NDIA Accountability Project

This project is in DRAFT

Submission 3257 — Name Withheld — NDIS Future Generations Bill

‹ PrevPage 1 of 3 · Source p. 1Next ›

Submission on the NDIS Amendment Bill

  1. Introduction / my connection to this issue I am a woman with a disability who is ineligible for NDIS funding, an advocate for underprivileged communities, and a partner to an experienced disability support worker (independent sole trader) who is based in a small regional WA community.

I am submitting this feedback as I believe this reform does not tackle the current issues with the NDIS and will cause significant harm to people with disabilities, families of people with disabilities, disability support workers, communities (particularly regional communities), and the economy.

  1. My overall position on this Bill I do not support this bill. I have already felt the negative impacts of this proposed bill on my family, coworkers, NDIS participants, and my local community.

  2. My key concerns Automated decision-making, eligibility/assessment changes, and loss of community participation I do not believe decisions should be automated and I do not feel that blanket eligibility should be applied/denied to disabilities. I do not believe that people, particularly those in regional communities, have access to the accommodations, modifications, treatments, and individual support required to manage disabilities on a personal level. Even with the above, people with disabilities still face unique challenges and barriers to social engagement, employment opportunities, and community access. People with disabilities have unique experiences that require individual assessment made by competent professionals.

Foundational supports / system changes and loss of supports With changes to NDIS provider registrations (along with cuts to funding and eligible participants) it will not be financially viable for independent sole traders to remain in the industry. This will disproportionately affect regional communities where there is already limited support. I also do not believe these changes address the root cause of fraudulent service providers and plan managers.

  1. My lived experience (Stories, examples, or observations) I have witnessed first hand the damage an incorrect assessment can cause. As an example, a participant that my partner supports was recently deemed as capable to work and live independently. This person has an intellectual disability, epilepsy, autism, and ADHD. He has limited social capacity, cannot count money, is unable to cook for himself, and routinely falls victim to scams; he carries his research everywhere, his research is a list of superheroes that he likes. As a result of this assessment, his support funding was cut from 28hrs/week to 4hrs/week.

Although my partner has supported him to start his own business- a pressure washing business for garbage bin cleaning- he is unable to do any of this work independently. He

requires support to schedule bookings, maintain appointments, commute his supplies to the location, and ensure quality work. As a result of his funding cut, he may not be able to maintain the contract he recently obtained with the local shire. The entirety of his funding is now being used to support him in retaining 4 hours of employment per week. He no longer has safe access to his community as he is vulnerable to exploitation. He will not be able to maintain his group activities or his volunteer work to build social capacity and life skills.

Not only is this devastating for him, and will undoubtedly lead to skill regression, the lack of support is likely to force his single mother to leave her full time job in the agricultural sector. It has also caused a substantial loss to income for 2 dedicated support workers.

While my partner and I plan our finances to anticipate wage loss due to lapses in plan reviews or cuts to funding- my partner is planning to leave the disability sector. In our regional community, experienced male support workers are very rare and highly valued, particularly for social and community engagement support. Young men represent a significant portion of people with acquired brain injuries and disability; it is beneficial for them to be able to build capacity with someone they view as a peer. In spite my partner’s commitment and love for his work, he no longer feels this is a viable career option. This is personally devastating for him and will further the shortage of available support.

I also know first hand about the damage ineligibility causes, even with a “mild” and “manageable” disability . I am diagnosed with ADHD and Level 1 autism and am not eligible for support. I maintain full time employment but this uses all of my emotional and functional capacity. I do not have capacity to maintain social engagement, participate in my community, regularly perform domestic duties, recreate or engage with hobbies. The constant pressure of masking my disability, and existing without any support or accommodation has resulted in chronic fatigue, burn out, depression, anxiety, self harm and suicidal ideation. It has also caused chronic health issues including pain, inflammation, and gastrointestinal issues. This has resulted in increased costs for medication, appointments, and travel for treatments. This is the toll my “mild” disability has taken without support; I cannot imagine the outcomes for other people with disabilities.

  1. What I believe this Bill gets wrong I believe this bill targets participants as the source of fraud within the NDIS and disproportionately affects independent sole traders. I believe this will push disability support into the hands of a few large private corporations, reducing support for regional communities and economic opportunities.

  2. What needs to change or be protected Without adequate support, people with disabilities can’t even advocate for themselves. I believe that there is a duty to protect our most vulnerable populations. Funding, eligibility, and support for people with disabilities must be protected. I believe the

return on investment for NDIS funding it is beneficial for the Australian economy and our communities.

I believe more consultation and consideration needs to be given to the damages these proposed changes will have on people with disabilities and regional communities.

  1. Final statement I ask the committee to consider my lived experience, the harm on our regional communities, and the negative economic impacts when reviewing this bill.

Thank you for your time in reviewing my submission as a concerned citizen.