Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
ABC News Breakfast -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) police presence. Now, in a rare outbreak of

bipartisanship, yes, it can

happen, the Opposition and the

endorsed the Productivity Federal Government have

Commission's call for a

national disability insurance scheme. Canned views the

Opposition spokesman for

families, housing and human

services and he joins us

now. Good morning. Good to see

you again. Good morning. Can a

fund like this and it will be

big and significant and if and

when it's established very long

running, can a Commonwealth

Government actually fund it sustainably over the year Dos

you think? The Productivity

Commission have suggested two

models. One is the funding

comes essentially from

other is that there's a pooling consolidated revenue and the

of fund ing from by the

Commonwealth and the States.

This all has torque wonned out.

We have endorsed the

Productivity Commission's approach, frankly we are disappointed with the Government's response because

there is no funding identified

and there is no real time table

set out for it. But to answer

the question, there are a

number of models that could be

put in place. The governments

want to have time to look at

how best to fund it. Whether it

comes straight from

consolidated revenue or should

a Medicare style levy be

imposed to pay Pay for the

scheme would that be supported? The Productivity

Commission said this ought to

be core government business, so that means consolidated Reserve

you. They said if they can't

achieve that, then some sort of

pooled scheme involving the

States, remembering that at the

moment disability support is

funded not only by the

Commonwealth but also

significantly by the States. So they have to sign up to

they have to sign up to any

proposal. If it koim to laefy

is that something the Coalition

would support? We generally

oppose the levies. The product

commilt Commission said report that the Government commilt Commission said in its

should be looking to cut

expenditure which is un

necessary swre. Said that about

a whole range of issues. That

would be our first priority - get rid of unnecessary

spending. The other thing is if

we haven't wasted so much money

on pink batts and the like then

the millions needed to fund

this would be available for a

very significant cause. Getting

specific here for a moment,

what should the role of the

States be? States have to play

a role in this. The States are

the primary service deliverers

of a lot of services in

Australia. And they should

remain so. They should. It is

not the whole of the

Commonwealth to usurp the

States in this regard. The idea

that these decisions can be

better made in Canberra rather

than at a local level I think

is frankly ridiculous. So the

States have to play a role in

this and they should be an

integral part of any

response. The WA Premier David

Barnard has said that he won't

sign up if it means handing

over management of his State

disability plooms. What do you

think - programs. What do you

think of that? I think that is a listenable position to take

and I think most other State

also take a similar position.

NSW has haid Said where is the

money coming from. I expect all

the State also say that. They

will be looking for a fair and

equitable way in which this can

be put together. You've

obviously seen the coal face of

this issue. How important is it

for those with disabilitieses

and just as importantly their

families or their carers to

have access to a guaranteed

national scheme? Something has

to be done. I've seen this in

my extended family of and a

person born with brain injury.

Who lived for 50 years who was

a burden on - burden in the sense of the worry about how

you provide for economically on

ageing parents. Something has

to be done about. This it is a

tragedy for so many families. It

It causes enormous economic and

even relational problems in

families. So I don't think

there is any disagreement about

having to do something. What

we're disappointed about is

there doesn't seem to be the

fund to get on and do the job

and put a time table in

place. Is this then one issue

on which we don't necessarily

have to expect any quarrelling

or fighting between to major

sides of politics over

implementation or do you

reserve your right too dispute certain waits of

implementation? We will look at the detail the entire economic and fiscal given the circumstances that instance. How necessary is it - Well placed in this of faith in the Government sme. Leaving to side your lack I don't think it would prize they're shifting the goal posts with many other Australians. If surplus we will be prized along Government gets back to a lots of people lots of helpful advice from issues, firstly there's been work. Just on a couple of other ensured that this is going to see what is put in place and be on their ward word: We want to not simply going to take them whole range of areas. So we're implementing programs in a itself incompetent in this Government has proven the detail of that this because

trust? One thing the Government important than the question of economic question is more trust. Dhow You don't think the question is the question of the bik - given the economic importantly I think then even base of this, popular doesn't come to pass. At the whole range of issues an it whole because they say one thing on a trusting of this Government Australians are increase ly dis and trust and I a lot of the Government can be believe period? The question is whether get that surplus in that time important that the Government the moment is it really that and the world find itself in at circumstances that Australia

has to retain is trust. Yes,

governments have have to be

flex about programs from time

to time but they have to have a

basic degree of trust by the

Australian people. I think this

has been lost. So you don't

think this is one of those

basic issues on which they

actually do so some leeway and

be given change some given

changing economic times. No, at

this stage they haven't put up how they will actually deal

with the current situation, let

alone the future. We don't

believe that they're going to

get back to a surplus and I

think if they now change their

rhetoric it will be simply a

convenient excuse for them not

to achieve what they were never

going to achieve

anyway. Parliament is back next

week after the long winter

sojourn. I am looking forward

to it! I don't believe every

word you say. But it does appear the carbon tax campaign

run by the Coalition has lost

some steam largely as well as a

by-product of Tony Abbott's

absence on holidays. Have you

lost momentum here? Is there a

way you will try to pick it up

next week? I think Australians

have generally made up their

mind about the carbon tax.

Increasingly they don't like it

and they don't want Australia going alone ahead of the world.

And I think most people have

basically made up their

mind. So that will be something

you're still strongly pursuing

in the next Parliament? We will

pursue it and pursue this

Government up hill and down

dale because we think they're