There is a dangerous idea at the heart of the debate over the NDIS: that some parts of the lives of people with disabilities are essential, while others are optional.
Too often, activities like playing sports, or participating in the community, are treated like extras. But they are not. And as a para-equestrian myself, I know just how critical community participation is.
Following months of debate about the NDIS, the long-awaited changes to the National Disability Insurance Amendment Bill have been passed. The government has argued that reform is necessary to increase the sustainability of the scheme, with the aim of reducing spending by $37.8 billion over four years.
Sure, sustainability is important. But sustainability cannot mean making the lives of people with disabilities smaller. One of the areas at risk is community participation: the support that helps people with disabilities attend appointments, visit family, go shopping (and stimulate the economy), play sport, and genuinely enjoy life.
A powerful Joint Statement from academics and advocates argued that NDIS cuts to social and community participation will cause preventable harm. The statement argued that ‘social, community and civic supports’ are the foundation of an inclusive society and fundamental to addressing gaps in social inclusion. “They enable people to take part in ordinary community life, develop and maintain trusted relationships,” it read.
According to the government, the bill aims to establish a $200 million fund – the Inclusive Communities Fund – to rebuild capability among community organisations to host genuine participation activities and reset participant budgets for social, civic and community participation and capacity-building daily activities. The government talks about “capacity building” and community participation as though they can be separated. But they are intrinsically linked: capacity is built through participation.
The need for physical assistance to access the community and engage in activities does not change the motivation behind those activities – to enjoy life – and nor should it change the value we place on that.
With cuts to community participation, disability sports programs are likely to falter, as are the abilities for people with disabilities to engage in activities that support their physical and mental health that do not meet the disability-specific criteria.
What has been left out of this discussion is the significant overlap between disability sport and mainstream sport that leads so many athletes to success.
Open competitions are at the cornerstone of disability inclusion, where the divide between people with impairments and those without blurs, where skill, passion and disability-specific adaptation and compensation take place.
For many people who compete in these open competitions, myself included, participation is only possible with the support of qualified support workers and members of the community.
There is a blurred line between acknowledging the physical needs of people with disabilities as being lifelong and significant and the effects of this impairment on social and mental health and wellbeing.
This wellbeing is something that is fostered by the activities people with disabilities participate in, the providers who deliver those services and those members of the community also engaging in these activities.
Productivity can be achieved alongside wellbeing.
Spending restraint can be achieved without restricting people’s lives.
It is not only people with disabilities who will be negatively impacted by these changes.
The entire community will be affected.