Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Hansard source

Before I begin, I want to wish Emma's 11-year-old a very happy birthday. I also say to the member for Lindsay that I'm very pleased to be able to follow her remarks today. She has personal experience of dealing with disability and I think the way in which she contributed tonight in explaining to everybody the importance of the National Disability Insurance Scheme was very, very well put, so congratulations.

I want to also speak tonight on the Medicare Levy Amendment (National Disability Insurance Scheme Funding) Bill 2017 and the 10 related bills. First of all, I want to send a very, very clear message to people with disability, their families and carers: Labor created the National Disability Insurance Scheme, Labor funded the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and a Shorten Labor government will continue the full rollout of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Full funding of the National Disability Insurance Scheme is secure under Labor and we will not be playing the sorts of political games that we've seen over the last four years from this government. I am also confident that a Shorten Labor government would fix the problems currently being experienced with the National Disability Insurance Scheme rollout. So for this government to try and claim that Labor does not support the NDIS is a disgrace. It is a disgrace and an untruth, and of course it is leading to people with disability and their carers being frightened. It must stop. It is completely and utterly irresponsible.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme has been budgeted for in the bottom line of every budget presented since 2013-14 by both Labor and coalition governments. The bilateral agreements signed with all states and territories contain long-term commitments by all governments—federal, state and territory—to the full funding of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Let's be very clear about this. Before the last election, the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, or PEFO as it's known, that's conducted independently by Treasury, did not say that there was a funding gap for the NDIS. Treasury were very clear about this. When Labor proposed the NDIS ahead of its creation in 2013, we clearly identified savings in the 2013-14 budget, and these included some very difficult savings decisions. We introduced a means test on the private health insurance rebate, reforms to retirement incomes, changes to fringe benefits tax concessions, tobacco excise indexation and increases to import processing charges, and these are just some of the major changes that we introduced to make sure that we could afford to fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

The figures underpinning these budget measures were developed by the Treasury—led at that time by Martin Parkinson, who is now head of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet—but the Turnbull government now says, somehow, that the scheme is unfunded. The vast majority of these measures were passed by the parliament, so the money is in the budget. If the money isn't earmarked for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, you might ask, 'What has this government spent it on?' The government says that it can now afford to fund a $65 billion company tax cut but it cannot afford to fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme. So it can find the money in the budget for a $65 billion company tax cut but not enough money for the NDIS. The Treasurer frequently says that the revenue that will be raised through the increase in the Medicare levy in the bill that we're debating today will go into a locked box to help pay for the NDIS. The Treasurer is wrong. Clause 81 of the Constitution says:

All revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall form one Consolidated Revenue Fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities imposed by this Constitution.

That means there are no locked boxes inside the consolidated revenue fund for specific expenditure, whether it's defence, schools, hospitals or the NDIS.

We never have a debate in this country about whether or not defence spending is fully funded, so why should funding for people with disability be treated any differently? As the Australian newspaper reported last year, far from using its proposed NDIS savings fund for the NDIS, the government should use the funds to spend money on anything it wants. I quote from the Australian newspaper at the time:

Scott Morrison—

that is, the Treasurer—

told The Australian that fund—

that is, the NDIS savings fund—

while quarantined, could be used by any future government for any of its spending whims.

'Could be used for any of its spending whims'—that's what the Treasurer said last year. So the money from the Medicare levy rise will go into the consolidated fund. This government's assertion that the revenue raised from increasing the Medicare levy will go directly to fund the NDIS is false. Even worse, the government's false argument is creating needless uncertainty about the future funding of the NDIS.

We shouldn't forget that this government has for years tried to make massive cuts in the social security system—to the disability support pension, the carer payment and the age pension—and tried to justify these cuts by saying, 'That was the only way to pay for the NDIS,' and they, of course, still want to axe the energy supplement to 1.7 million Australians. If the Prime Minister gets his way—and of course everybody over there has voted for this cut—new single pensioners will be $14.10 a fortnight, $365 a year, worse off. That's what pensioners will lose.

Unfortunately, the government continue to play off one group of vulnerable Australians against another. They have no credibility on this issue whatsoever. Of course, there is a legitimate debate for the parliament to have about equity in the tax system and how best to raise revenue for the budget. But there is no debate about the future of the NDIS. Both major political parties have agreed to fully fund the NDIS, and for that we should all be very pleased. The task for the parliament is to determine if revenue and expenditure measures are justified and in the interests of all Australians. And there's of course no doubt that the NDIS is justified. The NDIS will transform the lives of 475,000 people with a disability. That's exactly why the Labor government created it. The question before all of us in this parliament is: what's the fairest way to raise revenue for the budget?

This government's plan to increase the Medicare levy would increase the tax burden on people earning as little as $21,000 a year. It means a worker on $55,000, for example, would pay an extra $275 in tax, while someone on $80,000 would face an extra $400 in tax. That's how much all of the people opposite are going to increase taxes on low-income earners in this country. This is at a time of stagnant wages, falling living standards and record levels of underemployment, all of which mean that low- and middle-income Australians are less able to pay more tax than they have in the past.

Independent research from ANU's Centre for Social Research and Methods shows that twice as many households would be worse off under the coalition's plan than under Labor's plan. Labor's approach is fairer for the budget and fairer for families and individuals. Labor's plan also raises over $4 billion more over 10 years than the government's proposed tax rise, because we would increase the Medicare levy for individuals earning more than $87,000 a year and keep the deficit levy on those earning more than $180,000 a year.

Significantly, the Parliamentary Budget Office has shown that middle-income Australians will be worse off under government policy because of this change to the Medicare levy. The PBO says that personal income tax will hit a 20-year high of 12½ per cent of GDP by 2021 in part because of this across-the-board increase to the Medicare levy as proposed by the conservatives in this bill.

In the remaining time I want to re-emphasise why it is that we need the NDIS and to really reinforce just how important this is. I was the minister responsible for introducing the National Disability Insurance Scheme in 2013. I personally have met thousands of people with disability and their families. I want to finish with one very significant story—a story that had a big impact on me. I'll call the woman I'm talking about Tracy for the purposes of this speech. She has young twin boys, both of whom live with severe intellectual and other disabilities. They don't have any speech. They require intensive assistance for toileting, feeding, dressing and bathing. They need constant supervision.

Tracy, at the time I met her, was desperate for help. She'd had nine case managers and nearly 50 carers in the six years of her children's lives. Under the old system of disability the crisis package she was getting only provided support for one child. The old system was not based on the needs of her children or her family. And the reality was that there just wasn't enough money. So we have set about making sure that Tracy and her boys, and families like Tracy's, are actually able to get the support they need so they can live a better life.

This story highlighted to me then, and highlights to me again as I tell this story to the House, why we need the NDIS. Of course there are a lot of problems. I'm the first to acknowledge that what many people are experiencing at the moment is not good enough. But these problems need to be fixed and there certainly should not be any political games as, together, we go about fixing them. First and foremost, we need more planners and better trained planners. We need to make sure that people with disability and their families have in-depth conversations with the planners—none of this over-the-phone planning. We need to make sure, as the Productivity Commission recommended just last week, that the staffing cap on the National Disability Insurance Agency is lifted so that the waiting times, the poor plans, the lack of planners—all of this gets addressed.

The other really serious problem facing the NDIS is of course the botched IT system. This also needs to be urgently fixed. This is where the problems began in earnest—with the new IT system. It's meant long delays and there are still serious problems with the IT system for people with disability and for providers. It is a mess and it needs to be fixed urgently.

Of course, there are also many examples of people's lives being improved—for example, a mother going back to work because her child is now supported by the NDIS. In another email, a mother from northern Tasmania told me how the NDIS has changed the life of her teenage son, who has learning difficulties. The scheme has given him a level of confidence and independence that, she said to me, was unimaginable before the introduction of the NDIS.

So we all need to come together to make sure the NDIS is as successful as we all hoped it could be. And I just want to reinforce the point again that a Shorten Labor government will continue to fully fund the NDIS. People with disability and their families can be secure in that knowledge. (Time expired)

See this speech in context