Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

I've withdrawn it—

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Order! The minister did withdraw, and I would ask that the minister please be heard with the same respect that others have been heard.

but what I just heard was a set of imputations about the motivations of the government in delivering this set of reforms. The problem with this debate, and some other debates that I've observed over the last little while, is that there's a group of people in here who think it's alright to make imputations, but, the moment that they are called on it, it's a big problem.

The result of the passage of this bill will be that the government will co-design, with participants and with the states and territories, a set of reforms. They will deliver better plans. They will deliver clearer expectations amongst participants. They will deliver on the expectations and spirit of the NDIS review. There will be good outcomes for participants. There will be a sustainable scheme—a sustainable scheme that will support participants for generations and generations to come. The access to the scheme as a result of the passage of this legislation will not change. It will not change. The kinds of services that participants will access will, within the scope of the budget that is defined for them, be flexible—more flexible than they currently are. The scheme will deliver real improvements, over time, and it will be co-designed with the community. The scheme enables that process to begin. That means that the proper foundations of the scheme will be protected.

I think that is a proper purpose for government. To say that it is motivated by anything other than making the scheme robust and improved, and to try and set up an argument that reforms and improvements to the efficiency of the scheme that will eliminate duplication and support participants in their engagement with the agency are somehow bad things, I just don't think that's right. This scheme will continue to grow, if the government achieves its objectives, by eight per cent every year. To characterise that as 'cuts' is just not right. It's just not fair.

We are not immune to criticism. We understand that the role of government is to listen to criticism and listen to feedback and to sometimes be criticised and sometimes be criticised unfairly—that's alright. But to make unfounded claims that create great anxiety is not a good idea. It may play politically, but it does not assist.

This is not a process where the government has arrived with a piece of legislation and pushed it through this parliament in five minutes. The government has signalled its intent here ever since it was elected. It's a National Cabinet decision that has been very widely canvassed and well understood. There is legislation here that has been in the parliament for quite some time. There will need to be a process of dealing with it in the parliament, and we will see how the parliament deals with it over the coming days. But it should not be held up. I understand that the position of one group in here is to oppose the legislation. Well, oppose the legislation. But the parliament should not hold this reform up.