Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Social Services. Will the minister update the House on how the government is providing certainty to people with disability that the services they rely on will be secure and sustainably funded? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the member knows, the NDIS is being implemented by the coalition, just as it was designed by Labor, to be a national insurance scheme. Eventually about two-thirds of the entrants will be Australians who were born with a disability and about one-third would have acquired a disability—the point being that any Australian or their family may come to need the NDIS.

That is precisely why it has always been viewed as fair that, for an insurance scheme, all Australians with some reasonable capacity should contribute a small amount, depending on that capacity. And who agrees that that is fair, as we noted yesterday? The disability sector, every single member of the coalition, everyone who was in Labor in 2013 and 75 per cent of the shadow cabinet now—and the list grows daily. John Della Bosca has said: 'The government has put money where its mouth is and is fully funding the NDIS, a victory for people who have fought so hard. We all have a role to play.' Craig Emerson has said: 'Labor should support the full Medicare levy rise. In doing so, it would lock in the NDIS.' So, with near universal agreement, why not just support the levy increase?

Keep in mind that Labor have now opposed the savings designed to fill the gap and opposed the revenue measures designed to fill the gap. There is only one explanation for why they will not agree to the levy increase, and that is a bloody-minded commitment to cling to the discredited myth that the scheme was 'fully paid for'. Why prioritise the myth that the member for Lilley fully funded the NDIS over the practical needs of 460,000 Australians when the member for Lilley cannot even explain it himself? Here is a summary as good as it gets in 2013, the best attempt at explaining the myth:

LEIGH SALES: So can I ask just a very simple question: will the budget … show where the money will be coming from …?

WAYNE SWAN: Absolutely. …

LEIGH SALES: So when I look at the budget in a few weeks, I will be able to say, "… here's exactly where the money's coming from"?

WAYNE SWAN: No, well, what you'll see is the forward estimates, but what you'll see is a general profile on what the Government has done over a period of time and may have done in this coming budget to make more headroom—

I do not even know whether 'headroom' is a budget thing, Treasurer! All of a sudden, the most important expenditure in Australia's history has become a Hyundai—headroom! And then he says:

… you want to have surpluses on average over the cycle … and that's the discipline that the Government is applying.

Even now, we have got to cut him loose! You have got to support— (Time expired)

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Treasurer, the budget forecasts that the bank tax will raise $1.6 billion in its first year. But the big four banks have reported that it will cost them just $965 million after tax in the first year.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McMahon will resume his seat. Members on my right, including the Leader of the House, are interjecting. I cannot hear the question. I am not going to keep doing this every question time. The member for McMahon will begin his question again.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. The budget forecasts that the bank tax will raise $1.6 billion in its first year. But the big four banks have reported that it will cost them just $965 million after tax in the first year. Does the Treasurer stand by the forecast for the bank tax in the budget which he brought down just two weeks ago?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do. If you go to table 9—if you want to follow along—at 5.18, the cash gross estimate for 2017-18 is $1.2 billion. That is on a cash basis.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

Yesterday was an accrual figure; that is the $1.6 million in 2017-18, which is on the fiscal balance. There is a difference between the two—underlying cash and fiscal. I am sure you can remember it.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McMahon will not interject.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is the figure for 2017-18, and that explains the difference between the numbers.