Sky News Saturday Agenda with David Lipson
LIPSON:
Mitch Fifield joins me now from Melbourne. Mitch Fifield thanks for your time today. First of all, let’s go to some of those questions raised by Frank and Ara. Mental Health first of all perhaps, harder to define than other disabilities if you like. How are you addressing that? How are you approaching that as the Minister responsible?
FIFIELD:
David, I think it’s important to recognise that we’ve come a fair way from the Productivity Commission’s interim report which didn’t envisage the NDIS providing supports to people with mental health issues. The final report of the Productivity Commission recommended that 57,000 people who have mental health issues be included in the scheme. It’s primarily a situation where people have a chronic mental health condition that affects them in a functional way. And what the NDIS will do is to seek to provide supports for those people who have a functional impairment as a result of their mental health issue. The NDIS won’t be seeking to provide clinical supports, and it won’t be seeking to replace the health system because, as Frank Quinlan quite rightly says, we believe in a recovery model of mental health. And the way that mental health is approached in Australia today is that the majority of mental illnesses people can recover from and can go onto lead good lives.
LIPSON:
Okay, so what about then the concern that both Frank and Ara raised about the potential for creating as he described it, an oasis in the desert. That people who are being cared for under the current system, that fear they won’t be eligible for the generous benefits offered by the NDIS.
FIFIELD:
Look I can understand the concern, because there are some existing programs that are being rolled into the NDIS. But what we have to make sure is that people who need the support continue to get the support. And just to take carers as an example. It may well be that there are some people who have caring responsibilities, and that the people that they support are not in fact eligible for the NDIS. And so, we’ve got to make sure that there is still appropriate supports for those people. But that is part of the purpose of the NDIS trial sites, is to see what works, is to see what isn’t working and to make adjustments to the NDIS and other programs as is needed. David I think this issue of concern that Frank and Ara have expressed is one that’s been exacerbated by the decision of the previous government to bring forward the commencement of the trial sites by a year. It means that a lot of these questions which may have been answered and addressed before the commencement of trials, are in fact being looked as while they’re ongoing. So I’m keenly aware of the issues that Frank and Ara raised and we’ll make full use of the trial sites to address those.
LIPSON:
With those difficulties in mind, can you still guarantee that the NDIS will be delivered on time?
FIFIELD:
The timeframe for the NDIS is embedded in intergovernmental agreements between the Commonwealth and the States and Territories and we are in the process of honouring those agreements. But Frank referred to the capability review that the independent board of the NDIS commissioned, which found that bringing forward the trial sites had compromised some of the key capabilities of the NDIS. As a result of that, the independent board of the Agency has commissioned KPMG to make an assessment of the Agency’s capabilities for delivering the NDIS. And one of the things that they will look at is whether the timeframe that is in those intergovernmental agreements is consistent with delivering a good scheme. And we’ll receive that advice from the board in, I think, around a month.
LIPSON:
Do you see as the Minister any data that perhaps may suggest that delaying a little bit may actually make the scheme more sustainable?
FIFIELD:
Well, what we have to go on at the moment is the capability review, commissioned by the board which raised the issue of the consistency of the current timeframes with delivering a good scheme. KPMG are going to take a further look at that.
LIPSON:
Sure. If it is delayed though it will be easier though for the Government to afford it, to pay for on current budget projections won’t it? And that may actually make it easier to convince people who are going to start seeing the Medicare levy increase from July this year, accept it?
FIFIELD:
David, we are committed to the full roll out of the NDIS. We’re committed to working within the funding envelope, which at full roll out is about $22 billion. We’re not looking for ways to delay the NDIS. What we’re doing are looking for ways to ensure that we can deliver it, and deliver it well.
LIPSON:
Is there any scope for a figure in terms of the cost, greater than $22 billion that has been estimated?
FIFIELD:
Well $22 billion is the funding envelope that we are working within. There have been some concerning discoveries that have been made about some of the bilateral agreements that the previous government entered into for the trial period, which show that over the trial period it’s possible could exceed costs by about $400 million. That’s a concern. We’re keeping a close eye on it. And that’s a function of the fact that, as I say, the trial commencement dates were brought forward by a year. That meant that data wasn’t as good as it could be.
LIPSON:
So what happens then if it ends up being more expensive than you had expected. Is that dollar figure capped, or what will happen if there is further blow outs I suppose? Will there be more efficiencies if you like in the services that are being provided, or is there scope for the dollar figure to increase?
FIFIELD:
David, we want to make sure that scheme is as efficient as it possibly can be. That the dollars get through to the people who need the support. All Australian governments, Commonwealth, State and Territory, have committed to very generous contributions to the NDIS, as is appropriate, given that the scheme is about supporting a group of people in the community who have been chronically neglected for decades. That’s appropriate. But we are determined to operate within that $22 billion funding envelope.
LIPSON:
And the Medicare levy increase from July this year, that won’t cover entirely will it, the $11.7 Billion of the Federal Government is going to ultimately put in. Where’s the rest going to come from? Do you know?
FIFIELD:
Well David we did support the increase in the Medicare Levy to part fund the scheme. And, you’re right, it doesn’t cover the full cost of the Commonwealth’s additional contributions. It does over the forward estimates, but beyond the forward estimates as the scheme rollout ramps up, it eventually comes down to about 42% of the Commonwealth’s additional contribution to the scheme. So what that means is that we as a Government will have to prioritise. We as a Government will have to identify savings in other areas. It’s not true, as the previous government led the community to believe, that they had fully covered the costs of the scheme. They hadn’t. It will fall to the Coalition to do that. And we will.
LIPSON:
Okay well just before I let you go, I do want to ask you about another story which is pensions. Which has got more and more of a mention in the press over the last couple of days. Potential for changes perhaps in the budget. Now I know you can’t speculate what’s in and what’s out of the budget, but just generally do pensions need to be made for sustainable? The pension system?
FIFIELD:
David, the first point I’ll have to make, and you’ll forgive me for doing this, is that the Labor Party are standing in the way of relief for pensioners. They voted against the repeal of the carbon tax, which would provide relief for pensioners. We are also committed to the legislated compensation that was to help pensioners in the wake of the carbon tax. But David, one of the reasons why we’ve had Intergenerational Reports, that were kicked off by Peter Costello, and we have things like the Commission of Audit, that we’ve initiated, is because it’s important for governments to look at both the fiscal and demographic context of policy decisions. And that’s what we’re going to be doing across the board in this budget. And you like me David, will have to wait, not too long, to see what is there in May.
LIPSON:
Just on those fiscal and demographic processes as you describe them. As they are running at the moment, is that system sustainable?
FIFIELD:
David, I think we’ve got to look at the pension not as an objective for people to get on to, but we’ve got to see it as a safety net. We have an ageing population, and I’ve got to say that’s a good thing. That’s the sort of challenge that we as a western advanced society have been working towards for generations. And I think that ageing population represents a huge community asset which we’ve yet to fully tap. With an ageing population we are going to need to draw upon that part of the community to be in the workforce. And we have plans such as a bonus for employers who take on people over the age of 50, who’ve been unemployed for some time. We want to see more older Australians continue in the workforce. They have a great contribution to make. And we’ve got to see an ageing population not as a negative thing, but as a terrific opportunity and as a terrific asset for Australia.
LIPSON:
Senator Mitch Fifield, thanks so much for answering our questions today.
FIFIELD:
Thanks very much David.