This bill became law on Sep 5th, 2024.
Health, care & disability
NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. funding will now depend on support types set out in NDIS rulesDetailed rules made under the Act that this bill uses to set which supports are covered and how some decisions are made., so whether something is covered turns on whether it is listed as an NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. support.
The 2023 NDIS ReviewThe 2023 review that said NDIS access rules and funded supports had become unclear and that costs were rising too fast. exposed unclear access rules, confusion about what supports the scheme funds, and unsustainable cost growth that was pulling the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. away from its original intent. This bill responds by defining funded supports, creating a new budget framework, tightening participant protections, and expanding rule-making to implement the reforms.
The NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. was already operating under rules that the 2023 NDIS ReviewThe 2023 review that said NDIS access rules and funded supports had become unclear and that costs were rising too fast. found had become unclear about who should enter the scheme, what supports it should fund and how to control fast-rising costs while keeping to its original purpose. After the review was delivered and National CabinetThe meeting of the Commonwealth, states and territories that agreed to the first wave of NDIS reform after the review. agreed in December 2023 to pursue an initial legislative tranche, this bill was introduced in March 2024 and passed in August before receiving Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect. in September 2024 to start resetting funded supports, budgeting and safeguards.
The main criticism was that the bill could be used to narrow what NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. participants can get, giving the government and bureaucracy more control while weakening individual choice, funding flexibility and review protections. That argument was pushed most strongly by the Greens, while the Coalition and several crossbench MPs did not oppose reform itself but said the bill was rushed, unclear and needed stronger safeguards before full support.
Bill Shorten MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, some crossbench members; opposed by Greens, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 05 Sept 2024
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
162 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. funding will now depend on support types set out in NDIS rulesDetailed rules made under the Act that this bill uses to set which supports are covered and how some decisions are made., so whether something is covered turns on whether it is listed as an NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. support.
NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. plans move to a new budget model, with funding linked to whether a person entered the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. through disability rules, early intervention rules, or both.
The National Disability Insurance AgencyThe government body that runs the NDIS and makes decisions about participant access, plans and information requests. can only order a participant to get a new assessment or examination when it cannot reasonably get that information another way.
The Minister must quickly publish a public timetable for the new NDIS rulesDetailed rules made under the Act that this bill uses to set which supports are covered and how some decisions are made. and consultation with states and territories after the law starts.
The changes to the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. must be independently reviewed 5 years after royal assentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect., creating a built-in check on how the reforms work.
(1) Subject to subsections (4) and (9), a support is an NDIS support for a person who is a participant or prospective participant if the support is declared by National Disability Insurance Scheme rules made for the purposes of this subsection to be an NDIS support for:National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) as-passed bill text
Create the new reasonable and necessary budget framework for the preparation of NDIS participants’ plans. This aligns with the original intent of the NDIS to support people with permanent and significant disability as part of a larger landscape of supports outside of the NDIS. The Bill provides for ‘new framework plans’ to be developed in accordance with a new budget framework. Participants will receive funding based on whether they accessed the Scheme on the basis of impairments that meet the disability requirements or the early intervention requirements or both.National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) explanatory memorandum
(3A) The CEO must not request that the participant undergo an assessment under subparagraph (3)(b)(i) or an examination under subparagraph (3)(b)(ii) unless the CEO is satisfied that the report of the assessment or examination would provide information that the CEO cannot otherwise reasonably obtain.National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) as-passed bill text
(1) The Minister must, within 5 days after the commencement of this Act, prepare and publish a statement of the proposed timeframes for:National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) as-passed bill text
(1) The Minister must cause an independent review of the amendments made by this Act to be conducted as soon as practicable after the end of the 5‑year period starting on the day this Act receives the Royal Assent.National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) as-passed bill text
Context
The NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. was already operating under rules that the 2023 NDIS ReviewThe 2023 review that said NDIS access rules and funded supports had become unclear and that costs were rising too fast. found had become unclear about who should enter the scheme, what supports it should fund and how to control fast-rising costs while keeping to its original purpose. After the review was delivered and National CabinetThe meeting of the Commonwealth, states and territories that agreed to the first wave of NDIS reform after the review. agreed in December 2023 to pursue an initial legislative tranche, this bill was introduced in March 2024 and passed in August before receiving Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect. in September 2024 to start resetting funded supports, budgeting and safeguards.
NDIS ReviewThe 2023 review that said NDIS access rules and funded supports had become unclear and that costs were rising too fast. delivers its final report
The final report, Working together to deliver the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set., identified unclear access rules, confusion about funded supports and cost growth pulling the scheme away from its original intent.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) explanatory memorandum ↗National CabinetThe meeting of the Commonwealth, states and territories that agreed to the first wave of NDIS reform after the review. backs an initial NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. reform bill
National CabinetThe meeting of the Commonwealth, states and territories that agreed to the first wave of NDIS reform after the review. agreed the Commonwealth would work with states and territories on legislative and other changes and committed to introducing an initial tranche of legislation in the first half of 2024.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) explanatory memorandum ↗Government introduces the bill
The bill was introduced to begin the first legislative response to the review, including changes to clarify funded supports, reshape participant budgets and strengthen protections.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, clearing the way for the first tranche of NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. reforms aimed at moderating scheme growth and resetting how supports are defined.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Bill receives Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect.
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect. turned the bill into law and enabled the new framework for listed NDIS supportsThe new legal list of supports the scheme can fund, replacing the older broader idea of reasonable and necessary supports., budget setting and related rules to be implemented.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (27/03/2024): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (20/06/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Committee (27/06/2024): Bill, circulated amendments and other matters referred to Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/08/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 28 to 11.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
Recorded vote: 39 to 12.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill could be used to narrow what NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. participants can get, giving the government and bureaucracy more control while weakening individual choice, funding flexibility and review protections. That argument was pushed most strongly by the Greens, while the Coalition and several crossbench MPs did not oppose reform itself but said the bill was rushed, unclear and needed stronger safeguards before full support.
Most criticism targeted drafting, safeguards and future implementation risk rather than the goal of NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. reform itself.
Risk of future cuts and tighter control
Critics argued the bill could become a vehicle for future NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. cuts by making support depend on rules and administrative decisions, which they said would weaken individualised support and leave participants with less control over what help they receive.
Rushed bill with too much left to later rules
A major reservation was that Parliament was being asked to pass a framework bill before key operational details were settled, leaving too much to later rules and consultation and making it hard to judge the real effect on participants.
Participant rights and review protections needed work
Some MPs said the bill as drafted did not yet adequately protect participant rights, especially around assessments, funding flexibility and access to fair review, raising concern that families could face more red tape and worse outcomes.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Passed 39 to 12. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, and Nationals. Opposition came from Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 28 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Opposition came from Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
House
Defeated 57 to 82. Support came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
A defeat would leave the government’s second-reading motion unchanged and allow the bill to proceed without the opposition’s proposed criticism and cost questions.
Defeated 14 to 34. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Nationals.
Defeating the package left the government’s bill largely intact and meant those extra participant safeguards were not adopted in the House committee stage.
Would change the bill text so supports can include help needed to overcome cultural or linguistic barriers and avoid isolation from the community.
Would change the bill text so supports can include help needed to overcome cultural or linguistic barriers and avoid isolation from the community.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment without a counted vote — the presiding officer judged the ayes louder than the noes, and no member called for a division.
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Government amendments would would change definitions so funding terms are tied to old framework plans and update related references to NDIS support and funding periods and would require the CEO to request assessments or examinations only when the report would provide information that cannot otherwise reasonably be obtained, and add a participant report note.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment package without a counted vote. APH records the agreed count by amendment, while the source documents are grouped into amendment sheets.
Senate
Defeated 13 to 25. Support came from Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party.
Defeat left the government’s second-reading motion intact and did not add the Greens’ proposed transparency and appeal safeguards to the bill debate.
Defeated 11 to 28. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeat left the bill’s second-reading motion unchanged and did not add the Greens’ proposed extra review protections to the bill debate.
Defeated 10 to 38. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, and minor parties and independents. One Nation had split recorded votes.
Defeat preserved the government’s wording on impairment categories and hardship exclusions in the Senate committee stage.
Passed 33 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, and Nationals. Opposition came from Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The vote added a group of committee-stage amendments to the bill.
Defeated 13 to 31. Support came from Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation.
Defeat left the bill’s plan-management restrictions as drafted by the government and did not impose the longer disqualification period.
Passed 31 to 12. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, and Nationals. Opposition came from Greens and Jacqui Lambie Network. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carrying the package advanced the government’s committee-stage changes and the related opposition amendments to the bill’s support definitions and plan-management settings.
Defeated 2 to 40. Support came from One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents.
Defeat meant the bill did not adopt One Nation’s proposed means-testing framework or its separate exclusion for sex worker services.
Defeated 13 to 27. Support came from Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Nationals.
Defeat left the bill without the proposed veteran board-representation requirement.
Defeated 13 to 30. Support came from Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, and Nationals.
The proposed safeguards did not become part of the bill.
Passed 34 to 29. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and One Nation.
Carrying the amendment inserted Indigenous board-representation requirements into the bill’s governance arrangements.
Defeated 11 to 36. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and Jacqui Lambie Network. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeat left the bill without the broader participant-representation and board-appointment changes proposed in the package.
Passed 27 to 10. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.
Carrying the package would have removed or blocked several of the bill’s core new NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. support and planning provisions, but the agreement here was only to the procedural framing of those Greens amendments in the committee stage.
Defeated 11 to 25. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, and One Nation. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeat left the government’s committee-stage framework in place and prevented the Greens’ broader rewrite of the bill’s access and planning settings.
Passed 44 to 21. Support came from Liberal Party, Greens, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor.
This procedural success cleared the way for a later vote to send the bill to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for further inquiry.
Passed 44 to 21. Support came from Liberal Party, Greens, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor.
This procedural vote made the later committee referral motion possible and sped up the path to a further inquiry.
Passed 43 to 20. Support came from Liberal Party, Greens, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor.
This delayed final Senate consideration so the bill could be examined further before any final passage vote.
The Senate agreed to a combined package of 53 government amendments and 14 opposition amendments without a recorded division in the collected run.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to a change requiring the NDIAThe government body that runs the NDIS and makes decisions about participant access, plans and information requests., when carrying out its functions, to ensure the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. remains financially sustainable.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to changes removing the government’s impairment-category provisions and deleting wording that excluded financial hardship alone.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to require the Minister to publish proposed timeframes for new NDIS rulesDetailed rules made under the Act that this bill uses to set which supports are covered and how some decisions are made. and to require the AgencyThe government body that runs the NDIS and makes decisions about participant access, plans and information requests. to publish monthly NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. statistics, including participant numbers and payments.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
The parliamentary record also shows 53 Government, 14 Opposition amendments agreed without a counted division.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Shorten supports the bill and says Labor is introducing it to secure the future of the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set..
Read in Hansard ↗Hollie Hughes opposes the bill in its current form and moves to send it to a committee for further inquiry, saying there has been insufficient consultation with the sector and community.
Read in Hansard ↗Scarr says the coalition supports getting the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. back onto a sustainable footing, but criticises the government for rushing the bill through without proper consultation and without the rules and instruments needed to judge its effects.
Read in Hansard ↗Chaney says she will back the reform in principle, but only with strong safeguards and close scrutiny of how it is implemented.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
25 speakers · 28 contributions · 25 support
“The Government is pleased to be introducing legislation into the Senate today aimed at securing the future of the National Disability Insurance Scheme.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Bill Shorten on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Shorten supports the bill and says Labor is introducing it to secure the future of the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set.. He argues it is needed because the scheme has drifted from its original vision and must be made sustainable, safer and more trustworthy for participants and future generations.
“I'm genuinely pleased on behalf of the Albanese government to be introducing legislation into the parliament today aimed at securing the future of the National Disability Insurance Scheme.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Bill Shorten supports the bill and recommends it to the House because he says it will put the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. back on track, strengthen the scheme, and protect participants from exploitation and misuse of funds. He argues the reforms are needed now to secure the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set.’s long-term sustainability and better target support.
“In conclusion, we work every day—I work every day—to make the NDIS better. I congratulate the coalition for being willing to engage in a constructive manner—the member for Deakin, in particular. We all understand the NDIS is changing lives for the better—hundreds of thousands of lives. We understand it is an investment, not a deficit. We understand it's creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and careers, small businesses and innovative startups. But it can't be the only lifeboat in the ocean. We do need to tell the truth about the scheme. There is more good news than bad news about the scheme, but some who are most keen on the scheme say that any discussion of the bad news is somehow demonising providers, participants or the scheme. It is not; it is telling the truth. To those who only see the bad news in the scheme and resent the idea of the scheme, it is changing lives. One day, even the critics may well need it. I recommend the bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The bill addresses the priority recommendations of the independent review to improve participant experience and return the NDIS to its original intent. The NDIS was founded on the notion that people living with disability should get a fair go; that they should have choice and control over the supports they receive so their life—an abundant, happy, contented life—can be lived to the full. In summary, that's what this legislation is all about: making sure the NDIS goes back to what was intended in 2013. After the damage that was done through the unregulated, haphazard, hopeless approach of the previous government, we're making sure this scheme goes back to what it originally was intended to do.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Labor is committed to getting the settings right to develop a system of disability care and support that works for all people with disability and their family and carers. This includes having a sustainable NDIS that meets the needs of participants and puts people at the centre, complemented by a strong system of foundational supports. Unfortunately, the previous government had very limited interest in the NDIS. They bowed to public pressure to keep it, but their only attempt at any kind of reform was their misguided and disastrous independent assessments policy. That was their only attempt at reform. The bill that is currently before the Senate is a key step in the process of getting the NDIS back on track after a wasted decade under the coalition, and I commend the bill to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm proud to support these reforms, as I know they will make NDIS participants' experiences of the scheme better. They will also make our world-leading NDIS sustainable, meaning that future generations of Australians with disability will be able to access reasonable, necessary and meaningful supports to lead lives of dignity, lives of choice, lives involving connection to community and lives of fulfilment. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'd like to finish by thanking the Minister for the NDIS for the important work being done on this scheme. The NDIS is life-changing. It's life-supporting. Many, many Australians rely on the NDIS on an everyday basis. We need, as a community, to have confidence in the NDIS. We need it to be financially sustainable. We need to know that services are safe and that they are quality. And we need confidence that illegal actors, criminals, price gougers, are shut down. This bill continues to do this, and I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“What we're speaking about here today is a bill which is best described as enabling architecture for the rules and future reforms to restore the original intent, integrity, consistency and transparency of the scheme that Labor created.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is our responsibility to ensure the NDIS is effective, is sustainable and provides appropriate support to those who need it most both now and into the future—and that is, of course, what this bill is all about. It delivers on our government's commitment to participants, and their families and carers, to restore trust in the NDIS and to ensure its continued success now and for many years to come.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a big step forward on that broader goal.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In this bill we propose a framework for broader reform that not only restores the NDIS to its original intent but creates an ecosystem of disability supports and more inclusive foundational mainstream supports and services. The government recommits to the design and implementation of these changes, including extensive consultation and co-design with the disability community—a fact demonstrated by the many amendments to the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But ultimately we recommended, once these things had been taken into account, and in line with the additional amendments made in the other place, that the bill be passed, because it's clear the urgent passage of this bill is necessary to restore certainty and sustainability for participants and their providers and to tackle fraudulent practices.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No.1) Bill 2024. In doing so, I wish to acknowledge the hardworking commitment of the minister and everyone involved in providing critical advice so that we can help to secure the future of the NDIS.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to support the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. I'm very proud to be part of two Labor governments which have presided over the NDIS. The Gillard Labor government founded the NDIS, and now the Albanese Labor government is getting the scheme back to where it was intended to be, to help people living with disabilities and the people that are caring for them.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024, is legislative reform to return the NDIS to its original intent and improve the experience of Australians living with a disability as well as their families and carers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation goes to addressing those very needs. It responds to a review, commissioned by the Albanese Labor government when we came to office, that exposed the problems within the NDIS. It addresses the flaws with the administration of the scheme and it responds to the rorting.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I commend the bill to the House. It's vitally important that we get the NDIS back on track, and it's the Albanese Labor government that's doing that.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Steve Georganas on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Georganas supports the bill, saying it will strengthen the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set., make it sustainable, and put participants back at the heart of the scheme. He presents it as a necessary Labor reform to improve services and ensure taxpayer money reaches disabled people.
“That's exactly what the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 is all about. This government is delivering on its commitment to strengthen the National Disability Insurance Scheme, to build it and to make it strong and sustainable.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Georganas supports the bill and says it is needed to get the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. back on track, strengthen the scheme, and deliver reforms backed by new funding. He argues it will improve transparency, fraud prevention, and participant outcomes through co-design with people with disability.
“This bill builds on those important steps. As I said last night, we know that in March earlier this year we introduced legislation to the parliament to enable this important and necessary change to the NDIS. The government, by proposing this bill, is delivering on a commitment to build a strong and sustainable NDIS.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“This bill, based on the recommendations of the review, seeks also to take the first steps to restore trust in the scheme. Fraud, overcharging and the underpayment of NDIS workers by a small proportion of providers undermine the system for all.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I understand the critical importance of the reforms proposed by the bill, and I genuinely hope that those opposite understand it too. So I hope that, instead of saying no to building a better future for the NDIS, they say yes, and, instead of saying no to securing a future where people with disabilities can reach their full potential, they say yes, and, instead of saying no, they say yes to a future for people with disabilities, a future that is filled with opportunity and acceptance. How can you say no to that? I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This scheme must get back on track. It needs to get back on track for the sustainability of the NDIS so that the critical role it plays in so many Australian's lives can be protected.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The legislation creates the scaffolding needed to start the journey of making the NDIS stronger and better for all people. Firstly, the changes will enable better early intervention pathways for people living with psychosocial disability and children under the age of nine. New participants will enter the NDIS under disability requirements, the new early intervention requirements, or both. Secondly, the legislation will improve how participant budgets are set and provide clearer information on how they can be spent. Budgets would be set at a whole-of-person level rather than as individual line items. More flexibility and participant autonomy will be built in. Thirdly, the changes will bolster the powers of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission to protect participants from illegal and unethical conduct, which we know is rife. We are out to catch the crooks and we will get them. Some changes can happen quickly, but others will take time.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is why I stand here today to support this bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. This bill is about enhancing the NDIS and safeguarding its future so that it is here to support people with disability today, tomorrow and into perpetuity.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I really urge all sides of the House to take this seriously to reach a consensus on this, because we can't have the lives of Australians with a disability become a political football. Not every view can be accommodated. This is a seriously good-faith exercise by the government in listening to people with a disability, and I think it will improve the scheme, make it fiscally sustainable and improve the experience for Australians living with disability.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I fully support the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. A huge amount of taxpayer money has been allocated to unproven supports. It was allocated without any real understanding of the purpose or the need, and it was allocated to people with relatively minor issues. It is terrible that the amount of support you get depends on who advocates for you. It's terrible that providers have grown rich by exploiting the NDIS at the expense of their clients. I've seen that happen in my own electorate. There are thousands of people who deserve support but are not getting it, because of the lack of transparency and the lack of oversight of the NDIS. I fully support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Raff Ciccone on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Ciccone supports the bill and argues it should pass without delay because postponing it would add major costs and leave loopholes open for dodgy NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. providers and criminals. He criticises the Liberal and Greens delay tactics as wasting money and harming people with disability.
“The delay will stop the government from using its NDIS legislation to close loopholes in the operation of the scheme. What we know is that the delays will cost Australians $663 every single minute, $1 million every single hour, $24 million every single day and $160 million every single week.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Ciccone supports the bill and says it is essential to get the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. back on track and secure it for future generations. He criticises opponents for politicising the scheme and delaying legislation that he says would waste public money.
“The bill will ensure that the NDIS is here for many future generations and for all Australians who need it most. What those opposite have suggested this week is nothing more than time-wasting politicisation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
18 speakers · 4 support · 4 oppose · 9 mixed · 1 unclear
“To quickly touch on the bill: in the end, we're not opposing this bill in the House. There are some things in here we think are sensible changes—subject to the range and litany of concerns that we've raised that are yet to be appropriately addressed by the government, and they will have an opportunity between now and the Senate committee inquiry report and, ultimately, the Senate looking at this to try to address and alleviate a number of these concerns. We will happily engage with the government on those. But the bill before us today, which has taken two years to get its way here to this dispatch box, amends the NDIS Act in substance in the following ways.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will reserve its final position on the bill until after the Senate inquiry is complete, but we do acknowledge and commend members of this parliament, and also members of previous parliaments, who have acted in a very bipartisan way on this issue. The NDIS is changing the lives of more than 600,000 Australians, and the coalition has always endeavoured to work constructively on and be a strong supporter of the scheme. We do want to see it fully funded going forward as a demand driven scheme. We've also been clear that it needs to be sustainable in the longer term. I look forward to working as constructively as possible with the minister to help get the NDIS back on track. I do thank him and his staff for their engagement with my office on what have been some very complex cases over the last couple of years, and I commend their work in making sure that the people with disability are placed at the centre of the scheme. I thank the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“However, insufficient time has been provided for proper consultation on the bill with the sector and the community, who have expressed widespread misgivings about the current legislation. The opportunity for thorough consultation is important in bringing the NDIS back onto a sustainable footing in a manner that does not disadvantage or negatively impact on participants most in need, and it is concerning that the Community Affairs Legislation Committee was not given the opportunity. So, as I finish up, I move the second reading amendment circulated in my name:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The opportunity to properly engage with this bill is important in bringing the NDIS back onto sustainable footing in a manner that does not disadvantage or impact negatively on participants most in need.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Given the broad consensus on the need for greater consideration and the coalition's willingness to work constructively with the government, it is, frankly, disappointing that this government has opted to object to a reasonable request for an extension to the reporting date for this legislation and for a meaningful hearing day with the NDIA. Frankly, without further time for proper consultation, at this stage my hope would be that this bill would be referred back to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for further inquiry.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That process shames each and every one of us in this Senate chamber, and I hope that, when that report comes to this chamber, we will throw out not only this bad legislation but that report, which was a complete abomination and an insult to every single person in this chamber.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I received some very telling texts from a fellow by the name of Mark Pietsch this morning. Mark once lived in the Central Western New South Wales town of Forbes. He's now the New South Wales state director of Physical Disability Australia. He wrote several texts to me this morning that are very concerning. He said, 'I know people in the Central West already struggle to access reliable disability services, and this bill, as it sits, will leave families worse off, and passes the buck to non-existent services.'”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee is conducting an inquiry into the bill and is due to report by 20 June 2024. We will of course reserve our final position on the bill until after the Senate inquiry is complete.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“At an appropriate stage, the coalition is going to move some sensible amendments that will be necessary to improve this bill. We need to ensure that the integrity of this system is preserved. We all—I'm sure there's unanimity in this place—recognise and value the importance of the NDIS, and we need to preserve the scheme's integrity, so our amendments will seek to ensure the sustainability of the scheme to allow it to continue improving the lives of some of the most vulnerable people within our community.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Now, what this bill does is introduce a number of changes, which the coalition does not oppose, and which I support, to put in place the process to put the scheme on a sustainable footing. But it's really just the first step in what needs to be a much more detailed and exhaustive process—a process that has to involve more consultation with the community affected by this scheme, a process that has to be conducted with greater transparency and accountability than has happened to date, and a process that must involve an honest levelling with the Australian public and with the disability recipients about what will be covered in the scheme and what cannot be covered.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We must legislate co-design, transparency, and constraints on the Minister's power, which this Bill does not. The Bill cannot be passed.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is not clear from the bill what a participant can do if they don't agree with the outcome of a needs assessment. The bill is silent on that. Again, that is something that a Senate committee could actually get to the bottom of. It could recommend some amendments to the bill. I would have thought that's pretty fundamental.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Whilst I support this bill, I feel the need to outline some of the concerns we hold as the coalition with the bill in its current form and reserve my final position until the bill goes through the Senate inquiry. I know I've said this before, but there is a lack of clarity and detail in the bills put to this House by Labor, and this bill continues to concern me. For example, I don't believe the bill has made it clear what a participant can do if they don't agree with the outcome of the needs assessment. I know from the feedback of many in my electorate that NDIA decisions are often inconsistent and ultimately debatable, but this bill currently doesn't outline any avenue for review.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is interesting to have this bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024, before the House because the now Minister for the NDIS, when he was the shadow minister for the NDIS, didn't think there was anything wrong with the scheme whatsoever and didn't think there was a need for change. In fact, he made the comment as the shadow minister: 'You can't move around the corridors of parliament in Canberra without tripping over a coalition minister whispering the scheme is unsustainable. I'm here to tell you today that is a lie.' Now we have the same former shadow minister, now the Minister for the NDIS, bringing before us a bill which, if I read the screen correctly, is, as quoted in its title, the 'getting the NDIS back on track No. 1 bill'. So something has changed from the perspective of the minister, the member for Maribyrnong, between commenting that it was a lie to suggest there were any issues with the sustainability of the scheme and bringing a bill before the parliament entitled the 'getting the NDIS back on track bill'. Nonetheless, we in the opposition are prepared to consider supporting this bill, to let it go before a Senate inquiry and make sure we look at all the potential implications for what's being proposed here. We are indeed open-minded to anything that is genuinely about improving the NDIS.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I really don't doubt—I'm not trying to make this into a political thing—those on the opposite side and I don't doubt the minister's desire to want to make the NDIS work. But we have got very, very serious and significant problems. Going to the bill, I really doubt that this bill is going to solve them.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The system will need a lot of financial reanalysis. The minister has spoken at length about getting it back on track, and everyone does want it to get back on track because if it keeps going at this rate it will become unsustainable and we'll have to go back to square one. I call on the government to start the conversations with the states and the NDIA to not just slow the rate of increase, which is planned and will hopefully save $14 billion from the expected increase, but to actually get a tighter control of the charges that are being charged by providers of care in the NDIS.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“However, insufficient time has been provided for proper consultation on this bill with the sector and the wider community who have already expressed significant and wide-ranging misgivings about the contents of this piece of legislation. It is the purpose and duty of the Senate to take this opportunity and have a more thorough investigation of a very significant bill, a bill that will have a very significant impact on the lives of many Australians who live with disability. So we do not support this bill being pushed through this place without adequate consultation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise tonight to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 and support comments made in this chamber about having a much more sustainable NDIS system whereby the money goes to the people who need it but isn't wasted on people who don't need it. It is interesting. I actually read an article yesterday online in Brisbane's Sunday Mail about how the National Disability Insurance Scheme is now being gouged by private equity owners. Let me tell you that the moment you hear the words 'private equity' you really need to find yourself a very good proctologist, because these people gouge the system. It doesn't matter whether it's public or private. I am sure that the NDIS system wasn't set up so that we could make wealthy billionaires wealthier.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
12 speakers · 14 contributions · 12 oppose
“I rise to endorse the work of my colleague Senator Steele-John in opposing the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 for the reasons that were explored at length in the Senate inquiry, which exposed just what a significant change to the scheme has been proposed by the government with this bill—not a tweaking or a little tuck and trim but some fundamental changes to some of the most important core elements of the scheme. These are changes that have been rushed through and that the government have been so embarrassed about that they tried to consult with parts of the sector and disability advocates under confidentiality agreements, and we're here today after this government, the Albanese Labor government, shut down the Senate inquiry, which still had more essential work to do to explore the real ramifications of this bill. Is it any wonder that the Greens will be opposing this bill?”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a wanton attack on the disability community. It was staged in a super dodgy way, requiring organisations to sign nondisclosure agreements, and it gives the minister an open chequebook for any future changes, without having to consult with anyone, least of all people with disability, their families or the organisations that support and represent them. The bill absolutely should not pass. It needs to be sent back to inquiry to give the community a decent amount of time to make their concerns known in the hope that someone in this chamber, beyond the Greens, might actually listen to the community.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I reiterate that this bill should absolutely not pass. It should be sent back to inquiry to give the community more time to make their concerns known and to enable further parliamentary scrutiny. Disabled people, those who love them and anyone who cares about the integrity of government social services should make their feelings known about this harmful bill. This bill will cost lives and it will set disabled people back decades. The Greens will not support this bill in its current form in the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I mentioned earlier, and many other people have mentioned in this chamber tonight, there are significant community concerns about this bill. This bill should not pass the Senate; it should be sent back to inquiry to give the community more time to make their concerns known and to enable further parliamentary scrutiny.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I foreshadow that I will bring a second reading amendment to this bill in my name on behalf of the Australian Greens. I want to urge this government to think seriously about what power it has to make a difference, what power it can ensure, as part of its legacy in this place, to look after the most vulnerable in our community. I heard many stories from those in the government and opposite around how disability affects all of us. As a First Nations woman—two children who also have a disability—it is critical that we stand up and continue to enable the voices of those in the NDIS community to be heard. We continue to advocate strongly, and, through Senator Steele-John's wonderful leadership, we continue to ask and demand that this government listen, that this government stop putting money into things that are to the detriment of the disabled community. People with lived experience of disability want to, should be, heard. They continue to ask the government to consider making changes to this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why the Greens won't support it in its current form.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jordon Steele-John on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Steele-John opposes the bill because he says it strips choice and control from the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set., replaces individual supports with government lists and mandatory assessments, and was developed without genuine co-design with disabled people. He argues the disability community has been betrayed and rejects the bill outright.
“Well, no. The disability community do not trust this government. The disability community have been profoundly betrayed by this government. The disability community do not accept this bill. The disability community reject this bill. And we do not accept that it is appropriate to ram a piece of legislation that affects the lives of 660,000 Australian citizens and their families, their friends and their organisations through this parliament with 2½ days of hearing, when the amendments offered by the government to this point are little more than lipstick on a pig—an insult to the intelligence of any disabled person, any lawyer, any advocate who reads them. We do not accept this.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Jordon Steele-John opposes the bill in its current form because it gives the minister secretive powers over NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. funding methods without basic transparency or a right of appeal. He says the Greens will back amendments to force openness and procedural fairness, but the bill should not pass unless those safeguards are added.
“It is in that context that the Greens offer this amendment, which calls for any method that may come out of this bill to be subject to basic transparency and the right of appeal. The right of appeal is a basic expectation that any citizen should have in relation to a government program. If a decision has been made that affects your life and you believe that the decision has been made in error, you should be able to appeal—that is a basic expectation. Yet this bill, in its current form, denies that right of appeal—denies that foundation stone of procedural justice—to the over 660,000 participants who rely on the NDIS for basic supports and to their families.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The government are saying with this bill, with this budget, that they do not care about you even if you need the NDIS. They don't think you're capable of managing your own life or managing your own plan of funding. It's needlessly and indescribably cruel. Many people on the NDIS already knew the government didn't seem to care about them. This rubs salt in that painful wound. With this budget and the bill, Labor have sent a pretty clear message to disabled people: they do not care about you, about your goals, about your aspirations or about your own agency. That's not good enough for me, it's certainly not good enough for those who need the NDIS and it's not good enough for the Greens. We will not support this bill in its current form.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 is an utter betrayal of the disability community and NDIS participants by this Labor government. The bill proposes the most significant changes to the NDIS since it started, more than a decade ago. What does it do? It cuts $14.4 billion from the NDIS. This is in the same federal budget that dishes out nearly $50 billion in fossil fuel subsidies; $175 billion in tax handouts for property investors; and over $80 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy, including every politician in this place, who are still going to get $4½ thousand off their tax every single year. But, at the same time as it is doing all that, this budget will cut $14.4 billion out of the NDIS.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Disabled people deserve to live a life free from the fear of where the next government cuts are coming from. They deserve to be listened to and to have their voices heard. They deserve to have the same choice and control over their lives as everyone else in the community. This bill does the opposite of that and it should not be passed.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Stephen Bates on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Bates says the Greens oppose the bill because they believe it threatens the future of the NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. and the rights of disabled people. He argues the scheme is already failing participants through delays, poor reviews and cuts that leave people without support.
“I rise to speak to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No.1) Bill 2024. The Greens see that this bill threatens the future of the NDIS and the rights of disabled people in Australia. The National Disability Insurance Scheme was designed to help. Its goal was to provide funding to eligible people with disabilities to gain greater independence, to access new skills, to be more immersed in their communities and, ultimately, to improve quality of life. Unfortunately, as time has gone on, we have seen more and more delays, with participants ending up in some dire situations.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Bates says the Greens will not support the bill because they see it as a vehicle for future NDISThe disability support scheme this bill changes, including what it will fund and how participant budgets are set. cuts, weaker individualised supports, and greater bureaucratic control over participants. He says they will still take part in the inquiry and seek amendments, but they oppose it as drafted.
“Despite the Greens' support for the release of these documents, we are not able to support the overall amendment. The Greens will actively participate in the inquiry into this bill and we will be bringing forward significant amendments to this legislation. But, as the bill stands, the Greens will not support Labor choosing to cut support to disabled people.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“At the moment, what we know is that this legislation has been rushed and that it does not have the support of even states and territories at this point in time. That does not bode well for vulnerable Australians who are living with a disability or who have a loved one who has a disability. They are going to be left in the lurch. So we can't support the government's amendment to their referral date. Next Wednesday is a joke, frankly. We need to make sure we have the winter break. We call it a 'break' but, actually, our senators—particularly Senator Steele-John—will be working his backside off on this issue, because it is important. He won't be having a break over winter. He will be working hard to get into the detail of this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“I don't have a strong record of supporting bills from the Albanese Labor government, but in this case I'm pleased to say that I will. The government has finally taken a big step towards securing the future of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. That is exactly what's at stake here. We must rein in the cost of the scheme if it's going to survive and help to provide for the needs of Australians living with a disability. The Australian people believe in making reasonable and necessary disability support availability for people who need it. If we don't make it sustainable, if we don't stop the rorting, if we don't stop it paying for things that aren't direct disability care, the goodwill towards the scheme will disappear. One Nation supports a more sustainable NDIS, and that's why we'll support this bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
10 speakers · 4 support · 6 mixed
“In conclusion, the NDIS is a good thing, but it needs to be sustainable. It is currently in need of reform both to make it sustainable and to put people with disabilities at the centre of decisions and to ensure common sense prevails. I appreciate the amendments agreed to and the assurances provided by the minister, and I will be watching implementation very carefully. If there are issues in implementation—and I suspect there will be, as with any reform of this size—I will continue to bring issues to the attention of the minister so that they can be addressed, and will support disallowance of delegated legislation if needed. The NDIS should be something that Australia is proud of, and I believe that it can be.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I urge the government to give this bill due scrutiny, including waiting on the report from the Senate inquiry, before progressing any further through this House, and to take the amendments to be moved in this place seriously. A thriving ecosystem of disability supports across Australia must be more comprehensive than what is currently contained in this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In considering this bill, I returned again and again to the desires, the dreams and the disappoints expressed by disabled members of our community when they talk about the NDIS. I thought of them and I thought of their parents, their siblings and their friends, of what we owe them and how important this legislation is. We've waited years for these vital reforms. It's absolutely necessary that we get them right, and I commit to continuing to work with the government in that respect.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I call on the government to work with the community in good faith to improve this bill so it achieves its purpose of securing a sustainable, thriving NDIS well into the future. Right now, this bill is causing anxiety out in the community, and until I see improvements on the bill I will be reserving my position.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The legislation before the House is very much welcome. The NDIS review put into perspective the current state of the scheme and made many recommendations for how to right the ship and ensure it's more sustainable and fit for purpose and true to its original intent. The review also shed light on an operational culture that prioritised the wants of providers over the needs of participants. In short, some people were making a lot of money from the NDIS, whilst people with disabilities were often missing out. It revealed an overly bureaucratic and convoluted structure that served to disenfranchise and alienate individuals and their families.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Despite the reservations I've expressed, I am inclined to support this bill, but only subject to satisfactory amendments and greater clarity from the government.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In summary, I understand the need to reform the NDIS to make it sustainable, but I am concerned that this bill, as currently drafted, may have unintended consequences for participants. I would urge the government to hasten slowly, listen deeply to the concerns of the disability community and make sure we get this right.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In closing, I support this legislation and I am looking forward to a NDIS that is not the only lifeboat in the ocean and a NDIS that is there for future generations.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I have discussed my concerns with the minister, and I commend the minister for bringing this difficult and complex issue before the parliament and for being willing to meet and work with me and my colleagues on the crossbench. I will not be voting against this bill, because I strongly believe reform is required to ensure the sustainability of the NDIS for future recipients, but I urge the minister to incorporate considered amendments put forward by people on the crossbench and to acknowledge the trust that my community and I put in his department to get this right.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill isn't perfect, but it's an important step forward on work that everyone in this House knows needs to be undertaken. So I wish the minister well with this work and I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 28 to 11.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 39 to 12.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law, which is when this reform package could start to take effect., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (20/06/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (27 Mar 2024): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (20 June 2024)
APH bill page notesBill, circulated amendments and other matters referred to Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/08/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (27 June 2024): Bill, circulated amendments and other matters referred to Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (9 Aug 2024)
APH bill page notes
