Senate debates
Monday, 6 November 2023
Documents
National Disability Insurance Scheme; Order for the Production of Documents
10:11 am
Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source
I too rise to speak again on this motion in relation to the NDIS Sustainability Framework. Last time I spoke on this I was almost speechless at the arrogance of the Labor Party. But to have Senator McAllister stand up here for less than 15 seconds to address the largest fraud that I think has ever been perpetrated on Australian taxpayers, and also on the 610,000 Australians with serious and permanent disability who are on the NDIS, is a complete disgrace.
When I was minister I ensured that all key financial and actuarial data was regularly published in full, including monthly updates. And it is a shame, and it is a stain on those opposite, that not only did they get rid of the monthly reports—the last third-quarter report is nowhere to be seen—but also they have confirmed that they are not going to release this year's Annual financial sustainability report for the NDIS. And they've just dropped the annual report for the NDIS—funnily enough, a few days after estimates, so we could not scrutinise it at estimates. Having read the annual report of the NDIS, I can say that it is no wonder that those opposite are now trying to hide from the Australian people the fraud that they are imposing on them.
Three years ago, as minister, I extended the hand of bipartisanship—in fact, multipartisanship—to those opposite, to start acknowledging the sustainability issues that the NDIS had and some of the fundamental structural issues that needed to be changed to ensure that this scheme could endure. Instead, Bill Shorten perpetuated the—I was going to say something unparliamentary—the untruth that there were no sustainability issues with the NDIS. And he promised before the election, 'There are no sustainability issues' and that he would not cut a single plan and that everything could go along hunky-dory. Instead of taking action, he's had yet another review, which will be a two-year review, which by all accounts will not be released publicly, and he has done nothing.
But not only has he done nothing with the scheme; it is far, far worse. The government have now denied the Australian people and NDIS participants the actuarial data that demonstrates the basis on which they have made their budget forecasts. Let me go through a little bit. Under law, they have to provide the Annual financial sustainability report. The last one that we published was 239 pages of detailed actuarial data on the scheme. So, everybody could see the basis on which, out over a decade, the costs would be incurred for this scheme. But not only have the government suppressed the last financial year's Annual financial sustainability report; these 239 pages have been replaced with—how many pages in the annual report, do you think?—four pages. And it is four pages in big text which says pretty much nothing. You certainly cannot work out the actuarial underpinnings of their 10-year budget forecast, including the forward estimates.
But one thing that probably galled Minister Shorten no end is that he could not stop the government actuary's report on the scheme going into the annual report, and—my goodness!—is this revealing. Project costs are higher than the previous financial sustainability report projected. The June 2013 projections assumed agency administration expenses would be 18 per cent higher than what they have budgeted out to 2026. Somehow, based on no actuarial public data, those on that side have ripped $74 billion out of the NDIS over the next 10 years. They are now hiding the actuarial data which would demonstrate how it is. What they have done in the forward estimates over the next three years, funnily enough, to get them through to the next election and past the next election, is invest $700 million. Over the forward estimates, that $700 million is supposed to find nearly $15 billion worth of savings without any data. It is a fraud. Everybody in the NDIS knows it. Shame on those opposite for having such contempt, with a PII claim that they have not explained. Shame on them.
No comments