After the Post School Options Inquiry
During 2005 some of the greatest anguish I have ever seen was created by the Department of Aging, Disability and Home Care with their changes to the post school disability programs in NSW. These disabled young adults upon leaving school found their main means of support and income radically changed, and in most cases severely reduced.
Parents were uncertain because of limited consultations, the most vulnerable disabled became severely disabled not by an accident of nature but by the bureaucratic changes of a Government Department, and service providers were left without funding trying to meet the needs of their disabled clients.
As the leader of Wesley Mission Sydney, which had become one of the largest providers in the nation of disability services (see 2005 Annual Report), I saw first hand the impact of the Department’s decision making. I frequently raised the issues privately with the Minister and in speeches and questions in Parliament.
Behind the scenes I advocated for the disabled, and sought as a committee chairperson to have an inquiry into the post school options programs decisions. However upon the commencement of this inquiry I choose to stand down as chair because of the potential conflict of interest I had while still being the Superintendent of the Mission. Some high profile public voices, such as Alan Jones on 2GB, kept the public pressure upon the Government until they finally conceeded that change was necessary.
The inquiry finished its work and presented its report entitled Changes to Post School Programs for Young Adults with the Disability: Getting a Fair Go. The report can be viewed online.
The report gathered evidence on the Department’s so called ‘reforms’, their impact on the lives of disabled young people and their families, and how the Department handled the criticism it received. In reducing funding to the disabled, and to the quantity and quality of services provided to them, the Government further handicapped some of the most disabled people in the community. We said this at the time but now we have documentary evidence from a wide number of people.
The Department showed ineptitude in handling the issues they created and a overhaul now is desperately needed. The Government tried to save its budget by cutting services to the disabled, but it is now clear that the Government must restore funding to ensure the disabled are given their vital rights and programs back.
The disabled must be some of the last ever to have their income and programs cut. There are 17 or so important recommendations to the Government which they must reply to early this year.
The Government must accept the inquiry’s recommendation or risk huge public outcry just prior to the next state election. The fate of the Labor Government could well be decided by how they treat some of the most deserving and venerable people in society.
REV HON DR GORDON MOYES AC MLC
