NDIS QUALITY & SAFEGUARDS COMMISSION: A STUDY IN MANUFACTURING COMPLAINTS, FRAMING SERVICE PROVIDERS & BETRAYING PARTICIPANTS THROUGH POLITICAL ACTIVISM

(AKA “NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED” v2.0)

In April 2021, Specialist Support Coordinator & Social Worker, Matilda Bawden, was placed under investigation by the NDIS Quality & Safeguards Commission (NQSC) over an email which sought to facilitate her client’s request not to have vaccinated staff attend her personal home, in full compliance with NDIS policies & Code of Conduct (CoC). As at 16/6/21, it is still current NDIS & DoH policy giving NDIS participants “choice and control” over medical matters & vaccines are still VOLUNTARY.

Despite having no lawful cause of action, the NQSC initiated & pursued a malevolent & malicious “investigation” based on no more than a hypothetical, speculative accusation, using a twisted interpretation of the original email but without a complainant; without a victim; &, without any act of wrongdoing.

The NQSC’s wrongful persecution of Ms. Bawden went ahead, in breach of:

• NQSC Complaints Management & Resolution procedures, and “key principles & good practices for effective complaints management”, requiring:
  • conciliation
  • procedural fairness
  • inclusion of the affected participant/s & respondent.
• NDIS stated policy on the role and functions of Support Coordinators (which DOES NOT include managing staff rosters!).
• NQSC’s stated claim that “We investigate events affecting the rights and safety of people with disability”, by making libellous media comment asserting that Bawden had breached the CoC, when in fact she was in full compliance with NDIS policies & the legal rights of her participants.
• Commonwealth Public Sector Code of Conduct.

Concurrently to this, many complaints were lodged with the NQSC by service providers & participants against a National Disability Services (peak body) Mandatory Vaccination Policy published in Feb 2021, which the NQSC has refused to investigate. NQSC has also refused to investigate even ONE of the alleged 1100 registered providers which support the Mandatory Vaccination policy in direct contravention of current NDIS, DoH policies & Human Rights principles!

To date, not one of these signatories has been investigated for:

• potential coercion,
• breach of policy & CoC,
• violation of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights & Nuremberg Code
• denial of informed choice & consents,

based directly on stated policy; not mere hypothetical conjecture.

Through its selective investigation & clearly demonstrated bias, the NQSC is proving to concerned citizens that it is using taxpayer resources to engage in VACCINE ACTIVISM; surreptitiously acting upon & enforcing the NDS Mandatory Vaccination Policy by:

• Betraying its mandate by failing to protect the rights of NDIS participants who object to vaccination policies.
• Threatening & punishing service providers willing to honour their client’s choices to refuse vaccines or vaccinated staff in their homes.
• Protecting service providers pushing experimental, mandatory vaccine policies; with reckless regard to risks of vaccine injury, adverse side effects or death.
• Using taxpayer funds to troll the private social media pages of NDIS workers (against whom there are no complaints or pending investigations) for their views on mandatory vaccines.
• Making up policies which don’t exist to regulate unregistered providers (namely, that unregistered Support Coordinators must provide “transition plans”).

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Matilda Bawden <matildabawden@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 2:29 AM
Subject: MY DEEPEST APOLOGIES
To: SA Complaints (NDIS Commission) <sacomplaints@ndiscommission.gov.au>,
Parliamentary <Parliamentary@ndiscommission.gov.au>
Cc: <senator.antic@aph.gov.au>, Stevens, Matthew (Sen A. Antic)
<matthew.stevens@aph.gov.au>, <makin@aph.gov.au>

Dear Friends and Colleagues

As you may be aware, the NDIS Commission has made the following order in relation to its investigation into my earlier email dated 7th April (reprinted below):

Under section 20(1)(d) of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Complaints Management and Resolution) Rules 2018#
, we require Ms Bawden to take the following remedial action in regard to this complaint:

1. Matilda Bawden and ALV are required to email the individuals an businesses who received the email on 7 April 2021 and provide them with the same information that has been provided to the NDIS Commission, namely:

•  That the information contained in the previous email on 7 April 2021 is no longer current,
• That Ms Bawden and ALV will not be ceasing or suspending any NDIS participant’s services, now or in the future, if they choose to receive a Covid-19 vaccination, an
• If a participant chooses to cease receiving services in the future, ALV will do everything required to facilitate a transition to a new service provider.

You are required to send a copy of the new email to the NDIS Commission, along with evidence that it has been sent and a list of the people/businesses who received the email.
This information is required by 28 May 2021 and can be sent to sacomplaints@ndiscommission.gov.au.

Although I did somewhat impulsively decline to comply with this order last Friday, as I consider it to be a gross abuse of the rights of NDIS participants and workers alike, I have reconsidered my position.

Notwithstanding this change of heart, I am deeply offended by the NQSC attempt to defame me and impugn my exceptionally good name and reputation, not just among my existing clients but among my many colleagues and professional associates. I think you all know the calibre of my professional work and the great pride and care I take towards ensuring that my
clients get the best value for money and best quality of outcomes. Many of you have been with me for far over 2 years.

Although my lawyer and I have assured the NQSC that no clients have been or will be in any way disadvantaged now or in the future as a result of any actions I may or may not take when providing, or declining to provide services, it appears that the NQSC is incapable of respecting those choices you & I might make, mutually.

To that end, I wish to offer an apology and clarification to all as follows:

1) I apologise for the use of the word “shedding” in my email when in fact I should have used the Dept of Health terminology of “transmission” in regards to the risks posed by vaccines currently available in Australia. I was poorly informed at the time of the email.

2) I apologise for the fact that a harmless and benign email was so maliciously and malevolently taken out of context by people to whom I owe NO DUTY OF CARE WHATSOEVER! My original email advising of a protective policy that would need to be adopted by some staff was written to meet the specific needs of a particular client as a direct result of her specific request NOT TO HAVE STAFF ENTER HER HOME IF VACCINATED. I have text messages to corroborate this instruction by the client who has an auto-immune disorder and Liver Disease. My client was denied medical treatments throughout last year’s lockdowns and was put at the bottom of the waiting list until recently when her appointments were finally rescheduled, so she was naturally concerned that if she was to risk contracting any new illnesses she would again be placed at the bottom of the waiting list.

Accordingly, my email sought to do no more than respond to a specific request by a specific client not to have vaccinated staff attend her home. That email only went to a handful of people who I believe would have chosen to vaccinate and with whom either my client or her staff might come into contact.

It was never my expectation that anyone would have interpreted an otherwise unremarkable email in such foolish fashion as to require an expensive investigation paid for by the taxpayer, as the NQSC has chosen to do. I know that not one of my clients would ever have done so and I thank you all for standing by me during this outrageous attempt at “indicting a ham sandwich”. In fact, I know that if there was any misunderstanding or confusion about the meaning of my email, not one of my clients would have hesitated to pick up the phone to seek clarification or assistance shouldmy email have been anything other than proper given the circumstances.

3) I am deeply sorry that my words, thoughts and intentions have been deliberately misconstrued by vaccine activists within the NQSC to deny my clients and co-workers the right to make their own informed choices about the risks of transmission and to adopt the COVID-Safe practices detailed on the NDIS and DoH websites. For the record, my email was FULLY COMPLIANT WITH NDIS & DEPT OF HEALTH POLICIES for limiting risks of transmission following vaccinations. It is inexcusable that the NQSC is ignorant of this fact.

4) I apologise that at the time of writing my email, I was unaware of how poorly educated & trained NQSC staff would be to the rights of NDIS participants and the proper exercise of its powers. When I pointed out to the investigator that he was in breach of the Complaints Management procedures, he explained that “we are not required to [comply with the procedures]”. The NQSC has no legitimate right to exclude my clients from its investigations, yet no client has been consulted (other than having their confidentiality and privacy violated under extreme duress).

5) I am deeply sorry that the NQSC appears to be completely unaware about the role of Support Co-Ordinators and that it is you (my valued clients) from whom I take my instructions. I will always respect your right to refuse access and entry to your private homes to anyone, for any reason – whether vaccinated or not.

All of my clients know, at no time was it my role as a Support Coordinator to manage staff rosters. All of my clients manage their own staffing needs. They direct when paid staff come and go and what functions those staff will perform. In fact, NDIS Fact Sheets clearly direct that Support Coordinators are NOT to manage the administration and rostering needs of clients.

Starting my NDIS plan with a Support Coordinator:
“A Support Coordinator is not a paid advocate or responsible for rostering and administration of individual supports.”

In this context alone, the NQSC investigation is entirely ridiculous, as it seeks to make something my role which is neither legitimate nor lawful & then it seeks to punish me for failing to fulfill it! Most of my clients scarcely get 5-10 hrs in the year & I dare say none of my clients would waste this time on rostering.

6) I am deeply sorry that the NQSC took on a viciously adversarial approach and totally skipped all the many steps it could have taken to avoid expensive investigation and inflaming hostilities. My clients and co-workers deserved better treatment without the threat of adverse findings for us all doing our jobs responsibly. Notably, the investigator completely skipped the part about “conciliation” before any investigation:

How is my complaint resolved?

Our aim is help you resolve a complaint quickly and simply. To do this, we will review the information provided to us by yourself and the NDIS provider, and talk to everyone involved about this information.

Resolution

We can often resolve complaints by speaking with you and the NDIS provider. Our involvement can help to clarify issues and bring information to everyone’s attention.

Example: John complained that the provider of his assistive technology hadn’t responded to his request for routine maintenance. We contacted the provider about John’s complaint, and they were able to schedule a maintenance appointment within a week. John was happy with this result.

Conciliation
Conciliation can be used to try to resolve a complaint that could not be resolved through other processes. The most common form of conciliation is a meeting between the person making the complaint, the person with a disability affected by an issue raised in the complaint, and the provider. Advocates or other support people may also be involved. Participation in a conciliation meeting is voluntary.

The purpose of a conciliation meeting is to help people understand the concerns being raised and to reach agreement on how a complaint can be resolved. Individual meetings or phone conversations are scheduled ahead of the conciliation meeting to help each party prepare and plan how they will participate.

We will facilitate the conciliation and help to clarify the issues and encourage discussions between people at the conciliation meeting. We do not advocate for either the person making
the complaint or the provider. It is not a public hearing, or a hearing before a court or a tribunal.

Each person is given the opportunity to put forward their views. Because of this, conciliation may be preferable for some people as this person-centered approach allows the person making thecomplaint to have their views heard directly by the provider and be involved in finding solutions.

Read more in the fact sheet What to expect in a conciliation. Example: Anna complained that she had had four new support workers in one week who didn’t understand her support needs. We facilitated a conciliation meeting where Anna met with her provider and discussed her concerns. It was agreed that in future, Anna would be introduced to all new support workers before they started a shift, to discuss her support needs. Anna was happy with this arrangement.
See: https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about/complaints

In its purported “investigation”, NQSC has chosen not to engage in any conciliation or negotiation. In fact, it DOES NOT EVEN REPRESENT A CLIENT; nor has it identified any client to whom a Duty of Care is owed where that client has been placed at risk, exploited, disadvantaged, vilified or neglected. The investigation is into nothing more than a hypothetical scenario which it conjured up for its own political purposes.

7) I am deeply sorry that this investigation may appear to imply that NDIS participants DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO VACCINE & STAFFING CHOICES, as I have not been able to appease thevaccine gods within the NQSC seeking to undermine the right of NDIS participants to MEDICAL CHOICE AND CONTROL by virtue of this investigation outcome.

8) I am most sorry that I only just became aware this last weekend that the National Disability Services has issued a policy statement demanding MANDATORY vaccinations for all Australians. It appears now that the NQSC has been carrying water for vaccine activists seeking to deny participants medical freedoms, hence its hostility towards my client’s right to choose who delivers her services after vaccination.

9) I am deeply sorry that during this harassment by the NQSC, I was forced to disclose your details. I know this places you all at risk of being personally targeted in future for special treatment.

10) I am sorry that some of you good clients and colleagues have felt the need to apologise to me for my unwitting predicament. I do not hold anyone else accountable as you did not cause this stupidity to manifest itself in such absurd fashion but I thank you for your kind words and continued support. As I am not a registered provider, I am a soft target to rogue public servants with a political agenda to pursue on your dime.

Finally, whilst there is a lot, lot more I would like to say about this dreadful misconduct & malfeasance by the NQSC, I wish to reassure you all that I will never abandon anyone in need, but you know that already! The Media Release attached herein best explains my position on this deplorable saga and I welcome you sharing this among your networks and elected representatives so that your rights to medical choice and freedom will not continue to be violated.

In closing, it is also important to mention that the person who initially sought to cause mischief by misusing the email is NOT A CLIENT and I believe that she has been both deceptive and fraudulent in how she has used her husband’s NDIS package. I am sure the precious NQSC resources wasted on me would have saved taxpayers far more had she been the focus of any investigations, but sadly that was not its priority on this occasion.

Warmly

Matilda Bawden

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Matilda Bawden <matildabawden@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 7:01 AM
Subject: MY DEEPEST APOLOGIES: STOP PRESS!
To: SA Complaints (NDIS Commission) <sacomplaints@ndiscommission.gov.au>,
Parliamentary <Parliamentary@ndiscommission.gov.au>,
<contactcentre@ndiscommission.gov.au>
Cc: <senator.antic@aph.gov.au>, Stevens, Matthew (Sen A. Antic)
<matthew.stevens@aph.gov.au>, <makin@aph.gov.au>, DRC Submissions
<DRCSubmissions@royalcommission.gov.au>, <bill.shorten.mp@aph.gov.au>

Dear Mr Griew and Mr Hall

I NOW WISH TO FORMALLY COMPLAIN ABOUT YOUR GROSS MISCONDUCT AND MALFEASANCE SOLELY BECAUSE IT HAS NOW HURT SEVERAL OF MY NDIS CLIENTS, & MANY OTHERS, GRIEVOUSLY.

In fact, it’s a scandal which needs to go public as the textbook example of what never to do in public office!!!

Whilst I was given the Christine Holgate treatment by my Mr Hall, I am not powerless & my colleagues, clients & I will not rest until there is proper remedy and genuine apology.

I am less concerned for myself than I am now for the innocent people hurt by this disgraceful conduct by the NQSC.

This morning I received a heart-felt apology and explanation from the person who triggered the ABC hit piece and your subsequent investigation into my allegedly non-compliant email.

Hi Matilda … I would never go out of my way to hurt you or your family in anyway I did enquire about the COVID injection and any reactions or shedding I was to receive my vaccination while working for southern cross I asked the dr if it was anything to worry about he asked to see my email to understand what I was talking about I didn’t think it was important… I would never do anything to hurt you. I tell the truth I’ve never been a back stabber. I have been told I’m loud and up front just like you. I care dearly for your sister and I know you love to help. Others, some backstabbing bastard caring more about fame and fortune, took a simple question of health management to a whole new level. I feel stupid for asking a simple question .. is the COVID safe for my family .. this same person has been rude and intimidating and has brought me and [husband} to tears. If it is any consolation I told this dr they care more about their f budget than people themselves… I am so sorry for the total disrespect and damage caused by my ignorance and trust of dr … working in the nursing industry I can only imagine the pain you have been going through … I wished I had known earlier so we could talk to each other kindly and understand we have both been used for someone else’s political agenda…. I thought your sister has been ill and I am relieved she has been worried I’m glad I felt safe enough to talk to you one thing that’s important to me is to talk directly to the person involved you don’t need to reply I respect what you think and feel and I’m not in a happy place right now I’m really struggling … thanks for listening sorry about the spelling I tend to talk all over the place when I’m stressed out I do feel very very stupid for still believing I can trust people not a big choice when your stuck in a corrupt system …. this message should be shared with sev and Alan I’m not a very private person I had my first child at 14 and I learnt early speak up or people will just keep talking over you and bury you in bullying don’t worry I will take care of the person who hurt you and I let your sister know it might take time. I will think about it for a long long time.

As I indicated in my initial “apology”, people who know me hold me in high enough regard and respect to know I would never intentionally exploit, hurt or harm them. I think this letter says as much. What is more, I did say repeatedly that my email was unremarkable and benign and she also says “I didn’t think it was important”. Yet, Mr Hall made sure it became important when he came for my scalp!

Although the professional consequences to me of being defamed by the NQSC have been enormous enough (not once BUT TWICE), as you can read in this letter, the woman and her husband are just one family going through a very dark time right now as a direct result of Mr Hall’s failure to comply with the stated protocols for Complaints Handling (QUOTE: “We are not required to!”).

I am not a vindictive person & I work very, very hard to be a very forgiving person, so in reading this woman’s apology, I am horrified that the complaint Mr Hall MANUFACTURED (on behalf of the NDS? ABC? Immunisation Coalition? Himself?) has now led us to a place in which this woman is so deeply distressed and alarmed by the fall out on me, that she now feels she is the one who has to set things right. Based on this letter, she is the last person who should set anything right as she didn’t set out to cause any harm. She is 100% correct
to say “we have both been used for someone else’s political agenda” & I sure hope she sues all concerned for defamation and malfeasance.

Moreover, it is Mr Hall who must set things right or have no legitimate place ever investigating any matters concerning a vulnerable person.

If my past experience is anything to go by, Mr Griew, I dare say you might give Mr Hall a promotion, as this is not my first time around the block with the NQSC. What is more, in addition to this woman (who is NOT A CLIENT), I now also have the same client awaiting TWO apologies from you, since you snubbed her request to meet with you some months back and she is yet another person injured by Mr Hall’s investigation.

If the NQSC’s role is not to protect people with disabilities, their staff and carers from abuse, then who do you really work for?

I have never been much of an activist, but I will not cower to Mr Hall or any NQSC official at the expense of my clients. We all deserve better than a rogue public servant with his own agenda. Does he take kick-backs? Does he offer “Pay for Play”? He wouldn’t be the first, since he doesn’t think NQSC rules and guidelines apply to him, least of all Codes of Conduct.

Again, Mr Griew, I request to meet with you and all of my injured clients to discuss these and other matters further. Again, I repeat (so that you will not again twist my words, intentions and meaning) my clients and I are willing to travel to you at our own expense, wherever that is, for a face to face. Should you require it, I will then also produce any other evidence and paperwork you may require. Equally, we will welcome you coming to us for that meeting, should you choose to do so.

Misunderstandings are easy to clear up, but I was singled out for special treatment – TWICE!

I will not let this slide without remedy no matter how much you may wish to punish me further for speaking out about the reckless practices inside NQSC.

With thanks

Matilda Bawden