Jason Wood (La Trobe, 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 the benefits the rollout of the National Disability Insurance Scheme will bring to people with disability, their families and their carers? How will these reforms be fully funded, and are there any alternatives?

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

I thank the member for La Trobe for his question. As the member is so very well aware, when the NDIS is fully operational it is going to provide coverage to each and every Australian, all of our own families, whether you have acquired a disability through the course of your life or were born with a disability. One example that was briefed to me earlier was the example of a 40-year-old participant who may have suffered a brain injury due to a physical assault at an earlier age when insurance support was not available. If that person enters the NDIS at age 40 and has 30 years inside the NDIS, the estimate is that they will be supported to the amount of about $110,000 a year. That is $3.3 million in care and support. That is available to each and every Australian and to our families, should we need it. That is why we say that, given everyone benefits, it is fair that everyone with a reasonable capacity to pay does pay a little bit.

I am asked about alternatives by the honourable member. That is a slightly tricky question, because there have been so many alternatives from members opposite that it is hard to keep count. I recall six so far, and counting. The sixth comes from the shadow Treasurer, and it is probably the most recent and bizarre. Alternative 1: Labor says they do not leave a funding gap, so there is no problem, nothing to see here. Alternative 2: Labor says that the funding gap that they say does not actually exist does need to be filled, but just not by the mechanism that they used to say was the only fair way to fund the NDIS. Alternative 3: all of Labor in 2013 said that the 0.5 per cent increase in the Medicare levy was the fair way to fund the NDIS. Alternative 4 is that, in 2017, 75 per cent of the shadow cabinet say it is still the fairest way to fund the NDIS. Alternative 5 is that the notable exception to the 75 per cent is the Leader of the Opposition, who said in 2013 that it was completely dumb to oppose the 0.5 per cent increase and now says that it is completely dumb to support the 0.5 per cent increase.

That brings us to alternative 6. Some theoretical physicists believe in multiverses: infinite universes in space, time, matter, energy and public policy. Maybe the proof is here with us. The shadow Treasurer, when asked a direct question on the Medicare levy, slipped up on radio, because he actually said what he really thought. He thought we should accept the Medicare levy but just not use it to fund the NDIS. This is what he said:

The changes before us, the proposals before us are that every Australian over an income of $21,000 should have a tax rise. Now, we accept the need for that.

That is right! The shadow Treasurer said:

… we accept the need for that. We don't accept the rationale of the NDIS link …

So alternative universe 6 is that they want the Medicare levy increase but not to spend on the NDIS. (Time expired)