Page 2875 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 14 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(2) further notes that:
(a) the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) recently ruled that sex therapy should be considered a “necessary and reasonable support” for a NDIS participant;
(b) the Federal Minister for the NDIS has indicated that the AAT ruling would be appealed to the Federal Court, stating that the services were “not in line with community expectations of what are reasonable and necessary supports”;
(c) any changes to the NDIS (Support for Participants) Rules 2013 to exclude sex or services intended to cause sexual release from participants plans would be a Category A change and require agreement of all state and territory governments; and
(d) the ACT Minister for Disability has stated that the ACT Government will not support any such rule change; and
(3) calls on the ACT Legislative Assembly to:
(a) recognise that, like everyone else, people with disability have sexual needs; and
(b) make a tripartisan statement in support of the provision of sex therapy and sex work under the NDIS by forwarding this motion to the Prime Minister and Minister for the NDIS, signed by the leaders of all ACT Legislative Assembly parties.
Mr Wall: Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I seek your guidance relating to the application of continuing resolution 10 in the standing orders, which relates to sub judice. Continuing resolution 10(1) says:
Cases in which proceedings are active in the courts shall not be referred to in any motion, debate or question.
Paragraph 1(c) states:
Appellate proceedings, whether criminal or civil, are active from the time when they are commenced by application for leave to appeal or by notice of appeal until ended by judgment or discontinuance.
For the benefit of the members, I seek leave to table the final listing from the Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales registry, which shows that on 5 August this year the National Disability Insurance Agency lodged the appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s decision to which Ms Cody’s motion directly refers.
Leave granted.
Mr Wall: I present the following paper:
National Disability Insurance Agency v WRMF—Notice of Appeal from a Tribunal—Federal Court of Australia, New South Registry—Filed 5 August 2019.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video