E&OE TRANSCRIPT

SUBJECTS: Disability Royal Commission recommendations; NDIS Review; navigating the NDIS; conflict in Israel and Gaza; upcoming vote on the Voice to Parliament; Labor’s implementation of Royal Commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody recommendations; petrol excise

RAF EPSTEIN, HOST: Bill Shorten is the Minister for the NDIS, the National Disability Insurance Scheme. He's also Minister for Government Services and is the Labor MP for the seat of Maribyrnong in the Federal Parliament. Good morning.

BILL SHORTEN, MINISTER FO RTHE NDIS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES: Good morning, Raf.

EPSTEIN: Lots of issues to get to. I might get to some calls first.

SHORTEN: By all means.

EPSTEIN: And then we'll get to some of the things that are happening around the world. Cheryl is in Kew East, just put your headphones on for me, Bill Shorten, so you can hear what Cheryl has to ask. Cheryl, go for it.

CALLER: Oh, hi, Raf. Hi, Bill.

SHORTEN: Hi.

CALLER: Yeah, it's a bit difficult to talk about disability this morning when we've got the Voice coming up and what's happening in Gaza, but -

EPSTEIN: No, no, all things are important. Go for it.

CALLER: Yeah. Look, I wanted to ask about the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission. I've got the executive summary in front of me, and I specifically wanted to ask about the roadmap to phase out group homes within 15 years. I've got a 35-year-old adult son in a group home who's non-verbal and needs absolute assistance in all aspects of his life, and I worry about how I talk to him about this. He takes in information in fragments, and I'm actually quite apprehensive about talking to him. I know the government is, is going to formulate its decisions in response, but -

EPSTEIN: So, is your question what's going to happen to them, Cheryl? And how do you talk to your son about it?

CALLER: Yeah.

EPSTEIN: Okay.

CALLER: Well, Bill, Bill doesn't know my son, so that's a bit difficult.

EPSTEIN: No, that’s okay, understood. But I'm sure he's familiar with the issues. Hang on a tick, Cheryl. Bill Shorten?

SHORTEN: Hey, thanks for raising that issue, Cheryl. And I think there's a lot of parents and plenty of people otherwise who are also saying, well, what does this Disability Royal Commission mean? It's proposed phasing out supported employment workplaces in 11 years, group homes in 15 and special schools by 2050, which is 27 years’ time. First of all, I just want to say that the Disability Royal Commission went for four and a half years. Labor initially called for one in 2017. We were fobbed off then by Mr. Turnbull and Mr. Porter, who said they're going to set up a Safeguards Commission, no need for Royal Commission. Then Mr. Morrison relented, but it's gone now for four and a half years, 15 volumes, 2.5 million words. The Commission, the six commissioners, and there were 10,000 people who told their stories, the commissioners agreed on a lot of things, but not on the question of the future of group homes and special schools. So, that's the background. The government is going to put together a response by the budget of next year because it was such a big commission report, massive, Leviathan, and that's being coordinated by my capable colleague, Amanda Rishworth, Minister for Social Services. So that's the big picture.

But let's go to your specific anxiety, and I think a lot of other families. Nothing is going to be shut any time soon. Now, that doesn't mean we don't want to take action, but there's a whole lot of moving parts which need to change before you could even contemplate the sort of radical change, and I'm not saying that's where the government will land. So, the first thing to say is you've got a little bit of time on your side about the conversations you have with your son. I think what will be most interesting and relevant for you is our NDIS review, which we had underway, it's only taken 12 months. We get it at the end of this month, and we'll talk to the States and the Premiers by mid-November. We want to make sure that housing for people with severe needs is humane, it's dignified, it's safe, it reflects the choice of participants.

EPSTEIN: There won't be as many group homes. Surely that's the direction of travel or not?

SHORTEN: Well, we need to get our definitions right, what we call a group home. And there's I think the future lies in smaller housing, but not necessarily turfing people out. I think some of the things which we can all agree on is that we want to give people the choice, young people the choice, to leave aged care facilities who are in it because there's no other choice. We want to make sure that we innovate more innovation in terms of congregate living. So, what we want to do is make sure that we don't put people who are not suited to each other in the same home. We also want to make sure that the people providing supported independent living to people in homes where there's multiple numbers of people with disability are trained and qualified and delivering appropriate support. There's a lot of moving parts, Cheryl. What I would say to you is that we are very interested in how we make the best quality outcomes, so to relieve you of that midnight anxiety you might feel about what's going to happen when you no longer can look after your son. But no one's rushing to any sort of arbitrary black and white outcome because that's not fair on people. And any change that this government does will be through co-design with people with disability and their families and their advocates.

EPSTEIN: Cheryl, there's a lengthy answer, but I didn't mind that lengthy answer, to be honest, because a lot of people aren't familiar with all the issues. How did that answer land for you?

CALLER: Well, it doesn't answer my personal question. And can I just make a comment, too? Yeah, sure. The, um, the Royal Commission heard horrendous stories for people whose experiences had been horrendous. But the strongest voices tend to be from people who are articulate, in a lot of cases have physical disabilities or sensory disabilities. The silent people like my son, I don't think that some of those advocates actually fully appreciate the situation of people with intellectual disabilities and profound autism.

SHORTEN: All right. Well, very quickly then, if I didn't allay your concerns, this is what I was trying to do, I can put it really plainly. No one in the federal government is planning to upend arrangements that are working, okay?

CALLER: Thank you.

EPSTEIN: Okay, Cheryl, thank you. Great issues, important issues to raise, so thank you. There are some broad issues, things like the Voice, things like the violence in Israel and Gaza. But let's go to Cedric first in Watsonia 1300 222 774 is the phone number if you've got a query for Bill Shorten, go for it, Cedric.

CALLER: Uh, good morning, Bill. I spoke to one of your staff members last December. At that stage, this investigation was underway, and so he couldn't give me much answers about my question. People, neurodiverse people, and the particular case I'm looking at is reasonably severe ASD. Unless you admit you have a disability, you cannot get past first post in lodging an application. And that's regardless of professional advice about whether you should get it. Is there - I was told last December that this was an issue the inquiry was aware of. Is there likely to be any change where professional recommendations for membership of the NDIS will be will not need the person to admit disability?

EPSTEIN: Bill?

SHORTEN: Um, I think there's a few issues in that, Cedric, and I'm happy to also follow up offline. The review you're referring to is one that we set up after the last election. It was a promise. We've set it up in about October of last year. It's now due to report. We've had 1400 different submissions. A lot of people on the review panel are people who have lived experience of disability. What that review is going to go to is a couple of the issues, and I think as I understand you were saying, one is the process to be admitted to the scheme and eligibility. We want to look at how the eligibility criteria are applied. We want to make sure it's a consistent experience, that it doesn't just depend upon whether or not your advocate is an articulate, middle class, well-funded sort of person, but from all groups of life, people who mightn't have the same resources to apply for the scheme. So, we want to get equity into application. What we also are looking at is moving away from just relying on diagnosis alone.

We want to make sure that - and I think that's consistent, I know that's consistent with the original purpose of the scheme. A diagnosis alone shouldn't in shouldn't automatically put you into the scheme. It's how that diagnosis affects you with core functions of living. In terms of ADHD. And I think this was part of the third thing you were saying. ADHD as a diagnosis is not automatically going to put you into the scheme. But there are some people who have ADHD who are on the scheme. It depends on their individual circumstances.

In terms of the last bit, which I concede, I didn't quite understand what you said. You don't want someone to admit that they've got a disability to get onto the scheme. I think that's difficult. I think that you need to explain what your disability is and how it affects core functions of living.

EPSTEIN: Hang on a tick, Cedric. We'll get your details. Happy to pass them on to Bill Shorten's office and they can follow up. It's about 24 minutes after 10:00 on ABC Radio Melbourne. Bill Shorten, what are you - oh, the news out of firstly the attacks in Israel and then the retaliation in Gaza. It's just going to get worse, isn't it? Not going to get better?

SHORTEN: Yeah, it is. I suspect it's going to get worse. I think Israel is having its 9/11 moment. And whilst that's a crude simplification, it does sort of, I think, help capture how people in Israel are feeling. It's a shock. They've thought it would be very difficult or they'd get warning if a whole bunch of terrorists were going to start crossing your border, kidnapping your families, and killing you. So, it is shocking. And what's also profoundly depressing is the violence, I don't know how it ends quickly. And so, it is - it just leaves you shaking your head. We in this part of the world do not understand or cannot understand easily what it's like. But for the people of Israel on their holiest of holy days to be attacked like this is… I don't know what problem these terrorists think they were solving, but it won't. It's going to cause greater harm for the people they say they love to. And so, I just don't understand how it sorts anything.

EPSTEIN: There's a slight change of Labor's stance on a two-state solution. I know for many people in Canberra it's a sort of a language issue. Some people in the, you know, other parts of this debate, they feel about it very, very deeply.

SHORTEN: Yeah.

EPSTEIN: Does something like this give Labor pause for thought? Does it rethink its recent adjustment on the way it negotiates with Israeli and Palestinian officials?

SHORTEN: I think the whole peace process and the two-state solution looks very difficult and unobtainable when you've got literally thousands of armed terrorists crossing your border. So, I'm not about to give anyone a lecture about their peace process at this point. The sooner that some order can be restored, the vision of hostages being taken back across into Gaza, shocking. The targeting of civilians in a very calculated and horrific manner. It just I think we need a lot more facts. But one thing's for sure, what we've seen is horrible and wrong, criminal, and illegal. And it's just - there's no there's no sense to this at all. There's no sense at all. And I know Israel is a very resilient. So, they'll come through. But still, the scenes are shocking over the weekend.

EPSTEIN: Mark, I want to get to more of your questions. I know you've got many on the NDIS. I think there are a few about the Voice as well. Let's go before we get a stock market report. Jenny, you're in Box Hill with an NDIS question. Go for it.

CALLER: Thank you. I think Aaron phrased it very well. I have a significantly intellectually disabled sister from a car accident when she was five. She's now 67 and aging, so her memory is going. Just recently this year, I no longer have direct access to her regular carers. We used to all have each other's phone number so we could either text message or let each other know directly. Now, when something crops up, I have to go through - can I say the provider's name or not?

SHORTEN: Sure.

EPSTEIN: Well, see, the issue is the NDIS doesn't - because the NDIS employs the carers. You can't talk directly to the carer. Is that the issue?

SHORTEN: No, the NDIS funds the carers, but it sounds like it's a service provider you're talking about, isn't it?

CALLER: Well, that's right. But Bill, what they've told me is that it's an NDIS requirement that the nominee, i.e., me and the carer, can no longer have each other's personal details.

SHORTEN: Well, that sounds silly. Okay.

CALLER: And when I argued and jumped up and down about it, they said no, it's an NDIS requirement.

SHORTEN: I think sometimes the NDIS gets blamed for carer, for what some service providers do. We'll get to the bottom of that. My gut reaction is on the face of what you've told me, that just sounds absurd.

EPSTEIN: Hang on a tick, Jenny. We'll get your details as well. I'll get back to more questions. Um, Bill Shorten's going to stick around, so we'll get you some news headlines. He's happy to take a few more questions. We've got to get to issues like The Voice, but let's do one more maybe, the special schools and the recommendation, the divided recommendation from the Royal Commission. Jackie is ringing about that. What do you want to ask Jackie?

CALLER: Hi. I was wondering how you're going to prepare the main schools to handle children that have urology and incontinence issues along with the disability and behaviours of concern.

EPSTEIN: Significant issue.

SHORTEN: First of all, I thank you for the question. And you're going to what I've been getting a lot of traffic on in since the Royal Commission made its recommendation. How on earth could closing down special schools work? The first thing is, the Disability Royal Commission was split. Those who said that should happen said it should happen in about 30 years. That is a long time off. I haven't got a final view on it because I think what happens is that some parents choose special schools because the mainstream system simply won't educate their kid. The second point I want to make is - so there's no choice. So, the argument of closing special schools just horrifies some families because they think we didn't have a choice. And also, with the nature - the other thing I want to say is that I feel a bit for the special needs educators and the school communities of special schools. Many of them have done an amazing job educating kids, so their morale must have felt a bit diminished when they heard some of this debate. And I do not share a negative view of special needs education. I've been to many special schools in my time as a Member of Parliament, and I think a lot of them are doing amazing stuff, frankly, on a budget, the equivalent of a paddle pop stick and a bit of, you know, sticky tape and a rubber band.

So, I think they're amazing. And I don't think special schools should feel the sense of perhaps negative judgement, which some of the commentary has sent their way. I think the sweet spot in terms of reform, and it's over 30 years and it goes to your question is, what our mainstream schools doing to better fund inclusive education. And not every child is the same. I think for some kids, if there was much better mainstream inclusion funding, then mainstream schools would be an alternative, which they're not now because of practical reasons. But for some kids, they're going to need special needs education in whatever campus it's delivered on. And that goes to your point.

So, I hope that just reassures that no one thinks it's a black and white issue. I do think one thing, though we should not have the tyranny of low expectations for kids with special needs. By that what I mean is we need to be better at vocational education in the secondary system. We've got to also establish the view that inclusion is not just the responsibility of special schools, it's the curriculum. It's making sure all teachers understand it and that they're well-resourced to do it so they can deliver their education mission.

EPSTEIN: Thank you for your call. Jackie I'll get back to more queries for Bill Shorten after we get some news headlines with Mary McDonald.

EPSTEIN: Bill Shorten is part of Anthony Albanese's cabinet. He is the Minister for Government Services and the NDIS. I'll get back to your calls, but Bill Shorten, we all get to vote on the Voice proposal on Saturday if we have not voted already. Is there a world in which in which the Yes case wins?

SHORTEN: Well, we'll find out. It's possible. The polls certainly seem to be painting one picture. I suppose this is where you get a bit of, I think the fancy terms cognitive dissonance or maybe what I mean is that, yes, voters tend to come and talk to me more than no voters. So, you know, I get an okay vibe from people, but you can't ignore the polls. In the meantime, we'll find out Saturday night after six. I think the proposition that we include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in modern Australia's legal birth certificate is important and I think the proposition that we listen to people through a constitutionally enshrined advisory committee called a Voice is a pretty reasonable request.

EPSTEIN: The PM said yesterday he won't legislate a Voice if there's a no vote. Does that make sense or not?

SHORTEN: Well, I think it would look pretty arrogant of a government to say, oh, well, you voted against a Voice, so we're just going to keep persisting with it, I think, yeah, I think his response was entirely reasonable.

EPSTEIN: Do you think we'll get progress regardless of the vote?

SHORTEN: Labor will keep trying to do the right thing by empowering First Nations people. But I think it will be a missed opportunity. But anyway, that's up to the people to decide. If I didn't believe in it, I wouldn't be voting yes. So obviously, I think voting yes makes more sense than not. But let's just wait and see what happens on the day and the night. And sure, I think it'll be an opportunity which Australians have said, we don't want this one and therefore we'll have to look at doing other things.

EPSTEIN: Is it too soon to look at the Yes campaign and question if the tactics were right?

SHORTEN: Oh, absolutely too soon. Yeah.

EPSTEIN: Polls been there for a long time, though.

SHORTEN: Polls have been around since the Romans. But that doesn't mean that -

EPSTEIN: No, I mean, the polls on this specific proposal have been bad for quite some time.

SHORTEN: Yeah, but let's have the actual vote. I mean, we live in an age where we want it all, we want to know everything ahead of time. The reality is we can't know the outcome finally, definitively, legally, until the vote is cast. So, we'll just wait till then.

EPSTEIN: Casper is in Mordialloc. What is your query, Casper?

CALLER: Um, First Nations people have been calling on Labor governments to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody for about 30 years. Why won't Labor listen to them and implement all those recommendations, including removing working with the states to remove the hanging points in cells?

SHORTEN: Well, I wasn't aware that we hadn't been pushing for some of those recommendations from the 90s, so I understood there had been some progress made. But I'm more than happy if you've got specific recs or - I'll take it offline. I thought we were doing quite a range of the recommendations already.

EPSTEIN: I guess that's that is the argument from people like Lidia Thorpe. But you've got to do heaps more on those practical things that come out of that Royal Commission 30 years ago that that's a greater priority than something like The Voice.

SHORTEN: Well, to that point, I don't accept that there's some big, two different big buildings, one marked practical change and one marked symbolic. I think it's all part of the same. I do think our constitution’s, it’s our modern Australia's legal foundation document and I do think First Nations people should be included in that. That's not an argument not to do practical things at the same time, I just don't think the gulf is that that far apart. I do think legal recognition, constitutional recognition is an important part of the whole.

EPSTEIN: Thank you, Caspar. Jane's got a query calling from Carlton. Go for it, Jane.

CALLER: Oh, hi, Mr. Shorten. I just wanted to ask a question, I guess, about what's happening with the changes to the AAT for NDIS. And following on from the question earlier, I think we have a lot of people who are applying to live in housing, to live alone or to live with one other people and being denied that and then being held up in AAT in what feels like quite vexatious cases, where reports don't appear to be being read and we just keep getting questions and questions and questions and not getting anywhere. So curious where that's up to?

SHORTEN: Thanks, Jane. At the time of the last election, there were about 4500 matters stuck in the AAT. I made that one of my early priorities to sort of blitz the waiting lists. I'm pleased to tell you that nearly 90%, or over 4000 of those cases which were around, have now been resolved. I put in a special independent expert review, people with disability who understand legal rights are to help look at the papers and say, well, why? That issue is just litigious. Why don't we just resolve it? So, we have cleared some of the backlog. So, I think the number of cases going to the AAT is down about 30% on what it used to be.

In terms of using expert reports, we're trying to overhaul the National Disability Insurance Agency to make sure initial decisions and internal reviews are a lot more transparent. There's one of the complaints I've often had is that people feel that they prepare reports, but they feel that the people reading them either haven't read them or don't understand them. So, we've increased the resources at the Agency, there are a lot of good people there, but we've overhauled the leadership and we are putting in more people and investing in more training within the Agency so that that sense you identify that we submit reports but, do people really understand what they're judging. That's the second part of my answer. The third part is Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus is overhauling the AAT. That's moving along quite quickly, and we want to make sure that for people hearing NDIS matters, there is a greater selection of AAT members who have a lived experience and awareness of disability. So, I think those three things I mentioned all should give you a slightly better feel. Not that every issue is going to be answered in the affirmative for someone who wants something different, but that there's a lot more empathy and humanity in the way which we're trying to work through problems and taking the lawyers out and have a lot more transparency on reasons for decisions, so at least you can grapple with the issue rather than being kept in the dark.

EPSTEIN: In a moment, I'm going to play you some, just some of the remarkable conversations we've had from Israel and Gaza. So, if you miss those at 830. But Rod’s got the final question calling from Apollo Bay for Bill Shorten. What is it, Rod?

CALLER: Yeah, I'd like to know why can't the tax on petrol being taken off to help with the cost of living? Because politicians don't go through the cost of living.

EPSTEIN: So, you want to take the excise back off petrol?

CALLER: Why can't they do that? Help people?

EPSTEIN: Bill Shorten?

SHORTEN: I think long term the petrol companies will just eat up the difference. The government has no plans to remove the excise that I'm aware of at this point. We are doing some other things which will help you, right? If you need to go to the chemist, you can now get 60 days’ worth of prescriptions, not 30. We've also put more medicines back on the PBS. We're also making sure that people's wages are beginning to move.

EPSTEIN: I guess he's also saying politicians don't really understand. You've got a decent wage; you don't really understand what people go through.

SHORTEN: Oh, and I heard Rod say that. But, you know, frankly, I could tell you, I understand you're not going to accept that because of my wage. So, I do get out. I talk to people I know I do the shopping every week. I'm very conscious that people are doing it hard. But, Rod, I don't know your circumstances. So, me telling you that I understand your circumstances you might take with a grain of salt, but my whole history, be it as a rep for workers or in parliament, has been to stand up for people doing it tough. So, I'll put my record to you. But having said that, I get that people are doing it hard and I'm not going to try and get out of violin and put a baseball cap in front of you and ask for your sympathy.

EPSTEIN: Thank you for coming in.

SHORTEN: Thank you.

EPSTEIN: Bill Shorten, one of Anthony Albanese's Ministers, and his responsibilities are Government Services and the NDIS.