I understand how critical it is to ensure people with disability in our community get the support they need. While acknowledging that without lived experience myself, my appreciation of how tough this last period has been will be different. However, I heard the fear, uncertainty and concern so many have been feeling over what changes the government will make to the NDIS.

I heard these concerns, raised them with the government and used them to push for change.

I also respect that some people think I should have opposed the Bill outright on principle, and I am sorry that those people feel let down. 

But just because you may not agree with my decision, this doesn’t mean I didn’t listen. I can assure you I did. I listened to everyone. 

And I am always up for having the discussion,explaining my decisions and being held accountable for them.

In consulting extensively on this Bill it was made clear to me by advocates and experts in the ACT that reform was needed to make the scheme sustainable into the future and they wanted me to engage and push for change rather than say no and oppose it.

I wanted to respond to some of the questions about why I ultimately voted for it and explain some of the changes that I was able to push for.

This isn’t the cop out some people have claimed - it comes down to how votes work in the senate. The NDIS Bill passed the parliament because of a deal between Labor and the Coalition. Because the two major parties supported it, Independents like myself and others on the crossbench did not have balance of power to force amendments or cast the deciding vote.

This limited how far I, and others on the crossbench, could push the government for changes on this legislation. 

My options were to oppose the bill outright and watch it go through regardless in an even worse form, or work constructively with the government to try to get some improvements to a bill that was going to pass anyway.

I chose to work to make sure that the Bill that ultimately went through was better than it otherwise would have been and that’s a decision I stand by. 

I was able to work with the Government to get their support for an amendment which will ensure that, going forward, people will actually know what they are being funded for. It is unacceptable that a person may only find out what the NDIA has accepted to fund if they take the NDIA to the Tribunal. The amendment I worked on with the government will fix that up, and ultimately help participants ask questions about their funding and challenge mistakes, where they happen.

I am also committed to continuing to listen and advocate alongside NDIS participants as delegated legislation is being drafted.

Since I was elected two years ago I have been consulting with people in the ACT and disability representative organisations to understand issues in the NDIS, and since this Bill was introduced, to understand people's concerns in greater detail and to try to work with the Government on amendments to the Bill.

I’ve had thousands of people email about the bill and I’ve hosted roundtables and one-on-one meetings with recipients, providers and experts.

There’s no doubt that this was a complex Bill and comes at a time where I know the disability community is reeling from what seemed to me to be a lacklustre and incredibly disappointing response to the Disability Royal Commission.

In response to feedback I received I also moved amendments that would:

• Ensure people are not having to undertake unnecessary medical examinations
• Guarantee the right of a person to undertake a replacement needs assessment
• Add some limitations around the powers of the CEO to override a person’s plan management preferences
• Add limitations on the CEO’s ability to mandate what support providers people can use
• Really importantly, ensure people do not have to pay for a needs assessment

Unfortunately, none of these were accepted by the Government.

However, together with a whole host of other advocates inside and outside parliament, we were also able to get the Government to shift more than they were initially prepared to.

The Government made over 80 changes to their Bill before it passed, including changes that tightened up how the NDIA can request information (and when they can’t do it) and enshrined co-design as a principle for making NDIS rules going forward.

It was also reassuring to see the states and territories agree to be part of the reforms going forward. I know the ACT has flagged $90 million for foundational supports. While I acknowledge there is still a lot of uncertainty about how foundational supports will be rolled out, and there’s a lot of work ahead in understanding how those supports will operate, I am assured that the money has been allocated and that that work can start.

This remains far from perfect legislation, and I am uncomfortable with how much of it seemed to happen without proper co-design with people with disability.

There is really broad acknowledgement, about the need for reform to ensure the NDIS remains sustainable into the future. I have had a lot of correspondence from Canberrans expressing this concern and saying we need the NDIS to be available now and into the future for the next generation, and worrying that without reform, the Scheme won’t survive. 

There is much to do from here, the first being scrutiny over the lists that determine what are NDIS supports - and what aren’t. I already got some traction on this as regards period products and making sure they are not listed as a “lifestyle choice”. The Senate has a key role in scrutinising all of these decisions, and I will be working with NDIS participants and advocacy groups in the ACT to ensure that scrutiny is provided.

In recent weeks, I have also written to Minister Shorten raising the issue of timing of NDIS pricing decisions and questioning why they have removed the higher rate for High Intensity Behavioural Supports.

I will keep engaging and pushing for better for people with disability in our community.