Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today over 4.3 million Australians live with a disability. Since its implementation in 2013, the NDIS has grown to transform the lives of over 540,000 Australians with significant and permanent disability. But the NDIS was never designed or intended to be the sole provider of disability support in Australia. Today there is genuine and justified longstanding concern across our nation about the absence of insurance coverage for people who are victims of a catastrophic incident but are not eligible for the NDIS—that is, they are over 65 years of age. Last week we heard about the class action prepared by Mitry Lawyers regarding the exclusion of over-65s from the NDIS.

This is not a new issue. In 2011 the Productivity Commission recommended the establishment of two separate but complementary insurance schemes: the NDIS, which we know was implemented, and the NIIS, the National Injury Insurance Scheme. The NDIS, as we all know, was implemented but only parts of the NIIS have been implemented so far by the state states and territories.

At that time, it was proposed that the NIIS would cover four categories of catastrophic injuries: workplace accidents; motor vehicle accidents; medical injury accidents; and general accidents, including sporting injuries, falls and the like. To date, all states and territories have implemented the workplace and motor vehicle streams. In 2017 COAG made the decision not to proceed with the medical injury stream. Sadly, the general accident stream, while COAG agreed it should proceed, has not been progressed further by any state or territory. So now if a person is aged over 65 and is met with a catastrophic injury they have to seek support through the aged-care and the health sectors. As we've heard very publicly, this is particularly difficult for Australians who do not have the financial means to support themselves. This general accident stream was designed to be a scheme for somebody over 65 who has had a fall off their roof or a sporting injury.

This week, I wrote to the Treasurer raising my concerns about this issue. I reiterated the need for another scheme that works alongside the NDIS to provide disability support for those who suffer so-called general catastrophic accidents. In my letter to the Treasurer I did note three options that I saw for the Commonwealth to consider how to move forward on this matter. While the Commonwealth does not have an ability to force the states and territories to do this, I do see three options for the Commonwealth to consider.

The first option is for the Commonwealth to work together with states and territories to establish the catastrophic accident scheme as a standalone scheme, as per the original Productivity Commission's recommendations.

The second option is to agree with states and territories on what constitutes a catastrophic accident and get them to reimburse the NDIS costs of those particular participants, in line with the motor vehicle and workplace accident streams which are already in operation. This would effectively create the NIIS within the NDIA, but again take funding pressure off the scheme.

The third option that I see is to renegotiate the intergovernmental agreements themselves with states and territories to increase contributions to the NDIS, given their failure to establish that scheme.

I remain deeply concerned that after 10 years of deliberation and inaction, we do not yet have this category of general accident, no-fault support for Australians over 65. It is time for our nation to address this gap and implement the general accidents stream, particularly for the over 65s.

Acting Deputy President, as you well know, it is a great privilege to be a senator for the great state of Western Australia. The most wonderful part of that job is getting out and about to meet, listen, learn and gain a greater understanding of the issues right across our wonderful state.

After two years of COVID restrictions it was important for me to return to Exmouth and the amazing North West Cape region to see the community's progress on a range of issues that I had been on working with them. A key theme that emerged from the many meetings and one-on-ones with community groups was an issue of balance—balance between the environmental requirements of this most beautiful and very special part of the world and the requirements of defence facilities across the North West Cape. And the issue of balance between the growing needs of local residents, particularly with the state government considerations of infrastructure and services, and the increasing boon in tourism right across the cape. It is now an issue of how to deal with and balance that. My thanks to the Shire of Exmouth CEO, Ben Lewis, who updated me on the very wide range of local infrastructure requirements and development plans they have underway. We canvassed a range of problems and barriers, but, pleasingly, we identified a range of solutions we can work on together.

I also had the pleasure of returning to RAAF Base Learmonth, this time on behalf of the Parliament of Australia's public works committee. I thank Defence and the committee for facilitating this very helpful and instructive visit.

I would also like to pass on my thanks to the Exmouth Chamber of Commerce for holding a round table for me with a wide range of local businesses. We discussed issues currently facing the community, including things like the rising cost of insurance, the lack of GPs on the Cape, the lack of aged-care facilities, working visa restrictions for a much-needed workforce and the chronic lack of housing in the area.

I also returned to see the progress of the Minderoo Foundation's Exmouth research lab. What they are now doing is nothing short of extraordinary. They're delivering world-leading marine research through the Flourishing Oceans initiative. It is something all Australians should be very proud of.

What is not yet clear is how all levels of government, including Defence, will now come together to find that balance between all those competing interests, with the history of Exmouth and the Cape, so that the amazing marine parks we have can meet the needs of the local communities and the tourists. There are ways forward but we have to now, as an urgent priority, work together to make that happen.

As you know, Acting Deputy President Dean Smith, Exmouth has an extraordinary history. Exmouth itself was constructed in the late 1960s to support the joint Australia-US Harold E. Holt naval communications base, to house the US Navy personnel and also their families. They truly did create a little America in Exmouth. The town was filled with all aspects of American life, which was very unique in Australia. Many of the men and women who moved there when it was nothing more than sand dunes to build Exmouth are still there today.

When the management operation of the site was handed over to private contractors, the facility remained. When I visited these and other defence facilities on the site I was somewhat stunned and surprised, as was the US ambassador at the time, to find out the land had never been handed back from the US government to the Australian government, which accounted for why these wonderfully historic buildings were decaying in front of our eyes. I was pleased at the time to initiate the handback. I am told the negotiations are progressing well but are not yet concluded.

One final mystery remains—I will be very happy for anybody to shed light on this. I noticed a photo of Harold E. Holt receiving a plaque with a single peppercorn on it from the US government representative, symbolic of payment for the lease of the land at Exmouth. I have been trying very hard to relocate that plaque because I think it would be very fitting for Exmouth to have that returned to it when the lease is formally handed over so that we can symbolically give it back to the United States and then house it permanently in Exmouth. If anybody can shed light on where that plaque may now be, please let me know. It would be a wonderful piece of history to retain.