E&OE TRANSCRIPT
TELEVISION INTERVIEW
SKY NEWS
WEDNESDAY 12 MAY 2021
 
SUBJECTS: Budget misses; re-opening Australia’s borders; lies and spin on NDIS spending; Independent Assessments.
 
TOM CONNELL, HOST: Welcome back. Well, a lot of Australians, of course, wondering when the borders might open. According to the budget, this is a forecast, not a Government promise, they'll be the middle of next year. One person not impressed with that appeared to be Bill Shorten. He joins me here in the studio. Thanks for your time. 

BILL SHORTEN, MEMBER FOR MARIBYRNONG: Hi Tom. 

CONNELL: So, borders shut until mid-2020, to which you seem to be disparaging of. You called the budget a nothingburger with a bad aftertaste. When should borders reopen?

SHORTEN: Well, how about the Federal Government deals with a number one issue in Australia and its budget - federal quarantine facilities. It's hard to open our borders until we're all vaccinated, until we've got a quarantine system which can cope with people coming to this country from other countries. It is amazing, Tom. This government could - you know, Josh Frydenberg gave one of the longest Treasurer addresses, at 40 minutes. He just forgot to mention federal quarantine facilities. So, to me, that's amazing, that there is nothing to fund federal quarantine facilities when Australia will need that in order to properly open up, in my opinion.

CONNELL: But isn't properly opening up not having quarantine, because we won't get a lot of visitors if they have to come here and wait 14 days.

SHORTEN: If we don't have quarantine facilities, then how on earth will we deal with the low to medium levels of international travel, which the budget forecasts before full tourism picks up in the middle of next year? This Government, you know they want to be at the opening of everything. They want a bunch of flowers for every announcement. They just don't want to do the hard work. I would have thought that they could have found in amongst their trillion-dollar debt, which they're going to put on future generations, just some money to build some federal quarantine facilities.

CONNELL: But again, isn't opening up about being vaccinated? I mean the tourism forum this week, put forward the proposal that once we get vulnerable Australians vaccinated, that's when we can open up. Isn't that the point, the mid 2022 target, isn't that talking about opening up without quarantine?

SHORTEN: Well, first of all, there's two issues. There's quarantine facilities and there's vaccination rollout. I mean, in the area which I look after for the opposition, Disabilities, they promised a disability plan for vaccination on the 22nd of February. You know, don't hold your breath waiting for that, because it's now nearly May the 22nd, three months later, and we haven't seen a sighting of their disability vaccination rollout plan. So, vaccination rollout, let's face it, they're in the toilet on that. And with quarantine facilities,

CONNELL: Right. 

SHORTEN: You would have thought they could have found something.

CONNELL: But for the full opening without quarantine, is mid-2022 a fair enough date?

SHORTEN: Well I just worry; this Government wants to talk about opening up after a federal election. You know, everyone, the pundits are saying this is an election budget. I mean, it's a lazy budget. It's got some risky assumptions. They're just trying to throw sugar around so that people re-elect them.

CONNELL: I mean, so if the vaccination date in the budget, the forecast, it's not their prediction, but their forecasts, should that align with opening up the borders? 

SHORTEN: Would have thought so. But I think this government just wants to - they're trying to copy from the states, look tough on borders so that they can get re-elected. Excuse me for being cynical, but if they wanted to be strong on the borders, they would have had federal quarantine facilities, wouldn't they? And they wouldn't have had such a slow vaccination rollout. But there's a couple of other things quickly in this budget which go to why I called it, a nothing budget. They promised a tax refund for nearly 10 million people, but it's only one off. So, we'll get past the election and then there's nothing there for anyone.

CONNELL: Well, just on that. So, Phase 2 of the income tax cut was the thing to replace the low- and middle-income tax offset, wasn't it?

SHORTEN: Well, that's what they said. But clearly, again, it's a bit of sugar to try and get people to vote for them.

CONNELL: But let's just clarify that. So Phase 2, they brought in this the lamington, as it's called, that I'll use that because it's a bit easier to say, as a stopgap until Phase 2 of the income tax cut came in once that came in, the lamington’s just a bonus, isn't it?

SHORTEN: Well, the point about it is that we're going to have low wages growth for the next two years - and there's no plan for the quarantine facilities. There's nothing on wages. And of course, there's a lot of risky assumptions that China will keep buying high priced iron ore for the indefinite future.

CONNELL: Well the assumption actually stays at fifty-five dollars a tonne on that.

SHORTEN: Well, the point about it is they keep saying that China is more and more risky, and yet economically, they're saying that China is a safe bet.

CONNELL: Well, they’re conservative on the iron ore price.

SHORTEN: But they're saying China is a safe bet. And the same time they've been saying it's a risk. But going to low wages -

CONNELL: Just on the lamington though, what are you saying? Are you saying keep it indefinitely?

SHORTEN: I'm saying that this is for the Government's budget. I mean, Labor will give its budget reply tomorrow night. And so, I'll leave those matters for then and we'll have our policies before the election.

CONNELL: But do you have a view on whether that should be permanent? 

SHORTEN: Well, I have a view that we should do more on wages. I have a view that we should be having policies in place which see people able to gain more permanent work, get out of the treadmill of casual and irregular employment. Their wages prediction says that inflation is going to go up by 3.5 per cent, the wages of something like 1.25 per cent, which means that people under this government are going to see a cut in their real wages power because inflation is going to outstrip wages growth.

CONNELL: Okay, but if you're criticising the government for this sort of one off for the low-income tax offset, are you saying you keep it?

SHORTEN: You and I both know that Labor's going to talk more about its policies before the election. That's one thing the opposition does have the luxury of doing, putting its policies out at this time.

CONNELL: I do want to get to the NDIS. 

SHORTEN: Yes, please.

CONNELL: So, you mentioned their rubbery figures, five billion extra from my reading is going in. It's not underfunded is it? Are you making that claim or?

SHORTEN: No, what happened is that the Government's been trying to roll out a new program to cut people's NDIS packages. They're called Independent Assessments. They're going to make four hundred and thirty-three thousand profoundly and severely disabled people reapply for the package they've got. This is causing lots of anxiety. The basis upon which the government's rolling out is stealth bombing mission of cuts is they're saying that the scheme is getting too expensive. Yet, the Government yesterday was saying, oh, it's going to cost X billion dollars by year 2024 - that's not news. In 2017, the government's own Productivity Commission said exactly what the funding trajectory would be, and that's exactly what it was. 

CONNELL: Well, not exactly. So, Commonwealth funding was supposed to be 56 per cent by 2028. It's going to be fifty-eight per cent next year. It's about a billion over this financial year and growing. So, it's close, but it is over budget.

SHORTEN: Well, first of all, the Government can save money in the NDIS by getting rid of the red tape and bureaucracy and returning it to the proper vision of the Scheme. 

CONNELL: Right, but it is slightly over budget.

SHORTEN: But you and I know the Government's trying to confect a political crisis. And on that basis of this fake crisis and numbers which are not new, numbers which have been around forever - 

CONNELL: But it is slightly over budget.

SHORTEN: But hang on a second - 

CONNELL: But that's true.

SHORTEN: The Government took four point six billion dollars out two years ago. And I know all these numbers are – 

CONNELL: But we're comparing the forecasted cost with the actual cost, which is actually over?

SHORTEN: Well hang on, let’s not move off the Government's atrocity two years ago, where they said in order to get their budget back in black, which they never did, they said that they could take four point six billion dollars out of the NDIS. Now they're saying that they need that money back in the NDIS. The reality is that the NDIS is working pretty much according to what the trajectories were.

CONNELL: Pretty much, yes. Slightly over, but pretty much.

SHORTEN: But it's not a crisis which is justifying the government rolling out a new scheme that make all people on the Scheme re-interview.

CONNELL: So just finally, on those Independent Assessments, though, is there anything wrong - can't these be done well and done carefully? An independent assessment should be the end of the world, surely?

SHORTEN: Why does a blind person need to prove they're blind again? Why does someone who's a quadriplegic need to prove they're a quadriplegic again? Why does someone with severe autism have to go and talk to a random stranger when they have treating allied health professionals and carers? 

CONNELL: People can become more capable when they've got a disability.

SHORTEN: Undoubtedly. But the point about this is that they're saying that basically too many people are getting into the Scheme that don't deserve to be there. And I don't buy that.

CONNELL: Well, what they're saying is maybe Independent Assessments are needed just for the integrity of it. That's okay, isn't it?

SHORTEN: Well, they're already getting assessments. There's almost supposition in the Government's faux crisis that somehow everyone who applies just gets in. They don't. And that somehow there's an assumption, what the Government says is up to now, the eight years that they've been running the Scheme, anyone who wanted a support package from the National Disability Insurance Scheme was getting it. That's not true. The reality is this Government is going to re-interview four hundred and thirty three thousand people. And I think that's a massive waste of money and time.

CONNELL: But human nature would suggest, though, someone's doctor is an advocate for them and that's a good thing. But it might mean they make someone eligible for the highest payment.

SHORTEN: So now we assume that all GPs, that their reports can't be trusted? 

CONNELL: I didn't say that, but there might – because human nature is that someone’s doctor - 

SHORTEN: But what you're saying – it’s not what you're saying, but you're saying that we can't trust allied health professionals not to be biased in favour of their patients. I'd want my doctor, and my allied health professionals, to be trying to get me the best care possible.

CONNELL: But if it’s borderline, your doctor was probably going to say, I want to help this person, let's put them up in this category, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but…

SHORTEN: I think the Government is saying that they don't trust the reports and that they want to get a stranger in. I tell you another aspect of human nature. If you had a child with severe autism, who you've been loving and cherishing, who’s been supported by speech pathologists and physios, why would you think that a stranger in a two hour interview is going to know better than you and all the people who've been, you know, embracing and supporting that precious child of yours?

CONNELL: It's an interesting question. We'll see what the assessments go.

SHORTEN: We're going to keep opposing the way they are structured now because of someone's got to stick up for the disabled.

CONNELL: Could you ever be open to assessments? Independent Assessments?

SHORTEN: There’s already assessments that go on. I just don't trust the - 

CONNELL: But a review. Would you ever be open to review or not?

SHORTEN: Well, I don’t trust this Government not to be using the reviews - 

CONNELL: Okay, but could Labor - you don't trust this government, but could an independent assessment be done well?

SHORTEN: It all depends on the circumstances of each person, as you could appreciate. If you've got two people with missing fingers, probably you can have a functional assessment. But for psychosocial conditions or neurological conditions like acquired brain injury or autism, every person is different.

CONNELL: Bill Shorten, appreciate your time today. 

SHORTEN: Yeah, great to talk, see you Tom.