Yet the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has recently passed through some of the deepest reforms possible to rein in its skyrocketing costs. Last year, the federal government, with bipartisan support, revised the NDIS framework to create a more sustainable model for funding supports for individuals with significant disabilities. In a span of just a few years, the NDIS has exploded into one of the federation’s largest and most expensive line items. Yet its expenses are projected to continue to climb at more than 20% a year.
The NDIS was always intended to fund these kinds of essential, life-affirming supports to Australians living with disabilities. We can all applaud that fact, but its growth trajectory has raised serious concerns among policymakers and taxpayers about its trajectory. Even as one works on stabilizing funding sources, the plan continues to grow. It has since ballooned to a vexing growth rate of more than 10% annually, despite bipartisan reforms passed in hopes of slowing its costs.
The Financial Burden of the NDIS
Key to discussions about the upcoming federal budget – live or die by the NDIS. Those rising costs have driven home the point that we can no longer afford to construct everything everywhere at any cost. We can’t afford to be penny wise and pound foolish. The program’s fiscal demands have been called “ambitious,” forcing officials to reconsider its funding landscape.
The impact of the National Disability Insurance Scheme’s fiscal trajectory was also recognised by Michael Sukkar, Assistant Minister for Housing. As he explained, “We actually have a funding envelope now, for the next four-year cycle. That’s a tall order, I must say, to bring growth down from the current level it’s at today.” This is an important statement to highlight the government’s recognition of the financial sustainability of the NDIS, and its statement to resolve this.
Furthermore, Sukkar emphasized the need for efficiency in public service, stating, “We have heard very clearly and absolutely on behalf of taxpayers we have got to get the best possible public service.” He maintained that to accomplish that goal, the agency has to lure top professionals and provide telework options to improve service which improves service delivery.
Bipartisan Support for Sustainable Reforms
The NDIS reform package is a welcome sign of bipartisanship from both major political parties. Understanding the failures of earlier policies to prioritize fiscal sustainability, legislators reached across party lines and restructured the NDIS’ foundational framework. This welcome bipartisan approach will go a long way to making sure that these fundamental supports are still delivered but at more sustainable levels.
I think my party has always believed that timing is everything and that policy needs to be implemented at the right time, Jane Hume, Liberal Party Treasurer. She stated, “It was a good policy that hadn’t found its appropriate time.” This recognition is important because, despite its merits, the success of the NDIS is dependent on its implementation and fiscal management.
The recent history of these reforms has been to support building a system that is flexible enough to move at the speed of an individual with a disability’s needs. They’ll be factoring in government budget constraints, too. By focusing on sustainability, policymakers hope to realign the NDIS with its foundational mission of providing vital support without overwhelming public finances.
The Future of the NDIS
Finding the right balance between ensuring that people with disabilities get the services they need and keeping federal spending in check will be critical. To do so, we would need to meet an annual growth target of 8.4%. Setting this rate will promote fiscal sustainability and ensure that people with disabilities get the care they deserve.
Debate and discussion on the NDIS continues. Policymakers are right to look at its role in the federal budget as a shining example of what is supposed to be its key role. The ongoing commitment to reform demonstrates a recognition of the need for responsible governance in managing one of Australia’s most significant social programs.
