OLVictor.ia. egai
Lawyers And
Legal Services
Melbourne Office
30 January 2013
350 Queen St
Melbourne VIC 3000
GPO Box 4380
Committee Secretary Melbourne VIC 3001
Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs DX 210646 Melbourne VIC
PO Box 6100 t: 03 9269 0234 1800 677 402
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600 ABN 42 335 622 126
By email: community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au
Dear Committee
National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012
VLA supports the establishment of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).
The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is an important step towards the protection and promotion of rights of people with disability, to exercise choice and control over their supports.
VLA supports using the infrastructure and support network established by the NDIS to broaden access to justice for people with disability and address the multiple legal problems that research confirmsÿ has a disproportionate impact on people with disability. By linking people with legal assistance, the impact of these problems on the lives of people with disability can be confined. By dealing with legal problems early, the adverse health consequences that can flow from unresolved legal problems can also be minimised.
VLA also supports meaningful access to justice for people with disability, which includes transparency and fairness in decision-making and support for the review of entitlement decisions.
We are therefore concerned to see that the Bill expressly proscribes the provision of funding for legal assistance by the National Disability Insurance Agency to people for internal and external review of decisions made under the NDIS. A failure to provide practical assistance to help people realise their rights and entitlements under the NDIS would be inconsistent with the Commonwealth Government’s Strategic Framework for Access to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice Systemÿ. Such a failure would perpetuate the power imbalance resident in the relationship between entitlement holders and decision makers. It would not enhance primary decision making so as to avoid further costs and problems. The Strategic Framework report notes that targeted assistance can enhance the effectiveness of review mechanisms, which in turn, can improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of bureaucratic decision making. It is unclear why a prohibition is thought necessary and what form of practical assistance would be made available to entitlement holders to exercise their rights.
Victoria Legal Aid Page 1
VLA would welcome the opportunity to work with the National Disability Insurance Agency and the Commonwealth Government to discuss the best way to meet the legal needs of people with disability. We consider that this collaborative, holistic approach will contribute to positive outcomes for people with disability and reduce the downstream pressure on health and other government services that can flow from unresolved legal problemsiiÿ.
We would welcome the opportunity to assist the inquiry by providing evidence at a Committee Hearing. Please contact me on 9269 0244 or Kristen Hilton, Director, Civil Justice, Access and Equity on 9269 0691.
Yours faithfully
BEVAN WARNER
Managing Director
i Law and Justice Foundation (2012) Legal Australia-Wide Survey - Legal Need in Australia, p xv. iiAustralian Government Attorney-General’s Department Access to Justice Taskforce (2009) A Strategic Framework forAccess to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice System, p131. iii Pleasence, Balmer and Buck (2008) ‘The Health Costs of Civil-Law Problems: Further evidence of Links between Civil -Law Problems and Morbidity, and the Consequential Use of Health Services’ 5 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, pp 351-373.
Victoria Legal Aid - 30 January 2013 Page 2
SUBMISSION TO THE SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME BILL 2012
Victoria Legal Aid – National Disability Insurance Scheme – 24 January 2013 1
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2 About Victoria Legal Aid …………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4 Summary of Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………………………..7 Supporting choice and control in the lives of participants ………………………………………………………10 Capacity…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..10 Nominees ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..11 “Unreasonable Risk”………………………………………………………………………………………………….13 Removal of plan and correspondence nominees……………………………………………………………13 Recognising the role of advocacy under the National Disability Insurance Scheme…………….14 Eligibility requirements for the National Disability Insurance Scheme………………………………………15 Age …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………16 Assessment of disability …………………………………………………………………………………………….17 Supporting good decision-making under the National Disability Insurance Scheme ………………….18 Internal Review…………………………………………………………………………………………………………18 Legal advocacy and administrative decision-making………………………………………………………20 Legal assistance for internal review of decisions by the Agency ………………………………………22 Supporting better life outcomes by addressing the legal needs of people with disability…………….22 Supporting prisoners to transition back to the community ……………………………………………………..24 Additional matters for consideration by the Committee………………………………………………………….25 Debt Collection Processes………………………………………………………………………………………….25 NDIS Rules………………………………………………………………………………………………………………26 Appendix One - Our Specialist Programs ……………………………………………………………………………27 Mental Health and Disability Advocacy Program……………………………………………………………27 Commonwealth Entitlements Program …………………………………………………………………………27 Equality Law Program ……………………………………………………………………………………………….28 Criminal Law Program ……………………………………………………………………………………………….28 Family, Youth and Children’s Law Program…………………………………………………………………..28 Client Access……………………………………………………………………………………………………………28 Legal Help ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….29 Community Legal Education……………………………………………………………………………………….29
2
About Victoria Legal Aid
Victoria Legal Aid (VLA) is a major provider of legal advocacy, advice and assistance to socially
and economically disadvantaged Victorians, including people with disability. In 2011/12 one in six
of our clients had a disability or mental illness. Our organisation works to improve access to justice
and legal remedies in the community and pursues innovative ways of providing assistance to
reduce the prevalence of legal problems in the community. We assist people with their legal
problems at courts, tribunals, prisons and psychiatric hospitals as well as in our 15 offices across
Victoria.
We also deliver early intervention programs, including community legal education, and assist more
than 90,000 people each year through Legal Help, our free phone advice service.
Since October 2012, our Legal Help phone advice service has provided assistance to 733 people
in the Barwon, region of Victoria with 93 of these people reporting that they have a disability.
Through this free telephone advice service, we have assisted people living with disability in the
Barwon region to deal with guardianship and administration matters, stalking and family violence
matters, infringement debts, property disputes and other legal problems.
Legal advocacy, advice and assistance underpins access to justice and is especially important for
people with disability who experience barriers to participation in everyday life. We deliver services
to people with disability through the following programs:
Mental Health and Disability Advocacy Program
Commonwealth Entitlements Program
Equality Law Program
Criminal Law Program
Family, Youth and Children’s Law Program
Community Legal Education
Client Access
Legal Help
The specialist work of these programs and our organisational response to people with disability is
outlined further at Appendix One.
3
Executive Summary
VLA is a public supporter of the Every Australian Counts campaign and supports the introduction of
a National Disability Insurance Scheme.
The National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012 is an important step towards the protection and
promotion of rights in accordance with the Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Australia’s obligations under those
instruments. We endorse the general principles of the legislation to support the independence and
social and economic participation of people with disability and to recognise the right of people with
disability to exercise choice and control over the delivery of their supports.
We anticipate that the NDIS will improve the outcomes of people in similar circumstances to many
of our clients. However, we also consider that the NDIS can do more to deliver a comprehensive
response to people with disability.
This submission contains a number of recommendations for improvements to the NDIS based on
our practical experience of providing legal advocacy, advice and assistance to people in relation to
access to commonwealth entitlements, mental health and disability issues, discrimination
guardianship and administration orders and other matters that are enlivened by the content of the
Bill.
In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following issues:
supporting choice and control in the lives of people with disability, including the need to
include a presumption of capacity for people with disability and the need to clarify the
intersection between nominees appointed under the NDIS and existing guardians and
administrators
eligibility for the NDIS, including clarifying the eligibility of people with mental illness
supporting good administrative decision-making under the scheme, including the
importance of access to legal assistance for review of decisions under the Act
supporting better life outcomes for people with a disability, including broadening access to
justice for people with disability to address NDIS and non-NDIS legal issues and supporting
the transition of prisoners with disability into the community.
VLA also strongly supports meaningful access to justice for people with disability.
The introduction of NDIS and the creation of the National Disability Insurance Agency present a
unique opportunity to address some of the other issues that may flow from living with disability. Our
practice experience tells us that people with disability are more likely to experience legal problems.
4
We also know that meeting the legal needs of people with disability reduces disadvantage and
promotes social inclusion and better health outcomes.
The Legal Australia-Wide Survey of Legal Need in Australia (LAW Survey), the most
comprehensive assessment of community legal needs ever conducted, highlighted that people with
a disability are significantly more likely to have legal problems, including substantial and multiple
legal problems. The LAW Survey found that people with disability often experienced multiple
problems across the spectrum of legal issues and often experienced the greatest difficulty
resolving these issues.
With these recent findings in mind, VLA supports using the infrastructure and support network
established by the NDIS to broaden access to justice for people with disability and address the
multiple legal problems that are often encountered by people with disability.
By linking people with legal assistance, the impact of these problems on the lives of people with
disability can be confined. By dealing with legal problems early, the adverse health consequences
that can flow from unresolved legal problems can be minimised. In some circumstances, this may
assist to minimise the need for other supports and contribute to the financial sustainability of the
NDIS.
For this reason, VLA would welcome the opportunity to work with the National Disability Insurance
Agency and the Commonwealth Government to consider the best way to meet the legal needs of
people with disability. We consider that this collaborative, holistic approach will contribute to
positive outcomes for people with disability and reduce the downstream pressure on health and
other government services that can flow from unresolved legal problems.
Finally, we support a commitment from the Commonwealth Government to provide new funding to
enable the legal assistance sector to meet the needs of people with disability and any increased
demand on legal services arising out of the commencement of the NDIS. Without such funding,
VLA will be unable to absorb additional demand arising from the scheme.
We are concerned to see that the Bill expressly proscribes the provision of funding for legal
assistance by the National Disability Insurance Agency to people for internal and external review of
decisions made under the NDIS. We consider that funding should be provided for advocacy to
assist people to realise their rights and entitlements under the NDIS, including for internal and
external review of decisions under the NDIS. Whether this funding is administered by the Agency
or by another Commonwealth Department is a matter for the government. However, funding must
be provided to ensure that the NDIS delivers a comprehensive and fair system for people with
disability.
While supporting the passage of the Bill, we encourage the Committee to further consider whether
the proposed arrangements for the NDIS will promote fairness and transparency in administrative
5
decision-making and facilitate positive legal interventions for people with disability to promote
better life outcomes.
6
Summary of Recommendations
Supporting choice and control in the lives of participants
Recommendation 1: That the Bill be amended to give statutory force to the presumption that a
person has capacity.
Recommendation 2: That the CEO be expressly required to consider the capacity of the
participant when appointing nominees and that a nominee should only be appointed by the CEO
where a person lacks capacity.
Recommendations 3: That the Bill specify criteria for assessing capacity that reflect the
recommendations of the Victorian Law Reform Commission in its Guardianship Report.
Recommendation 4: That the relationship between the functions of nominees and the functions
of people appointed under other statutory schemes be clarified.
Recommendation 5: That nominees be required to act on the instructions and abide by the
wishes of a participant, to the extent possible.
Recommendation 6: That the concept of “unreasonable risk” in clause 44(2)(a) be clarified to
ensure that the operation of the provision does not unduly interfere with the autonomy of
participants.
Recommendation 7: That the Bill be amended to allow for the removal of a nominee if there is any
risk of harm to a participant.
Recommendation 8: That the Bill expressly recognise and accommodate legal and other
individual advocates to support participant decision-making under the NDIS.
Eligibility requirements for the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Recommendation 9: That the Committee give consideration to the justification for the age criteria
and consider removing the age criteria so people over the age of 65 are not disadvantaged.
Recommendation 10: That the disability requirements in clause 24 be clarified, particularly in
relation to the status of mental illness under the NDIS.
Recommendation 11: That a beneficial approach be adopted to assessment of disability for the
purposes of eligibility for the NDIS.
7
Supporting good decision-making under the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Recommendation 12 – That the Bill specify an upper time limit of 30 days for internal review of
decisions.
Recommendation 13 – That principles of natural justice expressly apply to the internal review
process.
Recommendation 14: That the Bill provide for a person to have supports backdated to the date of
application for review of the decisions where a review is decided in their favour.
Recommendation 15: That the Commonwealth Government provide new funding for legal
assistance for internal and external review processes under the NDIS.
Recommendation 16: That third parties (such as family members) be able to apply for review of
decisions where a person is represented by a nominee.
Recommendation 17: That subclause (2) of clause 6 proscribing funding for legal assistance for
internal and external review of decisions be omitted from the Bill.
Recommendation 18: That the Commonwealth Government provide new funding to enable the
legal assistance sector to meet the needs of people with disability and any increased demand on
legal services arising out of the commencement of the NDIS.
Supporting better life outcomes by addressing the legal needs of people with disability.
Recommendation 19: That the Agency collaborate with Victoria Legal Aid to facilitate appropriate
legal interventions for Victorians who receive support from the NDIS to promote access to justice
for people with disability.
Supporting prisoners with disability to transition back to the community
Recommendation 20: That the Agency consults with agencies such as the Adult Parole Board,
Corrections Victoria, Forensicare and the Department of Human Services to ensure an integrated
approach to the provision of post-release services for Victorian prisoners.
8
Additional matters for consideration by the Committee
Recommendation 21: That the standard for the waiver of debts in special circumstances be
consistent with the existing standard in section 1237AAD of the Social Security Act 1991.
Recommendation 22: That the Committee consider whether the matters proposed for inclusion in
the NDIS Rules ought to be set out in the legislation to preserve the ongoing integrity of the NDIS.
Recommendation 23: That the government undertake consultation on the content of the NDIS
Rules.
9
Supporting choice and control in the lives of participants
One of the primary aims of the NDIS is to enable people with disability to exercise more choice and
control in their lives though a person-centred, self-directed approach, with individualised funding.
We strongly support this approach.
Our experience representing clients with disability confirms that people can feel disempowered
when their freedom to make decisions concerning health care, accommodation or finances is taken
away. In our experience, our clients have better outcomes where they are given the opportunity to
meaningfully participate in decisions about the matters that impact their lives. We give effect to the
individual autonomy of our clients when receiving instructions from our clients in matters under the
Guardianship and Administration Act 1986 and in hearings before the Mental Health Review Board.
Capacity
In general terms, the structure of the NDIS gives effect to the objective of enabling people with
disability to exercise more choice and control. Regrettably, however, the Bill does not give statutory
force to the common law presumption that a person has capacity, consistent with Article 12 of the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This will provide symbolic confirmation that
disability alone does not, of itself, trigger an inquiry into a person’s capacity.
In addition, we are concerned that some features of the NDIS may inhibit the realisation of
individual autonomy and choice in decision-making. Indeed, there are parts of the NDIS that have
the potential to preference a NDIS model of substituted decision-making rather than supported
decision-making.
While the guiding principles of the Act provide that a person with disability should be supported to
exercise choice and control in the pursuit of their goals and the planning and delivery of their
supports, the Act does not specify the nature of this support or make separate provision for this
support (beyond the nominee process which is more akin to substituted decision making rather
than supported decision-making).
Clause 5 of the Bill specifies additional principles guiding actions of people who may do acts or
things on behalf of others. It provides that where a person does an act or thing on behalf of a
person with disability, the act or thing is to be done in accordance with the general principles of the
Bill and the following principles: people with disability should be involved in decision making processes that affect them,
and where possible make decisions for themselves; people with disability should be encouraged to engage in the life of the community; the judgements and decisions that people with disability would have made for themselves
should be taken into account
10
the cultural and linguistic circumstances of people with disability should be taken into
account the supportive relationships, friendships and connections with others of people with
disability should be recognised.
However, these principles do not include a presumption of capacity. VLA recommends that the Bill
be amended to include a statutory presumption that a person has capacity consistent with the aims
of the NDIS to enable people with disability to exercise choice and control in their lives.
Recommendation 1: That the Bill be amended to give statutory force to the presumption that a
person has capacity.
Nominees
By contrast, while most people will be able to participate in the NDIS without assistance, some may
need a level of support in order to realise their rights under the NDIS. This may include
circumstances where a person does not have the capacity to make reasonable decisions in relation
to a particular aspect of their plan.
Part 5 of the Bill sets out the arrangements for nominees who may do things on behalf of a
participant. It provides for plan nominees and correspondence nominees. Clause 78 of the Bill
provides that a plan nominee may do things that can be done by a participant under the Act
relating to the preparation, review or replacement of their plan or the management of funding for
supports under the plan.
The Bill does not specify any criteria to be taken into account when appointing a nominee.
Therefore, there is no requirement that the CEO establish that a person is not able to manage their
plan or administer their support package. In our view, in order to realise individual autonomy and
maximise individual choice and control, there should be more robust control around the
appointment of nominees to ensure that the CEO adopts the least restrictive approach necessary
to protect the person and promote fair transactions.
For example, section 22 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1986 (Vic) provides guidance
to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal when making an order to appoint a guardian. It
specifies certain matters that must be taken into account when making an order, including whether
their needs could be met by means less restrictive of the person’s freedom of decision and action
and the wishes of the proposed represented person. An order can only be made if the Tribunal is
satisfied that it is in the best interests of the person to make the guardianship order.
11
Both plan nominees and correspondence nominees have a duty to ascertain the wishes of the
participant and act in a way that promotes the personal and social wellbeing of the participant.
However, unlike the arrangements in relation to children in clause 76, the Bill does not expressly
provide for the CEO to consider the capacity of an adult participant and their ability to make
decisions for themselves prior to allowing a person to assume control of the management of their
plan or other matter.
VLA recommends that the Bill be amended to expressly require that the CEO must have decided
that a person does not have capacity, or cannot make reasonable decisions for themselves, when
deciding whether to appoint a nominee. VLA supports the capacity assessment principles
recommended by the Victorian Law Reform Commission in its guardianship review for any inquiry undertaken by the CEO. 1
In addition, it is not clear how the functions of nominees appointed under the NDIS will relate to
existing functions of guardians and administrators except to the extent that the CEO must consider
whether a guardian or administrator has been appointed when appointing a nominee. Given the
potential overlap between the role of the nominee and the role of a guardian, VLA supports further
clarification of the intended relationship between the two schemes. If it is intended that a person’s
existing guardian or administrator perform the function of plan nominee or correspondence
nominee under the NDIS, additional training and resources may be required.
To ensure that there is continuity of support and that duplication is avoided, where the CEO
appoints a nominee for participant on the basis that the person lacks capacity, the nominee should
be, to the extent possible, the person appointed under a relevant statutory scheme to assist the
person.
Finally, clause 80 of the Bill requires a nominee to act in a manner that promotes the personal and
social wellbeing of the participant. Nominees have a duty to ascertain the wishes of the participant,
1 Victorian Law Reform Commission (2012) Guardianship: Final Report, p 122. The Victorian Law Reform Commission recommended that capacity be assessed in accordance with the following principles: a person’s capacity is specific to the decision to be made impaired decision-making capacity may be temporary or permanent and can fluctuate over time an adult’s incapacity to make a decision should not be assumed based on their age, appearance, condition, or an aspect of their behaviour a person should not be considered to lack capacity to make a decision merely because they make a decision that others consider to be unwise a person should not be considered to lack the capacity to make a decision if it is possible for them to make that decision with appropriate support when assessing a person’s capacity, every attempt should be made to ensure that the assessment occurs at a time and in an environment in which their capacity can most accurately be assessed.
12
but there is no requirement that they follow the instructions or abide by the wishes of a participant.
To give effect to the aim of the NDIS to provide a system of supported decision-making that
maximises individual autonomy, VLA recommends that the nominee be required to follow the
instructions and abide by the wishes of a participant to the extent possible.
Recommendation 2: That the CEO be expressly required to consider the capacity of the
participant when appointing nominees and that a nominee should only be appointed by the CEO
where a person lacks capacity.
Recommendations 3: That the Bill specify criteria for assessing capacity that reflect the
recommendations of the Victorian Law Reform Commission in its Guardianship Report.
Recommendation 4: That the relationship between the function of nominees and the functions of
people appointed under other statutory schemes be clarified.
Recommendation 5: That nominees be required to act on the instructions and abide by the
wishes of a participant, to the extent possible.
“Unreasonable Risk”
It is generally accepted that the autonomy of people to make their own decisions should be
respected regardless of the quality of these decisions. VLA considers that a “bad decision” by a
participant should not trigger the loss of their decision-making capability.
VLA submits that the current approach in the Bill may invite some subjective assessments of the
quality of the conduct and decision-making by a participant. In particular, section 44 provides that
a statement of participant supports in a participant’s plan must not provide that the participant is to
manage the funding for supports under his or her plan to the extent that it would present an
unreasonable risk to the participant.
The Bill does not provide any guidance on what the CEO should consider when making this
assessment. VLA submits that there should be legislative guidance to clarify the intended
operation of this provision so it does not unduly interfere with the autonomy of participants in the
NDIS.
Recommendation 6: That the concept of “unreasonable risk” in clause 44(2)(a) be clarified to
ensure that the operation of the provision does not unduly interfere with the autonomy of
participants.
Removal of plan and correspondence nominees
One of the central aims of substituted and supported decision making is to ensure fair treatment
and protection of vulnerable people from others who may exploit them. Our experience in the
13
guardianship and administrative decision making jurisdictions tells us that people with significant
disability, particularly people who are elderly, can be at significant risk to a range of exploitative
behaviours.
For example, we represented an elderly lady who resided with her son who held a power of
attorney in respect of his mother. The son spent our client’s remaining resources and dissipated
her assets before admitting his mother to a public nursing home. Her only income was an aged
pension. The son subsequently disappeared. We successfully applied to have the power of
attorney revoked at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Appeal. While an administrator was
appointed, our client’s assets were not recoverable.
VLA has some concerns about the high threshold for the suspension and removal of a nominee.
Clause 91 of the Bill provides that a nominee can be suspended (and ultimately removed) if the
CEO has reasonable grounds to believe that the person has caused, or is likely to cause, severe
physical, mental or financial harm to the participant.
VLA submits that a nominee should be removed if there is any risk of harm to a participant. The
harm should not need to be severe as currently provided for in the Bill.
Recommendation 7: That the Bill be amended to allow for the removal of a nominee if there is any
risk of harm to a participant.
Recognising the role of advocacy under the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Legal advocacy can be an important tool for people with disability to realise their rights and
entitlements. In addition, legal advocacy assists to identify and address the disadvantage that can
flow from the multiple legal problems that, according to the LAW Survey, are more likely to be
experienced by people with disability. Despite the preventative and remedial value of legal
advocacy, the Bill is silent on the role of legal or other forms of advocacy for people with disability.
The role of legal advocacy is recognised by the National Disability Advocacy Program noting that it
seeks to uphold the rights and interests of people with all types of disabilities on a one-to-one basis
by addressing legal aspects of instances of discrimination, abuse and neglect. As stated in the
National Disability Advocacy Framework, legal advocates may:
provide legal representation for people with disability as they come into contact with the
justice system; pursue positive changes to legislation for people with disability; and assist people with disability to understand their legal rights.
14
Importantly in the context, legal advocacy also assists people to realise their rights and resolve any
disputes with government. According to the LAW Survey legal issues involving government are
among the most common with approximately one in ten survey respondents reporting an issue with government.2 The LAW Survey also reported that the outcomes of government problems were less likely to be favourable.3 The Survey also found that people who take no action in relation to a
legal issue achieve the poorest outcome.
Facilitating access to legal advocacy, advice and assistance is consistent with the general
principles guiding actions under the NDIS set out in clause 4 of the Bill.
Recommendation 8: That the Bill expressly recognise and accommodate legal and other
individual advocates to support participant decision-making under the NDIS.
Eligibility requirements for the National Disability Insurance Scheme
While NDIS will substantially improve the support available to people with disability, even once fully
implemented, the NDIS will not be able to assist all people with disability. Support will be provided
at different levels, depending on assessed need. The potential implications of different levels of
support based on an individual assessment increase the imperative for fair and transparent
decision making under the scheme, including access to review of decisions made under the
scheme. This is discussed further at page 18.
Potential participants in the scheme, or someone acting on their behalf, may request access to the
NDIS by providing information or documentation to the CEO of the Agency. Decisions about
eligibility will be based on the World Health Organisation’s International Classification of
Functioning, Disability and Health. The CEO will make the decision on whether or not the person
meets the access criteria. The access criteria include:
age requirement
residence requirement
disability or early intervention requirements
The Bill also includes some conditions for access to the NDIS, including a requirement that a
person take reasonable steps to pursue compensation for personal injury.
2 Law and Justice Foundation (2012) Legal Australia-Wide Survey – Legal Need in Australia (the LAW Survey), p.xiv. 3 The LAW Survey, pxx.
15
Age
The prevalence of disability in our community increases with age. In 2009, 35 per cent of people
aged between 60 and 64, reported living with a disability. This increases to 66 per cent of people aged between 80 and 84 and over 80 per cent of people over the age of 85. 4
Despite the correlation between disability and age, the Bill restricts eligibility to people who are
under the age of 65 on the date of application for access to the NDIS. If a person is a participant
in the NDIS, they continue to be so until the person dies; or turns 65 and enters permanent
residential aged care or permanent community aged care; or their status as a participant is
revoked.
The Statement of Compatibility for the Bill provides that the age limit has been set on the basis that
people over the age of 65 are eligible for long term assistance and support under the aged care
system and that the support offered by the NDIS is not intended to reproduce or replace existing
support through the aged care system.
According to the Statement of Compatibility, the age limitation is reasonable and necessary
because it supports the broader intent of an integrated system of support operating nationally and
providing seamless transition through different phases of life. It does not detail any differences
between the support available under the NDIS and the support available under the aged-care
system or make any conclusions on whether they can be considered to provide equivalent level of
service and support for people over the age of 65.
We agree with the position in the Statement of Compatibility that the establishment of the NDIS
promotes and advances the rights of people with disability in Australia by providing support for
them to exercise their social, economic and cultural rights. However, we recommend that the
Committee give further consideration to whether people who do not satisfy the age criteria for
access to the scheme will be disadvantaged.
Our practice experience shows that older Australians, particularly those on low incomes and with a
disability, are especially vulnerable. We also note the recent findings of the Productivity
Commission that, for example, the supply of aged care services is not matched to the level of
demand, that current subsidies for supported residential care is inadequate and that consumers in
the aged-care system have limited choice about the mix of services they receive and the provider of those services.5
4 Australian Bureau of Statistics (2010) 4430.0 - Disability, Ageing and Carers, Australia: Summary of Findings, 2009. Available at http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4430.02009?OpenDocument. Accessed 23 January 2012. 5 Productivity Commission (2010) Productivity Commission Inquiry Report Summary of Proposals: Caring for Older Australians. Available at http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/aged-care/report. Accessed 23 January 2013.
16
The age criteria may operate to discriminate against people on the basis of age to the extent that
the NDIS and the aged-care system may provide different levels of support. In particular, people
with disability will be denied the option of accessing the supports available under the NDIS if they
have reached the age of 65 when the NDIS commences. This cohort of people will have no option
but to enter the aged-care system while those aged 64 will have the choice of both the NDIS and
the aged-care system. This is primarily a transitional issue for the scheme as those who attain the
age of 65 while participating in the NDIS will have the choice of entering the aged-care system or
remaining in the NDIS.
Recommendation 9: That the Committee give consideration to the justification for the age criteria
and consider removing the age criteria so people over the age of 65 are not disadvantaged.
Assessment of disability
Clause 24 sets out the disability requirements of the NDIS. The Bill provides that a person meets
the disability requirements if the person has a disability that is attributable to one or more
intellectual, cognitive neurological, sensory or physical impairments, or to one or more impairments
attributable to a psychiatric condition. In addition the Bill requires that:
the impairment or the impairments are, or are likely to be permanent (even where the
impairment varies in intensity).
the person must have substantially reduced functional capacity to undertake, or
psychosocial functioning in undertaking, communication, social interaction, learning,
mobility, self care, or management.
the impairment must also affect a person’s capacity for social and economic participation.
the person’s support needs are likely to continue for the person’s lifetime.
VLA submits that subclause 24(1) is unclear and should be clarified, particularly in relation to the
status of mental illness under the NDIS. The clause appears to differentiate between impairments
attributable to a psychiatric condition and other impairments.
In addition, while the explanatory material for the Bill clarifies that the Bill is intended to capture
episodic or fluctuating conditions, this is not clear in the concept of varying intensity adopted by the
Bill. Clause 24(2) provides that an impairment or impairments that vary in intensity may be
permanent. The combination of this clause and subclause 24(1) suggests that people with mental
illness may not be captured by the Bill where the psychiatric condition results in episodic or
17
fluctuating conditions (and may include periods where a person is asymptomatic) as this may not
be considered a “permanent impairment” for the purpose of determining access to the NDIS.
VLA supports mental illness being dealt with in the same way as the other impairments specified in
clause 24 for the purpose of access to the NDIS.
Finally, in our experience the assessment of a person’s level of impairment for the purpose of
Commonwealth entitlements can be overly restrictive. We support a beneficial interpretation of
clause 24 of the Bill to promote the social and economic participation of all people with disability.
Recommendation 10: That the disability requirements in clause 24 be clarified, particularly in
relation to the status of mental illness under the NDIS.
Recommendation 11: That a beneficial approach be adopted to assessment of disability for the
purposes of eligibility for the NDIS.
Supporting good decision-making under the National Disability Insurance
Scheme
Internal Review
The Bill provides for a process of internal review of decisions made under the NDIS. Part 6 of
Chapter 4 of the Bill sets out the appeal and review processes for the NDIS. There are a number of
decisions under the NDIS that will be reviewable decisions. These include:
That a person does not meet the To appoint a correspondence
access criteria; nominee;
To revoke a person’s status as a To cancel or suspend, or not to
participant; cancel or suspend the appointment of
To approve the statement of a nominee;
participant supports in a participant’s To give a notice to require a person
plan; to take reasonable action to claim or
Not to review a participant’s plan obtain compensation
Not to make a determination in To give notice that the CEO proposes
relation to actions on behalf of a child; to recover an amount; To make, or not to make, a
determination that a person has
parental responsibility for a child To appoint a plan nominee;
18
The Bill provides that written notice of their review rights must be given to participants when a
reviewable decision is made, as well as details of how to request a review. The reviewer must not
have been involved in the original decision, and must confirm the original decision, vary it, or set it
aside and substitute a new decision. A person may then apply to the Administrative Appeals
Tribunals for external review of the decision to confirm, vary or set aside the original decision
arising out of the internal review process.
VLA supports the availability of internal and external review processes to resolve issues arising
under the NDIS. However, we have some concerns about the arrangements set out in the Bill.
These are: there is no funding allocated for legal assistance for review of decisions under the NDIS. there is no upper time limit for a decision by an internal reviewer a request for a review of a decision does not affect the operation of the decision or prevent
actions being taken to implement the decision. This means that the Agency can continue to
implement a plan. Where the outcome of a review of a decision is favourable to a
participant, the Bill should provide that the relevant entitlement or decision is backdated to
the date of the original request for review. there is no requirement that the internal review processes follow principles of natural justice third parties are not able to seek review of decisions.
Recommendation 12 – That the Bill specify an upper time limit of 30 days for internal review of
decisions.
Recommendation 13 – That principles of natural justice expressly apply to the internal review
process.
Recommendation 14: That the Bill provide for a person to have supports backdated to the date of
application for review of the decisions where a review is decided in their favour.
Recommendation 15: That the Commonwealth Government provide new funding for legal
assistance for internal and external review processes under the NDIS.
Recommendation 16: That third parties (such as family members) be able to apply for review of
decisions where a person is represented by a nominee.
19
Legal advocacy and administrative decision-making
As discussed above, legal advocates can provide important support to people with disability. Legal
advocacy also supports and encourages fair and effective administration of government programs.
The importance of good administrative decision-making was recognised by the Access to Justice Taskforce.6 The Access to Justice Taskforce reported:
“Disputes with government are a large category of total legal issues reported. A
substantial proportion of people do nothing in response to legal issues and a
significant number of disputes are unresolved. As decision maker and participant in
these disputes, the capacity of government to influence access to justice in these areas is considerable.”7
As discussed above, people with disability are more likely to experience legal problems. More
generally, the survey found that people whose main source of income was government payments had significantly higher odds of experiencing substantial legal problems. 8 People accessing
support from the NDIS are likely to fall into a category of people who are more likely to experience
legal problems – they live with disability and are also in receipt of payments from government.
In our experience, poor administrative decision-making can affect some of the most vulnerable
people in Australia. For people in receipt of income support payments, it can mean having
payments stopped or suspended. Many of these people are not in a position to assert their rights to
challenge administrative decisions. We assist clients to challenge administrative decisions made by
Centrelink and other government agencies. The largest single category of applications for review
was applications made in respect of decisions about disability support pension. Based on that
casework experience we know that agencies can often get decisions wrong. For example, the
fallibility of Centrelink’s decision making processes is illustrated by a Commonwealth Ombudsman’s report of March 2011,9 which identified ‘systemic weakness’ in Centrelink’s review
processes, including a lack of transparency and insufficient information provided to customers
about their review rights – leading to delays and inaction.
By applying scrutiny to administrative decision-making processes, access to legal assistance for
review of administrative decisions enhances the imperative for government to improve these
processes and ensure that primary decisions and internal review processes are sound and comply
with the legal and administrative frameworks for decision-making.
6 Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department Access to Justice Taskforce A Strategic Framework for Access to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice System, 2009, p 131. 7 Ibid, p 55. 8 The LAW Survey, p 69.
9 Commonwealth Ombudsman (2011), Report No. 04|2011: Centrelink: The Right Of Review – Having Choices, Making Choices
20
The role of legal advocacy for vulnerable people in receipt of Commonwealth entitlements is
highlighted in the following example from our casework.
CASE STUDY
A Centrelink decision to cut a woman off from her Disability Support Pension in 2007
was overturned 5 years after the application for review was lodged. Due to administrative
error, Centrelink did not respond to the request for review until a further application was
made in 2011. In the interim the woman, who suffers from severe chronic mental health
issues, became homeless because she could no longer afford to pay her rent. As a
result her mental health further deteriorated and she remains seriously affected by this
period of instability in her life. Unaware of her legal rights and struggling with her mental
health the woman did not follow up her request for review with Centrelink.
In 2011 a Centrelink Social worker encouraged the woman to apply for Disability Support
Pension again and in the process Centrelink realised it had failed to respond to her
request for review in 2007. When the client received the negative outcome of the review
she contacted Victoria Legal Aid. VLA represented the woman in two appeals, and
established her case despite the evidentiary difficulties caused by Centrelink’s extreme
delay. Centrelink has now conceded that she was eligible for Disability Support Pension
from 2007, and she will now receive back pay to the date she was cut off. The woman
states that whilst this is a great relief it cannot redress the pain and suffering she
experienced through Centrelink’s failure to process her appeal at the time she lodged it.
Without the assistance of VLA it is unlikely that this woman would not have pursued her
appeal to overturn the decision. Further, given the complex legal issues and evidentiary
requirements it is unlikely that she would have been able to establish her case if she
had.
Legal advocacy can also assist to resolve matters before proceeding to hearing. In our
experience, approximately 95 per cent of matters relating to disability support pensions can be
resolved with the support of legal assistance without needing to proceed to hearing. This reduces
pressure on court lists and can represent a saving for government.
As well as being better for those affected by decisions of government, there are advantages for
government that flow from getting a decision right the first time and short-circuiting the duplication
and delay caused by poorly made or erroneous decisions.
21
Legal assistance for internal and external review of decisions by the Agency
Given the important role of legal advocacy in promoting good decision-making processes and
supporting the rights and interests of people with disability, VLA opposes the provision expressly
proscribing funding for legal assistance for review of decisions under the NDIS in clause 6 of the
Bill. VLA considers that access to legal assistance will enhance the quality of the relations and
transactions within the NDIS and promote better outcomes for people with a disability. It may also
assist in the identification and resolution of other common legal problems experienced by people
with disability.
Clause 6 of the Bill provides that the agency may provide support and assistance (including
financial assistance) to prospective participants and participants in relation to doing things or
meeting obligations under, or for the purpose of the Act. Sub-clause (2) then sets out that this
does not permit or require the Agency to fund legal assistance for prospective participants or
participants in relation to review of decisions made under the Act.
VLA considers that subclause (2) should be omitted as it diminishes the role of legal advocacy for
people with disability. We consider that this clause should be removed irrespective of whether or
not any funding for legal assistance is administered by the Agency or some other source.
We consider that funding should be provided for advocacy to assist people to realise their rights
and entitlements under the NDIS. Whether this funding is administered by the Agency or by
another Commonwealth Department is a matter for the government. However, funding must be
provided to ensure that people are able to realise their rights under the NDIS. Without additional
funding, VLA will not be in a position to meet any additional demand associated with the scheme.
Recommendation 17: That subclause (2) of clause 6 proscribing funding for legal assistance for
internal and external review of decisions be omitted from the Bill.
Recommendation 18: That the Commonwealth Government provide new funding to enable the
legal assistance sector to meet the needs of people with disability and any increased demand on
legal services arising out of the commencement of the NDIS.
Supporting better life outcomes by addressing the legal needs of people with
disability
VLA submits that the introduction of the NDIS and the creation of the Agency presents a unique
opportunity to address some of the other issues that may flow from living with disability - including
social exclusion, discrimination, housing issues, poverty and difficulty accessing government
services. The challenges for people with disability were recognised by the Prime Minister in the
22
Second Reading Speech for the Bill, where she spoke of the isolation, poverty, loss of dignity,
stress, hopelessness and fear of the future that people with disability may experience.
The LAW Survey found that some people are particularly vulnerable to legal problems - 65% of
legal problems were experienced by only 9% of respondents and 85% of problems were experienced by 22% of respondents.10
The LAW Survey highlights that people with disability are significantly more likely to have legal
problems, including substantial and multiple legal problems. According to the LAW Survey,
disability status was one of the two strongest significant independent predictors of legal problem prevalence in Australia.11 It found that people with a disability are most likely to experience legal
problems and experience the greatest difficulty resolving these issues.
The LAW Survey concluded:
‘Many disadvantaged or socially excluded groups were particularly vulnerable to legal
problems. They were not only more likely to experience legal problems overall, but
also had increased vulnerability to substantial legal problems and multiple legal
problems. In all jurisdictions, people with a disability stood out as the disadvantaged
group that had higher prevalence according to the greatest number of measures. In
addition, the associations between disability and increased prevalence were often among the strongest.’12
A person with a disability is twice as likely to experience a legal problem as a person
without disability. Almost two thirds of survey respondents with disability reported experiencing legal problems.13 People with disability often experienced legal problems
across the spectrum of legal issues. People with disability had increased odds of
problems from all 12 problem groups, including consumer, credit, debt, crime,
employment, family, government, health, housing, personal injury, rights, money and accidents.14
The Agency will be the primary broker of services to people with a disability. It will be a central and
ongoing point of contact for people with a disability. The general principles articulated in the Bill
contemplate that the Agency should assist people to access supports outside the NDIS (see clause
4 (13). Consistent with these guiding principles, VLA submits that the Agency should facilitate
appropriate legal interventions for people who receive support from the NDIS.
10 The LAW Survey, p 58. 11 The LAW Survey, p 66. 12 The LAW Survey, p xv. 13 The LAW Survey, p 68. 14 The LAW Survey, p 71.
23
We anticipate that legal problems, or potential legal problems, may be identified or uncovered by
the Agency or registered providers of support during the course of performing functions under the
Act. By linking people with legal service providers, the impact of these problems can be confined.
In some circumstances, this may also work to minimise the need for other supports and contribute
to the financial sustainability of the NDIS. In our experience, early identification and resolution of
legal issues is more valuable than providing legal representation in courts and tribunals. Early
identification and resolution of legal issues also promotes positive health outcomes as we know that unresolved legal problems can have substantial health consequences. 15
VLA would welcome the opportunity to work with the Agency to consider the best way to meet the
legal needs of people with disability. We consider that this collaborative, holistic approach will
contribute to improved outcomes for people with disability and reduce the downstream pressure on
health and other government support services that can flow from unresolved legal issues.
This will require an investment from the Commonwealth to ensure that the legal assistance sector
has sufficient resources to meet any additional demand pressures on existing services.
For example, consideration could be given to developing a referral arrangement between the
Agency and VLA as a way to broaden access to justice for people with a disability, consistent with
the Commonwealth Government’s Access to Justice Framework. Access to justice is broader than
ensuring that people can have their day in court or litigate a dispute through formal legal
processes. Access to justice is about real people with everyday problems. It is about providing
people with the best opportunity to resolve these problems.
The coordination of health and legal services to address the multiple needs of people with disability
has been endorsed by academics and is supported by recent research into unmet legal need in Australia.16 A holistic approach that addresses the legal and non-legal needs of people with
disability is more likely to promote better health outcomes in the long term.
Recommendation 19: That the Agency collaborate with VLA to facilitate appropriate legal
interventions for people who receive support from the NDIS to promote access to justice for people
with disability.
Supporting prisoners to transition back to the community
There were 4,737 prisoners in the Victorian prison system on 30 June 2011.17 This equates to a
38% rise in the Victorian prison populations in the last decade. There are a large number of
15 See for example, Pleasence, Balmer and Buck (2008) ‘The Health Costs of Civil-Law Problems: Further evidence of Links between Civil –Law Problems and Morbidity, and the Consequential Use of Health Services’ 5 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 351-373. 16 The LAW Survey, p 19. 17 Corrections Victoria, Corrections Statistics FAQs. Available at http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/home/prisons/research+and+statistics/corrections+statistics+faqs. Accessed 23 January 2013.
24
prisoners with disability and mental health concerns. For example, as many as one third of Victorian prisoners have a diagnosed mental health condition.18
There is a large prison population in the Barwon region, where the NDIS will be launched in
Victoria. The Bill does not provide any guidance on what, if any, supports will be available to
people in custody through the NDIS. It is also not clear how the NDIS will relate to existing
supports provided to prisoners by Corrections and Justice Health.
VLA encourages the government to give close consideration to how the NDIS will be delivered to
people serving custodial sentences and recommends that the Agency consult with the Adult Parole
Board, Corrections Victoria, Forensicare and the Department of Human Services during the
implementation of the NDIS to ensure an integrated approach to the provision of post-release
services.
Recommendation 20: That the Agency consult with agencies such as the Adult Parole Board,
Corrections Victoria, Forensicare and the Department of Human Services to ensure an integrated
approach to the provision of post-release services for Victorian prisoners.
Additional matters for consideration by the Committee
Debt Collection Processes
The Bill enables the Agency to recover certain debts from participants.
A person may incur a debt in a range of circumstances, including due to administrative error by the
Agency.
The standard for the waiver of debts in special circumstances is more restrictive than the existing
waiver provisions in the Social Security Act 1991. Section 1237AAD of the Social Security Act 1991
provides that waiver is not available on special circumstances grounds if there is any knowing
failure or contravention or false or misleading statements. However, the equivalent provision in the
Bill does not include “knowing failure or contravention”, or any other mental element, to qualify the
scope of acts and omissions that will make the waiver provision unavailable to a participant. There
is nothing in the material accompanying the Bill to explain why the Bill adopts a more restrictive
approach for the waiver of debt incurred by participants in the NDIS.
Recommendation 21: That the standard for the waiver of debts in special circumstances be
consistent with the existing standard in section 1237AAD of the Social Security Act 1991.
18Ombudsman Victoria (2011) Investigation into Prisoner Access to Health Care, p 5.
25
NDIS Rules
Much of the detail of the NDIS will be prescribed in the NDIS Rules, which have not yet been
released. VLA supports a period of consultation on the content of the NDIS Rules. For example,
the NDIS rules will prescribe: detail of the access criteria for the NDIS the reasonable and necessary supports under the NDIS content and scope of the participant plans treatment of compensation payments
VLA submits that some of these issues are too fundamental to the integrity of the NDIS to be left to
the NDIS Rules. Unlike the enabling legislation, the NDIS Rules will not have parliamentary
oversight. Therefore, the NDIS Rules may be vulnerable to amendment without appropriate
scrutiny to ensure that the NDIS continues to meet its statutory objectives. For example, the
access criteria could be overly restricted or the scope of the supports provided under the NDIS
constrained or the scope of the overall scheme contracted. We support further consideration by
the Committee as to whether this approach is satisfactory.
At a minimum, the Commonwealth Government should undertake further consultation regarding
the content of the NDIS Rules.
Recommendation 22: That the Committee consider whether the matters proposed for
inclusion in the NDIS Rules ought to be set out in the legislation to preserve the ongoing
integrity of the NDIS.
Recommendation 23: That the government undertake consultation on the content of the
NDIS Rules.
26
Appendix One - Our Specialist Programs
Mental Health and Disability Advocacy Program
Our Mental Health and Disability Advocacy (MHDA) program is aimed at providing quality legal
advice and advocacy to people with mental health issues and who experience some form of
disability, particularly cognitive disability.
Our MHDA program assists people with disabilities in a wide range of civil and administrative law
matters, including:
involuntary mental health treatment discrimination matters
guardianship and administration infringements and debt matters
orders social security matters
supervised treatment orders and victims of crime compensation claims,
other compulsory disability treatment and
under the Disability Act 2006 criminal law matters.
supervision orders under the Crimes
(Mental Impairment and Unfitness to
be Tried) Act 1997
Lawyers in our MHDA team are experts at communicating with and assisting clients who have any
mental health or disability issues in a holistic way.
We provide outreach legal advice and duty lawyer services at all metropolitan psychiatric facilities
and at most regional psychiatric facilities. In 2011-12 we assisted almost 2000 individuals
regarding Mental Health Review Board matters across the state and provided additional advice and
assistance to many more. We also provide duty lawyer services at VCAT and, for people with
special circumstances, the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.
The work of the MHDA program is informed by the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence. The
MHDA lawyers strive to not only help clients with their legal problems but also to dignify their
experience of the mental health, disability and legal systems, improve their knowledge and
understanding of the law, increase their access to services and entitlements and promote their
autonomy and human rights.
Commonwealth Entitlements Program
Our specialist Commonwealth Entitlements team provides assistance to clients with administrative
reviews of Centrelink decisions, and assistance with social security prosecutions. Assistance with
27
social security matters is a Commonwealth priority, identified in the National Partnership
Agreement.
Under the National Partnership Agreement, the Commonwealth has also prioritised the provision of
assistance to war veterans seeking entitlements from the Commonwealth government.
We provide telephone advice regarding social security administrative review matters. We also run
an advice service in Melbourne and some of our regional offices and an advice service at the
Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
Equality Law Program
Our Equality Law Program holds weekly anti-discrimination law advice sessions and regularly
provides advice and representation to clients who suffer discrimination, harassment,
victimisation and vilification. We assist clients with complaints of discrimination in various
jurisdictions, including the Federal Court and the Federal Magistrates Court, using various
legislation, including federal anti-discrimination legislation, the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and
the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic). These services form part of VLA’s holistic services to
our priority clients that aim to reduce disadvantage and meet overall legal need in the
community.
Criminal Law Program
Within our Criminal Law program, specialist lawyers provide advice and representation for people
accused of criminal offences who have mental health or other disabilities. We assist people in
prison and once released, including those on post-release orders. Our criminal lawyers also
provide a dedicated duty lawyer service to the Assessment and Referral Court (ARC) List.
Family, Youth and Children’s Law Program
Our Family Law Program assists adults and children to resolve their family disputes to achieve
safe, workable and enduring care arrangements for children. We also assist parents in
building their capacity to resolve future disputes without legal assistance by applying finite
legal aid resources in areas of most need and to those who are most disadvantaged or at risk
of social exclusion, including parents and children with disability.
Client Access
The Client Access team plays a central role in driving and implementing VLA’s access and
equity agenda in the context of changes to community demographics and an increasing need
to prioritise access to VLA services.
28
Our Client Access team works collaboratively across VLA to produce evidenced-based policy,
improve and streamline processes, develop tools and bring people together to achieve
systemic change.
The Client Access team coordinates organisational efforts to improve VLA’s response to
priority client groups. We are currently improving our whole of organisation systems to improve
access and improve client’s experience of VLA.
Legal Help
Legal Help is VLA’s phone service. It aims to provide a comprehensive, streamlined service for new clients and clients with a new legal problem. Legal help officers will assess a caller’s needs and provide information, preliminary advice and referral as required.
Legal Help operates as a major gateway for the community to access VLA, legal information, advice and further assistance. Legal Help:
handles over 80,000 calls a year from members of the public, community and government
workers – averaging over 300 calls per day assesses the legal queries and needs of callers and provides legal information and
preliminary advice helps callers access relevant VLA services and resources, including publications,
information on our website, workshops, duty lawyer services, ongoing assistance and
representation provides referrals to other legal and non-legal services provides legal information and advice in English and other languages. Some of our legal
help officers are bilingual and we use telephone interpreters whenever needed. Legal Help is staffed by lawyers and experienced paralegals with broad legal knowledge
and practical legal experience.
Community Legal Education
People with a disability are a priority audience for VLA’s community legal education (CLE) work.
Our major project work, engagement sessions and information materials are driven by client need,
strategic partnerships and response to changing laws and policies. Our CLE work is also a key
plank of VLA’s 2012-14 Disability Action Plan.
Our work targets specifically people with a cognitive disability or a mental illness. Key activities are:
partnering with Victoria’s Department of Education and Early Childhood Development to
create a suite of teaching tools for high school special education teachers on three key
legal topics relevant to young people with a mild intellectual disability.
29
developing some resources to assist people to understand and navigate the changes to
Victoria’s mental health laws. delivering sessions to students with an intellectual disability and adults with an intellectual
disability (through our relationship with advocacy organisation VALID) supporting Inside Access, a community-based legal service for prisoners with a mental
illness, to deliver a series of legal education sessions in prisons. delivering training to workers for the disability and mental health sectors. producing and distributing a range of free legal information materials on a variety of legal
topics, including Securing Their Future, a publication about financial planning for parents of
children with a decision-making disability.
30