Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, , 3:47:13 to 4:07:24
The NDIA introduces new leadership and discusses integrity reforms, fraud prevention measures, and an ongoing investigation into former employees linked to IBAC findings.
Topics: Social services, Integrity
Speakers: Speaker 36, Hon Anne Ruston, Hon Jenny McAllister, Ellie Whiteaker, Louise Glanville, Blair Comley
Well, thank you very much to all of the officials and agencies who have uh been here this morning and late last night on outcome one. Is that right? Yes, I'll come on. Um I will release the relevant officials and agencies for outcome one. And we will move to outcome four disability and carers. So I call officers from the Department of Health, Disability and Aging in relation to outcome four, disability and carers. I also welcome the Chief Executive Officer of the National Disability Insurance Agency, Mr. Graham Head AO, and the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commissioner, Ms. Louise Glanville. We will take a suspension for approximately five minutes just to change um witnesses and get everyone to the table. Good afternoon. Welcome to officers from the departments. Mr. Comley again, thank you. It's a long stint for you. I apologize. That's okay. Thank you. And also the teams from the National Disability Insurance Agency. Minister, I believe you have an opening statement.
Yes, thank you. Over to you. I I want to start by noting the change of leadership at the NDIA that was announced yesterday. Mr. Kurt Fearnley has made a very significant contribution as chair of the board. And his leadership has supported the board in their oversight during a period of substantial change and reform. Dr. Innes is well known and deeply respected, particularly as a lawyer and former disability discrimination commissioner, and I look forward to working with Dr. Innes in his capacity. Together we have a big task in getting the scheme back on track and delivering the government's reforms, and I do want to give the committee an update on progress since we were last together. This government is focused on ensuring the scheme's integrity, and we take fraud very seriously. Every dollar that is taken by fraud is a dollar that is taken from someone who needs it. And regrettably, where we see fraud, we also see a range of other harms to participants, right through to violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The government committed more than $800 million to uplift NDIS integrity in this budget, and significant legislative reforms have passed the Parliament. The government is preventing fraudsters from accessing the NDIS at every point by preventing access to the provider market, introducing robust payment controls, creating stronger powers in investigation and enforcement, and introducing tough new penalties to deter wrongdoers. It will take time to address the deficiencies that we inherited when coming to government, but our efforts are bearing fruit, and as more controls are rolled out, I'm confident that the measures will deliver a high integrity scheme that people with disability can do deserve. Since we were last in this forum, Parliament also passed the NDIS amendment securing the NDIS for Future Generations Act 2026, and this legislation advances Labour's commitment to ensuring that the NDIS can continue to provide life-changing supports, both now and for generations to come by making the NDIS sustainable.
Ambiguity, primarily where a role had been held by multiple people over time. The two current NDIA employees are referred to by their former roles and are not named in the report. Given the matters are now being considered by me as agency head, I do not consider it appropriate that I further identify the employees concerned. I want to reassure the committee that as agency head, I am taking all steps available to me to ensure the matters are considered carefully and appropriately. That work is underway. Neither officer is on duty in the agency. It's important that the work be allowed to proceed properly and fairly in accordance with all applicable legislative and procedural requirements. Doing otherwise would put at risk the process I'm following and any outcomes of that process. I must stress that in taking any action, I must take great care both to mitigate any risk to the agency and the scheme and to avoid prejudicing the outcomes of the work that is underway. For these reasons, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the individuals concerned, the matters considered by IBAC or IBAC's findings, the matters being considered by me as agency head or any potential outcomes of my consideration of those matters. While Senators may wish to put questions to me today, I will need to consider in respect of each or any question whether I'm able to answer without prejudicing the processes that are underway and where necessary and appropriate I may take the question on notice in order to seek advice.
Thank you, Mr. He. Ms. Glanville, do you wish to make an opening statement on behalf of the Quality and Safeguards Commission?
Thank you, Chair. I would just also like to acknowledge Kurt Fearnley and the work that he has done not only as chair, but he was also very involved in the early years of the scheme as well, from 2012 to 2016. And he has been a tremendous advocate for the scheme, and we have enjoyed at the Commission also meeting with him and his colleagues from time to time to talk about the work that we do. And we wish him all the very best for the future. But no other comments from me at this stage. Thank you.
Thank you very much. We'll now move to questions. Senator Ruston.
Thank you. Thank you to everyone for your statements. And I might just follow on from your opening statement, Mr. Head, and take on board your willingness to provide an update on the matter that it was the subject of the Victorian IBAC comments. And I respect the fact that you can't identify the people involved. But I would be keen to understand whether the staff that we are referring to have held positions in the NDIA or where they had authority to prove funding distribution or grants.
So I might take that on notice because I know with more precision the duties of one role than another than both of the roles, but we are going through a process of looking at all of the matters in which either officer were involved. The nature of IBAC's findings are quite specific around the conduct that it was examining. We're going through a process to as I said, and either officer is on duty, and we're going through a process to examine everything that's relevant around the officers' time in the agency.
Well, to that end, then if you could also provide advice whether they were ever responsible for reviewing the integrity of any of the programs that operate within the agency. Were you aware of this investigation when was the agency aware of this investigation when these You would be aware,
Senator, that organisations such as IBAC and equivalent organisations generally apply legally binding confidentiality requirements to people who are either giving evidence or subject of investigation? So I am quite comfortable to provide on notice relevant information about when matters were brought to my attention, but I want to take advice on those issues.
So you don't feel comfortable to tell me whether the agency employed these people knowing that they were under investigation. You feel that that's something you want to take on.
Well, these people were employed in the agency some time ago. That requires understanding exactly when IBAC commenced its processes. All of those things, Senator, as I alluded to in my statement, are being worked through as part of the process that I need to go through in order to be able to consider matters and take any action that I consider appropriate and am able to take.
Okay. So I'm assuming this is just going on notice when you became aware of the investigation, how you became aware of the investigation. And what action internal action the agency is taking, and I do understand that you've provided some advice in your opening statement to that effect. So if if you could provide that information, that would be great. Can I just ask before I move on? I've got some questions about assistance animals. Where would I ask those?
Depends what the question is. I mean, if it's a yeah, can you give flavour of what the Well sort of really about the status,
the nationally consistent status of these animals? I just want to know when to ask it because I understand this up.
Well, we're all here together. I think that's so we've we've tried to simplify it for you that we have the agency, the call in safeguarding commission of the department.
All right, so um I'll do that one. And the other one that I wanted to ask about was um uh there's uh ask Izzy, which is a uh a program. Um that will be in social services, won't it? Yeah, okay, all right, that's great. Um, um if it's okay, and Mr. Chair, I'm gonna cede my time to start.