Disability services
David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (12:08): My question is to the Minister for Disability. As we have discussed previously in this house, disability workers in supported independent living residences are staring down the barrel of pay cuts of up to hundreds of dollars a week if the Victorian government does not act. State subsidies filling the gap left by insufficient NDIS funding run out next month. This will have dire consequences for SIL residents. The impacts are already being felt with the closure of over 70 group homes to date. Disability workers are already leaving the disability sector in droves. With insufficient wages and unattractive conditions, how will the sector attract quality workers? I ask the minister to update the house on how the government will ensure the delivery of quality care to people with disability living in supported independent living residences.
Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (12:09): Thank you, Mr Ettershank, for this question; I am, I think for the third or fourth time now, happy to answer this question in this place. But for the benefit of those in the house who have forgotten since I last answered this very same question, the government supported workers to transition to non-government providers in the establishment of the NDIS in 2019. In 2019 providers assumed responsibility for approximately 550 homes, which is about 2500 residents and about 5500 employees.
As I have detailed before, to ensure that staff were supported through this transition phase, a phased approach was taken to the implementation. Government worked collaboratively with the stakeholders during that time and particularly with the union during the transfer process. There was indeed a formal MOU at the time which was established with HACSU alongside the agreements of the transfer providers, with all parties acknowledging that this would end on 31 December this year. It has been, since 2009 to 31 December this year, a phased approach since the establishment of this process through the NDIS but SIL is now the responsibility of the NDIA. SIL services are funded by the NDIS, and it is reassuring to see transfer providers who have put forward a joint statement about their engagement with the Commonwealth on plan sufficiency, because this is critical and it was always critical, which was why there was the phased implementation agreed to with the workforce through the union and with the SIL providers themselves through that MOU, because this was becoming, as part of the NDIA, a matter for which the Commonwealth needed to come up with a plan for that sufficiency.
For my part, I will continue to advocate, as I have at a number of disability ministerial councils now, and I know colleagues around the country have also continued to raise with the Commonwealth – we pay $3 billion a year into the NDIS, and in return the NDIS needs to make sure that the plans are sufficient to meet the needs of people for whom it exists to service. I would also encourage workers to engage in their EBA negotiations, and they should continue to have those discussions through their employer bargaining representatives. But ultimately this is a decision about the Commonwealth making sure that there is enough funding and that the plans are sufficient to provide for the outcome that Mr Ettershank is seeking.
David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (12:12): Thank you for indulging me, Minister, if that was a repetitious question, but I appreciate the update. Minister, the government is proposing to abolish the Victorian Disability Worker Commission at the very same time that it has made no funding commitments, obviously, to support the providers now responsible for those transferred disability group homes. Given that the existing subsidy underpins critical safety measures such as the inclusion of single house supervisors in every group home, mandatory qualifications, staffing ratios and proper clinical and practice supervision, how can the government justify dismantling the state’s independent safeguard body while refusing to guarantee the very funding that keeps those residents safe?
Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (12:13): President, I think you were questioning whether the question itself perhaps offends anticipation, and I think it walks the line considerably. But I would at the outset dispel a couple of myths there. Firstly, we contribute $3 billion a year to the NDIS, and it is the Commonwealth’s responsibility to ensure plan sufficiency. I would also say in response to Mr Ettershank’s question – or perhaps the new Leader of the Opposition said it best when she said that she noted ‘that the bill merges disability oversight bodies, including the incredibly important’ work of registration and regulation ‘into the Social Services Regulator as well. Again this is overdue reform.’
She said:
Families have been calling for a consistent approach to worker regulation across disability and social services for many years.
I think the new Leader of the Opposition understands this issue and she has put it perfectly. But let me at the outset reject your premise that in some way we are not contributing to NDIS plans. We contribute $3 billion a year to the scheme, and we continue to advocate that, in return for that, the Commonwealth ensures there is plan sufficiency.
The PRESIDENT: Thank you. I was concerned the supplementary may have offended the anticipation rule, but I think the minister stayed away from that concern in her answer.