ABC Radio Ballarat
Interview with Prue Bentley
12 August 2010
9:00am
E & OE
Subjects: National Disability Insurance Scheme, National Disability Strategy, stimulus waste, carers
PRUE BENTLEY:
The Coalition has pledged $314 million for students with a disability which includes a $20,000 portable education card for those who qualify. Mitch Fifield is a Victorian Liberal Senator and Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities, Carers and the Voluntary Sector. He’s in Ballarat today to talk to the local disability sector and with us this morning. Good morning.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Good morning Prue.
BENTLEY:
Now the funding model. Let’s start big and move down perhaps. The funding model for this sector has been called a crisis driven, outmoded and welfare based approach. Would you agree?
FIFIELD:
Absolutely. Australia’s system of support for people with disabilities is a frayed patchwork. It would be fair to say that it’s broken. And rather than operating on the basis of providing support to people according to the need that they have, support is provided according to what state they live in and determined often by how they acquired their disability. So if you’re in a motor vehicle accident, you probably get pretty good support from the TAC. If you’re in an accident in the workplace and you acquire your disability that way, you’ll probably get reasonable support through a workers compensation scheme. But if you sustain your disability through falling off the roof at home or you’re born with a disability, it’s a very different situation. You’re pretty much on your own and you’ve got to try and cobble support together. So the system is bust and there does need to be a better way.
BENTLEY:
This sounds to me like an argument for a National Disability Insurance Scheme, a no fault model of insurance scheme. Is that what you’re talking about?
FIFIELD:
We need a decent system of long-term care and support and one of the proposals is the concept of a National Disability Insurance Scheme which would essentially fill the gaps that are currently there. The Coalition fully supports the referral of the concept of a National Disability Insurance Scheme to the Productivity Commission. They’re currently undertaking an inquiry which will report in the middle of next year. And what I’ve said, what Tony Abbott has said, is that if the Productivity Commission thinks that it’s doable, then that will be an indication that it’s something that we should take forward. There does need to be a better way. We’re really in a situation where support for people with disabilities is rationed. Pretty much like an old Soviet model. It’s not good enough. Families, people with disabilities are angry, quite rightly so, and we do need to do better for them.
BENTLEY:
Labor’s committed to submitting a 10 year disability strategy to COAG if re-elected. Is that something you would support?
FIFIELD:
The National Disability Strategy, the document which the government have produced it’s fine. It’s an aspirational document and we don’t have a particular problem with that. But what the sector is looking for, what Australians with disability are looking for, is a solution. A large part of the problem lies with the state governments who ration support, who ration respite, who ration supported accommodation, who ration wheelchairs and aides and equipment.
BENTLEY:
Isn’t that though because of federal funding?
FIFIELD:
The Federal Government does provide a fair degree of support, financial support to the states. But those things are core state government responsibilities. The Commonwealth’s prime responsibility historically has been income support – the Disability Support Pension, carers payment, carers allowance – and assisting people with disabilities in employment and disability business enterprises. But increasingly the Commonwealth is having to fill the gaps created because the State Government is too often vacating the field.
BENTLEY:
Where do you stand on these carers payments? Because they have been increased under the Labor Government. Would the Coalition increase them or keep the payments as they are?
FIFIELD:
The Coalition introduced the Carers Payment. The current government has increased a range of pensions and that’s a good thing. In fact we introduced a Private Members Bill to increase pensions which the Government voted against. Subsequently they did increase pensions which we thought was a good thing. The current government also sought to abolish the carers bonus which was something we paid in government, and under sustained pressure they relented and introduced an equivalent payment. But I think it’s fair to say no government, state or federal, of any persuasion has covered itself in glory in the area of disabilities. And I think a lot of credit has to go to disability groups and carer groups who over the last 18 months have got together to speak with one voice and to really raise the profile of disability as a policy issue.
BENTLEY:
…if you’ve got a view or a question you would like put to the opposition on disability and carers sector, now is your chance. Senator Mitch Fifield is with us in the studio…Mitch Fifield, with a National Disability Insurance Scheme? What exactly does that mean?
FIFIELD:
What it means is ensuring that if you’re a person who has a disability, who might already be receiving income support, for instance through the Disability Support Pension. But you might be lacking some of the additional things that you need to have a decent quality of life. And the National Disability Insurance Scheme is designed to do those things. And they could be things from aides and equipment. It might be a wheelchair that you need or it might be some sort of long-term supported accommodation. Or it could be some sort of personal care. You might need assistance in getting out of bed in the morning because of your disability. You might need some of those daily tasks which we all take for granted, you might need assistance for some of those. So it’s to assist you with that basic quality of life support which sadly is too often lacking.
BENTLEY:
And it will come a quite a significant cost.
FIFIELD:
There was some work done before the Productivity Commission commenced their work which estimated that the unmet need in the community for people with disabilities is somewhere between $3 and $5 billion a year. Now it sounds like a big figure but when you consider the $16 billion which is being spent on school halls and the billion or so being spent on roof insulation by this government, I constantly ask myself what could have been achieved in the area of disabilities if just a fraction of that money which was wasted on school halls and home insulation had been diverted to disabilities. So it sounds like a big figure, $3 to $5 billion, but when you compare it to the waste under the current government, I think it’s something that’s within the capacity of government.
BENTLEY:
That’s true but the money that was spent on school halls and stimulus would be to create jobs which would ultimately buoy the economic situation in Australia so that we can deal with those issues. Would you not agree with that as part of the strategy?
FIFIELD:
No. The bulk of the school stimulus spending has actually come after Australia had avoided recession. So we didn’t avoid recession because of the school stimulus spending and we certainly didn’t avoid it because of the home insulation scheme. The US had masses of stimulus spending as well. Is this government really saying that the solution for the US recession was actually staring President Obama in the face? If only he’d built a few school halls and insulated a few roofs they would have avoided recession? I don’t think so. I think it’s been a massive waste. There were several reasons why Australia managed to survive much better than comparable economies. Because we had a budget surplus going into this. Because we didn’t have any net government debt. Because we had strong demand from China for our commodities. Because we had a floating exchange rate . . .
BENTLEY:
. . . So you’re saying . . .
FIFIELD:
. . . These are the things that cushioned Australia. It wasn’t school stimulus and it wasn’t home insulation.
BENTLEY:
So you’re saying that the surplus, if it had it not been touched, would have sat there and Australia still would have still sailed through the recession.
FIFIELD:
There was a justification for a small stimulus. We supported the original $10 billion stimulus. We didn’t support the subsequent $42 billion stimulus. Small stimulus, appropriate stimulus which came into the system quickly – yes. Wasteful spending which largely came after the economic crisis – no. And that debt which has been accrued could compromise the ability of future governments to do more for Australians with disability. So when I see waste, I get angry.
BENTLEY:
Let’s get back to disability as you say. We’ve heard on this program in recent months about a chronic shortage of respite care services for severely disabled people and their cares. I for one even took a personal phone call from a listener who was struggling to get respite care for her husband. And she broke down on the phone to me because she was really stressed by her situation she could not find anyone who could help her get some time out from caring for her husband. What is the Coalition looking to do to help these people and these carers who do so much work in our community?
FIFIELD:
That’s one of the reasons Mark Banwell, our candidate has got me here and Senator McGauran has got me here, is to hear on the ground from service providers in Ballarat just what the need is. As I travel around the country I hear time and again the need for respite. I think everyone who is a carer is happy to perform that role. But there’s a point at which it becomes unreasonable to expect someone to be a carer without some form of assistance, without some form of respite. It goes back to the point I raised before that we really ration support and assistance for people with disabilities and carers. A National Disability Insurance Scheme, that concept, is the medium to long-term solution for those respite needs. But what we have to do is we have to find the resources to increase respite in the meantime.
BENTLEY:
There has been no commitment by either party in this election for respite care. Do you think that’s a failure?
FIFIELD:
We haven’t announced all the elements of our disability policy as yet. But I think there’s an onus on government to always look for ways to improve support for people with disabilities and their carers.
BENTLEY:
Let’s move to the local issues. What do you expecting to hear from the local disability service providers in Ballarat today?
FIFIELD:
I’m expecting to hear that there’s a strong need for supported accommodation. I’m expecting to hear that there’s a need for more respite. I’m expecting to hear that there’s a waiting list for some of the things which we assume people get if they need them such as wheelchairs. We can put a man on the moon but apparently it’s beyond the wit of state governments to provide a wheelchair to everyone who wants one, needs one, when they need it.
BENTLEY:
You mentioned supported accommodation. $60 million has been pledged by Labor to build supported accommodation capital works project. Would you support that initiative?
FIFIELD:
We will take a look at what Labor has committed to. But I would observe that in 2008 Labor promised 300 extra supported accommodation places. Four Corners found in their program in February this year that only 40 of those places had been provided. And when Bill Shorten, the Parliamentary Secretary was asked, where are they? He said well we just gave the money to the states. We don’t know if they’ve called for tenders. We don’t know where the places are. That’s up to them. I don’t think it’s good enough. I think if the Commonwealth is giving money, the Commonwealth should know that it’s actually getting value for money and that that money is getting through. I doubt this government’s capacity to delivery the extra 150 places they’ve promised given they’re still struggling with the first 300.
BENTLEY:
So is the Coalition still looking to pull the states into line?
FIFIELD:
I think the Commonwealth has an obligation to ensure that when it gives money to the states that it’s certain the money is getting through and the states are upholding their end of the bargain. Absolutely.
BENTLEY:
We’ve run out of time I’m sorry. There’s plenty more to talk about. But thank you for coming today and welcome to Ballarat.
FIFIELD:
Thanks very much.
ENDS