Disability Services and Inclusion Bill 2023 and another

The majority voted against the amendments on sheets 2169, 2204, 2179, 2171, 2180, 2170, 2209, 2175, 2178, 2173, 2211, 2176, 2177 and 2202, which were moved together by West Australian Senator Jordan Steele-John (Greens).

What was the purpose of these amendments?

Senator Steele-John explained that:

Firstly, we seek in parts of these amendments to correct basic administrative flaws in the bill that were flagged by disabled people during the inquiry and yet have not been clarified in the bill. We seek in these amendments to do things such as make clear that services and advocacy provided and funded under the bill extend to online and digital spaces. [...] We seek to ensure that the code of conduct put forward by the government is actually enforced and monitored by a dedicated commission which has the capacity and ability to uphold and investigate complaints brought by disabled people. [...]

We seek in these amendments to give effect to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Australia has been a signatory to this convention, has ratified this convention, since 2008. One of our amendments simply calls on the government to ensure that no service that is funded under this act violates the principles of our commitments under the UN convention. [...]

We seek also to implement basic recommendations given to the government during the course of the inquiry, in relation to how this bill can better support First Nations people through the adoption and implementation of key recommendations and principles within the Closing the Gap framework, to which all government departments administering these services are already committed. [...]

As Senator Ruston flagged in her contribution, we seek to ensure that the government establish a national, consistent framework for the use and ownership of assistance animals and the ability to move through Australia with the support of an assistance animal in the full knowledge that for so many Australians who need such a support, there are far too many complex, varying regulations at the state and territory level, and the people who need these forms of support are so often subject to discrimination and exclusion.

We seek also to make basic changes to this act so that it does not enshrine the concept of 'respite' within it at a moment when we need to be moving away from the idea that disabled people are a burden on our friends, families and carers. This act seeks to enshrine the language of 'respite' when it attempts to talk about supported out-of-home accommodation, which is vital, which people need, which plays a key role in facilitating the skills development of disabled people as well as preventing carer burnout.