Back to Articles
Federation Chamber: Private Members' Business - National Disability Insurance Agency

Parliament of Australia

ENRICHED

Details

Date Published
30 June 2024
Priority Score
1
Australian
Yes
Created
12 Oct 2026, 10:00 am

Authors (1)

Description

Search engine for Australian parliamentary documents and media.

Summary

This parliamentary motion critiquing the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) highlights the use of technology and artificial intelligence in Australian government service delivery. The document calls for investment in AI to deliver better outcomes for participants rather than increasing administrative burdens or bureaucracy. While the primary focus is on bureaucratic inefficiency and workforce growth, it underscores the political demand for AI to enhance transparency and timeliness in high-stakes public sector decision-making.

Body

Mr CONAGHAN (Cowper) (11:44): I move: That this House: (1) notes that despite the Government increasing the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) workforce by more than 5,700 public servants since the 2022 election, participant complaints, funding disputes, fraud investigations and demands on parliamentary electorate offices continue to grow; (2) further notes with concern, the increasing seriousness and urgency of matters being raised, including cases involving loss of essential supports, participant safety, housing insecurity, hospital discharge delays and risks to health and wellbeing; (3) expresses concern that administrative failures within the NDIA are placing an increasing burden on carers, providers, support workers and electorate offices, to resolve participant matters that should be addressed promptly by the NDIA; and (4) calls on the Government to: (a) urgently reduce the backlog of reviews, reassessments and participant decisions; (b) prioritise participant-facing service and decision-making roles over administrative growth; (c) reduce waste, inefficiency and unnecessary bureaucracy within the NDIA; (d) strengthen accountability, timeliness and transparency in decision-making; and (e) ensure that investment in staffing, technology and artificial intelligence delivers better and more timely outcomes for participants rather than greater administrative burden. On this side of the floor, we know that bigger government doesn't necessarily mean better outcomes, and nowhere is this more obvious and evident than in the National Disability Insurance Agency. I understand the logic here. You think putting more staff means more hands on deck, which should mean that those decks are cleared more swiftly and more effectively, but anyone working in an electorate office right now—it's a job that I would not like to do. It's a very difficult job, but we've got great people doing it. Anyone in an electorate office right now will tell you that they have never received more urgent and justifiable pleas for assistance from their constituents than they have in the past few months. Electorate staff have increasingly become an emergency escalation point at levels that they have not experienced before, particularly in regional seats like mine in Cowper. You've got to ask how that can be. The NDIA has more than doubled its public service workforce since 2022, from just over 5,000 to a whopping 11,052. They've doubled it. They're now working on the federal scheme at a federal level, and they should be clearing it at twice the rate. This isn't just anecdotal feedback. You only have to look at the complaints lodged over a three-year period to see the outcome erosion in black and white. As of 30 June 2024, around 71 per cent of requests undertaken that year were completed within 60 days. Seventy-one percent—that's not too bad. But that number fell to 54 per cent in June 2025 and then fell to just 30 per cent by 20 December 2025—30 per cent! It's a disgrace, considering that the workforce has doubled. These stats are taken from the government's own performance dashboard, and we need to remember these aren't just numbers on a page or a screen. These are people in need waiting for months and months and months for care, desperate care and, in many cases, people who have previously received care and have been unceremoniously cut off. We've all had examples of that. Again, you just need to look at the government's own reports to validate this. The latest report shows a clear split between simpler front-end decisions and more complex matters for existing participants. Only 48 per cent of internal reviews were completed within 60 days, and only 32 per cent of participant requested assessments and 44 per cent of scheduled reassessments were completed on time. With the further impending changes to the scheme, this situation is only going to get worse. Foundational supports are capped at $10 billion over five years, jointly funded by the Commonwealths and states. Thriving Kids accounts for $4 billion of that amount, but not all states have signed up to the Thriving Kids, leaving implementation gaps. Continued poor transition and implementation rollouts like these—we've seen service restrictions and closures and workforce losses and gaps in support, particularly in regional communities. This issue has to be addressed. Today, I'm calling on the government to publish the size and age-of-review reassessment and decision backlogs, show how many additional staff are participating in face-to-face roles and what results and efficiencies they have delivered, provide transparency over service standards for decisions, reviews and complaints, and report performance publicly. The government has doubled the NDIA workforce and is now reshaping how billions of dollars in disability support are delivered, but the results for participants most in need are already speaking for themselves. The government are failing on the NDIS, and they need to do better. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Fernando ): Is there a seconder for this motion? Mr Batt: I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.