6158.jpg

Jim Chalmers says Coalition hints at aggressive NDIS cuts will ‘send a shiver up the spine’ of recipients

The Coalition has hinted at a more aggressive approach to containing the cost of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) in comments treasurer Jim Chalmers says would “send a shiver up the spine” of people relying on the $47bn program.

The shadow finance minister, Jane Hume, said on Sunday that there was “more that can be done” to curb the scheme’s rapid growth.

Labor and the Coalition last year passed laws to overhaul the NDIS to help limit annual growth to 8% by 2026-27 after warnings the scheme was on track to cost $100bn per year.

The latest NDIS scheme actuary report expected the growth rate to fall to 8.4% in 2025-26, down from 12% this year.

“The NDIS is one of the areas in the budget that has run out of control – it was growing at 14% per annum,” Hume told Sky News.

“Now, when we went into opposition, the Coalition said to the government that we would work with them to rein in the spending and get it under control.

“It’s been brought back to around 8%. It looks like it’s going to be much higher than that this year, but it’s been brought under control somewhat.

“We think there’s more than can be done.”

Asked if the Coalition had a specific NDIS cost target in mind, Hume did not nominate a figure. Instead, she argued government spending should not outpace wider economic growth over the long term.

Chalmers seized on the comments, warning of “huge cuts” to the NDIS if spending growth was tied to GDP growth. The national economy grew at 1.3% in the 12 months to December, according to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures.

“This means huge cuts to the NDIS, and that would send a shiver up the spine of a lot of people who rely on the program,” Chalmers told Sky News.

“That is a very scary proposition.”

Coalition sources have confirmed the opposition has no plans to limit NDIS growth to GDP, clarifying that Hume’s comments were related to overall government spending, not expenditure on individual programs.


Source link

Tags: No tags

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Gravatar profile