NDIS aka DisabilityCare

Remove this Banner Ad

J_Moore said:
I'm glad it's introduced, and I'm happy to pay for it. Hopefully the current financial climate will ensure its set up with a bit more care, but I imagine it'll be largely free from the axe.

Long term, I'd like to see money diverted from unemployment and aged pension benefits and towards this program.
Click to expand...
Why aged pension?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Interesting that despite the federal government's criticisms of Barnett for not signing up, a number of the biggest disability service providers in WA have come out and supported Barnett's stance. I haven't heard of any condemning Barnett.
 
Underdog said:
Interesting that despite the federal government's criticisms of Barnett for not signing up, a number of the biggest disability service providers in WA have come out and supported Barnett's stance. I haven't heard of any condemning Barnett.
Click to expand...

That's because the actual people with diabilities aren't being heard.

http://www.abc.net.au/rampup/articles/2012/12/07/3649714.htm

Between 85 and 91 percent of Western Australians with disability remain unfunded and under supported, or can't work or be active in the community in other ways.
Click to expand...
 
Glinn Mgraw said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but why isn't this being run through Centrelink?
Click to expand...

I was working whilst at uni and receiving ausstudy which required weekly reporting. The experience was horrific.

Aborigines brawling, women crying and young punks threatening staff and patrons.

Centrelink should be limited to unemployment benefits. Pensions and other social benefit schemes should be kept separate.

Centrelink is just too dangerous.
 
yibbida said:
That's because the actual people with diabilities aren't being heard.

http://www.abc.net.au/rampup/articles/2012/12/07/3649714.htm
Click to expand...
You make it sound like these services aren't interested in helping these people. They are.

These organisations feel we have the best system in the country and want to be sure that changes in the system is not going to have a negative impact whether it be now or in the future. They are yet to be convinced.
 
Underdog said:
You make it sound like these services aren't interested in helping these people. They are.

These organisations feel we have the best system in the country and want to be sure that changes in the system is not going to have a negative impact whether it be now or in the future. They are yet to be convinced.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my intention. The point was there is obviously a lot of people that slip though the gaps who aren't getting any help and have no organisation acting on their behalf.
 
Power Raid said:
I was working whilst at uni and receiving ausstudy which required weekly reporting. The experience was horrific.

Aborigines brawling, women crying and young punks threatening staff and patrons.

Centrelink should be limited to unemployment benefits. Pensions and other social benefit schemes should be kept separate.

Centrelink is just too dangerous.
Click to expand...

Centrelink does many of its functions online now.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

yibbida said:
That wasn't my intention. The point was there is obviously a lot of people that slip though the gaps who aren't getting any help and have no organisation acting on their behalf.
Click to expand...

Of course.
But that's why the NDIS should work through the existing systems to cover the gaps rather than creating a new layer of Canberra based bureaucracy
 
Barnett this morning has said...

WA remains the only state not to sign up to the scheme, but Mr Barnett says this is because WA is "way ahead'' of other states where the level of care is poorer.
He said some people would get less funding and support under the federal government's system.
"There are going to be, I hate to say it, winners and losers,'' he told Fairfax radio today.
"I don't want to see any losers. I don't want to see any person made worse off, and yet, that will happen under the NDIS the way it's structured.''
The premier said the management of the system was just as important as the level of funding provided.
He said 80 per cent of disability services were currently run by state governments.
"To simply throw that out and say something ran out of Canberra is going to work better, I think is a huge risk,'' Mr Barnett said.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...lection-promises/story-fnhocxo3-1226648308280
Click to expand...

Below is one of the service providers in support of the stance.
Nulsen Chief Executive Officer, Gordon Trewern says his organisation is concerned that the Federal Government is rushing the NDIS timetable in an effort to leave a ‘legacy’.
“There is no dispute that there is a need for a national NDIS entitlement scheme.
“However we are backing the Premier’s refusal to abandon WA’s decentralised model of funding services as a condition of signing on to the NDIS.
“This is a huge piece of social change and we have to get it right without rushing into it,” Trewern said.
“Although an NDIS entitlement system remains the ultimate goal, control that is centralised in the Eastern States would be worse than the good WA model that is currently in place.
“Our fear is having to operate within a transactional model with someone in Sydney who doesn’t know the individual and who will simple work from a formula that says ‘you are entitled to X, and that’s it’,” Trewern said.
“My view is that the Premier is acting in the best interests of the people with disabilities in this state.”

http://www.probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2013/05/wa-agency-backs-state’s-resistance-ndis
Click to expand...

It should also be noted that Trewern is not just an insignificant CEO, he is on the National Disability Services Board.
 
There's a difference between taking a national view and state view...

Additionally, their support of NDIS does not necessarily mean they agree with its proposed implementation. There's a big difference between supporting a concept and having an input into it, and the end result.
 
Belnakor said:
would improve most states just not WA, so I would say they should support it, all things remaining equal.
Click to expand...
How?

The NDIS will be . the incredibly prescriptive, like anything the federal govt does anything with a lot of gray becomes very transactional. Howard recognize this somewhat when he outsourced a whole lot of welfare to the salvos and others. Commited people with a decentralized model with some freedom to make decisions on the ground. WA is right to be concerned if they already have a good decentralized model that is working, it also generally cuts down on the number of public servants that are not delivering the service.
 
Qsaint said:
Howard recognize this somewhat when he outsourced a whole lot of welfare to the salvos and others.
Click to expand...

Outsourcing job providers for Centrelink has been a joke. The benefit is that the main critics of Centrelink are fans of privatisation so don't complain about it. The negative is private companies rort the system. One of the main ways is because the govt pays them for getting people jobs, so they claim they got someone a job even when that person got the job themselves.
 
Ratts of Tobruk said:
Outsourcing job providers for Centrelink has been a joke. The benefit is that the main critics of Centrelink are fans of privatisation so don't complain about it. The negative is private companies rort the system. One of the main ways is because the govt pays them for getting people jobs, so they claim they got someone a job even when that person got the job themselves.
Click to expand...
Not the job network a lot of the services anything from drug rehab to indeed help for disable people. The Salvos have more sites in Australia than McDonald's
 
yibbida said:
That wasn't my intention. The point was there is obviously a lot of people that slip though the gaps who aren't getting any help and have no organisation acting on their behalf.
Click to expand...

The debate isn't around the additional funding. It's about how you distribute that funding and support. The DSC is best placed to do it.
 
NDIS is a massive failure and needs to be reviewed immediately.

By way of background the reason for NDIS is more than providing financial support for to those most in need in society. Many of the people have mental health issues of varying degrees and simply can't cope with the "process" of life, including bills, rent, medicare and other government services.

The NDIS is a cruel scheme that pushes the onus and responsibility onto the client with much of the service online. If they can't apply online, in time and in the correct manner, they lose their benefits. If people with mental health could cope and know their rights............they wouldn't need support. Thus the support they need, needs to consider they need help claiming their entitlements.

In traditional disabilities services, a carer is assigned who goes out to the house to understand the needs. This is an important step, especially when a person has just become disabled and may need doors, showers and stairs varied to meet the new needs. They also meet families to understand existing support networks.

The old system is a care based system and tailored to needs. The NDIS is a political stunt which is proving to be nothing but cruel.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/m...-disappointment-advocate-20170524-gwc8ww.html
 
Power Raid said:
NDIS is a massive failure and needs to be reviewed immediately.

By way of background the reason for NDIS is more than providing financial support for to those most in need in society. Many of the people have mental health issues of varying degrees and simply can't cope with the "process" of life, including bills, rent, medicare and other government services.

The NDIS is a cruel scheme that pushes the onus and responsibility onto the client with much of the service online. If they can't apply online, in time and in the correct manner, they lose their benefits. If people with mental health could cope and know their rights............they wouldn't need support. Thus the support they need, needs to consider they need help claiming their entitlements.

In traditional disabilities services, a carer is assigned who goes out to the house to understand the needs. This is an important step, especially when a person has just become disabled and may need doors, showers and stairs varied to meet the new needs. They also meet families to understand existing support networks.

The old system is a care based system and tailored to needs.
Click to expand...
Mental health specifically is not part of the ndis yet, they are talking about including it in the future
 
Sainteric said:
Mental health specifically is not part of the ndis yet, they are talking about including it in the future
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on the classification based on a medical assessment. For me, someone who doesn't have the mental capability to manage their affairs has a mental health issue.

Sadly people are falling through the cracks without personal service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top