E&OE TRANSCRIPT
SUBJECTS: Sustainability of the NDIS, NDIS costs and spending
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Reining in the cost of the National Disability Insurance Scheme isn't an easy task. The government plans to reduce spending on the programme by $15.3 billion over the next four years. One of the companies involved with the scheme is now calling for means tested co-payments to bring down the costs and empower clients similar to the childcare model. The Minister for the NDIS is Bill Shorten and he joins us this morning. Bill Shorten, welcome.
BILL SHORTEN, MINISTER FOR THE NDIS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES: Oh good morning, Patricia.
KARVELAS: Kismet is an online platform that matches people with a disability with NDIS providers. It's told The Australian newspaper that co-payments are the logical way to reduce the cost of the scheme, also means testing. Is that something that you would consider?
SHORTEN: No.
KARVELAS: Why not?
SHORTEN: Well, I think the challenges in the scheme are not to do with asking people with profound disability to co-contribute. I think that's a very simplistic proposition, to be honest. I'm not going to pretend I'm going to give it too much oxygen. The challenges in the scheme, as we've articulated many times, and we will keep articulating, I think, to make sure that every dollar in the scheme gets to the people for whom it was originally designed. Now, that starts with the federal agency improving its capability. And in the Budget, there's a record number of new jobs being created at the agency to make sure that we can provide that specialisation and capability. And we're converting people who are labour hire in the agency to permanency. We want to have longer term planning. I think the annual planning process, which many participants go through, means the focus is on the annual plan. Whereas for a lot of people with permanent disability, it's dehumanising to be asked, are you still blind? Do you still have down syndrome? Are you still a quadriplegic? So I think if we take a longer term focus, I also think if we tackle spiralling price costs and price gouging by companies and service providers, I think then we can also lower the trajectory of growth. I think there is a challenge around supported independent living. These are special packages of 7/24 support for people who are profoundly disabled. I'm not sure that's working exactly as hoped. I did a forum with Libby Coker down in Leopold on the Bellarine Peninsula yesterday of 120 participants, and when I offered these views, there was a lot of nodding, head nodding in the room. But I can guarantee you that whatever companies proposing that people with disability have to pay more to deal with their permanent disability, I'd like that company to test it with participants and see how popular that is…
KARVELAS: Yeah.
SHORTEN: …because it's just- it's not the- it's not looking at the- what that proposal says is we should get disabled people to pay more rather than actually dealing with the inefficiencies in the scheme. It's a surrender to say, let's- this is too hard to reform, so let's just ask people, many of whom are very poor, pay more money.
KARVELAS: But they say it's based on the childcare model. Does- don't you think the childcare model- I mean, you back that. Why does it work…?
SHORTEN: It’s a different system. It's a different system. When we have a lifelong disability, it's for life. The reality is that one of the greatest predictors of poverty in Australia is disability. The- I want to see the scheme have a- be better run, but I don't think that the only way- I think it's a failure of reform. It's a surrender of imagination. It's the tyranny of low expectation to say the only way that we can change the cost base of the scheme is by making people with disability that pay more. That gives a leave pass to the inefficiencies, to the price gouging, to the anti-competitive practises of some providers. It gives the leave pass to the Australian Government at all levels to provide support outside the scheme for people with disabilities. One of the biggest challenges is that now the NDIS exists, everyone says that every disability issue is an NDIS issue which it was never intended to be. So if you just go down the sort of simplistic, and that's me being polite, oh, let's get profoundly disabled people to pay more money, that doesn't change all of the inefficiencies I mentioned. How does that change a service provider ripping people off?
KARVELAS: Yeah. So you've been talking since you were elected in the language of profound disability when it comes to the NDIS, but not everyone on it is on a profound- has a profound disability. Does your language imply that you think people who don't have profound disability should not be on the NDIS?
SHORTEN: My language is the language of the legislation. There’s nothing…
KARVELAS: But there are people who don't have profound disabilities.
SHORTEN: Oh, if you know of tens of thousands of people on the scheme you don't think are eligible, feel free to…
KARVELAS: No, no. That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm just talking about the definition.
SHORTEN: No, no, but- Patricia, it is actually what you're suggesting. I'm not changing any definitions. What I'm saying is there's legislation. It says that you've got to have a look at the nature of your disability. But I don't think- again, the problem or the challenge with the NDIS is that so much of the debate, and it's partly due to the negligence of the last nine years of the incompetent landlords of the Federal Government, the Coalition, that everything is now being looked at, saying the NDIS is a bin fire and we've just got to cut costs. Of course people want to make sure that every dollar is spent wisely. No one wants to see every dollar spent more wisely than people with disability. But I don't accept a couple of basic propositions. One is that we should be asking people with disability to contribute to a government scheme when in fact they don't have much money to begin with. I don't accept the proposition that there's tens of thousands of people who are somehow having a lend and just on the scheme when they don't deserve to be. I know some people think there are, but when you actually get behind a person's individual circumstances, there aren't. This scheme is changing lives.
KARVELAS: Yeah, look, there's no doubt. But let me just move on if I can, Minister.
SHORTEN: Sure. Of course.
KARVELAS: Disability workers say they're being underpaid by thousands of dollars by NDIS providers with the Australian Services Union in New South Wales and the ACT alleging 10 per cent of providers are self-reporting the underpayment of staff. Now, you've issued a warning to businesses to stop underpaying their workers. Is that all you can do?
SHORTEN: No. I'm grateful to the Union for raising the issue. I beg your pardon. It is appalling that anyone would take advantage of disability workers, modestly paid disability workers, who support the most vulnerable. So the National Disability Insurance Agency is going to work with the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman regarding these reports. I want the agency, the Disability Insurance Agency, to work with the Fair Work Ombudsman who are in charge of checking wage breaches, to investigate and identify action to tackle underpayment. And I want to see an immediate audit started. I've said to the union we want to see the evidence. But again, unlike my predecessors, if someone comes to you with bad news, I don't immediately shoot the messenger. I take the unions seriously. And if there are- essentially if there are companies who get paid money from the participant who stands in the shoes of the Commonwealth Government, so the disabled person pays a company for hours of care, if the company is getting paid – these numbers are just for more illustrative purpose than real award numbers, but if a company is getting paid to pay a worker $32 an hour and the company's only paying the worker $27 an hour or $24 an hour, that's not on.
KARVELAS: Look…
SHORTEN: It's just simply wrong.
KARVELAS: Bill Shorten, a report from late last week found internal modelling predicted there would be 27,000 less participants than previously predicted in the NDIS as the Government plans to save over $15 billion over the next four years. Is that accurate?
SHORTEN: In the future. In the future, I think that we can, but that's not a number for next year, by the way.
KARVELAS: So when is there going to be 27,000 less participants?
SHORTEN: Well, I know it's always dangerous for politicians to do it, but there's a mistake in the article. The mistake in the article says: Mr Shorten did not respond directly when asked by the West if he acknowledged budget numbers would slow. We wrote back to this journalist at 12pm on Sunday. Today's Wednesday. But anyway, that's life. We've made our disagreement clear to the journalists this morning.
What the journalist is saying is they've read, and full marks for doing a bit of homework and reading the forwards. In year 26-27, so that’s not now…
KARVELAS: Twenty-six, 27, yeah.
SHORTEN: Yeah. We estimate that as a result of reforms that the initial projection could be lowered by the number of the people on the scheme by 27,000. So that's no one on the scheme right now being booted off.
KARVELAS: Sure. But it means- no, but it refers to eligibility though, Minister. It means that 27,000 will no longer be eligible, right?
SHORTEN: No. What it actually- what we're getting at- again, this is very important We're precise because I don’t- I see the Greens are up to their old bag of tricks of scaring everyone and saying the scheme shouldn't be touched because it's too hard to fix up. What this means for adults is that we believe that if we can set up supports outside the scheme in the area of psychosocial support, maybe not everyone needs to go on the scheme who might have otherwise gone on the scheme. You've heard me speak ad nauseam in the past that the NDIS shouldn't be the only life raft in the ocean, and we believe that with our reforms we can improve it. We also think that if we do better planning with people, we can see some people, and it's only some proportionately, a very small proportion of the total number, actually not need the same support in the scheme that they once did.
KARVELAS: Okay. So 27,000, it is accurate then, in the future of diverting them from the scheme.
SHORTEN: It's our forecast, yeah. In 26-27…
KARVELAS: So they are the people that you do want to avoid going on the scheme.
SHORTEN: No, I think- sorry if I wasn't clear, I apologise. I said that we think that if we build our supports outside the scheme, some people mightn’t need to come to the scheme. But I also…
KARVELAS: Yeah, they'll be doing other supports is what you're saying.
SHORTEN: Yes, but I also said- yeah. The reality is the NDIS can't look after every disabled person in Australia, but at the moment I think there's insufficient supports outside. And that's not just a comment about the states – federal departments, local government, we can do more. But I also said that some of that potential change is through making sure that we've got greater employment support for people with disability, and some of them won't need some of the support in the scheme.
KARVELAS: Okay, I just want to move on, Minister. We've learnt that the union delegates at the NDIS Commission have been directed to remove information about the referendum from their officers’ union, yes information. Can you confirm that that's been the case, and have you spoken to the Commission about this?
SHORTEN: I found out about this yesterday evening at about 6pm, 7pm. I understand, and my office has made clear to the Commission, if the union wants to put up something on its noticeboard about the referendum, this is not the end of western civilisation and I've got no problem with it going up.
KARVELAS: Can you…
BILL SHORTEN: So…
KARVELAS: Okay, because they say that the Public Service Act prohibits it.
SHORTEN: I think- I don't know about that. I don’t- my gut reaction is that a piece of paper saying vote yes in the referendum on a pin board or a whiteboard in a kitchen is not an affront to the law. So, again, I'm not going to micromanage every workplace in Australia. You'd be interested to know, or maybe not but I'll share it with you anyway, that I literally have about 37,000 public servants working to me, working and doing a great job, working across hundreds of offices. There appears to have been an issue in a noticeboard in an office. It's not my job to micromanage and no one and would expect that, but as a general principle the ability of a union to put a notice up on a noticeboard doesn't impede productivity. And I think information on the referendum is valuable.
KARVELAS: Before I let you go, moving to the RBA. Jim Chalmers revealed on this show last week that he'll make a decision on the Governor's future next month. Do you think Phil Lowe should go?
SHORTEN: That'll be a matter for Jim to present to the Cabinet. And…
KARVELAS: I know, but are you concerned about the decision making of the Governor?
SHORTEN: I think it would be inappropriate of me to comment. Now. I do think- I'm concerned for mortgage holders and how they're coping with the rate rises. But no, I think it would be not right for me to make a public comment on that.
KARVELAS: Next week, they…
SHORTEN: We've got a process and the Treasurer is doing a great job.
KARVELAS: Yeah, and they’re considering of course another interest rate rise. Is that something that you think mortgage holders can take?
SHORTEN: I don't know every individual’s circumstances, but I can appreciate that mortgage holders are being- are doing it very hard at the moment. So I'm not about to say that another rate rise would be good for most mortgage holders. It clearly wouldn't be. They'd rather not have it, I'm sure. I don't need to do a poll or I don't need to even read a newspaper to work that out. It’s tough.
KARVELAS: Should Taylor Swift tickets, Minister, be off limits to scalpers?
SHORTEN: Listen, my gut reaction is anyone who's seeking to carve a margin above the registered price is being opportunistic. It's not behaviour I support. I know that in the past different governments have put in limits on what scalpers can do. I'd just say to people who think that it's good to rip off a family or some teenage girls who want to go and listen to Tay Tay, really? Is that your business model? Really? Get a life.
KARVELAS: Are you one of the many parents in Australia today trying to secure yourself Tay Tay tickets?
SHORTEN: I did take my middle daughter to Tay Tay when she last came out to Marvel Stadium. It was interesting. A lot of mums there, a few dads. Although I have discovered that there's an argument amongst some of the millennials about the merits of Tay Tay versus Lana Del Rey, but I'm just- we're really heading- can we go back to talking about the NDIS? I'm really out of my comfort zone.
KARVELAS: I’m about to say bye to you. Yeah, I can see that.
SHORTEN: [Laughs]
KARVELAS: You need to calm down.
SHORTEN: [Laughs] Yeah.
KARVELAS: Sorry, that was quoting a lyric. Shake it off, Minister. See you later.
SHORTEN: I'll shake it off, bye.
KARVELAS: That’s the Minister for the NDIS and Government Services, Bill Shorten, and you’re listening to RN Breakfast.