To listen to the government speak about the National Disability Insurance Scheme, you'd think the system was perfect and just needed minor tweaks. Well, if that were the case, I wouldn't get emails from mums of kids with autism, or any number of complex disabilities, at the end  of their tether, trying to get basic supports. I wouldn't get angry dads who've spent literally days of their lives on the phone trying to finalise a plan. I wouldn't have providers of services grimly tell me about how the plan gaps compromise their cash flow and therefore their viability and take an inordinate amount of unfunded time to resolve. Nor would my office be in the top two of advocates to the NDIA about participant problems.

So let's get clear: we welcome improvements to the system—including some fee increases and recognition of transport costs for regional and rural areas—but, frankly, the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury still have too many of our services come from Penrith, and we are considered part of the city, yet it can take an hour and a half to get to a participant. And, for an area like mine, the paltry mobility allowance put into plans—as very few incorporate transport—means that my transport providers are struggling to absorb the vehicle running costs, and participants risk being marooned at home.

The consequence of underspending $1.6 billion is all these problems, plus the fact that early intervention simply hasn't happened for many families. We will not let slide the fact that this government is propping up its budget with money that should have been spent on people with disabilities, with participants on average $20,000 worse off. Why are people's reviewed plans, in their second or third year, much less than the previous year, when nothing else has changed? Why are the delays in reviews so long? Is it deliberate savings from participants, is it a result of inconsistent rules and inconsistently trained staff, or is it just a consequence of the staffing cap?

One person who has spent days of his life trying to finalise plans for his children is Chris from Blaxland. His story is a litany, over the course of three months, of waiting on phone lines, not receiving promised phone calls or emails, more paperwork, poor communication and disappointment. I'm grateful to him for sharing with me the detail and his suggestions on how to improve the system. This government owes him and so many other parents an apology for stuffing them around for months at a time. Parents tell me they'd like to see things like a minimum standard of training for plan managers, who should have at least some experience of working in the disability sector. They want better access to information, including a vetted list of NDIA-approved providers that shows what services are available in specific areas. When you're servicing participants in a 4,000-square- kilometre electorate, a service available in one part of the electorate isn't necessarily going to be there in another. It's clear to me that parents need better support mechanisms to help them negotiate the system.

None of this should be rocket science, but you need a stable agency running it. Without a CEO, and given the mass exodus of senior leadership in recent months, it's hard to see that happening anytime soon. You also need proper representation and understanding, at the staff and board level, of lived experience of disability. It's another big gap.

Service providers are also aware of the problems. New Haven Farm Home, who provide supported living in Freemans Reach and Richmond, have raised with me a number of issues they face as they try to do the best    by their participants, and I thank them for allowing me to visit their homes. Members of the Blue Mountains Disability Roundtable, which meets monthly to compare notes and advocate for improvements to the system, point out that, on top of the general problems being faced around the country, the Penrith office, which serves the mountains and Hawkesbury, has issues that are not experienced in other regions, including ongoing plan gaps. They point to significant delays in decision-making and processing information. All of that means that they don't get paid, while still delivering services to the participants. They don't want to see people miss out on vital services. And they wear the cost from their own cash flow, hoping that the delayed plan will make it up eventually. It doesn't always. What's more, the t