Hollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Hansard source

I am sorry, but I am less clear than I was before. That Minister Shorten has referred to the NDIS as 'the only lifeboat in the ocean' is indicative of the fact that a whole lot of kids are going onto this scheme who should not be on the scheme. In fact, we know that we have around 11 per cent of boys aged between five and seven currently receiving NDIS plans. There is no way on God's green earth that 11 per cent of five- to seven-year-old boys in this country have a permanent and lifelong disability. If that were the case, we would be in for a world of pain in the next 20 or 30 years, if 11 per cent of boys currently aged from five to seven have significant, permanent, lifelong impairments. That is impossible to be the case. There is no way, under this legislation—and from Minister Shorten's own words around the importance of foundational supports, around the importance of bringing the states and territories back to the table. People who do not have significant impairments, who do not have permanent and lifelong disability, are not on the scheme.

For that to be the case, there has to be some concept of who the next lifeboat, the second lifeboat in the ocean, is for. We have the NDIS as the only lifeboat in the ocean at the moment, according to Minister Shorten. So who is going from this lifeboat into the foundational support lifeboat? Who is going into the other lifeboat? What are the disabilities or conditions? What are the temporary impairments? We know they will not be lifelong and permanent disability. And I'm not having a go at you here. There are too many people on it. There is no way that 11 per cent of five- to seven-year-old boys have a disability. It is not possible.

But I think the Australian people deserve to know, and parents in this country—parents of that 11 per cent of five- to seven-year-old boys—have a right to know which one of the conditions that their children have stays on the NDIS lifeboat or moves over to the foundational support lifeboat. I am less clear. I don't think the intent of this bill is for the scheme to grow in numbers, because there is no way you are capping growth if that is the case. So I think that—whoever is saying that—it is a myth, or it is certainly misleading. There is no way that we want to keep this level, this volume, of children being pushed through to the NDIS. I think it is just fair—it is not attacking; it is not having a go—because this is the reform we're talking about. If we're doing reform, we've got to put our big boy pants on and have some tough discussions.

If your child has a global developmental delay, some fine motor skill issues or even some gross motor skill issues, a sensory processing disorder or oppositional defiant disorder—there are a lot of disorders going around these days. To have made the modelling, the figures and the assessments for how much this is going to save—and I'm sure Senator Reynolds will take us through some of those numbers. If these saves are going to be made and the growth is going to be capped, which of these disorders or conditions are going to move from the NDIS lifeboat to the foundational supports lifeboat?