Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme

The secretary

My wife and I are the grandparents of three children each with a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Our twelve year old grandson has lived with us, with his grandmother as carer, since he was eight months old. Until he was six years old, he received state government funding for early childhood intervention. In 2015 he was diagnosed with Autism Spectrum disorder, with severe language disability, both expressive and receptive, difficulties with social skills, and sensory integration issues.

His primary school carried out a cognitive assessment using the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition (WISC-V), in 2015. That assessment returned a Full Scale IQ of 65, that fell into the extremely low range when compared with his peers.

We applied for NDIS funding, our case was registered and funding rejected.

Another WISC-V assessment was carried out by the high school last month. That assessment returned an overall cognitive ability in the extremely low range compared with other children his age. Full Scale IQ was 66 confirming the result from the 2015 assessment.

This, nearly 13 year old child, attends an independent state college. This term his learning support aid has sat throughout every maths lesson, statistics is the current subject. This dedicated professional helped the child to focus on the work, assisted him with strategies for quieting his overactive mind, and together they designed a method for decision making, when solving a statistics problem that is used by the whole class. This dedicated learning support professional is currently on maternity leave, yet returns to work two days a week to ensure our grandson achieves his potential. In the statistics program he achieved a C+ for the first time in his entire school life. The class recognition for his design of a decision making script for statistics problems, together with the result in the statistics exam has meant wonders for his self image.

I am now a 73 year old retiree. My wife a 63 year old small business owner. We have funded maths coaching, psychology and occupational therapy when needed from our own pockets over the years. A child dependent in the home has always limited the time for work and we have always battled.

Based on the results of recent assessments we intend applying to NDS for future funding however, we are fairly certain that NDIA policy is to limit claims for ASD.

Our nine year old grandson is diagnosed with ASD level 3, ADHD, and global development delay. He has NDIS funding for psychology. 92% of that plan has been expended, the psychologist recommended more treatment, which was applied for and denied. A claim for Occupational Therapy was lodged months ago and remains unanswered. His funding was rolled over recently with a note stating that most NDIS claimants find it beneficial if their plan is just rolled over.

This child has trouble with emotional regulation at times. His psychotherapy has been immensely beneficial, and necessary, that is why so much of the plan has been expended at this time of the year. He needs structure in his life and his most favourite thing in the world is his special school. Holidays and pupil free days are a nightmare, the fact that school isn’t open today is beyond understanding for him. The household is in a constant state of upset until schedules return to normal.

The state of Queensland currently allows impulsive 10 year old children to be charged as criminals. I worry that 16 year old children acting impulsively in public stand little chance in such a system.

Our four year old grand daughter is diagnosed with level 3 Autism with global development delay. Her NDIS funding includes speech and occupational therapy.

The occupational therapist is recommending more time, the plan is currently 74% expended. Once again, the plan was recently rolled over with the note that most claimants find it beneficial if their plan is rolled over.

The government sets the policy of the NDIA. Current policy is to ensure the NDIA remains sustainable by curbing the number of claims, and limiting plan expenses. I’m aware that the previous government spent vast amounts on business consultancies, McKinsey and Boston Consulting, to investigate and advise on the operations of the NDIS and its supervision by the NDIA.

I question the very idea that a business consultancy can have any knowledge at all about the operations of an entity established with a remit to serve the needs of those in society with a disability, assisting them to achieve their potential.

My doubts were confirmed by press reports stating that these ,highly priced business advisors, have provided to government advice suggesting that reports from the treating specialists, medical practitioners, and carers of claimants, should be ignored, due to their EMPATHY BIAS.

Further confirmation came from the reporting that staff formerly responsible for the managing of the robo debt scheme, were being transferred to the NDIS to

• reduce fraud. The previous government believed that any claimant for any welfare payment was a potential fraudster.

I think as much time and effort should be expended ensuring that both claimants and service providers meet their obligations to society. To my knowledge, there is no audit of the service provision and charges from service providers. Experience elsewhere (aged care, and banking and finance) have disclosed the practice of charging for services that are not provided.

Both the previous and current governments have a fixation on the efficient market hypothesis despite the evidence everywhere in the economy of market failure (housing, energy, aged care). The dismantling of the Australian Public Service has been the result of this constant worship of market efficiency, and both major parties are guilty of the practice. The Rudd government introduced the concept of efficiency dividends, subsequent conservative governments continued and perfected the job of outsourcing of government responsibility, always in the name of EFFICIENCY.

I’m no economist but I think blind Freddy would know that if two entities are providing the same service, both funded by the government, one of them taking a profit, the profit taker must either provide less service for the same dollar, or operate a different way. In aged care for instance, rather than provide proper meals to the inmates, occupants of many privately run facilities were found, by the royal commission, to be undernourished, it’s reported that many still are.

In the NDIS, many employees are casuals, employed on precarious contracts with precarious incomes and a set of kpi’s that have little to do with service to the disabled, but much to do with the retention of future income.

Rather than focussing on cost cutting, the NDIA should be properly equipped to cater for the actual needs and aspirations of disabled claimants. The best outcomes will be achieved by employing a workforce of individuals trained and dedicated to the provision of properly designed plans and services to the disabled, and includes those with lived experience of a disability.

Any cost to society will be balanced by the improved quality of life of those with disability and their carer’s, as well as their potential to contribute to the economy, or society in other ways.

Thankyou for the opportunity to contribute a submission to this inquiry.

No machine-readable text was extracted from this page.