Welcome

Welcome to this sixth edition of the Fix NDIS Campaign Newsletter. Our aim to to get several people from the disability community elected to the next federal parliament to Fix NDIS. No-one else is going to do it for us, so we will do it ourselves. Subscribe. Keep informed. Become involved.

Campaign Director

We are seeking a Campaign Director to oversee our national campaign. This is a voluntary position for the next five months. We require a person with exceptional commitment and skills in renovating Australian democracy and transforming the social services landscape.

See www.democracyfirst.org.au/fixndis/

Enquiries to: Vern Hughes 0425 722 890 [email protected]

We will stand a team of candidates from the disability community in up to 30 selected seats out of 150 in the House of Representatives in the next federal election.

We will mobilise the disability community around Australia in support of them – people with disabilities, families, friends, support workers, service providers, and advocates. There are millions of us.

Out team of candidates will include:

• 8 in Sydney/Newcastle/Wollongong
• 8 in Melbourne/Geelong
• 6 in South East Queensland
• 3 in Adelaide
• 3 in Perth
• 1 in Tasmania
• 1 in Canberra

We invite your participation. Complete the form below.

www.democracyfirst.org.au/fixndis/

Fix NDIS

Millions of Australians are deeply disappointed with the way NDIS has been botched as an important social reform. It was intended to personalise supports for people with disabilities through individual budgets to purchase supports to suit each individual so we can all take our place in society.

In fact, NDIS has become a big bureaucracy that people with disabilities have to fight to get the support we need. Its costs have blown out through mismanagement and refusal to heed the advice of thousands of Australians who want NDIS to succeed.

“The NDIS reforms are a masterclass in how not to reform a system. By concentrating power, eroding procedural fairness, and dismissing legitimate concerns, the government risks turning a vital support system into a bureaucratic nightmare. If the goal was to create a system that fosters distrust, fear, and disempowerment, then bravo—they’ve hit the nail on the head.” Renee Fisher, Democracy First Candidate for Isaacs.

It has become clear that both the Albanese Government and the Dutton Coalition have no idea how to Fix NDIS. In fact, they have colluded in a flawed attempt at reform which will mean more bureaucracy, more heavy-handed regulation, more waste of money, and less self-determination for people with disabilities.

The disability community has lost trust in our politicians. They have failed us.

To Fix NDIS we will need to elect our own people to federal parliament to use their leverage to get it right.

Erin McGrath | What does the NDIS consider to be a permanent and significant disability?

Erin McGrath is the Democracy First candidate for Maribyrnong, Victoria.

Why are people with severe and complex disabilities over-represented at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT)? Why is NDIS consistently falling short of its legal obligations in its treatment of people who do not fit into a typical support package or box type??

What does the NDIS consider to be a permanent and significant disability?

A permanent disability means a person’s disability is likely to be lifelong. A significant disability means a disability with a large impact on a person's ability to complete everyday activities.

If you meet this criteria successfully, the NDIS will then review what activities they in fact deem are difficult to perform without significant levels of support. This could be walking, difficulties with communicating, socializing, learning new things or self care, such as showering and brushing your teeth.?

At these point, many people with complex disabilities fall through the cracks. NDIS will use its incredibly limited definition of what “reasonable and necessary” means to them. ?

It seems to me that the NDIA is increasingly using a definition of disability that is different from the legal definition of disability as per the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA).?

If individuals feel they must go through the AAT process to adequately ensure their disability needs are met, this surely indicates there is a problem. It is also undoubtedly true that legal proceedings can be incredibly stressful and have the potential to severely worsen a person’s abilities, leaving them worse off.

I do not believe that NDIS and Agency is using the correct definition of disability in Australia (DDA). Persons are considered to have a disability if they have a limitation, restriction or impairment, which has lasted, or is likely to last, for at least 6 months and restricts everyday activities.

This includes:

• Sensory loss of sight (not corrected by glasses or contact lenses)
• Loss of hearing where communication is restricted, or an aid to assist with, or substitute for, hearing is used
• Speech difficulties
• Intellectual difficulty learning or understanding things
• Physical shortness of breath or breathing difficulties that restrict everyday activities
• Blackouts, seizures or loss of consciousness
• Chronic or recurrent pain or discomfort that restricts everyday activities
• Incomplete use of arms or fingers
• Difficulty gripping or holding things
• Incomplete use of feet or legs
• Restriction in physical activities or in doing physical work
• Disfigurement or deformity
• Psychosocial nervous or emotional condition that restricts everyday activities

Furthermore, according to the DDA the legal definition of disability in Australia includes:

1. Total or partial loss of the person’s bodily or mental functions: This could include conditions that impair a person’s physical or mental capacity. For example, paralysis (loss of motor function) or mental health conditions could fall under this category.
2. Total or partial loss of a part of the body: This refers to the absence of a part of a person's body due to congenital conditions (present at birth), injury, disease, or medical procedures. For example, amputation would fall under this category.
3. The presence in the body of organisms causing disease or illness:? This refers to diseases or illnesses caused by organisms such as bacteria, fungi, or parasites. For example, a person living with HIV/AIDS would fall under this category.
4. The malfunction, malformation or disfigurement of a part of the person’s body: This includes conditions that result in the malfunctioning, malformation or disfigurement of parts of the body. For example, conditions like rheumatoid arthritis (which can cause joint malformation) or burns (which can cause disfigurement) would fall under this category.

These definitions are broad and inclusive, recognising that disability can take many forms and affect people in different ways. The DDA protects individuals with these disabilities from discrimination in many areas of public life, including employment, education, getting or using services, renting or buying a house or unit, and accessing public places.?

I question whether the NDIS and Agency in fact have a legal right to justify their rejections of participants in the scheme based on their own very limited definition of conditions that meet their requirements.

I would remind them that there is only one legal definition of disability as per the DDA, and the NDIS and Agency cannot make their own rules to suit “value for money” and the financial sustainability of the scheme.

This goes against the United Nations Convention on The Rights of Persons with Disability that Australia was the 20th state to ratify and which took effect on?16th August 2008.

Join Up | Participate | Become Involved

Everyone is welcome. We want tens of thousands of Australians involved in this campaign, from various backgrounds.

• People with disabilities
• Family members
• Carers (unpaid)
• Support workers
• Service providers
• Advocates
• Supporters

Register and tell us how you would like to be involved. www.democracyfirst.org.au/fixndis/

Enquiries: Vern Hughes 0425 722 890 [email protected]