There is fierce opposition to NDIS independent assessments coming not only from the disability community, but also legal groups, medical bodies, state governments and others, according to SBS News analysis of hundreds of submissions to a parliamentary inquiry.
Of the more than 240 read by SBS News, the vast majority rejected the contentious reforms as proposed, voiced concern or singled out the government for criticism.
The submissions reveal there is also considerable concern from outside the disability sector, which has been essentially united in opposition to the reforms since they were announced in August last year.
Submissions from outside the disability community voicing concern and opposition have come from the likes of the Australian Medical Association, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, and the Queensland and Northern Territory governments.
, , , health professionals, parents and grandparents of NDIS participants, and a former National Disability Insurance Agency chair have also made critical submissions.
The small number of submissions that did not raise significant concerns or criticisms included the government’s own Department of Social Services - which made a joint submission with the NDIA - and former NDIA board member John Walsh.
The submissions contain a number of recurring themes, including concerns about and transparency, the need for vulnerable people to be subjected to invasive questioning by strangers, the ‘one-size-fits-all’ model , and the changes undermining the principles of choice and control the NDIS was built on.
The process, as currently proposed, would see participants and would-be participants assessed by a government-contracted health professional.
Using standardised tools, the assessor would ask them personal questions and request they complete certain tasks before making a decision about their eligibility for the NDIS and the support they receive.
The government and NDIA have repeatedly said the assessments are a simpler and more equitable way of gauging a person’s capacity, while supporting fairer decisions about scheme access.
Several existing NDIS participants to make submissions said they didn't necessarily mind undergoing a functional assessment, but did have concerns about how they have been proposed here.
'It just won't work'
People With Disability Australia president Samantha Connor said the analysis shows further consensus the government's current approach has few supporters.
“Lawyers are alongside us, clinicians are alongside us, because … they see the struggles that we go through just to get what we need from a system that isn't working now, and they know that [independent assessments as proposed] will be devastating for so many people and it just won't work,” she said.
PWDA was part of in March that called for the assessments to be scrapped and redesigned.
"I think I can say that most of the people that I know who are disabled people and their family members, we are perhaps now at one of the lowest points that we've ever been," Ms Connor said.
The independent assessment inquiry has received by far the most submissions of any launched by the Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS to date.
The official closing date for submissions was 31 March, though new submissions have been uploaded online several times a week since.
Greens Senator Jordon Steele-John said he has never seen such an outpouring of concern in his four years on the committee.
“This is the most overwhelming response we've ever received. It is almost unprecedented and it speaks to the level of concern that exists in the disability community”, he said.
He accused the government of “not caring about the views of disabled people” by pushing ahead with the reforms in the face of the backlash.
“We have heard story after story from people speaking to the committee who have gone through trials saying that [the process] … does harm to people,” he said.
Assessments going ahead in 'some form'
NDIS Minister Linda Reynolds she has heard the “anxiety and concern” around the assessments, but remained committed to introducing them in some form.
She also said she thought the scheme was currently relying “too much on individual public servants’ judgment and also their natural empathy”.
from a pilot program still in progress, raising hopes among advocates that the policy could be scrapped.
The NDIA was grilled last year in Senate estimates .
The federal government pledged in last week's federal budget, which also forecast supports covered by the scheme would cost $31.9 billion in 2024-25.
The government in recent weeks has said the NDIS was growing much faster than initially projected, and independent assessments would help keep the scheme sustainable in the long run.
However, Productivity Commission estimates from 2017 contradict the idea there was no warning NDIS costs would reach such a level, with projections showing the scheme’s cost by 2024-25 was expected to surpass $30 billion.
In a statement, Senator Reynolds said she was “consulting genuinely and transparently with all stakeholders on all issues before finalising any proposals”.
“My priority is building a sustainable, enduring and fair NDIS for generations to come," she said.
“An extra $17 billion has been allocated by the federal government to the scheme over the last two budgets. This demonstrates the need for federal, state and territory governments to work together to manage increasing costs to protect its future.”
The NDIA in February , just days , prompting questions about how engaged the agency really was during the consultation.
The concept of independent assessments was recommended in an independent review of the NDIS Act in 2019 - known as the Tune review - and by the Productivity Commission at the scheme's inception.
However, documents obtained under freedom of information laws last month into the Tune review, which had been used as justification for introducing them.
It was revealed two weeks ago an academic had written to the NDIAto make it look like she supports the agency's approach to the assessments. Two other academics have come forward seeking to "contextualise" comments used by the NDIA since.
