2 May, 2013
ABC 774 Drive
With Rafael Epstein
2 May 2013
5:10pm
E & OE
Subjects: National Disability Insurance Scheme
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
Mitch Fifield is the Coalition’s disabilities spokesman. Senator thanks for joining us.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Good evening Raf.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
Under what conditions would you support the levy?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We’re trying to bring a positive approach to bare here because we want to see the NDIS become a reality. That is why Tony Abbott indicated today that we are prepared to consider supporting the Government’s proposed levy …
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
… He was a bit reluctant yesterday though.
MITCH FIFIELD:
We were taken a bit by surprise as were all Australians. Because the Prime Minister in December said that there would not be a Medicare levy for the NDIS and that there wouldn’t need to be one because she had made proper provision for the funding of the NDIS. Now she woke up one morning and realised that the cupboard was bare, that she had found almost every other area to spend money on. But hadn’t made provision for people with disability. Which is why we find ourselves in this situation.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
So what conditions would you place on your support?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We think firstly that potential participants in the NDIS scheme are entitled to know whether they are likely to be covered or not covered by the NDIS. The Prime Minister needs to release what are called the NDIS Rules, which are regulations, which expand upon the eligibility criteria in the legislation.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
Let me read those. You voted for that legislation. I know it got bipartisan support. They seem fairly broad and comprehensive to me. I just wanted to let people know what’s in the legislation. It is people with a disability attributable to intellectual, cogitative, neurological, sensory, physical or psychiatric impairment, if it’s permanent and if it substantially reduces their functional capacity to communicate, socially interact, learn, be mobile, self-care, or self-manage. The point of the legislation is that, I thought the reason the scheme changes the game is you don’t list the ailments. You list the way you cannot interact with society. And then the Australian society agrees to pick up the bill. Aren’t you asking them for something they can’t give you?
MITCH FIFIELD:
No. You’re exactly right, the NDIS scheme doesn’t take a medical diagnostic approach to working out if someone is eligible for the scheme. They look at the impairment someone has. What the effect is on their functional capacity. Which is the right way to go. And the legislation, which is a broad framework, does provide some broad outline as to eligibility criteria. Now what will go into greater detail are the NDIS Rules which are the regulations, which are essentially the guts of the scheme. And the Government have released draft rules, but they haven’t released the final rules. Now we’re getting very close to the commencement of launch sites on 1 July. So we need to have that. The other thing that we need to have released is the assessment tool, that is the tool …
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
… I don’t understand why we’re down in the weeds, and I mean that in detail. If you support the idea. Don’t you say, well listen, we think it is a priority. We want to spend x billion dollars. We will see how far that gets us. And then we’ll build on it from there as we can. Isn’t that the way you begin a scheme like that? You can’t know everything about it until begins to get up and running.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Yes, there are things that will be learnt along the road through the launch sites. But given that the launch sites are due to commence 1 July, given the Prime Minister wants to establish a whole new tax base, it is not unreasonable for potential participants to have in their hand at this stage the full eligibility criteria details. Yes we’ve got the legislation and that’s good. But we also need the rules. And we also need to have the assessment tools.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
It’s a bad look though isn’t it to support a paid parental leave levy that is going to give wealthy parents $6,000 per a week for 6 months. But you won’t support a levy, or you know, you’re giving qualified support on a levy for a disability scheme that all of us can access if we need it.
MITCH FIFIELD:
The PPL levy covers the cost of that particular scheme. And the point that we raised yesterday is that the levy as proposed by the Prime Minister only covers less than half the cost of the NDIS.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
That’s the same with the Medicare levy. I don’t understand the principle if you’re supporting a levy for parents to have leave, to have children. And you know, the wealthier you are, the way your system works, the wealthier you are, the more money you get. And good luck to you if you’re on $150,000. You get that salary replaced for 6 months under the scheme. Why support the principle of that levy and not say, yep, we support the principle of this levy too. We’re not sure how much we’re going to be able to afford. We will back the levy. In it comes, whatever money it raises, that goes towards the scheme. Anything extra that we need, we just have to wait and see. What is wrong with taking that position?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We proposed a broader Paid Parental Leave Scheme. And we’ve identified how that will be funded. The Prime Minister has changed her position as to how the NDIS will be funded. Until recently she said that it could be funded from consolidated revenue. Until recently she shared the view of the Productivity Commission. She has done a complete about face. She has said that she can now only fund part of the scheme if she introduces a levy. Now given that the Prime Minister has changed entirely the funding mechanism for the NDIS, it’s not unreasonable to say, ‘Prime Minister, you’ve indicated how you’ll fund maybe 40% of the NDIS scheme. Can you please outline how you will fund the balance of it?’ It is the Prime Minister who has changed her position. It’s not unreasonable for the Opposition on behalf of the Australian public to ask how she will make up the difference. And that is the additional information that we have sought from her. We’re not trying to be difficult. We’re asking entirely legitimate questions …
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
… It very much looks like you don’t want to precisely say yes because you are worried you give her political advantage.
MITCH FIFIELD:
No. We have sought to elevate the NDIS above the partisan fray at every step. We proposed a year ago that there should be a joint parliamentary committee chaired by both sides of politics to oversee this scheme. Because we want a mechanism to lock in the support of the entire parliament.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
Mitch Fifield is with us. He’s the Coalition’s disabilities spokesman. Coming up to 5:20pm on 774 ABC Melbourne. Mitch Fifield. You will have seen the Myers’ CEO, Bernie Brookes, that the levy will take retail sales down another level. Now he has apologised for offending people. But do you agree that a levy on income tax hits consumer sentiment, effects consumer sentiment. Do you agree with that?
MITCH FIFIELD:
There’s no doubt that a levy does see money that would otherwise be in people’s pockets in the hands of government. We’re mindful of that because a lot of families are doing it tough …
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
… So the Myer CEO is right?
MITCH FIFIELD:
No. I’m saying that any tax increase hurts families. We recognise that. Which is why we are being very sober in our consideration of the Prime Minister’s proposal.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
I am sure that you’ve read more of the Productivity Commission’s NDIS report than I have. You know that it is essentially an investment in productivity. It puts more people into workforce. It actually generates more money.
MITCH FIFIELD:
It is an investment in productivity Raf. I have read the Productivity Commission report. And they said that the best option for funding the NDIS was consolidated revenue. The Prime Minister has told us in her view …
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
… But still, the Productivity Commission. You’re saying that a levy takes money out of consumers. Money that would go to shops. But the Productivity Commission, that’s not what they say is it? They say that it’s actually about a significant investment. Lifting productivity, putting more people into work.
MITCH FIFIELD:
The Productivity Commission is right. The NDIS is an investment in the Australian community that will lead to productivity benefits. Absolutely agree with that. The only point I was making Raf is that anytime you introduce a new tax, that’s an impost on families, many of whom are struggling. The Parliament always has to be sensitive and mindful when someone proposes a new tax. That’s why we want to be certain that the Prime Minister has a plan for how to fund the balance of the scheme.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
Will it be law by the time of the election, do you think? If you were making a bet.
MITCH FIFIELD:
The NDIS legislation to establish the scheme has passed through the Parliament. The Prime Minister has proposed a new law to establish a levy. We’re prepared to look at that. We think that the Prime Minister should provide full information on the eligibility criteria and she should provide full information as to how she intends to fund the balance of the scheme. We’re not looking to be difficult here Raf. Let me be clear about this. No one wants to see an NDIS in place more than I do. But we want there to be complete transparency in relation to who’s in and who’s out of the scheme and in relation to how the Prime Minister will fund this scheme.
RAFAEL EPSTEIN:
We will see what everyone thinks. Thank you for joining us. I appreciate it.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Thanks Raf.