Page 4376 - Week 14 - Thursday, 28 November 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
housing, going to school, going to CIT or TAFE or being protected if they are a child at risk, and so on; what are the extra services being provided by those mainstream services which go beyond a reasonable adjustment; and if we go beyond the reasonable adjustment, what would become a specialist disability response and would properly sit within the NDIS—for example, every child needs to get to school, but disability school transport is an additional specialist support that we provide; should we cash out those services and send the cash to the national agency so that people with a disability can have real control and choice by using that cash to purchase the services that they may want; if the risks are too high of cashing out, both for the provider viability and for the people with a disability who need a viable provider market, should we just keep the contracts going and provide the value of those contracts as an in-kind contribution to the commonwealth and to the NDIS; and as we move 5,000-plus people in to the NDIS over the two years of the launch, how should we phase in people over those two years—by age group, by provider or by program?
Within this context we also need to consider what services the territory is best positioned to continue to provide. As I have said before, the NDIS will inevitably bring changes to all services for people with a disability. All providers, both government and community, need to look carefully to the questions of: the financial viability of the service; the relevance of the service; the extent to which people may choose that service if there are other options; and the community need and priorities.
We must ensure that transition of people into the scheme is tailored to the needs and nuances of our community, and that it is as smooth as it can possibly be. I acknowledge the commitment and efforts of all of the directorates and community partners involved in working through these very complex issues.
Finally, Madam Speaker, as I stated at the beginning, over 800 grants were awarded in the first round of the ESO. It is pleasing to note that that first grants reached some of the most hard to reach groups: 67 applicants identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders and, of those, 60 grants were offered; 31 applicants identified as being refugees or humanitarian entrants, and 28 were offered grants.
There are a number of reasons that these figures are important. Firstly, of course, the individuals who are offered the grants have access to additional resources to purchase an item, support or service that they have identified as being important for their life. There are also people who were not able to be offered a grant but who were identified for follow-up contact, perhaps because there was some concern about their current arrangements, or to assist them with a referral to another needed service. Over 300 applicants are being followed up in this way after the first round.
More broadly, these figures show us that across our community hundreds of people who are most likely to be directly impacted by the launch of the NDIS have, through the enhanced service offer, had some contact with it, have heard that it is coming, and have been told how it may relate to them from July of next year. They have been encouraged to think about how they would like their supports and services to be configured and managed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video