Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the brief time that is left I would like to take note of the government's response to the Community Affairs References Committee report, Violence, abuse and neglect against people with disability in institutional and residential settings.

I think I have to say straightaway that I am very disappointed with the government's response to this report. In particular, our first recommendation was:

The committee recommends that a Royal Commission into violence, abuse and neglect of people with disability be called, …

This was overwhelmingly what people with disability called for. The committee made this recommendation because that is what they called for and because we heard just a little of the evidence of people who have been affected by abuse, neglect and violence in residential and institutional settings. When I say that, we just did not have the resources that a royal commission would have. People were very, very clear; the government has ignored what people cried out for when they made this call for the royal commission.

Part of the government's response was to say, 'Well, we have the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework.' I am sorry: yes, they have that but it just does not cut the mustard! It does not address the huge concerns that people with disability have about the need to have a forum to address past issues of abuse. In the same way that the royal commission into child abuse is looking at and investigating these issues now, that is exactly what people with disability have been calling for.

We on the committee heard a lot of evidence about the abuse, violence and neglect of people with disabilities, and it was very clear that we had only heard a little of the evidence, as I said. We did not have the resources, and the Senate inquiry is not set up to have the resources, to be able to do the sort of in-depth investigation that a royal commission would entail. And as for using the excuse of the framework: if this were not such a serious issue it would be laughable. For a start, the NDIS—and there are a lot of people with disability who will not in fact get the NDIS—only protects a certain cohort of people. And it is about guaranteeing quality and safeguarding into the future—not retrospectively, and not looking at the abuse, violence and neglect of people with disability that has occurred in the past. It does not provide an opportunity for that investigation and it does not provide the opportunity for people to have their say. It is simply that the government has sidestepped the issue because they do not have the guts to deal with it. That is all I can think of: they do not have the guts to deal with this very significant issue.

There were also points raised around the existing royal commission. Well, the existing royal commission has touched on some of these issues but it cannot and does not address the significant issues that were raised by our inquiry. In fact, it does not address some of the ongoing abuse of adults with disability in residential and institutional settings. The government has squibbed it on that particular issue, and I know that people with disability will continue to address this issue. They will continue to campaign.

The point that has been made to me is that people with disability are routinely denied access to justice. We saw that in our inquiry, and that is why we also made a series of recommendations around access to justice. Again, we did not get a satisfactory response.

People with disability feel like they have been constantly silenced on this issue of abuse, and I will stand with them and work with them until we do get a royal commission, because people have been let down by this government. They have been let down for years because they have been ignored and not believed. They have not had access to justice, and here is the government's response, which people have been waiting for a significant period of time, and the government has squibbed it.

Having said that, I have run out of time. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted. Debate adjourned.