Page 3345 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 21 August 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
transition to the new scheme, the pathway for both bureaucracy and NDIS clients has been somewhat of a rocky journey. Since the move to transition, the directorate previously responsible for the delivery of disability services has had a confused status among people and groups who previously received funding from them, and there have been some turbulent times. We all know the on-again, off-again status of SHOUT, the concern about whether TADACT would or could be restructured and funded, the future of Pegasus and of Radio 1RPH, not to mention various people with mental health issues that do not fit the NDIS format.
I regret to say that I am still not entirely convinced the current arrangements are either yet well understood or entirely fair. We have too many advocacy groups who have become the forgotten people. We have mental health patients. Some qualify for NDIS while others do not. We have others who may or may not qualify under Health or under another directorate, like SHOUT was, eventually.
I am sure the intention was to make life easier for those with a disability and for their carers and families, but in fact the choice and control mantra has become somewhat of a nightmare for too many. And a key group of people who fall into this category are our most vulnerable members of the disability community: those from a culturally and linguistically diverse background and our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Canberrans.
Despite numerous questions from me on specific support initiatives for these vulnerable groups, I am yet to be convinced that there is anything substantive beyond advocacy groups and translated material. Both these things are important and absolutely necessary. But are they enough? Language barriers and having someone to speak for them is one part of the picture. Cultural barriers and the enormity of responding to a sudden trauma is another thing altogether. I know that the minister cares deeply about these groups, given her other portfolio responsibilities, and I await further initiatives in really supporting and making a difference to these groups.
I suspect there is even less understanding about the role of Disability ACT now. There is, for example, a budget allocation of $4.2 million for an office for disability, and this included an increase of $1 million over last year. I assume some of this is to progress the disability justice strategy and the connect and participate expo held earlier. We learnt during the estimates hearings that staff are also supporting advocacy and emergency funding. But despite all that, there is still an element of luck, of inconsistency in who gets supported, and I am not sure that that is fair.
Advocacy or support groups were clearly an overlooked area when the NDISÂ framework was being established. The patch-up approach through the capacity building and linkages funding is all very well but it is no long-term solution. I do not believe it is a deliberate oversight, just an unfortunate happenstance.
I know that in education the additional funds for disability education are equally not well understood, despite my questions during the estimates hearings and in question time only last week. I note the minister for education undertook to provide further information to the Assembly about this budget item and I look forward to receiving more detailed information on this.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video