Steele-John misses NDIS hearing amid dispute

The Greens are facing a procedural deadlock that has left their disability spokesperson sidelined just as scrutiny of the National Disability Insurance Scheme intensifies. Senator Jordon Steele-John will not attend Senate estimates this week to answer questions about the NDIS, a body undergoing major structural changes through 2030.

The absence stems from a dispute that began more than a week ago when the Nine newspapers reported a three-page letter sent to Greens leader David Shoebridge. The letter called for an independent investigation into allegations of inappropriate behavior toward women between 2017 and 2025. Shoebridge announced that Steele-John would take leave while the claims were examined, a move he described as a standard response for a party that prioritizes fair process.

The situation complicated itself when Steele-John rejected the narrative. He denied agreeing to take leave and accused a faction within the Western Australian Greens of playing nasty political games by leaking the letter to the media. He stated he spoke publicly to prevent his silence from being interpreted as guilt. Shoebridge maintains that the senator agreed to the leave but concedes he cannot compel compliance unilaterally.

Forcing the senator out requires a specific legislative threshold. A secret ballot in the party room must yield a two-thirds majority, meaning more than seven members must vote to expel him. This would be a drastic measure, and even if the Western Australian Greens clear him in their independent probe, his standing within the federal caucus would likely suffer.

In a statement issued late Friday, Steele-John said he had explored attending the estimates digitally but was informed that option was also unacceptable. He said he would instead focus on the independent investigation he hopes the Western Australian Greens will commence soon. The decision to skip the hearing is significant for the disability community, where Steele-John is well regarded, and for a party that prides itself on consensus decision-making.

The dispute has immediate implications for Shoebridge's new leadership. His handling of the matter will set the tone for his time in charge and could lead to a bitter internal fight. The party must decide whether to rely on the independent probe or move to force the issue through a vote, a choice that carries political, legal, and ethical weight.