Three years ago, the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability tabled its final report , a hefty 12 volumes and 222 recommendations.
Author
- Laura Davy
Senior Lecturer, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University
In recent days , a coalition of more than 20 disability advocacy and representative organisations marked the anniversary with Australia's first independent progress report of how the recommendations have been implemented.
It examined ten recommendations from the royal commission - ones it says people with disability and advocates raise consistently - to see how their implementation has progressed.
It found none has been fully implemented. Four show no real action. One - better coordination of support under the National Disability Insurance Scheme or NDIS - is going backwards.
Remind me about the royal commission
The royal commission was established in April 2019, after years of advocacy by disability rights groups and a senate inquiry into violence, abuse and neglect of people with disability.
It ran for more than four years and cost almost A$600 million, making it the longest-running and most expensive royal commission in Australia's history.
It was also the most accessible, large-scale public inquiry Australia has ever held. People could tell their stories in public hearings, private sessions, written submissions or video statements.
There was Auslan interpretation, easy-read material, and psychological and legal support for people who took part. More than 1,500 de-identified personal narratives were published. The first volume of the final report is devoted to the voices of people with disability.
The result presents extraordinary evidence about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation, and the social conditions that produce them. It combines personal testimony with commissioned research and expert evidence, across every setting where people with disability live.
The recommendations are similarly broad.
They call for a new disability rights act , giving domestic legal force to Australia's obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
They also call for a dedicated disability department and minister, and an independent, disability-led National Disability Commission to report annually to parliament on implementation of the royal commission's recommendations.
The commissioners were divided on whether to phase out special schools, group homes and supported employment.
How did the government respond?
The Commonwealth government holds sole or joint responsibility for 172 of the royal commission's 222 recommendations , with the rest falling to state and territory governments.
Governments released a joint response in July 2024. Of the 172 recommendations, the Commonwealth accepted 13 in full and 117 "in principle". Some 36 were marked for further consideration and six were "noted".
The 13 accepted in full are largely adjustments to existing policies or systems. Most of the substance sits in the 117 accepted in principle, a phrase that means government agrees with the policy intent but may take a different approach. These include establishing a First Nations Disability Forum, which is in the initial consultation and design stage.
High-level reforms - such as the recommended disability rights act and the National Disability Commission - remain "under further consideration" three years on. The recommendations for a dedicated disability department and minister were noted , with no intention to act.
Any good news?
There has been some progress. This includes a new disability employment program, progress on a plan to address violence against women and children with disability, and a new Commonwealth funding program for individual advocacy to help people access services, make decisions and uphold their rights.
But the government promised six-monthly public progress reports on implementation of the royal commission's recommendations. The first was published four months late , in November 2025. It reported eight of the Commonwealth's 172 recommendations had been carried out fully.
The taskforce set up to monitor implementation has since been disbanded .
An independent analysis by Queensland disability advocates found only 3% of recommendations were genuinely implemented, and there were no updates on more than half.
It also found the Queensland government had downgraded some commitments in an updated response, which the advocates only discovered by comparing documents side-by-side.
What happens next?
With so much promise and so little apparent action since, what's the next step?
My research suggests we need to tell people what has changed because they spoke up, and explain honestly what hasn't, and why.
Royal commissions can't change policy themselves. Once a report is handed down, control passes to the ministers, departments and other stakeholders who decide which recommendations are taken up and how.
Disability ministers oversee implementation and so should report publicly and on time to build trust and promote accountability.
The Commonwealth still needs to give an answer on the disability rights act and the National Disability Commission. And state and territory governments that change their commitments should say so openly.
Another three years?
As Melbourne researcher Kay Wilson wrote earlier this year:
the 'success' of a Royal Commission is difficult to assess and may require a long timeframe.
So we may well be having this conversation again in three years' time.
If so, the disability royal commission will still be valuable. It is a permanent public record and a benchmark against which advocates can measure the gap between Australia's human rights obligations and the reality of people's lives.
But it was meant to be a catalyst for reform, not only a yardstick.
The disability royal commission also raised the bar for how governments engage with people with disability. If thousands of people share painful experiences and then hear nothing back, the lesson many will draw is that speaking up changes little.
That's a lesson that outlasts any government and makes future engagements with the disability community that much harder.
Laura Davy receives research funding from the Australian Research Council.
