Transcript
ABC News 24
With Melissa Clarke
18 December 2013
4:30pm
E & OE
Subjects: NDIS, Sophie Mirabella
MELISSA CLARKE:
Mitch Fifield, thanks for joining us.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Thank you.
MELISSA CLARKE:
Now the Government wants to make the NDIS more cost effective, how do you do that?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well, I would hope that all political parties want the NDIS to be as cost effective as possible. The alternative to that is that it’s cost ineffective. The NDIS is something that Australians with disability have waited for, for a long time. They deserve a better deal, and what we want to make sure is that as much of the money that is allocated for the scheme as possible gets to those people that need the support.
MELISSA CLARKE:
Where are the areas that you would change to make it more cost effective? Where are the problem areas?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well, we’ve had one quarter of the NDIS launch sites so far. What we’ve found in the launch site quarterly results is that average package costs are about 30% higher than anticipated and it’s taking twice as long to get people through the process and to set them up in the scheme. So we have asked with other Australian governments through the COAG process for the NDIS Agency to report for the next meeting of COAG as to what some of the cost drivers might be and what other things can be done to improve the implementation of the scheme. And I think it’s important to recognise that this is something that all Australian governments asked for at the COAG meeting last week. All First Ministers asked for this work to occur, and this morning I was chairing the COAG ministerial council on the NDIS and we’ve been tasked with providing that information for the next meeting of COAG.
MELISSA CLARKE:
And certainly that will be critical because if that finding of what the costs are behind this 30% higher than anticipated costs are if that’s something like overheads, or administration or problems with the processes, that you might be able to change. But if it’s just that the calculations that were made in trying to forecast these costs are wrong and to deliver what disabled people under this scheme actually need just costs more than anticipated, what do you do then? Do you stick with the same funding envelope or do you accept that perhaps the initial costs were underestimated and that you need to spend more to meet the needs?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well it’s important that we have the work done to understand why it is that average package costs are higher than anticipated. Once we’ve received that work which will be provided to the next meeting of COAG we’ll be in a position to see what steps need to be taken. But, it’s important to be crystal clear that the Government is absolutely committed to delivering the NDIS in full. And we’re committed to honouring the funding envelope.
And I just think it’s really disappointing that while I was chairing the ministerial council meeting this morning, Bill Shorten and Jenny Macklin were out and about seeking to scaremonger, while I was actually sitting down with ministers getting on with the job of implementing the NDIS. The Labor Party could not resist the temptation to try and make this a partisan issue, to try and scare people with disabilities. That should not be the approach. We should work through this together.
MELISSA CLARKE:
Mitch Fifield, there is concern from some within the disability sector though that yesterday we had the budget update where we had both the Treasurer and the Finance Minister putting a lot of emphasis on the fact that the budget is in a poor state and that saving need to be made and in the same breath talking about having cost efficiencies in the National Disability Insurance Scheme. You can see why people are concerned that two and two might equal four, and if the Government is looking for cost savings and warning that everyone needs to be ensuring that they’re doing their bit to help the budget bottom line and return to surplus, you can understand why they might fear that that might mean that either some people might miss out, or not be eligible or that the roll out might be delayed?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well, I can understand people with disability being concerned when Bill Shorten and Jenny Macklin spend all of today and last night trying to cause fear, trying to cause concern. The point that the Treasurer made yesterday is that we want this NDIS to be as efficient as it possibly can. And what that means is ensuring that taxpayers get value for money. But also, that the people that the scheme will support get the maximum value of each dollar that’s available. That’s what we’re talking about. We’re committed to delivering this scheme, we’re committed to the funding envelope, we just want to make sure that the scheme is the best that it can possible be.
MELISSA CLARKE:
What about the time frame? You say you are committed to the scheme and the funding envelope, are you still committed to having it fully rolled out by 2019?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well the timeframe is something that is embedded in the bilateral agreements between the Commonwealth and jurisdictions. We said that we will honour those bilateral agreements and we’re in the process of implementing them as we speak. This was part of the purpose of the ministerial council meeting this morning that I chaired. This is a shared venture of all jurisdictions. This isn’t just a Commonwealth project. This is something that all Australian governments have committed to deliver. And today I was working with Labor Ministers and Greens Ministers about how to implement the NDIS. And First Ministers at COAG last week restated their commitment for the full delivery of the NDIS. And they did what you would expect them to do once you’ve got the first quarter’s results. They asked for my ministerial council and the NDIS Agency to come back with advice as to why the figures are trending as they are. We’ll do that work, we’ll report back and we’ll work collectively with all governments to make the NDIS a reality.
MELISSA CLARKE:
And in this meeting, obviously you’re getting information from those ministers in states that are hosting the trials, and each trial site is different in the way it’s being formulated, is it too early to say yet, or do you have any indication to say whether one system is working better than another? Or perhaps some advantages to some trials over the others, that you have been able to guage at this early stage?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Well the four trial sites which have commenced in Geelong, the Hunter Valley, Tasmania and South Australia are all following the same model. The only difference between the launch sites is that the Hunter Valley and Geelong are comprehensive sites covering all age cohorts. Tasmania and South Australia are focusing on particular youth cohorts. The whole purpose of the trial sites, the launch sites, is to learn lessons, is to test, and to take those lessons and learn from them before the scheme is fully rolled out. That was always the intention of the trial sites, I know some in the Opposition are getting a little excited about the fact that we’ve referred to the launch sites as trial sites, but we’re doing that to emphasise that there are lessons to be learnt. That’s the whole purpose of these sites. We are determined to learn from them so that we can make any necessary adjustments before the scheme is rolled out in full.
MELISSA CLARKE:
And Mitch Fifield, just very briefly before we let you go. One of your former colleagues Sophie Mirabella has been appointed to the board of the Australia Submarine Corporation. Is she the right person for the job or is this a case of jobs for the mates as we often see when governments change?
MITCH FIFIELD:
No, she is absolutely the right person for the job. She was the shadow for industry for a long time. The Australian Submarine Corporation is a significant industrial venture. She’s got a first class mind. It’s an appointment made purely on the basis of merit.
MELISSA CLARKE:
Mitch Fifield thanks very much for joining us.
MITCH FIFIELD:
Thanks Melissa.
ENDS