Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Shame indeed on those opposite, not only for the lack of transparency, for the hiding of data and for the flouting of the order from this place to provide the most basic level of visibility but also because the minister, week after week, keeps coming out and saying, 'We've consulted all of these people,' but, as Senator Steele-John said, you have not heard a thing. Not only have you introduced and passed NDIS legislation, but you haven't even reported or provided a government response to that great inquiry, and yet here you still trumpet that it is a public interest immunity claim.

The only reason it would prejudice Commonwealth-state relationships is that you have entered into this legislation, you've palmed off a whole series of foundational supports—you've carved them out of the federal budget—but the states and territories have agreed to not one single cent of that expenditure. The fraud continues on and on.

The NDIS annual financial sustainability report was due shortly after the end of the financial year, which is over five months ago now, and those opposite are still hiding the AFSR. Why are they doing that? They are doing that because it would expose the financial fraud those opposite have now inflicted upon not only the 650,000 participants and their families but the Australian taxpayer. They have produced the first-quarter report for this year, but of course it was after estimates—and no wonder, because what the quarterly report shows, as the AFSR will when it comes out, no doubt, is the full extent of their financial fraud.

What do we know from the first quarterly report? First of all, they've carved $60 billion worth of savings over 10 years out of the scheme, and, to date, they've hidden every single bit of financial analysis that would enable this place and Senate estimates to scrutinise where those savings are coming from. What the first quarterly report shows is that not only are they not going to make those savings—we don't know where they're coming from—but, in the first quarter of this year, guess what? Even with all the cuts, the reviews, blocking people from entering the scheme, shunting people out of the scheme and sending people to the AAT in record numbers, the scheme is still going up above that forecast in the budget, which is exactly what those on this side of the chamber have said it would do for years now, since Bill Shorten became minister. So the total payment level is on track to exceed the 2024 total payments, which highlights that, even with all of the cuts and the broken promises, they still cannot manage the scheme in accordance with the budget.

Here are the facts they didn't want us to know at estimates. Average and median payments per participant have continued to increase by 7.6 per cent and 4.2 per cent, respectively, over the past two years—completely the opposite of what those opposite promised. Somehow they were magically going to cut the scheme, and they've taken the money out of the budget, but guess what? They are going to keep supplementing the scheme.

Average plan budgets have also increased. This is the second driver of cost in the scheme. The first is participant numbers and average payments per participant. Average plan budgets have increased over time for all participants by 5.5 per cent per annum over two years, and 9.4 per cent if you look at the special independent living, SIL, arrangements. But plan inflation also continues to rise, with an annualised plan inflation level now of 12.8 per cent, which has increased from 10.1 per cent from June this year. So not only can they not manage the scheme—scheme costs going up and administration costs are going up—but the scheme is blowing out, even with all of the cuts those opposite have made.

One of the things they championed so much—hand on heart, they said, 'We are going to reduce the number of cases down at the AAT. We are going to be more generous. There will be no cuts.' Well, that is simply not true. Again in the first quarter, there were over 50,000 requests for participant plan reviews, 4,000 per week. Most concerningly, plan reassessments, which can be initiated by the NDIA, increased from 40,000 to 55,000. So, despite the claim they would fix this scheme—