Defence Portfolio
Mr PIKE (Bowman) (18:51): As the shadow assistant minister for the NDIS and for mental health, my phone has certainly been running hot over recent weeks, with a lot of stakeholders in both areas who are deeply disappointed with the government's budget. After denying reality on the NDIS for many years, in this budget Labor have finally recognised that the NDIS is not sustainable on its current growth trajectory.
The coalition is prepared to work constructively with the government in relation to the NDIS reforms that have been built into the forward appropriations of this budget, but I am highly sceptical of the Labor government's capacity to truly deliver the reform that the scheme needs. In the last quarterly report, scheme growth was up from 10.3 per cent to 11.3 per cent.
It's getting worse as we go along. That's despite the fact that at the start of this financial year the government was aiming for a growth trajectory of eight per cent, which then became five per cent and is now sitting at two per cent. While they've been setting all these targets, it's actually been growing in the wrong direction.
They're failing to land many of the reforms that they had promised previously that were going to bring the scheme under control. They've delayed the implementation of the ICANN tool. No stakeholders know anything about the Thriving Kids initiative, which is supposed to kick off in October.
The shadow minister for the NDIS touched on the massive fraud issues that we're seeing across the system, and the government's inability to deal with those issues. Many of the reforms that the government is now proposing are things that the coalition has been supporting for years, including functional assessments, stronger registration and digital payment controls.
These are all measures that the Labor government, in opposition, previously opposed. Our concern is that Labor is rushing cuts and eligibility tightening, while the real integrity reforms that we want to see in the scheme are going to be delayed for years and probably won't be fully implemented beyond the forwards of this budget. I note that neither of the NDIS ministers are present here today, but I have several questions.
Will the government detail how the projected $37.8 billion reduction in NDIS payments growth will be achieved? What specific assumptions are being made regarding participant numbers, plan growth, eligibility changes, foundational supports and fraud savings? When last in government, the coalition was ready to launch a new digital payment system.
It was something that the former minister, Bill Shorten, threw straight in the bin. Is the government using that as a basis for the design of the new digital payment system? How was the $300-plus million price tag on this initiative estimated?
Given the change to functional assessments, how will the government define which children will be eligible for Thriving Kids support and what thresholds or assessment tools will be used? Will access to Thriving Kids access be based on functional assessments or on diagnosis? With the October start date just around the corner, what is the specific design of the Thriving Kids initiative, and how will there be uniform implementation of services across each of the state jurisdictions?
What specific services and supports will be delivered under the $3 billion Foundational Supports program outside the NDIS? How will they differ from existing NDIS funded supports, and how much of this funding is being directed towards the Thriving Kids initiative? These are the questions that stakeholders are asking, and I hope the government members are nimble enough to try to provide some level of answer tonight.
In relation to mental health, this budget does not inspire confidence about the government's ambition for mental health reform. At a time when the sector is putting all hopes on the next national mental health and suicide prevention agreement, the budget papers are remarkably thin and only give more uncertainty. Only 12 months of extension of funding has been committed for the agreement.
The government claims negotiations are ongoing, but there is no clear funding envelope in the forwards for the agreement to continue, let alone be expanded. That is concerning because demand for mental health services is, of course, rising. Providers are under pressure and too many Australians are still missing out on critical psychosocial supports.
The last thing that anybody wants is vulnerable Australians falling through the cracks during periods of major system change. That's the worst possible time for them to get the settings wrong. The sector deserves far more certainty than what is being delivered through this budget.
In relation to mental health, these are answers that the sector and I are both crying out for. Given that many of the sector are pinning their hopes on a new, more ambitious agreement, why is the government not anticipating any new funding for the next years of the agreement? Does the absence of funding beyond 2026-27 indicate the government has no ambition for a new mental health and suicide prevention agreement?