Senator ANTIC (South Australia) (15:18): I also rise to take note of answers given this afternoon. I have to say from the start that it is of no difficulty for me to stand up here and defend the government's position with respect to the delivery of the rollout of the NDIS scheme. This is an enormous undertaking, and it's one which the government has handled extraordinarily well. We heard Minister Ruston earlier this afternoon speak to the issue of what was left behind by the Labor government prior to coming into government in 2013 and, very aptly, I thought, she referred to it as being a little bit like a plane that took off before it had been fully built. The NDIS—as my colleague Senator O'Sullivan mentioned before—is now available across all states and territories. Over 300,000 people with a disability have now joined the NDIS, including over 100,000 of those receiving support for the first time. It is, in fact, correct to say now that between 83 and 90 per cent of participants have rated their experience with the NDIS during the transition from 1 July 2016 as either 'good' or 'very good'. The outcomes are also showing significant improvements: a nine per cent increase in independence for children aged between seven and 14 years; a seven per cent increase in assistance with daily living for participants aged 15 to 25; and an 11 per cent increase in accessing community and social activities for participants aged 15 and over. The list goes on. There are significantly improved services throughout the NDIS contact centre. Around 83 per cent of calls are answered within 60 seconds, compared to a four- to five-minute waiting time under the previous model. The average answer speed is now consistently 28 seconds, and the average abandonment rates are now reliably sitting at 1.5 per cent. There is such a long list of improvements that it is almost trite to go through them all. But it strikes me that what we're hearing from the other side of the chamber at the moment is nothing more, really, than a lecture on our dedication to this plan. Our dedication is very, very evident, and we won't be lectured by the Labor Party on our dedication and performance in rolling out the NDIS. This strikes me as being almost like one of those radio shows with a 'guess the sound' type campaign. To me, this sounds very much like the sound of clutching at straws, because we know that the contrast between the government and the opposition is the contrast between a stable and united government getting on with the job with a clear plan and delivering on promises, versus a Labor Party that is conflicted on policy and tarnished by scandal. What we've seen here is, at best, a very thinly veiled attempt to try and attack the government on something—which, really, is quite extraordinary. You only have to look at Labor having left behind a funding gap of almost $5 billion for the NDIS when it was fully rolled out, growing to almost $7 billion a year over the next decade. These are extraordinary statistics. If we had continued down Labor's path, these higher than expected package costs could have resulted in multibillion dollar blowouts in the total cost of the NDIS, putting its entire future at risk. This government has continued to roll out improvements. It has continued to improve. In my home state of South Australia, we're now seeing 30,000 South Australians benefiting from life-changing support through the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Everyday South Australians' lives are now being changed by the support, and there's significant growth in the numbers of people with disabilities now accessing the scheme—from 11,000 in 2017 to over, as I said, 30,000 in this month of September 2019. It is, of course, important to reiterate, as the government has earlier this afternoon, that the misunderstanding here is the misunderstanding which surrounds the concept of a demand driven scheme. That is really the basis of this. Of course, if the Labor Party were so intent on outcomes, they would deliver notifications of those incidents rather than simply try to score points during question time. I have to draw the Senate's and parliament's attention to all of these matters. Labor just doesn't seem to know what it stands for anymore. It doesn't seem to— (Time expired)