This was published 2 years ago
‘You’re either in or you’re out’: NDIS architects say scheme is inequitable
The architects of the National Disability Insurance Scheme have accused federal and state governments of abandoning 4 million Australians with disabilities who are not eligible for individual funding under the scheme.
One of the architects of the scheme, Bruce Bonyhady, said the NDIS had become an “oasis in the desert”.
Bruce Bonyhady, one of the architects of the NDIS scheme.Credit: Joe Armao
He said while about 500,000 people were able to access support, those outside the scheme got very little or nothing.
“You’re either in or you’re out. It’s deeply inequitable,” said Mr Bonyhady, who was the inaugural chair of the National Disability Insurance Agency from 2013 to 2016.
“We need to build it up now so that there is equity between the last person who comes into the NDIS and the first person that misses out. Without that, the NDIS is being built on sand.”
Former National Disability Insurance Agency board member John Walsh told a conference convened by Disability Services Consulting on Thursday he didn’t think the NDIS had ever been implemented as envisaged.
Minister for the NDIS, Linda Reynolds. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
“I just look at it as a lost opportunity,” Mr Walsh said.
“I can’t begin to say how angry I am about the way the Australian governments collectively have let down people with disabilities.”
Mr Walsh said the government was so focused on designing the NDIS, it forgot about the National Disability Strategy, which was intended to ensure all 4.5 million Australians with a disability fulfilled their potential.
“It was diabolical. They didn’t know what they were doing,” he said.
Mr Walsh said if he had his time again, he probably would not have joined the National Disability Insurance Agency board.
“It was clear to me right from the start that there were structural problems with the way the legislation was being drafted and I would have done more than just send a confidential letter to the government,” he said.
“I would have yelled out through journalists or something that the scheme was going to have a problem. People kept telling me that I’m better off on the inside, trying to influence change than on the outside, screaming from the rooftops, but in hindsight, I don’t think I achieved very much.”
In 2017, the Productivity Commission recommended increased funding for all people with disability, which it called Tier Two.
NDIS Minister Linda Reynolds said a new and improved National Disability Strategy would support people with disabilities to achieve much better individual outcomes.
“In my consultations, I have also clearly heard about the negative consequences of the lack of state and territory provision for what the Productivity Commission called Tier 2, or what I call community-based support,” she said.
Senator Reynolds said this was intended to provide people with disabilities who were not eligible to receive NDIS-funded support with referral services and support.
“A functioning community-based support system would contribute greatly to the sustainability of the NDIS by ensuring people with disability could get support,” she said.
“I think it would be a tragedy for all 4.5 million Australians with disability if the NDIS became their only option.”
Mr Bonyhady said he was pleased to see Senator Reynolds acknowledge the importance of support for all people with disabilities but said this was not solely a state and territory responsibility.
“The Commonwealth and the NDIA both have critical roles to play,” he said.
Mr Bonyhady said the Commonwealth had defunded Partners in Recovery – which was designed to provide better co-ordination between services for people with severe mental illness – and the Personal Helpers and Mentors Program.
He said most of the participants in these programs were not eligible for the NDIS and therefore the Commonwealth had contributed to the erosion of funding for people not eligible for the scheme.
Mr Bonyhady said the National Disability Insurance Agency lamented that the NDIS was getting new participants when it was a product of people who hadn’t been able to get support coming in with increased impairment.
“So in just the same way as motor vehicle accident schemes invest in roads and road safety, the NDIA has a role to play. This is a shared responsibility, not solely a state and territory responsibility.”
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.