Greens spokesperson for Disability Senator Jordan Steele-John has accused the federal Labor government of implementing a secret cost-cutting framework for the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) that is reducing participants’ plans without their knowledge. Senator Steele-John expressed his disappointment in Labor’s actions, as they had previously promised no cuts to the NDIS. He criticized the government for hiding behind public interest claims and denying the existence of the framework when asked for more information.
The issue gained attention when the federal government failed to provide the NDIS Financial Sustainability Framework, despite two separate Senate votes in favor of its publication. Senator Steele-John called on the government to be transparent and demanded a formal explanation for withholding the requested information.
The NDIS plays a crucial role in enabling disabled individuals to lead fulfilling lives, but it requires proper funding and support to be effective. Many members of the disability community feel deceived by Labor’s claims of no cuts in the last budget, and Senator Steele-John called for honesty regarding the government’s intentions with the scheme. The NDIS is projected to become the highest cost to the federal budget, surpassing Medicare, with a projected cost exceeding $50 billion by 2025-26.
In response to these allegations, a spokesperson from the Department of Social Services (DSS) stated that all measures taken to improve the NDIS operations have been made public. They cited the National Cabinet’s decision to set a growth target for the NDIS and the publication of the associated measures in the May 2023-24 Federal Budget. The spokesperson also highlighted the independent review of the NDIS established by the government and the continued increase in participant support funding.
NDIS Minister Bill Shorten emphasized the government’s commitment to the scheme and its intention to make it more efficient. He regarded the NDIS as an investment and acknowledged the need to address inconsistencies in outcomes. Shorten expressed his belief that running the scheme in the best interests of participants would address concerns about the rate of cost growth.