Richard Hamon has hundreds of pages of documents to go through as part of his Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) case. Legally blind due to a degenerative genetic condition, he’s seeking more funding under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to allow him to travel for specialist vision assessments so that he can buy assistive technology.
In the meantime, he needs the AAT documents in audio format. He’s been asking for this for the full 18 months the case has been with the tribunal. When he finally received them he found that instead of hiring professional readers, who note paragraph sections to allow listeners to stop, start and skim through the documents, Hamon says they have been read by National Disability Insurance Agency staff. The 17.5 hours of recordings feature popping from the reader being too close to the microphone, distortion, and no way to jump to page or paragraph sections.
“It’s excruciating to listen to,” Hamon tells Crikey. He says the NDIA argued that professionally producing the audio files would cost too much. “I raised the concern from the outset that they would fail to meet accessibility standards.”
Funding goes to the wrong places
Hamon lives in regional Tasmania, where specialists are limited. He’s requesting trips to Melbourne for assessment through Vision Australia to be fully funded by the NDIA so that he can purchase assistive technology with his NDIS funding. The NDIA could avoid producing the audio files by funding this trip. It has already agreed to fund the technology.
Hamon says his experience in the AAT has caused severe health problems due to stress, and spinal problems have arisen by hunkering over his computer while he waits for his assistive technology assessments.
“[The NDIA] are not interested in cooperating with people with disabilities. They’re only interested in contesting with them,” Hamon says.
There’s been a 400% increase in people with disabilities disputing their NDIS plans in the AAT. The NDIA spends upwards of $17.3 million a year on external legal firms to fight people with disabilities’ claims. Hamon has a disability advocate representing him. The NDIA has hired the high-profile law firm HWL Ebsworth.
Hamon has gone back and forth with the agency, in one case putting forward a cost estimate for a trip to Melbourne of $45.39 in per-kilometre driving costs to get him from the ferry to a nearby hotel for a medical appointment. HWL Ebsworth lawyers contracted by the NDIA then checked the figure, finding a $2.38 cost discrepancy.
Hamon says NDIA was concerned about the cost management of hiring professionals: “If they’ve cost cut on audio and I don’t find them accessible to sue because they’re so exasperating to listen to, then that puts me back in the AAT.”
The NDIA told Crikey it “makes provisions for and ensures accessibility to enable full engagement with the processes” and “does convert documents it has created to accessible formats” when lodging them to the AAT.
It didn’t say whether it has policies around producing documents in accessible formats, though Hamon says the files provided don’t fit with best-practice guidelines.
Accessibility isn’t difficult
Accessibility in the AAT is a concern too. An August 2021 joint submission signed by 20 disability organisations recommended the NDIA co-design improvements to make the AAT process more accessible. It found the process is “unnecessarily complex, slow and difficult to navigate” and the NDIA conducts the appeals process in an “improper and unfair way”.
There are two things that have to happen to make content accessible, CEO of the Centre For Accessibility Australia Dr Scott Hollier says: “People with disabilities have to have the right tools on their device of choice … and content needs to be prepared in a way that works with those tools.”
Assistive technology includes a text-to-speech program, screen magnifiers and high contrast colour scheme built around the web content accessibility guidelines — an international standard to ensure content is accessible. If formatted correctly, a screen reader will announce subheadings, bullet points and describe images, with users able to pick the voice and speed of the reader.
“But it only works if the content is designed to that standard,” Hollier said. The NDIA website has struggled to meet these standards previously, although it has undergone multiple redesigns.
Public-facing digital content in Australia has to comply with a version of these standards or face breaching disability discrimination laws. But, Hollier said, it’s up to a complainant to lodge a complaint and prove the company hasn’t done the right thing — rather than it being up to the company to demonstrate it is complying with the standards.
“It’s always an uphill battle in Australian policy.”
3 rules we have learnt from the previous govt.
1. All welfare recipients are malingerers and scammers. They have to be monitired and blocked at every turn using the full force of every oppressive gogernment agency.
2. The correct people to assist in this process are liberal voting lawyers, accountants and other specialists who can devise endless expensive ways of frustrating these malingerers till they eventually give up. These experts are to have unlimited funding themselves.
Who are the real scammers?
I am one of the 4 millian disabled who has no cover by NDIS due to being over 65. Fortunately I can manage on my own, but dealing with Aged Care is a srtuggle too. Governments have to face up to the ever growing liability in the area of disability, and putting in a decent public service to run it would save a fortune. Every thing I ask for has to go through umpteen private advisers and contractors. The cost is astronomical and no directed to helping the disabled. The monthly visit of the NSW health nurse is how it ought to be – several years of fautless and friendly service, and not a private contractor . .
After 9 months I have just had NDIS approval for some Home Mods (modifications). Nothing particularly complicated just a shower/toilet/bathroom accessible for a LBKAmputee. I had already paid $2000 of my own money to tear down a wall to make the space accessible for my wheelchair. The initial quote from the builder for the full reno was about $20k. Which is pretty standard for a basic bathroom reno. There was a slight problem in that it included an accessible closet for my clothes (the entrance replaced a wardrobe) and that was not allowed. It took them 3 months to decide this. And after another 2 months of back and forth removing that item from the work the quote had gone up to $30k. Then the NDIS decided I must have asked for both a wet leg (a $20k prosthetic you can wear in a shower) and bathroom mods and that was not allowed. Which I hadn’t. So after resending them all the material they already had that said I would be lucky if I could use a basic K1 prosthesis, which would anyway need to be removed to shower. I had to state if my Home Mods were approved I would not later ask for a wet leg I never wanted in the first place. The quote was asked for again and this time came back at $40k. Not because the builder was greedy but because building costs have skyrocketed in the last 6 months. So in order to save a few hundred dollars for a cupboard, it has now cost them an extra $20k and me 9 months wasted pissing into a bottle, without a proper shower. And it still hasn’t even been started yet! Multiply all that by 500,000 participants and you can see why the NDIS is wasting $10bn to save a few million.
Re-educate the staff . . . and replace Senior Management. The entire Public Service at large requires urgent review which is surely now underway. If change is not apparent after six months . . . talk to Independents. Rome wasn’t built in a day.
I have a relative who works in the NDIS. The NDIS is like any other welfare program. People will line up to abuse it. The stories people who try to get house renovations and all sorts of services and equipment including cars and motorcycles is staggering. When they are allowed to self manage their allocations the fun begins. Flat screen TV’S, exercise equipment and gym subscriptions. The list is endless. Contractors who do lawn mowing etc, charging for services they don’t perform during colder months. I could go on, I won’t.
That is nonsense. Even if some people are trying it on, those sorts of claims unsupported by proper evidence would get stopped fairly quickly. However nothing you have mentioned is an outrageous ask depending on the condition. Home renovations are a common funding request due to accommodation for disabilities. Modified cars and motorcycles are an obvious request. Exercise equipment and gym subscriptions are such an obvious item for funding that I can tell you are really reaching. As for the tv, why specify ‘flat screen tvs’? Is there any other kind nowadays? And there are very good reasons why a new, bigger tv might be requested for people with certain sorts of disabilities.
Furthermore, no-one ‘works in the NDIS’, which btw is not a ‘welfare programme’. People work for the NDIA. But the actual NDIS funds are administered through for profit and not for profit agencies, which is a big part of the problem for the programme. I suspect your relative doesn’t actually exist and this is just another version of ‘I have a cousin who can’t find any employees because they’re all on the dole and out surfing’. But if your relative does exist it sounds like they are part of the problem. In fact, it sounds like they have no idea of the purpose of the NDIS and are simply a bitter, twisted person who, let’s face it, is getting a better cut from the NDIS than any of the clients are. So tell them to stop lying and stop their whining.
I agree. I have had extensive experience with NDIS and none of the equipment detailed above would ever be paid for because 1. Most participates are plan manged so invoices are approved and paid by a third party, who will not approve an expense that is not within the guidelines. 2. Home modifications have to be assessed by an occupational therapist and then have 2x quotes by builders and then (after approval) the building is supervised by an independent builder. The biggest delay in any of this is the extremely slow approval process by NDIS. We are still waiting for over 7 months for the last part of the home modifications to be approved. The comment expressed by Denis are just completely wrong and really tarnishes participants.
Yes, I suspect the ‘relative’ doesn’t exist at all, because Denis’ comment is pretty far removed from how the NDIS actually works.