Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

Like my colleagues, I speak in opposition to this bill, quite simply because it is not needed. It is nothing more than a cheap and sick political stunt that is designed to justify cuts to other social services programs on the basis of providing ongoing funding for what is a very important reform, the National Disability Insurance Scheme. We all know the importance of looking after people with disabilities. Labor established the NDIS, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, in the 2013-14 budget after an extensive period of consultation that was undertaken predominantly by the now Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, when he was Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services in the Rudd government. He travelled around the country, undertook extensive consultation with disability service providers, families, carers and, of course, Australians living with disabilities. What he found was that, quite alarmingly, in modern Australia people living with a disability are still second-class citizens. They are not getting the same level of support and access to rewarding and fulfilling lives and the opportunity to contribute to our economy that other Australians are enjoying. This finding was backed by a very thorough investigation and report from the Productivity Commission which looked at this issue and recommended to government that the National Disability Insurance Scheme be established. They did that on the basis of looking at the productivity benefits that would flow to Australia if we did establish the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and the Productivity Commission quite rightly found that we were holding back Australia's productivity and potential increases in GDP and incomes by not providing people with disabilities with the opportunity to live rewarding and fulfilling lives, undertake further education and training, be involved in the workforce, and ensure that they had connected and fulfilling lives that would ultimately not only improve their wellbeing and the social wellbeing of communities but grow our economy. It was on that basis that the Leader of the Opposition made a recommendation to government, cabinet supported it and the NDIS was announced in 2013.

As I said, when Labor announced it, we ensured that this important reform was fully funded in the 2013-14 budget, and it is only of late—really since the Abbott government was elected—that the questions the conservatives have thrown at this fund and this program have begun to surface. Firstly, then Prime Minister Abbott asked the commission of inquiry to look at not only this issue but government services more generally. The commission of inquiry recommended that additional funding was needed. Since then, we have had a conga line of conservatives lining up to criticise the NDIS, and to claim that the process is not funded, that we cannot afford this important reform and that there is a need for this special account to offset funding and offset programs in other areas, and to try and water down social services more generally. Well, as the Labor members have pointed out on several occasions in this parliament, through the Senate inquiry that was conducted into this reform—as have, indeed, many of the organisations that work in this space—this is simply not true. It is not true. And it is wilfully irresponsible for the conservatives, for the Abbott-Turnbull government representatives and for others who rail against this policy to claim that it is not funded, because it is fully funded and that was outlined in the 2013 budget.

In that budget we announced the 0.5 per cent increase in the Medicare levy from 1.5 per cent to two per cent, to go into a special fund called DisabilityCare Australia that would, over the course of five years, be funded to the tune of $20.4 billion from 2014-15 to 2018-19. Some of that money was going to funding the NDIS. Admittedly, those funds would not cover all of the cost; we realised that when the fund was established. But we then found further savings measures in that particular budget over the course of the ensuing decade, and those other savings measures included a plan to ensure that there were reforms to the private health insurance rebate totalling $6.5 billion in value, $6 billion in retirement incomes reforms, and $20.6 billion in other long-term savings measures, and those other long-term savings measures included: changes to tax concessions for fringe benefits, changes to tax concessions for net medical expenses, changes to indexation of tobacco excises and increases to import processing charges. So there they are in black and white in the budget: fully funded, fully costed, signed off by Treasury, I might add, at the time, and never disputed when they were originally put into the 2013-14 budget. This is a point that was recently made very well by the Senate inquiry that looked into this bill that we are debating here today in the Labor members' dissenting report. So the claim that the NDIS is not fully funded is nothing more than rubbish and a concerted campaign from many conservatives who do not believe in the ideal of an NDIS and many commentators who want to see it underwritten and under-managed to ensure that it is never fully implemented.

There are other concerns that have been raised with this particular bill—namely, the establishment of a special account. Quite simply, there is no need for the establishment of this special account that this bill seeks to undertake. The reason is that there is already a special account that was established to fund the NDIS, and I mentioned that special account earlier—the DisabilityCare Australia fund that was established by Labor, which was receiving the funds from the increase in the Medicare levy. So the effect of this bill is to establish another special fund. And what is the reason? Simply so that the Turnbull government can claim that they need to make savings to other social security measures—most namely, cuts to pensions, cuts to benefits for unemployed people, cuts to family payments and cuts to paid parental leave. They are using this particular fund to justify cuts to social services in other areas. It represents this government's twisted priorities when it comes to budget savings measures and trying to increase revenue to ensure that our fiscal position is more sustainable in the future because, once again, they are attacking the most vulnerable and weak in our society and letting off the big end of town with their $50 billion corporate tax cut. Well, Labor says that that is not on. And we have called this for what it is: nothing more than a ruse and a sick attempt to divert attention and to try to claim that the NDIS is not fully funded so that they can make cuts elsewhere in the budget.

These are concerns that have all been expressed by stakeholders who work in this area. In the Senate inquiry that was undertaken into this bill over recent months, those concerns were enunciated by many of the people and providers that work in this area—particularly the concerns about the establishment of a special fund. Peter Davidson from ACOSS, in giving evidence to the inquiry looking at this bill, said:

… it is not obvious why this new fund is needed. Its purpose, apart from the generic one of funding the NDIS, is not clear, and we do not believe it should be supported in its present form.

Also Stephanie Gotlib from Children and Young People with Disability Australia said:

It is believed that the creation of this special account … places essential disability services and support as non-core business of the Australian government, with their full funding being dependent on other budget-saving measures identified by the government of the day.

Stephanie says it perfectly. The community and stakeholders have seen what is behind this bill and have called it for what it is. It is just another attempt by this government to cut social services.

There is also a concern regarding the minister's discretion. The minister will be solely responsible for policy and management of this fund. Again, this is a concern that has been expressed by stakeholders regarding the drafting of the bill and the management of this fund. In their submission, ACOSS said:

This has rightly caused concern amongst the disability sector, as a core part of the NDIS is the independent management of Commonwealth and State government funds by the NDIA. In addition, the funding cap sends a message that funding for the NDIS could be restricted, and consequently services and supports made available under the scheme would be limited.

That is the view of people who work in this industry and the stakeholders who are involved with this. They know what is going on here, and they see through what the government is doing in establishing this fund. The fund is not needed, because we already have a special fund for the NDIS. That was established by Labor in 2013-14.

The real reason that the government are doing is that they are seeking to make cuts to other social security measures in the budget to justify this fund, and those cuts will come to people on unemployment benefits, to pensioners, to families and to working mothers in this country—and that is wrong. It is wrong not only because of the substance of those cuts involved but also because they are attempting to mislead the public into believing that the NDIS is not fully funded—therefore needing this special fund and needing to make those cuts in other areas. That is downright deceitful. This fund is not needed, because the NDIS was fully funded by the Labor government in the 2013-14 budget.

The NDIS is a very necessary reform—something that we all understand will improve the lives of people in Australia living with disability. It will ensure that they can live rewarding and fulfilling lives. It will ensure that they can contribute to their communities and enhance their educational and productive capacity, which will end up growing our economy. It is a very important reform and it should not be undermined by deceitful acts such as this from this government, and I urge everyone to vote against this bill.

See this speech in context