_{If this email has been forwarded to you, sign up here}

The disability sector returned to Parliament House to explain why Labor’s NDIS Bill is dangerous, uncertain and unfinished. Senators listened respectfully. Yet the absence of Coalition Senators in the room offers the clearest indication that whatever amendments emerge, the Bill itself is likely to pass.

The long hallways of Parliament House are usually empty at this time of year.

Politicians are in the middle of their long winter break. The lucky ones are on study trips in the Northern Hemisphere. The less fortunate are back in their electorates, building up their numbers and preparing to retain their seats at the next election.

Up on the second floor, Committee Room 2S1, is similarly empty. This is where the Senate inquiry into Labor’s latest NDIS Bill is taking place and that tells its own story.

Chair Labor Senator Ellie Whiteaker, conducts proceedings carefully and respectfully. People terrified by the proposed reforms are given time to explain why. They are listened to.

Greens Senator Jordon Steele-John asks successive groups essentially the same question: should the Bill pass in its present form? The answer is almost invariably no.

Independent Senator David Pocock checks his phone, then looks up to focus closely on a point of evidence. Labor’s Senator Dr Michelle Ananda-Rajah appears remotely from Melbourne. Other senators may also be online.

But the telling reveal is who cannot be seen.

No Coalition senator is sitting in the room yet two of them - Alex Antic and Wendy Askew - are members of the committee. Neither is at the table. (Committee membership)

This does not prove Labor and the Coalition have reached an agreement. It is, nevertheless, the strongest indication yet that the deal will be done and the Bill will pass.

The only remaining question is whether Labor will accept the sector’s demand for amendment. And if it does, which protections will it concede?

Two simple narratives now dominate the NDIS. The government’s case for stopping fraud and the growing cost of the Scheme, versus the dangers of reducing participant support.

NDIS Minister Jenny McAllister said integrity action against providers returns money to participants. Her figures show nine in ten of the smallest 1,000 plan managers carry an integrity red flag and more than 4,000 claims worth $19 million were rejected over nine months.

Evidence from outside government focused on what the broader reforms could do to participants. National Legal Aid warned that complex eligibility tests, automated planning, debt provisions and narrower review rights could leave the most marginalised people behind. Vision Australia showed how a uniform reduction may operate in practice: cutting three weekly hours of community access to 1.5 hours could make basic activities impossible, while stricter reassessment rules could delay replacement dog guides and other high-cost assistive technology.

The Northern Territory evidence exposed the danger of designing rules around metropolitan assumptions.

Unfortunately, despite the evidence, the ultimate test remains the cost of the scheme. Very little of the evidence is addressing this.

Friday Data Watch: Nine in ten of the smallest 1,000 plan managers reportedly carry an integrity flag; the Northern Territory has 17 NDIS staff on the ground; and Vision Australia says a 50 per cent reduction could leave some participants with 1.5 hours of community access a week.

My apologies that today’s email was delayed by a production issue. We will have more on the Senate hearings next week.

Nic Stuart, [email protected]