will come to the disabled person when they pass on has also been a real issue.

The coalition has always enthusiastically supported every step along the road to the achievement of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. You will recall, Deputy President, that we supported the initial work of the Productivity Commission and we also supported the $1 billion that was set aside in last year's budget, although we queried whether this was the appropriate amount in view of what the Productivity Commission had said. Deputy President, you would also be aware that we in the coalition supported the five launch sites and we supported the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales for a full statewide rollout of the proposal. Indeed, we also support this legislation.

If I have one hesitation about my leader, Mr Abbott, it is that he always seems to be so fit, riding around the country on a bicycle and doing things like surf swimmers, long-distance runs and long-distance bicycle rides. I just wonder if anyone who is that fit and spends so much time with that sort of extreme activity is an appropriate leader for me! But that is the only thing for which that I would ever hesitate in my support for Mr Abbott! I say that, for the written record, tongue in cheek. I also raise that to indicate that I was very proud when Tony Abbott—I am always very proud when he does all of his pollie pedals, as they are called. Over the years he has raised a great deal of money for charity through a pollie pedal which he initiated many years ago now. I am particularly pleased that he has made what can be seen as a personal commitment to Australians with a disability and particularly for those who care for them by dedicating some $540,000 raised by the 2012 Pollie Pedal charity bike ride to Carers Australia.

It was good to see news reports of that pollie pedal bike ride. It was 1,000 kilometres. Fortunately, he did not ask me to join him, but I know that some of my colleagues did. Along that 1,000 kilometre route Mr Abbott met with people with a disability, with carers and with disability organisations. I understand that the next two pollie pedals that he is involved in will also be in partnership with and help raise funds for Carers Australia.

We believe that a National Disability Insurance Scheme can be delivered within the timeframe recommended by the Productivity Commission and we think that a government acting responsibly and prudently—managing well the finances of the country—can do that.

We have tried to offer support to the current government through the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee, to be chaired by both sides of politics, to oversee the establishment and implementation of the NDIS. As I understand it, that has not actually been agreed to by the current government. I may be wrong in that and, if I am, I apologise. But if I am not wrong and they have not agreed to that then I would certainly urge those senators taking part in the debate to impose upon their leadership to agree to a joint parliamentary committee so that we can take the politics out of it and actually achieve a serious result—a bipartisan result—for something that is, without question, as Tony Abbott said, at its time now.

This is a once in a generation reform that will evolve over many parliaments of this country. It will not be the property of any particular party or group; it will be the property of the parliament as a whole, on behalf of the Australian people. I think that is very important. We need to get it right, and that requires a very high level of consultation and attention to detail not just now but from now until the full implementation.

I could say that this government has not been anywhere near the top of the class when it comes to consultation. Very often, things are done on the spur of the moment for the wrong reason and without proper thought being given to how things will be funded. I would hope that, in the instance of this particular initiative of many, many people, there is that appropriate very high level of consultation and attention to detail. That is why I thought the idea of a joint parliamentary oversight committee would be very, very useful.

I am pleased to see that a colleague of mine, my local federal member, Mr George Christensen, the member for Dawson, moved a motion in the House of Representatives to establish this non-partisan joint committee some time ago. Unfortunately, those who control the agenda in the House of Representatives have not seen fit to bring that motion to a vote at the present time. Again, I would urge those senators from the other side of the chamber taking part in this debate to impose upon their leaders to bring that motion forward for a vote in the other place so that the House can, in a bipartisan way, express support for that suggestion.

In our own chamber, Senator Fifield moved the same sort of motion to establish that oversight committee, and it is of some genuine regret to me that the Labor Party and the Greens political party combined together in the Senate to vote that down. That seemed to be contrary to the spirit of the way in which this legislation has been dealt with. I know that my leader, Mr Abbott, reiterated the offer at a recent Press Club speech when he said, and I quote:

The Coalition is so committed to the National Disability Insurance Scheme, for instance, that we’ve offered to co-chair a bi-partisan parliamentary committee so that support for it doesn’t flag across the three terms of parliament and among the nine different governments needed to make it work.

What Mr Abbott was very rightly saying and drawing attention to is that this is not something that one political party in one parliament can deal with in the time that they happen to be the government of the country. I do not make any comment on opinion polls but, should the government of Australia change later on this year, it will be important that the new government has been involved in this process from the very start and that the current government continues to be involved, and the same must be said right across the states of Australia.

The first stage of this scheme, as I understand, will benefit more than 20,000 people with disabilities, their families and their carers living in South Australia, the ACT, Tasmania, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria—and it will indeed go on further than that. It is something that I very much support.

I note the remarks of my senate colleagues in the very detailed Community Affairs Legislation Committee report on this bill. I note the submissions that have been made to the committee during their presentation. I particularly note that the first hearing of the committee was held in my base city of Townsville. I was pleased to see so many people from the Townsville community—the Mental Illness Fellowship of North Queensland; the Townsville Independence Program for Adult Community Living; Community Connections; Supported Options in Lifestyle and Access Services Inc; Deaf Services Queensland; a very significant group in the North Queensland area simply called Cootharinga; the independent advisory Townsville service; the Ingham Disability Support Services group; and Inclusion Works—appear before the committee. They were just some of the ones from the north who made submissions, and they were the ones who were called before the committee to give their evidence in person. I thank them all for the evidence they gave. The suggestions and comments that they put forward have helped get us to where we are at the present time. I support the bill.

Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to this landmark legislation, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013. There are times when the din of public debate recedes and the actions of members and senators of this place combine to bring into sharpest relief the role of government. We are reminded in those moments for what purpose Australians from one of the diverse and liberal populations of the world have wrought a society that understands itself as a single community, each part supported by the other. We have built our nation on a guarantee of fairness and a guarantee of egalitarianism, a society that acknowledges that together we built the conditions in which any one of us might make a prosperous life and that we owe to it each other to ensure that prosperity is shared.

This is a nation that acknowledges that, no matter the different circumstances into which our children are born, all Australians should have access to the best possible education system. We acknowledge that effort should be fairly rewarded with decent wages and conditions for those who labour at an honest day's work. And we acknowledge that our commitment to Australia can be honoured in a sincere exchange of customs and heritage so that culture is no barrier to success.

Yet every day many Australians are diagnosed with a significant disability, either congenital or acquired through accident or misfortune. For many, their disability will cause them to drop out of the Australia most of us experience. Instead of participating in a vibrant national life, their experience may be shaped by the constraints of isolation, poverty, stress and insecurity. Many struggle with the cost of care, with treatment and with equipment. Even more grapple with issues of dependence that make carers of family and friends and amplify the consequences of disability.

The approach most people living with disability have been forced to take has been ad hoc. It has sought to deal with issues as they arose and as finances, time and energy allowed, all too often without the level of control and choice that they need. So too has the government's approach to disability been characterised by inconsistency, with budget allocations failing to take account of the true cost of disability or plan for the longer term.

While it has been clear for some time that this approach is not satisfactory, serious reform in this area has eluded successive governments—not even having found its way onto the agenda of the previous coalition government. I am pleased to say that the Gillard Labor government has placed disability reform firmly on the agenda for the nation and, encouraged by the strongest indications of community support through the Every Australian Counts campaign, has developed this new policy response from the ground up.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme and the bill before the Senate right now are part of extending the Australian pledge of a fair go to all people, including those living with disability. It will replace the current funding model with an insurance-like scheme based on actuarial analysis and a philosophy that shares the costs of disability services across the community. Rather than simply funding central services, it will allow funding to be directed towards eligible individuals' ongoing support needs and enable people to exercise more choice and control in their lives through individualised funding. In doing so, it will give effect to the principles outlined in the international agreements to which Australia is party, especially the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, especially those articles that urge a sense of independence and self-determination. Similarly, it will help to deliver those principles under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in that it will enhance the expression of the fundamental human rights of people living with disabilities.

The principles underpinning the National Disability Insurance Scheme are expressed, as they should be, in terms of human rights and the ability of people living with disability to exercise choice. But the NDIS is not simply a statement of principles. It is more than a reprioritising or reshaping of disability support in this country. It is also significantly expanding the level of support for people who need assistance in taking control of their lives. This bill creates a new agency, the NDIS Launch Transition Agency, to provide for the first stage of the rollout of the NDIS and demonstrate the model by assisting more than 20,000 people living with disability, their families and their carers living in South Australia, Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria. These launch sites, funded with a $1 billion commitment from the Gillard Labor government, will begin the implementation of the NDIS from 1 July this year.

I am pleased and proud that Tasmania has been chosen as a launch site and I want to acknowledge the strength and energy of those campaigners in my home state of Tasmania who have fought long and hard for an NDIS—of course for their state, but also in recognition of the challenges faced by all Australians living with disability—people such as Margaret Reynolds, somebody from whom wise counsel is assured, whether as a former senator or in her previous role at National Disability Services Director; and also David Clements, the current state manager of NDS; and extraordinary organisations like Baptcare and the Brain Injury Association. Their work has meant that, from 1 July 2013, all eligible 15-24-year-olds in Tasmania—estimated at around 1,000 people—will be covered by the new National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Tasmania is an ideal location for the initial implementation of this project. Not only is it by virtue of its size, geography and governance a relatively flexible place to be first mover on such a scheme; it is also in pressing need of enhanced disability support. Partly as a result of its demography, Tasmania has the highest prevalence of disability out of all states in our country. Subsequently, the effect of disability is most acutely felt in Tasmania and the principles of the NDIS more sorely needed. It is my sincere hope that the greater provision of tailored care, decided, directed and ultimately employed by those affected by disability, will ease its burden and allow the young Tasmanians who will be amongst the first users of the NDIS to shape their own destiny.

It should never be that a young person suffering an acquired nerve injury from a bicycle accident is relegated to a nursing home because of lack of care or that a person should have to forgo the most routine conveniences because of a normally easily repaired home design issue. In a community as wealthy and as privileged as Australia we should never allow the vicissitudes of accident and luck to override the autonomy of our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, neighbours and friends.

Like the grand architecture of Medicare, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, our public education system and our award wage system—the rest of our social safety net, most of which results from the efforts of community activists and Labor governments—we must make the legacy of our success a society in which we can all take part. We must make a promise to all Australians that we will never abandon them or leave them behind so long as we have the capacity to move forward together. The NDIS will take us forward together. I am proud to be part of a Labor government responsible for this new social compact, and I commend this bill to the Senate.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will leave the broader debate surrounding this bill to my colleagues, particularly the ever-eloquent Senator Fifield, and confine my remarks to just one issue: the protection of privacy of individuals under this act. I have spoken about this issue over the years in various different contexts and I do so because privacy reflects the great tension in our democratic life between the quest for individual autonomy on one hand and the impulse for community on the other—a great philosophical, moral, social and political battle. There is never any easy answer, but even here today on the National Disability Scheme Bill 2013 those issues are again alive. I will confine my remarks just to the issue.

I am concerned that in its current form the bill does not adequately protect the privacy concerns that scheme participants and service providers may have in relation to the handling of their data. First, section 60 of the bill allows any person to obtain, make a record of, disclose or otherwise use protected information held by the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency if it relates to the purposes of the bill. This potentially represents a broad infringement of privacy rights because the objects of the bill, set out in section 3, are highly generic. They include, for example:

… support the independence and social and economic participation of people with disability; and

…   …   …

raise community awareness of the issues that affect the social and economic participation of people with disability, and facilitate greater community inclusion of people with disability.

These are broad, highly generic terms.

In promoting these wide-ranging objectives, it is the privacy rights of scheme participants that are expected to give way. Moreover, according to subsection 60(3) of the bill, obtaining, recording, disclosing or using information will be taken to be for the purposes of the bill if the CEO of the agency believes on reasonable grounds that it is reasonably necessary to facilitate research or actuarial analysis into matters relevant to the scheme or, even more broadly, to facilitate policy development.

This provides an executive official with considerable discretion over the privacy rights of scheme participants. It is concerning that these rights, under the express terms of the bill, are subject to such generic matters as policy development. Surely, some thought should be given to the development of much clearer guidelines with respect to the exercise of this discretion. I note that such guidelines are not included in any of the draft NDIS rules released on 5 March.

Section 66 of the bill enables the CEO of the agency to disclose NDIS information if the CEO certifies that it is necessary to do so in the public interest. The CEO may also disclose information to the secretary, chief executive or head of a Commonwealth, state or territory department or authority for the purposes of that department or authority.

These provisions significantly expand the disclosure powers of the CEO and might further undermine the privacy rights of scheme participants. The draft NDIS Rules for the Protection and Disclosure of Information do not impose defined guidelines to limit the exercise of the CEO's discretion. For example, in considering whether to issue a public interest certificate, the CEO is required under clause 4.3 of the rules to consider whether:

… the person to whom the information will be disclosed has sufficient interest in the information.

A person will have sufficient interest in NDIS information if the person has:

… a genuine and legitimate interest in the information …

These criteria hardly alleviate concerns about the abrogation of privacy rights under the bill. Indeed, the rules simply replace one set of broad criteria with another. The end result is that there is a threat to privacy rights under the NDIS bill and its accompanying rules as currently drafted.

At section 12.7 of its 2011 inquiry report entitled Disability Care and Support, the Productivity Commission argues that any national disability insurance scheme must preserve the confidentiality and privacy of data provided by scheme participants. The Productivity Commission recommends, among other things: de-identifying scheme data; imposing conditions on how data can be used by researchers, for example, through enforceable undertakings; and requiring researchers to comply with principles regarding responsible and ethical research conduct. These matters are not expressly dealt with in the bill or the draft NDIS rules.

Some protection is afforded under the newly-created Australian Privacy Principles set out in the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Actthat was passed late last year and is due to commence in March 2014. For example, clause 6.4 of the sixth Australian Privacy Principle requires the de-identification of data collected by an agency prior to disclosure to another entity.

However, while the Australian Privacy Principles will apply to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Launch Transition Agency, as a Commonwealth public agency, it is unclear what privacy protections will apply to the handling of information by the wide range of other entities that are likely to be involved in the NDIS. In particular, I note that the 'small business exemption' applying to any business with an annual turnover of less than $3 million has been retained in the formulation of the new Australian Privacy Principles. Further, state public agencies are not covered by the Australian Privacy Principles and not all of the states—specifically Western Australia and South Australia—have in place similar privacy arrangements to the Commonwealth scheme.

In its submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs inquiry into the bill, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner said:

Given the amount of personal information that will be collected and used under the Scheme, it will be important to ensure appropriate and consistent coverage of all participating entities under privacy law.

It is crucial that a uniform approach to privacy protection is mandated under the bill.

I note that the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs will be conducting a privacy impact assessment in relation to the NDIS. While I welcome this development as a means of considering in further detail the privacy implications of the scheme, it is unfortunate that the Senate could not have had the benefit of this analysis before being called upon to pass the bill and to debate the issues.

It is also disappointing that the Senate standing committee's final report dealt with the privacy implications of the bill in less than two pages, and in those two pages did not really provide any substantive policy analysis. The standing committee's conclusion in relation to the privacy implications of the bill is simply that:

Department officials are scheduled to meet with the Australian Information Commissioner to discuss the concerns outlined in his submission. The Committee anticipates that if any amendment to the provisions that ensure consistency across jurisdictions was required, this would be considered by the Department.

Again, it would have been useful for privacy concerns in relation to the bill to have been properly assessed and brought to the attention of the Senate before the debate here this evening.

The protection of privacy rights is by no means a 'side-issue' that we can allow to slide under the radar. As we saw last week when the government announced its new media law package, Australians do not take the abrogation of privacy rights and freedom of speech lightly. Indeed, the protection of privacy and freedom of speech are foundations of the society that we live in today. It is important that any debate about privacy rights takes place in the public domain upon a consideration of all the relevant circumstances and implications. In the event that the privacy impact assessment finds that there are gaps with respect to privacy protection under the bill, the parliament must ensure that these gaps are remedied without delay by amending the NDIS legislation as passed.

Matt Thistlethwaite (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I speak in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2013. At the outset I would like to congratulate and thank all who have worked over many years and decades to make this bill and this scheme a reality. We are lucky in some respects that those who have worked to make this happen know a little bit about what overcoming adversity and succeeding against the odds is all about. I am of course referring to the more than 400,000 Australians that live every day with a significant or permanent disability. It is because of their determination, tenacity, energy and bravery that the NDIS is poised to make a real and lasting difference to the way this nation treats its disabled citizens, and I pay tribute to them and thank them for that.

The bill establishes the framework for the NDIS, a new program for funding care and support for people with a disability. It is intended to commence for full access across Australia from 2018. The bill also establishes the NDIS Launch Transition Agency, the body that will manage the first stage of the NDIS in five locations around Australia from July 2013.

For many years now Australians who suffer from a disability and their carers and their families have not been able to access adequate levels of financial support and care. By many accounts, the system in place charged with ensuring that these people can enjoy a full, rewarding life free of discrimination has in some respects failed them. Problems that have been identified with the system have ranged from the sheer complexity of the current system, the failure of funded services to meet demand and differential treatment depending on how someone acquires their disability. These are deficiencies that really should not be allowed to endure in modern-day Australia, particularly in the light of significant projections of increase in the number of people who will live in our society into the future with a severe or profound disability.

In 2009, the Australian government commissioned the Productivity Commission to investigate the feasibility of a national disability insurance scheme. The commission subsequently found that:

The current disability support system is underfunded, unfair, fragmented, and inefficient, which gives people with a disability little choice and no certainty of access to appropriate supports. The stresses on the system are growing with little costs.

As a solution, the commission proposed that the NDIS provide insurance to all Australians who acquire a significant disability, provide support through the provision of information and referral services and provide long-term care and support to the around 410,000 Australians living with significant and ongoing disability.

The scheme will be launched in five sites across Australia from July 2013. The first stage of the scheme will begin in South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, the Hunter in New South Wales and the Barwon region in Victoria, and will benefit more than 20,000 people living with disability, their families and their carers. I am proud to say that in my state, the federal government has reached a long-term agreement with the New South Wales government to fund and deliver the National Disability Insurance Scheme in 2018. I offer credit and thanks to the New South Wales government for working with the federal government on a long-term delivery solution for this important scheme.

The framework of the NDIS will bring long-term certainty to the resourcing of disability care and support, so that people with disability can feel secure that they will get what they need over their lifetime. The scheme will respond to each individuals' goals and aspirations for their life, and will plan with each person to take account for their individual circumstances; this will include support for carers and other informal and community supports that are important to the person living with disability.

The scheme will work with families in their role as carers, ensuring they are not overwhelmed by the task and can continue to provide valuable informal care. The scheme will also focus on intensive early learning intervention, particularly where it is evident that it will substantially improve a person's predicament, or slow the progression of their disability over their lifetime.

In Australia, a person with a disability has a poverty risk around 2.7 times that of a person without a disability. This scheme recognises the importance, where possible, of helping people with a disability to get back into the workforce.

The government has heard the frustration and desperation of people with a disability, who are sick and tired of being, in many respects, second-class citizens, one of whom, Tricia Malowney, wrote a compelling article last year about her plight as an Australian with a disability. She said:

I am a 20 per cent-er - one of the approximately 20 per cent of Australians who have a disability. The majority of us are underfunded (or not funded at all) for the supports we need to participate fully as Australian citizens. Australians with disabilities cross all demographics. We come from all socio economic sectors, we live in the city and we live in rural locations. We come from CALD backgrounds and we are Indigenous and refugees. We are married, we are single, we are parents and carers. We are LGBTI and we are straight.

We do not have the same impairments, but we share the same social disadvantage.

…   …   …

So, we've had enough … - we need the NDIS and we need it now.

Well, to Tricia, and all of those who have been campaigning for many, many years for this invaluable and important reform, I am proud to say that—and proud to be part of—a Labor government has heard you and is delivering this important reform. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for COAG) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I begin my remarks this evening, I want to indicate to the chamber and for the record, that I dedicate my speech tonight to my very good friend Liam Hitchin, who is a thirteen-year-old boy in Orchard Hills in Western Sydney, for whom this will make an extraordinary difference.

I want to begin by acknowledging the sentiments of my colleague Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition, and say, as he did, 'The NDIS is an idea whose time has come.' The fact that Australians with disabilities deserve a better deal than they are getting is something that both sides of this chamber can agree about. The current system could best be described as a patchwork quilt. It is something that I have heard time and time again from disability advocates in Western Sydney in particular. That view was only reinforced by the 1,600 or so submissions that were made to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee.

It is clear that many people with disabilities and their families simply do not know where to go for help. Different states have different systems, and there are different conditions for those with congenital conditions and for those who acquire them during the course of their lives—at home, or on the road or at work. They have to navigate a maze of insurance forms, state departments, federal departments, and inevitably, queues wherever they turn. The process is enough to make some people just give up, and we do need to streamline the system to prevent this from happening.

We need to provide support on a needs basis rather than rationing, with the entitlement for support going to the individual. The individual needs to be able to pick the aids, the equipment and support services that they need, and this is at the heart of the Productivity Commission's report into support for people with disabilities, which, as my colleague Senator Fifield has indicated, the coalition strongly supports. The Productivity Commission approach provides the blueprint for how this scheme should operate. As well as supporting that Productivity Commission approach, we also supported the $1 billion provided by the government in the last budget. We supported the five launch sites, we supported the agreement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales for a full state-wide rollout following the Hunter launch and, importantly, we support this legislation.

At this point, I also want to acknowledge the leadership and commitment of the New South Wales Minister for Disability Services, the Hon. Andrew Constance, the member for Bega. His work in this area and his commitment to making sure that the NDIS happens, and happens for the people that he serves and cares for in New South Wales, is without parallel. He is an exceptional minister, and he is serving those people with a dedication that, some days, is stunning.

This scheme will complement the work of organisations that I have had a great deal to do with in recent years: organisations like the Nepean Area Disabilities Organisation in Penrith; Great Community Transport, which serves the Blue Mountains and the Nepean area; the Penrith Disabilities Resource Centre; the Royal Institute for Deaf and Blind Children; the Thorndale Foundation; and Northcott Disability Services in Parramatta. I have met with representatives from those organisations on many occasions and even recently with Senator Fifield, who was in Western Sydney for a meeting with those organisations at a round table in Emu Plains. Top of their agenda is the NDIS. For people like Denise Heath from the Nepean Area Disabilities Organisation and Denise Roberts from the Penrith Disabilities Resource Centre this is a seminal moment in how they do their jobs and how their organisations operate. I must say that, although I knew them to be highly competent and efficient heads of their various organisations, the forethought and consideration they displayed on that day to both Senator Fifield and me of how their organisations may work within the NDIS was extremely impressive.

In implementing this agenda we will obviously continue to engage with disability advocates every step of the way to ensure that we have the best National Disability Insurance Scheme. We on the coalition side of the chamber believe the NDIS can be delivered within the Productivity Commission's time frame and we stand ready to work with the government to see the NDIS delivered as soon as possible.

We do perhaps disagree on one issue. A number of those on the other side of this chamber and elsewhere continue to say that the NDIS represents quintessentially Labor values. I think that is somewhat disappointing. This is not something that should represent the values that are synonymous with one political party. It should be above politics. This NDIS represents Australian values. It is about helping those who are less fortunate and face extra challenges that are beyond their control. We do not intend to and would not brand this as a Liberal scheme or a coalition scheme, and I am disappointed that some on the other side are trying to do the same.

The NDIS is a person-centred and self-directed funding model that aims to empower individuals, not governments, to reduce the red tape and the hassle that people face. This represents a real turning point for people with disabilities and their carers. We have to do everything possible to ensure that we get it right. This is a once-in-a-generation reform that will unfold over the life of several parliaments and it should be owned by the parliament as a whole and by the people the parliament represents, not any particular political party. To that end the coalition has called for the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to be chaired by both sides of the political divide to oversee the implementation of the NDIS.

In a debate last week I spoke about the effectiveness of parliamentary joint committees. On that occasion I was discussing constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. These committees can be extremely effective bodies. A parliamentary oversight committee would unite all of the parties and would provide a non-partisan environment where the design and eligibility could be completed cooperatively. I think that is a very important concept in this discussion. My colleague from the other place Mr George Christensen, the member for Dawson, has had a motion in the House of Representatives to establish this committee for some time but, unfortunately, it has not yet been brought forward for a vote. My colleagues Senator Fifield and Senator Boyce moved in June last year a very similar motion to that to establish an oversight committee but it was voted down by the Labor Party and the Australian Greens.

So I renew the coalition's call today for the government to accept our offer of a non-partisan parliamentary oversight committee. We will be moving an amendment to this bill to establish such a committee. I heard Senator Thistlethwaite as he concluded his remarks this evening acknowledge the effective work done between the Liberal government in New South Wales and the federal government here in Canberra. There is no reason why we cannot extend that to make it even more constructive to establish such a parliamentary oversight committee.

Every government in Australia wants the National Disability Insurance Scheme, so it is disappointing when we see some people put politics above those wishes. The COAG meeting before last was a fairly good example of that. The persistence of the New South Wales and Victorian Liberal governments to withstand some pretty heated attacks that they received from the federal government meant that we did end up with agreement to host launch sites. We continue to ask the Prime Minister to adopt a more cooperative approach—something that has been missing in a number of instances from the Commonwealth's dealings with the states and territories up until now.

Debate interrupted.