1.1
The Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme (the committee) was appointed by resolution by the House of Representatives on 26 July 2022 and the Senate on 27 July 2022.
1.2
The committee is composed of five Members and five Senators, and is tasked with inquiring into and reporting on:
(a)
the implementation, performance and governance of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS or the Scheme);
(b)
the administration and expenditure of the NDIS; and
(c)
such other matters in relation to the NDIS as may be referred to it by either House of the Parliament.
1.3
The committee is required to present an annual report to the Parliament on the activities of the committee during the year, in addition to reporting on any other matters it considers relevant.
1.4
The committee can also inquire into specific aspects of the Scheme. On 8 September 2022, the committee agreed to self-refer an inquiry into the capability and culture of the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA or the Agency), with particular reference to:
(a)
the capability and culture of the NDIA, with reference to operational processes and procedures, and nature of staff employment;
(b)
the impacts of NDIA capability and culture on the experiences of people with disability and NDIS participants trying to access information, support and services from the Agency; and
(c)
any other relevant matters.
Conduct of the inquiry
1.5
The committee advertised the inquiry on its website and wrote to relevant persons and stakeholders seeking submissions. The committee set two submission closing dates, of 12 October 2022 and 16 December 2022. The earlier submission date allowed the committee to consider possible witnesses for hearings held later in 2022, with the December 2022 date helping to inform hearing arrangements for 2023.
1.6
To date, the committee has published 174 public and name withheld submissions, which are listed at Appendix 1 and are available on the committee's website.
1.7
The committee has also held several public hearings as part of its inquiry, as follows:
3 November 2022 in Newcastle
4 November 2022 in Sydney
14 November 2022 in Perth
17 November 2022 in Geelong
18 November 2022 in Melbourne
2 February 2023 in Adelaide
3 February 2023 in Brisbane
1.8
In addition to the formal programs of witnesses, the committee has heard short statements from individuals with a lived experience of disability and the NDIS. Witnesses who appeared at the hearings are listed at Appendix 2.
1.9
Transcripts of the hearings, together with submissions and additional information provided to the inquiry, are available through the committee's inquiry website.
1.10
The committee will continue its program of public hearings as the inquiry continues.
The need for an interim report
1.11
The evidence received by the committee to date as part of this inquiry has highlighted several consistent issues with the capability and culture of the NDIA, which are having a detrimental impact on some NDIS applicants and participants who are trying to access information, support and services from the agency.
1.12
Most of the issues identified in this inquiry – while genuine and pressing – are not new, and have been the subject of targeted recommendations in earlier inquiries by this committee. Many of these recommendations have been accepted by the current or previous government but are still being implemented.
1.13
For example, the committee received evidence from submitters that a cost‑cutting culture has emerged within the NDIA, and heard that this has affected assessments of reasonable and necessary supports, placing an unreasonable burden on applicants and participants.
1.14
Submitters also expressed frustration at having to continually prove their disability at plan reviews and appeals, and at having to repeatedly submit the same documentation to the NDIA.
1.15
Evidence received by the committee called for more disability training for NDIA staff, including on complex disability and the interactions of multiple disabilities.
1.16
Submissions called for the NDIA's communications to be improved, with more clarity on the roles of staff within the NDIA, more transparency of rules and decision-making processes, and for draft plans to be provided to participants and their families and carers. Several submissions also suggested that the NDIA could improve its communications with particular cohorts, including culturally and linguistically diverse communities, First Nations participants, and participants who have difficulty with spoken and/or written communication.
1.17
Submitters also emphasised the demand for advocacy services, to help participants access the NDIS, navigate NDIA processes, and to prepare for plan reviews and appeals to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).
1.18
For these reasons, the committee sees benefit in tabling this interim report now. The committee will continue its work, gathering evidence from stakeholders about the NDIA's processes, procedures, staffing, capability and culture, with a view to making further recommendations to address identified shortfalls in the functioning of the NDIA. The committee looks forward to receiving more evidence about how reform could be implemented to improve engagement and outcomes with the NDIA, for people with disability and their advocates.
Structure of the report
1.19
This report consists of four chapters, as follows:
Chapter 1 (this chapter) provides general information about the conduct of the inquiry.
Chapter 2 provides background to the NDIS and an overview of the NDIA, and highlights some of the key activities undertaken by the NDIA and other relevant organisations since the committee's last report.
Chapter 3 examines some of the key issues relating to the capability and culture of the NDIA identified in evidence to the committee.
Chapter 4 outlines other matters relating to the capability and culture of the NDIA that the committee will continue to examine in the coming months.
Note on terminology and references
1.20
References to submissions in this report are to individual submissions provided to the committee's inquiry into the capability and culture of the NDIA and published on the committee's website, unless otherwise indicated. References to Committee Hansard are to proof transcripts, unless otherwise indicated.
1.21
The committee acknowledges that there are a variety of terms used to reflect the diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and identities. In this report, the terms 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people' and 'First Nations people' are used, with respect.
1.22
The committee also notes that some submitters and witnesses may refer to NDIS participants and other people with disability as 'clients' of particular services. This report may use the term 'client' when quoting from a submission or a hearing transcript. Otherwise, the report uses the terms 'participant', 'person with disability' and 'people with disability', with respect.
1.23
The committee recognises that people use many terms when talking about disability. The committee is aware that there are people in the community who prefer 'identity first language', people who prefer 'people first language', and people who use terms interchangeably.
1.24
People first language seeks to put the person before their disability and avoid the disability becoming the primary, defining characteristic of an individual. For example, 'person with disability'. Identity first language reflects the belief that being disabled is a core part of a person's identity which cannot, and should not, be treated as separate. For example, 'disabled person'.
1.25
The committee recognises there is no consensus as to which language should be used, and that each member of the community will have their own opinion on terminology. The committee also understands that each person will have a preferred way of communicating and self-describing. The committee respects that language is an individual and highly personal choice.
1.26
In the context of this inquiry, the committee has used people first language in its report to ensure consistency with the terms of reference.
Acknowledgements
1.27
The committee thanks all those who have contributed to the inquiry by lodging submissions and appearing at public hearings. The submissions and other evidence received by the committee have been illuminating, and the committee appreciates the time and effort that people have taken to share their often very personal stories.