Liam Thatcher

@lthat.ch

164 Followers 423 Following

No relation. NDIS policy and supporting disability advocacy. Account is in personal capacity. he/him

Post from Darren O'Donovan on LinkedIn: Nice to see the government remove the 'other treatment' drafting error from the NDIS Bill [items 89 and 91]. Doing so also removes the reversed onus of establishing that a treatment is 'unlikely' to noticeably improve or alleviate your impairment. Item 92 is untouched and is now the ball game. Its contents can be moderated by later rules. But: People are expected to undertake any treatment that can 'reliably be expected' to materially improve, reverse, or alleviate the impact of, the impairment or impairments. People know my views on how a low bar like "noticeably improves" or marginally alleviates your impairment may see people parked into risk and waiting rooms. And trigger cycles of arguing over marginal treatment or habilitation options that don't really touch the sides of their lifelong need for disability supports. It's not outcome focused. We need to stop putting new rows into statute, and work to designed solutions. Approaching the treatment requirement this way goes way beyond what the agency argued for in Davis. We need a mature, well worked tackling of the upstream health drivers of NDIS access. Another drafting error, randomly referring to a new, narrower category of 'medical' treatment in the provision allowing refusal for 'medical reasons' seems to have survived. I'm also not sure about the Greens' amending note referring to public funding. Clearly, they weren't allowed amend the main body definition of treatment that is 'regularly undertaken' in Australia. But the note would read stronger if it said 'only' if public funding is available. Or adopted the prescriptive framing of the following note on restrictive practices. As currently drafted it risks being read as some kind of deeming observation, rather than interpretive guidance setting limits on the broader phrase.
The Greens secure eight week extension for NDIS cuts The Greens have released this statement: The Greens have secured an 8 week extension to the inquiry into the NDIS cuts until 14 August 2026, which will delay the bill and grant more time to build pressure on both Labor and the Liberals to withdraw their support for the Bill entirely. With Labor, the Liberals, the Nationals and One Nation currently supporting the NDIS cuts, the Bill has been widely expected to pass the parliament. However, support for the bill is flagging – with the Senate yesterday spending hours debating withdrawing the bill. With support for this Bill collapsing and a growing public understanding that this Bill makes limited attempt to focus the cuts on rorting, the Greens will continue to press for the cuts Bill to be withdrawn. As a precaution, the Greens have also secured changes to weaken some of the more outrageous provisions. The Greens and government-agreed amendments will: Limit ministerial powers to impose sweeping cuts to people’s supports budgets Ensure greater transparency on automated decision-making Provide greater protections for disabled people by ensuring that they cannot be forced to undergo harmful restrictive practices to gain access to the NDIS, and that any treatments required must be available in the public healthcare system. While these amendments reduce some of the most egregious harms of the bill, it remains a dangerous and callous threat to disabled people. Regardless of amendments, the Greens will oppose the NDIS Bill if it comes to a vote. This extended inquiry does not preclude additional future delays to the bill, and the Greens say that they will put as many roadblocks in front of these cuts as are needed to stop it once and for all.
A headline from The Australian: How the lucky country is becoming the stupid country Subtitle: SOon after the US bombing of Iran, my teenage grandson asked me: 'Grandpa, does this mean a third world war?' After some deliberation, here's what I told him. Written by: Robert Gottliebsen, Business Columnist