Impact of agency self-interest on people with disability and their families

‹ PrevPage 1 of 2 · Source p. 1Next ›

From: To: Community Affairs, Committee (SEN); Subject: Submission to the Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012 Date: Thursday, 17 January 2013 9:52:45 AM

Please consider this email a formal submission by me to the Senate Standing

Committee on Community Affairs Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance

Scheme Bill 2012.

The current disability system has many problems that need to be addressed.

The current system supports agencies with a vested interest in maintaining disability dependence. Bureaucracies both in the Commonwealth and State Government and in the private and community agencies continue to expend funds and energy into the maintainance of their structures, management salaries and benefits and administrative overheads.

Access to services and equipment to enhance independence and choice for people with disability and those affected should be through independent agencies run by people with disability and/or those committed to providing the best return to those being serviced.

All of the NDIS features listed are vital. In marking these three please note that I mean beyond lip service. Making “rights” reality and beyond “influence” to control.

The main features of the NDIS that will make a difference to the community are:

People with a disability can choose the types of support to use, More rights for people with a disability, People with disability/family will influence the types of support and services offered

The most important services for the NDIS to provide are:

Equipment and home/vehicle modifications, Employment support, Accommodation options

I support the introduction of the NDIS.

I have witnessed and continue to see the impact on people with disability and their families and carers of the present sytem of agency self - interest. The cost of home modifications and the lack of well - designed and operated accommodation options for a range of people are preventing any quality of life. This is particularly true for people in rural areas. For those who may have spent their lives on the land, for example; the only options for them are city-based dog boxes.

There are more community solutions possible, but these require a change in funding. Whilst there will be a massive political fallout, it is time to dismantle the disability industry and those who have manipulated people with disability and those affected for decades.

These are big windmills with powerful allies but they must be brought to account. With their substantial government support redirected to creating leaner, more client focussed and controlled service delivery infrastructure.

I agree for my submission to be made public

Regards,

Ms Jill Warne