NDIA Accountability Project

Impact of NDIS reforms on supports for a person with Multiple Sclerosis

‹ PrevPage 1 of 3 · Source p. 1Next ›

@@Attn. Legislative Affairs Committee Re: The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024

I am writing to you to express my concern about planned reforms to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), as they articulated in The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024.

I have been a self-managed NDIS participant since late 2016, when the NDIS rolled out in my area of Sydney. I have had Multiple Sclerosis for 34 years, and - especially over the last 10 years - my mobility, spasticity, fatigue and ability to do many activities of daily living & social & community participation have worsened progressively and significantly.

I ask for your support in making sure proposed reforms do not pass into law.

My particular concerns with the Bill are outlined below.

It is difficult to understand I am not a lawyer and found the bill difficult to understand. It is also unclear to me what the intent is of much within the bill. There has not been enough time allowed for people to understand the bill. I feel there has been no codesign with disabled people in drafting this bill.

The bill relies heavily on “Rules” and “Delegated Legislation”/ “Legislative Instruments”, however there are no details for these as yet. They are yet to be designed. Codesign should be at the focus of this. Codesign should be legislated into the bill now to assure there is a standard of transparency and accountability in the design of these rules and legislative instruments.

Human Rights and Choice & Control Choice & Control is a really important issue for disabled people. The who, what, when, why and how of their supports.

The definition of what is a NDIS support in Section 10 of the Bill, uses a lot of words but is still not clear. Not all of the UNCRPD is covered in this section. Section 10 needs a lot more work.

Additionally, the Bill grants a lot of powers to the NDIS CEO that limit a person’s choice & control, e.g.:

Assessments

After the threat of Independent Assessments (IA’s) raised by the previous government, Assessments are of great concern to people with disabilities. How will Assessments in this Bill be different to the IA’s proposed by the previous government?

In my case, I currently rely on multiple allied health providers to assess my disability needs, including physiotherapists, neurophysiotherapists, occupational therapist, neuro psychologist, podiatrist, orthotist dietician and continence nurse.

My great concerns are;

  • who will be conducting these assessments,
  • what qualifications will they have? How will they possibly be as qualified as the range of allied health providers I currently use?,
  • what tools will they use to assess me?,
  • they won’t be independent.,
  • they won’t know me or my 34-year history with MS.

There needs to be more information provided to participants now on these assessments, and that their codesign with people with disabilities is legislated.

Protections and Accountability

There needs to be more accountability placed on the major parts of this bill reliant on Delegated Legislation. In particular; - The ‘NDIS Rules’ are not yet determined or finalised with the States & Territories. The government needs to show disabled people now: o How will these rules be used o Some draft rules/or what they currently have planned - The definition of NDIS Supports needs to; o Make sure that the definition isn’t too narrow. o Be clear on what is and isn’t a NDIS supports.

Appeals Participants should have the right to appeal both the needs assessment and the method used to arrive at their plan funding. It is not clear in the bill that you can appeal the needs assessment. More detail is needed in the bill on when, where and how the needs assessment can be challenged, and /or a replacement assessment be undertaken. The right to challenge/appeal or get a replacement assessment needs to be clearly articulated and included in this bill.

Conclusion These reforms pose many risks to people with disability in Australia. More work must be done to ensure the scaffolding contained in the Bill is solid enough to set up an optimal NDIS 2.0, BEORE dissolving the current legislative framework through Bill ratification.

I am writing to ask you to STOP the changes to the NDIS Act (2013) going through until due diligence around Commonwealth government responsibility to disabled people, has occurred.