National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the

NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 [Provisions]

The NDIS has been a lifeline for my daughter, it has opened her life and given her opportunities she would not have had. My daughter is a 48 year old with Down Syndrome, a permanent disability, but with the assistance of NDIS we have seen her world open up, she now has so many choices and her confidence has grown.

This Bill is frightening to us. The proposed changes within the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Bill 2024 should NOT go ahead.

What is being proposed takes away choice and control from people with disabilities.

The new legislation designed to improve the experience of NDIS participants contains concerning clauses that expand the powers of the NDIA CEO unnecessarily.

The discretion given to the CEO in section 47A of the Bill is an unnecessary and concerning expansion of the CEO’s powers.

The proposed revisions allow an individual’s NDIS plan to be varied on the CEO’s own initiative, without request, consultation, or consent from the participant.

This would be like an axe hanging over the disabled person, not knowing when it could drop.

The NDIA should not have the general discretion to vary an NDIS plan without consultation or consent by the participant. It goes beyond the recommendations made in the Tune Report and provides exceptionally broad powers to the CEO.

It puts total control to the CEO and her office in deciding what supports and funding an individual needs or should have without consultation with individuals and if they deem the individuals funding should decrease not even having to tell them why and with no way for the disabled person to object or have the decision overturned.

It is particularly alarming that the proposed new power has no limits in the legislation. Providing unconstrained power to the NDIA CEO means any NDIS participant could have their plan varied at any time – this is not a fair or reasonable situation.

The use of these powers must be constrained by set criteria and be subject to review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Why do you think the NDIA have the disabled persons needs at heart, that they know what is best for the disabled person, that they have the knowledge to make decisions about what supports the person with a disability needs?

I say this because my daughter has experienced NDIA taking away supports she already had and having to go through the Tribunal process. Does Down Syndrome magically disappear in the evening and on Public Holidays? No, but that is what NDIA thought. The NDIA person at the Tribunal Mediation didn’t even have the correct current Plan for my daughter and had given the two lawyers representing NDIA incorrect information. Does this sound like a competent person making decisions about a disabled person’s needs? The stress to us was incredible, the dollars wasted in this exercise would have been substantial, and a complete waste of all those people in attendance.

Registered Providers

Why is it presumed that Registered Providers are not ripping off disabled people. The always charge the maximum hourly rates, there is added TTP, charging for time spent in preparation of programs even when they don’t do them, all because they can. After all, it’s allowed! There are many ways of rorting that come within the rules.

My daughters NDIS Plan funds, in the past, have been abused in these ways by a large, well known Registered Provider. Fortunately my daughter has strong advocates, her parents, but we are aging. Not everyone does.

Why is it presumed that Registered Providers only employ care workers that are competently trained and will not mistreat clients? There are many ways to mistreat besides physically. We know from firsthand experience.

Just because a Registered Provider says all the right things in Mission Statements and other written documentation does not mean they follow through to day to day care of clients.

They need to be held accountable with regular inspections and auditing.

Needs Assessment - Who decides what assessments are needed and Who does them. Are they going to be ticking boxes or putting disabled people back into boxes, are we going back in time, not forward with this Bill?

There should be consultation and input from disabled people in the whole process. There needs to be more accountability. What is in this Bill could be abused and misused by the CEO and her officers and subsequent Government Ministers with changes of Governments. There should be more detail of the thinking behind the decisions in the Bill.

This Bill should be withdrawn.

Thank you for your time.

Kind regards,

Mrs Lyn Williams