Journal of Australian political economy · 2019 · 14 citations · 0 references
Public AffairsInsuranceSocial PolicyDisabilityDisability InsuranceDisability PolicyDisability BenefitsDisability RightsDisability Studies TheoryIndependent LivingIndependent Living PolicySocial ProtectionDisability Access To Health CareDisability Insurance AdministrationDisability Insurance ReformIndependent Living MovementIndependent Living PlacementInsurance AgencyMarketplace ContextNational Health Insurance
On behalf of the disabled people's independent living movement (ILM), Brisenden (1998: 26) argues that 'the equality we are demanding is rooted in the concept of control; it stems from our desire to be individuals who can choose for themselves'. The rhetoric of choice and control has been central to the rollout of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) in Australia, commencing in 2013. The National Disability Insurance Agency's (NDIAs) (2018[1]: 4) 'vision of the NDIS is to build a competitive and contestable marketplace that is flexible and responds to the choices and preferences of participants.' The NDIS seeks to deliver choice and control over disability services by operating as a cash for care scheme (Yeandle and Ungerson 1997: 2), by directly paying participants to act as consumers in a state-managed market for disability services.