The Six Commitments

Further information in support of our Political Platform can be found below. All major political parties, independents, politicians and candidates are being approached with the same commitment requests.

1. Commitment to the Royal Commission into violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation of people with disability across all settings in Australia, and encompassing matters raised by AFDO and its members that are not currently in or are lacking sufficient weight in the Royal Commissions Terms of Reference as well as conflict of interest issues with two of the appointed Commissioners.

A Royal Commission has been agreed to be held into violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation of people with disability in all settings across Australia.

The Federal ALP made an election pledge that they will fund a Royal Commission for this purpose to the sum of $26 million dollars once in office. AFDO welcomed this announcement but seeked a further commitment from all parties to fully fund the RC to the extent required for it to undertake a comprehensive inquiry.

Following a Greens Senate motion supported by the ALP, cross bench and some independents this was referred to the House of Representatives. This was agreed by the House of Representatives and the Coalition Government then committed to fully fund the Royal Commission, released a draft Terms of Reference for comment and provided significant funds in the current budget and in forward forecasts.

Following the input on the draft, the Coalition Government released the final Royal Commission Terms of Reference and announced the appointment of six Commissioners to commence work on the inquiry as soon as practicable.

AFDO and its members do not believe that, as they currently stand, the powers of the Commission do not go far enough in terms of bringing about or recommending prosecutions to relevant authorities. There is also no commitment to a full redress scheme for people with disability who may have had their human and legal rights affected by violence, abuse, exploitation and/or neglect. The Terms of Reference into Child Abuse in Institutional Settings should be used as a comparison as these strongly outline requirements on both of these issues.

The issue of two of the appointed Commissioners having strong conflicts of interest must be addressed, we have joined with the sector and called for both Ms. Barbara Bennett and Hon. John Ryan to both step aside and be replaced on the Commission immediately.

The Commission and all the Commissioners must have the full confidence and trust of people with disability, their families, advocates and supporters in order for it to effectively undertake its inquiry across Australia. Due to the conflicts of both of these Commissioners the sector has indicated that unless they stand aside and are replaced this will not be the case.

We require that the Royal Commission in its establishment and operation:

Is fully funded to undertake a comprehensive inquiry
Covers all settings across Australia
Has full and comprehensive investigatory powers inclusive of providing prosecution investigation recommendations for human rights and/or legal breaches
Provides a redress scheme for people with disability who have had their human and/or legal rights breached.
Provides support for people with disability to fully participate in the RC both pre, during and post inclusive of accessibility, support and professional counselling
Provides additional Federal Government funding support to advocacy and systemic advocacy organisations to assist people with disability in their participation or handling of the Royal Commission both pre, during and post the inquiry duration
Remove and replace appointed Commissioners identified by people with disability, their families, the disability sector, colleagues and supporters who have significant conflicts of interest. This must happen to maintain the integrity of the Commission as well as confidence in its role and operation.

2. Commitment to funding the National Disability Strategy and progressive achievement of measurable outcomes at a federal level as well as ensuring this applies to all levels of government.

The National Disability Strategy was agreed to by the federal and state/territory governments in 2008. The Strategy is a well-developed document with key strategies to deliver on Australia’s commitment under the UNCRPD under six main areas;

Inclusive and accessible communities—the physical environment including public transport; parks, buildings and housing; digital information and communications technologies; civic life including social, sporting, recreational and cultural life.
Rights protection, justice and legislation—statutory protections such as anti-discrimination measures, complaints mechanisms, advocacy, the electoral and justice systems.
Economic security—jobs, business opportunities, financial independence, adequate income support for those not able to work, and housing.
Personal and community support—inclusion and participation in the community, person-centred care and support provided by specialist disability services and mainstream services; informal care and support.
Learning and skills—early childhood education and care, schools, further education, vocational education; transitions from education to employment; life-long learning.
Health and wellbeing—health services, health promotion and the interaction between health and disability systems; wellbeing and enjoyment of life.

Whilst, the document’s aims and strategies are supported, there has been little financial or relevant other commitment at any level of government, and it lacks agreed outcome measures to ensure that the objectives are progressively reached.

The main deliverable under the strategy over recent time has been the implementation and roll out of the NDIS, which is an important achievement but is only one element in meeting the six strategic areas.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) of which Australia ratified and is a signatory, as well as a signatory to the Optional Protocol. Once a country ratifies this means that the country is legally bound to implement the core 33 articles and must report on their progress in writing to the United Nations on a periodic basis.

Australia has also ratified and signed to the UN Sustainability Goals. These 17 Goals are intrinsically linked with the UNCRPD and requirements for the rights of people with disability. These two international requirements mean that Australia must deliver measurable outcomes in meeting its obligations under both.

3. Commitment to set aside, as a clearly defined reserve fund, the full and ongoing funding of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and to provide any necessary legislation to this effect. This must be at the level required for the full Scheme each year, including any funds remaining being retained in the reserve fund, including from any budget underspend in any given year.

A Royal Commission has been agreed to be held into violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation of people with disability in all settings across Australia.

We require that the Royal Commission in its establishment and operation:

Is fully funded to undertake a comprehensive inquiry
Covers all settings across Australia
Has full and comprehensive investigatory powers inclusive of providing prosecution investigation recommendations for human rights and/or legal breaches
Provides a redress scheme for people with disability who have had their human and/or legal rights breached.
Provides support for people with disability to fully participate in the RC both pre, during and post inclusive of accessibility, support and professional counselling
Provides additional Federal Government funding support to advocacy and systemic advocacy organisations to assist people with disability in their participation or handling of the Royal Commission both pre, during and post the inquiry duration
Remove and replace appointed Commissioners identified by people with disability, their families, the disability sector, colleagues and supporters who have significant conflicts of interest. This must happen to maintain the integrity of the Commission as well as confidence in its role and operations.

This is to provide certainty for all approved participants and for the long term security of the Scheme.

The NDIS is the greatest social reform of our time and, as such, it is critical that it is fully funded at the required level for the longer term.

An indication that funding is outlined in forward estimates provides no certainty for people with disability, their families, or for any Australian who may acquire a disability in the future.

As an insurance scheme, it is counterintuitive that the NDIS remains the subject of annual reviews of funding at every Federal Budget. Other levels of government are also co-contributors to the scheme, and this also needs to be addressed to ensure that full contributions continue to be made to the required levels.

People with disability that are in and eligible for the Scheme must have assurance and certainty that their funding won’t be cut off or reduced at some time in the future.

AFDO calls for a Reserve Fund to be legislated and operated for the NDIS for the full amount required to be funded for the Scheme each year and to hold any unexpended funds for future scheme use in any financial year. The agreements with other levels of government must likewise protect the full amounts required for the operation of the scheme.

This would provide the certainty that people with disability, their families, supporters and the wider Australian public require.

4. Commitment to people with disability who are not part of the NDIS for continued access to services and relevant supports provided at a Federal and State/Territory level through COAG and other agreements or arrangements.

One in five Australians are people with a disability, that’s over 5 Million of our current population. You are also more likely to acquire a disability as you age, we are living longer, and the projected age of Australians as a proportion of the population is rapidly rising with this to significantly increase over the next five to ten years.

The NDIS is welcomed and fully supported by AFDO however, the scheme will only cover 460,000 Australians with disability at full roll-out. That leaves over four and a half million Australians living with disability who are not part of the scheme.

AFDO is concerned that some levels of government are failing in their obligations and duty to these Australians by reducing or removing services and supports that were previously in place, or that may be required following the implementation of the NDIS.

Another key concern is for those people with disability who are not part of the NDIS and are over sixty-five years of age and in the aged care system.

These Australians also require a commitment to continued access to services and supports to ensure they remain well and in their homes for as long as possible or that aged care providers are required to meet these requirements.

The Federal Government and all levels of government have a responsibility to ensure that those Australians who are not part of the NDIS as outlined above, continue to have access to essential services and relevant supports.

AFDO calls for this commitment from the federal level, and this is also a key component outlined in COAG or any other agreements or arrangements with other levels of government.

5. Commitment to funding national Disability Representative Organisations

We require a commitment to increased, ongoing, adequate, equitable and indexed funding to Disability Representative Organisations (DROs) that undertake systemic or individual advocacy, including specialist people with disability organisations that know and are experts of their communities.

Disability is diverse, meaning that there is a significant difference between the needs of people and that organisations that connect to their own communities and provide information and peer support are essential as we move to full roll-out of the NDIS, the priority of a renewed National Disability Strategy 2020 – 2030, and build the capacity of communities to become more welcoming and accessible.

Funding of DRO’s has been reduced and in the case of the AFDO led Consortium (11 members) bid resulted in a totally inadequate funding amount being awarded by the Department of Social Services of just over $27K per annum for each organisation to undertake this work! Other DRO’s received $300K each per annum in their own right?

The Federal ALP has previously committed to reinstating the funding for DRO’s back to the level provided pre-2014, with 2 million dollars promised in the 2016 Federal Election to be added to the existing funding allowance. We anticipate a similar commitment this coming election and whilst acknowledged, this would still not be enough to ensure that we have well-resourced and high functioning national representative organisations for people with disability.

6. Commitment to funding disability advocacy and its Peak body

Disability advocacy is vital to protecting and advancing the rights and interests of Australians with disabilities and contributing to the ongoing quality assurance, improvement of service systems and importantly, ensuring compliance with our United Nations requirements under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disability UNCRPD of which we are a signatory nation.

The Productivity Commission recognised the critical role of independent advocacy with the NDIS. Advocates play a crucial role in not only protecting the rights of individuals but in contributing to the systemic improvement of the NDIS.

In addition, independent advocacy remains instrumental in addressing the inequities and injustices experienced by people with disabilities in other service systems and domains, for instance, education, health, justice and housing, and thereby optimising the intended ripple effects of the NDIS in the lives of people with disabilities.

AFDO and our member, Disability Advocacy Network Australia (DANA) strongly argue that advocacy should be funded proportionally to disability service delivery expenditure and through a model that values independence and accessibility. To reap the benefits of a strong and healthy advocacy sector, the sector should be represented, supported and strengthened nationally.Although there was a welcome announcement of an extension of National Disability Advocacy Program (NDAP) funding to June 2020, the Commonwealth’s contribution to disability advocacy via the NDAP is falling in percentage terms relative to its contribution to service delivery, and in recent years also in real terms due to indexation failing to even meet the costs of maintaining operations at existing levels.

The independence of advocacy from service provision is crucial to avoid conflicts of interest. Only truly independent advocates can safeguard and promote the rights and interests of people with disability and adequate funding for independent advocacy organisations, such as provided through NDAP and state and territory advocacy programs, is essential to ensuring independent advocacy is accessible for the most vulnerable people with disability.

Coordinating the focus across the disability advocacy sector is the work of the sector’s national peak body, DANA. Largely unfunded DANA has been supported via AFDO and its membership. As the national advocacy peak, DANA should be appropriately funded via NDAP along with its advocacy members. This needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency.