Submissions Archives - Queensland Advocacy Incorporated

2020 Review of the Disability Standards for Education – QAI Submission

QAI provided a submission to the Department of Education, Skills and Employment’s 2020 Review of the Disability Standards for Education.

Drawing upon our extensive experience of working with families who have children with disability in the education setting, we highlighted a lack of awareness of the Standards and inconsistent adherence among education providers as key issues.

We drew attention to the enrolment gatekeeping practices that continue to deny children with disability their right to an inclusive education and raised concern about the lack of accountability regarding the decision-making of principals in response to requests for reasonable adjustments.

Further to this, we raised the difficulties within the current complaint processes and highlighted how a student’s ability to access education on the same basis as students without disability is highly dependent upon the culture of the school as opposed to best practice.

We urged the government to amend the wording of the Standards to impose clearer legislative requirements on education providers, increase awareness of the Standards, ensure greater accountability of decision-making and implement measures to improve the culture of schools to ensure they welcome and encourage the participation and learning of students with disability.

Inquiry in to the NDIS Quality & Safeguards Commission – QAI Submission

QAI made an extensive submission to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme regarding the new Inquiry into the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission at the end of July 2020.

QAI made 12 key recommendations which you can read in full with the rest of the submission here.

List of attachments we submitted:

Cover letter we sent with the submission

2. QAI submission “Reshaping the Disability Services Act (Qld 2016)– worker screening 2018“

3. QAI Submission “Disability Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 (Qld)“

4. Submission to Department of Social Services “NDIS Thin Markets Project 2019“

5. Submission to Joint Standing Committee “National Disability Insurance Scheme Workforce Inquiry”

6. Submission to Qld Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Prevention Committee “Disability Services and Other Legislation (Worker Screening) Amendment Bill 2020 (Qld)“

7. QAI Submission to the Disability Royal Commission “Emergency Planning and Response 2020“

Disability Services Worker Screening – QAI Submission

QAI has made a submission on the Disability Services and Other Legislation (Worker Screening) Amendment Bill 2020 (QLD) to the Committee Secretary of the Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Prevention Committee.

Below are the Recommendations QAI made to the Committee.

You can read the full submission here.

QAI recommends:

The proposed new section 14 of the Disability Services Act (as outlined in clause 9 of the Bill) be updated to change the definition of funded service provider to include the State.
The Queensland Government publish its framework for deciding whether a person poses an unacceptable risk of harm to people with disability which is more exhaustive than that provided in the proposed new Part 5, Division 4 Subdivision 3 of the Disability Services Act (as outlined in clause 11 of the Bill).
The Queensland Government work with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, plan or self-managed participants, and unregistered service providers to encourage optional workers to request a national worker screening clearance.

Supported Independent Living – Position Paper

QAI has released a Position Paper on Supported Independent Living (SIL) arrangements. The below Position Statement is an extract from the paper.

You can read the full document here.

Position Statement

The following position statement is based on the values, beliefs and aspirations that Australians with disability can have a good but ordinary life when they have personal power, control and are
supported to exercise their autonomy and rights as other citizens.

Supported Independent Living (SIL) has become the mechanism for the proliferation of the archaic block funded group home. Rather than enabling a person to live ‘independently in their home’, it is in reality shared care in a congregated setting, often not of the person’s choosing but instead organised, negotiated, and created by the NDIS system and the service providers.
A dearth of truthful information about the inflexibility of SIL, has reinforced the misconception that a person with high and or complex support needs must therefore enter a SIL arrangement. Most people do not have any independent unbiased information about SIL and have the mistaken belief that because they live in shared accommodation they must continue in the existing arrangements.
People formerly living alone and supported for 24 hours of support, 7 days per week under the state system, are pressured by NDIA Planners as unwilling participants into SIL arrangements and costing Plans accordingly.
In most instances, the avoidance of information about alternatives and benefits of accessing the NDIS with a non-SIL funded Plan, and lack of transparency regarding the over-inflation of SILS quotes is forcing more people back to the archaic model of group or shared home living.
If a participant wants to share with another person and articulates a desire to share
some supports with their chosen housemate, (ie: overnight support only, or a combination of one or two activities), each person is very possibly able to obtain a Plan that is not only going to meet their needs but also be less restrictive, more flexible should either housemate wish to relocate, and is possibly more efficient and effective.
The solution to the abovementioned is to abolish Supported Independent Living (SIL) from Plans.
Replace it with individualised NDIS Plans for everyone including people who wish to share accommodation and support. When and where people who choose to live together, wish to share supports they merely state that intention in their Plans.

Group Homes – Submission to the DRC

QAI made a submission to the Disability Royal Commission on Group Homes and our concerns for the vulnerable people who live in them.

Below is a short excerpt fromt he submissions introduction followed by links to the full submission and all its attachments.

Introduction

This submission focuses on the experiences of vulnerable people with disability who do not have the opportunity or voice to express their own wants and wishes directly. Many of the people are often forgotten in places that do not feel like a home, are unsuitable for them and give rise to a series of physical, emotional, and/or sexual abuses that infringe or remove basic human rights. The passage of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), which commenced operated from 1 January 2020, provides, for the first time in Queensland,

You can read the full submission here.

List of attachments submitted:

Attachment A QAI Position Paper A Home of One’s Own

Attachment B QAI Report Legislation and Life

Attachment C OPA Upholding the right to life and health A review of the deaths in care

Attachment D CCQ Deaths in care – Final Expert Report

Attachment E QAI Submission to DSS Thin Markets Project

Attachment F QAI Submission to JSC Inquiry NDIS Workforce

Attachment G QAI Submission to JSC Inquiry SIL

Attachment H Submission to DRC Issues Emergency Planning and Response submission

18 Jun, 2020
(0) Comments
By Admin
DRC Submissions, Latest news, Submissions

Emergency Planning & Response Submission to the DRC

QAI made a submission to the Disability Royal Commission on Emergency Planning and Response in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the impacts the restrictions which were put in place had on people with disability.

You can read the full submission here.

Below is a brief excerpt from the submission:

Background

The federal and state governments have implemented never seen before measures to slow the spread of COVID19 (Coronavirus) through the community. These restrictions, whilst necessary, have significant impact on people with disability and cause further disruption and disadvantage to our lives.
QAI and other disability advocacy organisations believe that people with disability have not been properly considered by government decision makers during this process and that more immediate consultation needs to be held with our community so that appropriate support measures can be put in place before further trauma is caused. Systems and processes also need to be clarified so that people with disability also can feedback their experiences during this time.

18 Jun, 2020
(0) Comments
By Admin
DRC Submissions, Latest news, Submissions

Woman in wheelchair alone looking out the window

Submission on the Impact of COVID-19 Restrictions on People with Disability in QLD

QAI made a submission to the Senate Select Committee on the impact restrictions put in place to minimise the spread of COVID-19 have had and continue to have on people with disability in Queensland.

You can read the full submission that details QAI’s significant concerns here.

Below is a short excerpt from the submission:

Background

QAI and other disability advocacy organisations believe that people with disability have not been properly considered by government decision makers during this process and that more immediate consultation needs to be held with our community so that appropriate support measures can be put in place before further trauma is caused. Systems and processes also need to be clarified so that people with disability also can feedback their experiences during this time.

Submission to the NDIS Workforce Inquiry

In April QAI made a submission to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Workforce Inquiry.

Below is an excerpt from the submission with our key recommendations. You can read the full submission here.

QAI’s Recommendations

Abolishment of Supported Independent Living (SIL) from plans. SIL funding for NDIS
participants should be replaced by open and individualised funding for everyone,
including people who wish to share accommodation and support.
Restructure pricing for supports at the top and bottom of the market with particular
emphasis on mental health supports, therapy supports and services for people with
complex needs.
Restructure pricing for regional, rural and remote regions to strengthen service delivery
which has higher overhead costs than their urban counterparts.
Provide adequate funding to participants in regional, rural and remote regions to enable
delivery of service.
Work with Indigenous councils to train service providers and staff to deliver services, by
building the capacity of local people.
The NDIA ensure each state and territory has a well-equipped, well trained and person-centered human rights based ‘provider of last resort’.
Provide both financial and physical support to participants to learn how to self-manage
their plan to enable maximum flexibility.
Provide support and guidance to self-managing participants to understand Australian
Taxation Office rules, Fair Work rules and other employment issues resulting from
directly employing staff.
Provide information to the mainstream and community on services that can be provided
under the NDIS to encourage mainstream services in a disability setting.
The NDIA (and Quality and Safeguards Commission) provide assistance to providers
and sole traders to participate in the auditing process which can be timely, costly and a
hindrance to staying in the NDIS market.
The Quality and Safeguards Commission to scrutinise service providers providing
housing and supports and restrict registration to ensure no provide is able to provide
both functions.

Priorities for Federal Discrimination Law Reform – QAI Submission

QAI made a submission in November 2019 to the Australian Human Rights Commission on the Priorities for Federal Discrimination Law Reform. Upwards reaching arms labelled with key tenants of human rights. Prosperity, equality, freedom, justice and hope.

Summary of QAI’s Recommendations:

QAI supports the summary of proposed priorities for federal discrimination law reform.
QAI considers that the Federal Government should undertake structural and substantive reform of the current discrimination laws, consolidating the separate discrimination statutes into a single Act that is comprehensive, consistent and extends reasonable adjustments to impose a specific positive duty across all protected attributes in all protected areas of life.
QAI submits that existing protected attributes should be extended to include carer’s responsibility, volunteers and interns, accommodation status and subjection to domestic and family violence.
The legislation should reflect and incorporate the obligations Australia has assumed at international law.
Gaps in coverage for carer’s responsibility, volunteers and interns, accommodation status and domestic and family violence must be addressed.
All permanent exemptions should be reviewed not only in light of the overall purpose of discrimination law to promote equality and fair treatment, but also having regard to the purpose and intent of the CRPD.
Current compliance mechanisms administered by the Commission are necessary and helpful and QAI supports their continuation. We note the significant problems with the temporary exemptions available under the DDA and consider that the granting of exemptions can undermine the strength and power of discrimination law.
QAI strongly supports the Commission’s position that there is a need for greater awareness-raising activities and possibly industry support to promote compliance, as well as robust review processes to measure the effectiveness of the Disability Standards. QAI considers that the introduction of voluntary audits, a general inquiry function and positive duties would be of significant value.
QAI strongly supports the introduction of a positive duty for public entities to proactively take measures to eliminate unlawful discrimination and harassment and advance equality.
QAI agrees that complaints processes must be available and accessible for all people.
QAI notes that the nature of confidential conciliations reduces the likelihood that matters will resolve and places the complainant in the position of having to proceed to a less accessible and available forum, which is a significant limitation of discrimination law.
QAI proposes extending the timeframe to 12 months, with extensions available, to cover complex disputes and circumstances where vulnerable complainants have been unable or unwilling to take action earlier.
QAI strongly supports the provision of greater clarity about the ability for representative actions to be brought and agrees this would enable a greater focus on systemic discrimination issues and reduce the pressure on individual complainants.
QAI submits that there should be no costs orders made against a complainant, except in very exceptional cases where there has been a clear demonstration of a deliberate and vexatious misuse of process. Strong safeguards should be in place regarding legal representation.
QAI considers that there must be measures introduced to address the particular vulnerability of persons experiencing intersectional discrimination that includes harassment and vilification. Protections for vilification under federal discrimination law should be at least equivalent to the protections offered by state law and should attract both civil and criminal penalties in appropriate cases.
Discrimination should not remain the sole remedy under Commonwealth law for a vulnerable person who has experienced an unlawful breach of their human rights. It is time to enact a federal Human Rights Act or Charter, which translates the international human rights Australia has agreed to respect and protect into binding domestic law.

You can read the full submission here.

QAI Submission Regarding Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder

QAI made a submission in November 2019 to the Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs regarding the Effective Approaches to Prevention, Diagnosis and Support for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD).

QAI’s Recommendations:

It is critical that NDIS applicants have advice and support from people who are familiar with the conditions and its effects, nurse educators and the like, who can explain the kinds of therapies and supports that are most appropriate and useful.
The NDIA has authority to ensure health authorities train and appoint more nurse educators in the field to be available for Participants with FASD.
NDIA Planners are not likely to be familiar with FASD or its impacts, so it is important that the NDIA issues information and advice to Planners that the person with FASD and or their supporters have the expertise and knowledge about their support needs and the Planning meeting outcomes should reflect this. At the very least, it is important for people to have mentor support during the meeting.
It is important to focus on the person’s support needs, even though the client’s support needs may not arise directly out of their FASD.
NDIA Planners and LAC’s should utilise the Complex Needs Pathways for Applicants with FASD who require financial support to obtain assessments and reports.
If an applicant needs supports to develop self-regulation or to decrease behaviours which others find challenging, evidence such as reports from speech pathologists, therapists etc should articulate the triggers or risks.
It is essential that people are accompanied by someone who not only understands the support needs of people with FASD, but also understands the NDIS planning process.
Mentors may be the best support: a person who can read moods, and be a ‘calendar’ to ensure that the person sticks to plans and appointments, and who drives attendance.
LAC’s and/or Planners should link Participants who have FASD to nurse educators and other professionals to assist them.
The NDIA should abolish Typical Support Plans as incongruent to the diversity of support needs.
It is essential that if not NDIS–eligible, people with FASD are able to secure block-funded non-clinical supports from mainstream agencies that are funded to provide them.

You can read the full submission here.