Editorial. Disability reform must not repeat NDIS failings

More than five years on from the establishment of a disability royal commision that cost $500m, taxpayers and advocacy groups are entitled to feel underwhelmed by the result. The inquiry was a worthwhile endeavour, but the sheer size of the task made it nearly impossible for commissioners – let alone all state governments and the commonwealth – to arrive at a practical agreement on how to proceed. There are splits on key recommendations, including banning non-therapeutic sterilisation, the phasing out of segregated schools, group homes and disability employment. The ambition of the inquiry was to improve laws, policies and practices to create a more just society that helps people with disability live free from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. The commission heard from almost 10,000 people. Many of them detailed horrific examples of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. These are all issues that must be firmly addressed but there will always be practical limits to what can be achieved in terms of evening the field in all areas of life.

The federal government’s initial response accepts 13 of the royal commission’s recommendations in full and another 117 in principle. The reality is that of the 222 recommendations, the federal government has primary or shared responsibility for 172. The remaining 50 are specific to states and territories. A further 36 are subject to consideration. Six were “noted”, which does not bode well for change.

Ultimately, reform will come down to the willingness of government to prioritise the issues that have been raised and the capacity to pay. It would be naive to believe the problems that beset the disability space have only become apparent to government because of the royal commission. Public hearings have both a therapeutic value and are also the best way possible to bring what is happening to public attention. There will, however, always be a limit to what can reasonably be done. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a clear example that in these areas it is simply not possible for government to be all things to all people. Bill Shorten on Friday will meet with premiers from South Australia and Tasmania who are concerned that states are being cut out of the loop on deciding how the NDIS should operate and who should qualify.

Perversely, the failure of the NDIS to contain its reach and rein in spending will make it more difficult to achieve big reforms in the disability space. State governments must not follow the same approach as the NDIS, which was for them to withdraw funding from existing programs as the commonwealth increased its effort. Detailing the federal government’s initial response on Wednesday, Social Services Minister Amanda Rishworth said it was a “key moment”. She was wise to stop short of adopting the royal commission recommendation that the federal government appoint a new disability rights minister. As the latest Closing the Gap report from the Productivity Commission shows, bigger government and more bureaucracy are not the answer.

The first imperative is to identify the problems and make those responsible do things better. As social affairs editor Stephen Lunn wrote on Thursday, while there was broad agreement and a pledge to work together, governments differed on how best to approach key issues. This suggests any reforms will be hard fought and slow to arrive. It is a reflection of the wide net cast by the royal commission and the difficulty in satisfying demand in an area that receives much more public attention than it once did. Reforming disability services is still a job that needs to be done. Money will always be an important part of the equation. This is why, for public acceptance, getting things right on the NDIS will be a good place to start.