🧵1/ NDIS, some facts to help with the "Blame NDIS" deflect and distract talking points.

I had wanted to do a comprehensive NDIS thread, instead I'll post this as MYEFO is out tomorrow and 'leaks' to News Corp have begun already.
2/
When Labor was developing NDIS it was fully costed. The initial productivity commission work was revalidated by the government actuary (to appease the Liberals). The table below is from the actuaries report showing $22B cost in 18/19.
So costs were known
3/
More than known, the Liberals made a point of saying the big bad number in their parliamentary speeches.

The costs in 18/19 were lower than forecast, but this was because of liberal incompetence making the rollout go slowly AND then used to create the 'back in black' surplus
4/
Labor in their wisdom then legislated to have details quartely reports to ensure issues were identified asap. Bill Shorten passed that law in June 2013.
So everyone knew the costs from the start and knew the progress every quarter since.
5/
To give you an idea of the abundance of information to show progress, here is one year of NDIS reports

The rollout mismanagement (slow to sign ppl up), led to lower NDIS costs than forecast. Shown here is the forecast spend (16.7B) and the actual spend ($12.9B) for 18/19
6/
The chasm is shown across all years here, including an attempt by the Liberals to "Reset" the rollout. They even failed to deliver to their 'Reset' plan. The $4B underspend was key to that imaginary surplus.
7/
Every year the Liberals keep saying NDIS costs to justify more Medicare levy. The Libs couldn't allow the NDIS 2 B seen as successful, so they kept inventing 'Labor bad' stories. Then Turnbull/Morrison had to concede that NDIS was funded (only b/c of their economic skills)
8/
Then Scott started other stories about rellocating for droubt funding etc.
9/
Of course the "Back in Black" budget fantasy was also reliant in the poor rollout speed, leading to a massive underspend.
10/
Another feature which does not get the credit it deserved was the wages harmonisation. Prior to NDIS there were over a hundred wages agreements across the sector nationwide. What became known as the SACS case was the determination needing to be made by the fair work
11/
commissioner to establish a consistent wage across the country for the different people doing NDIS work. Some people say that this was overlooked. It wasn't and the forecast for the increase in wages was legislated into a funding reserve. This 'special fund' was designed
12/
to make wages adjustments over 10 years. This ended last year and the Liberals somehow say it's a surprise. BUT it appears in the budget every year and the balance grew fatter as a result of the slow rollout. That $500M underspend is missing from the economy!
13/
I am proud of NDIS, I think all Australia should be proud of the NDIS, the way a society treats the most vulnerable is a measure of a society's success. Negotiating with every state to create a nationwide scheme is nothing short of remarkable.
14/
😃WELL DONE NEARLY FINISHED: In 2008, when Labor formalised Australia as a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities the country chose to move away from a 16 century nation state model for people with disabilities.
15/
The poor laws on 1601 entrenched the model of government control with church & charity determination for what disabled were provided with. It's a fascinating evolution.
What the NDIS did was make self determination the goal, people having the chance to control their own lives
16/
This is the end, for those who aren't familiar with John Walsh, he was instrumental in designing a people centric NDIS model.
Hope this has made sense and helped identify the Liberal/News Corp propaganda.
Well Done Labor #AlboForPM #NDIS

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with #Mate

#Mate Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SuxHypocrisy

14 Dec
1/ $66M Because the Liberals didn't foresee more pandemic leave being needed?
Bizarre🤔A special appropriations determination that is exempt from parliamentary scrutiny (can't be disallowed) was raised last Saturday.
It goes to the NRRA who have $200M+ in unspent money.
#Auspol
2/ The explanatory memorandum has some clues;
👉to do this, the money must be "Urgent" & "unforeseen" (or from error)
👉It's for the $1,500 Pandemic Leave payments
👉$66M allows for 44K payments
👉They only budgeted $12.6M because of Delta.
👉They only realised last week.
3/ The NRRA new & has attracted scandals from the beginning
Liberals gave Liberals mate Shane Stone $617K salary as Chair of this new agency.
Asked about his appointment in estimates Mr Stone said he was informed by “the Prime Minister’s office by one of the very senior advisers”
Read 6 tweets
1 Nov
1/Re: Leaked Text- 🐂💩 & a Dumpster Fire
Here is my dismantling of @CroweDM illogical propaganda piece.

🔥Dumpster Fire
A. Australia has now leaked text messages from the French President. How is leaking confidential text msgs going 2 help restor trust.
theage.com.au/politics/feder…
2/ B. Nothing in the text messages proves Emmanual Macron was not telling the truth. The selective leaking invites speculation by the reader to assume a contract (for what we don't know) may not proceed.
C. Read without the 'selective spin' this can easily be about one component
3/ or one phase, or even a milestone sign off. It seems implausible that the French President would ask whether an entire $90B contract was going to be cancelled via text and then not follow up.
Read 6 tweets
24 Sep
1/ FACT CHECK:
Nancy Pelosi was repeating what Scott Morrison had said. Nancy was NOT making any assessment.
Shame on @smh for your deceitful headline (Included on tweet 4 if you aren't aware)
Who will tell Nancy Pelosi she met #ScottyFromMarketing

#Auspol #ThisIsNotJournalism
2/
Also worth noting, Nancy wasn’t making a ‘special’ statement, it was near the end of a press conference to with a focus on tax changes and supporting women.
The full transcript is here
speaker.gov/newsroom/92321…
3/
If you have been lucky enough to not see this deceitful propaganda piece, here it is. Image
Read 4 tweets
26 Aug
1/
$91M-GROSS NEGLIGENCE AND FAILURE:
A short thread to explain why this $91M grant is yet another consequence of the Liberal & National party abysmal failure in its role as custodians, regulators, auditors & managers of the Aged Care sector.
grants.gov.au/Go/Show?GoUuid…
2/
The grant is to deal with staff and skill shortages.
8 years ago on the last sitting day before xmas the Liberals rammed through a bill to remove $1.2B meant to staff wages. Tony Burke got up to speak and was gagged. Please read the entire speech the Libs allowed.
3/
In 2011 Labor finalised the agreements with the states to make the federal government 100% responsible. This was a huge achievement, one of the reasons was the unclear responsibility for dealing with abuse. Inadequate staff numbers led to many abuses (e.g. use of sedation)
Read 7 tweets
24 Aug
1/ Electoral Changes-Members & Deregistration

Some relevant & fun info that some people appear to be omitting.
Particular those with giant ego's claiming they are being specifically targeted by these changes.

1983-Public funding for parties began based on the price of a stamp
2/
With public funding came the need to ensure the system wasn't gamed. The amount of funding given in the 2019 election was $69M. In 1983 it was $7.5M
3/
The current number of 500 members👇 was established in 1983. The Senate Committee used this as a indication that genuine community support 4 the party existed. This number has not changed in 38 years
The 'issue of similar names was raised in 83 as well.👇 (Excerpt from Report)
Read 8 tweets
21 Aug
1/
Doherty Model - Needs to be redone & released.
I intended to read & capture a few snippets of interest. However this appears to be a fatal flaw.
The TP value is assumed to be 3.5👇, no sensitive analysis was done for higher values. The CDC is using 5-9.5👇
2/
This model should be released so we (The tax payer and people who are expected to accept decisions made using the model) can interrogate these assumptions to see the impact of this and the many other 'assumptions'.
Other issues include;
-The use of nationwide assumptions..
3/
..not allowing for differences at the state/ region/ remote/rural/etc. to be considered. Attached is a government funded paper on this topic and it makes this issue very clear.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(