The NSW and Victorian governments have criticised the federal government over the lack of funding arrangements for the national disability insurance scheme.
Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan have been accused by the Victorian government of perpetrating a "cruel hoax" on disabled Australians by talking up a national disability insurance scheme before any funding deal has been put to the states.
And the West Australian government has cited the proposed NDIS as evidence federal Labor is in the habit of "committing fully to projects without having much idea how much the projects will cost". The comments came as a meeting between Mr Swan and state treasurers in Canberra on Wednesday emerged as a roadblock to plans to fast-track the NDIS.
The stoush also indicates the growing challenge to federal Labor by conservative governments in the five wealthiest states, following the Liberal National Party's landslide election win in Queensland last weekend.
On Saturday The Weekend Australian revealed Ms Gillard's plan to make disability insurance a central feature of the May budget, burnishing the the Prime Minister's credentials as a can-do leader with "true blue" Labor values.
But with the scheme due to cost about $13.6 billion a year following the scheduled commencement in 2018, incorporating the $7.1bn already allocated each year to disability support, the states are claiming Ms Gillard and Mr Swan are all talk.
FULL STORY Link
LISA Comment: As we said, “No way, no how, will the NDIS be reflective of the intentions of the Productivity Commission, in the near future!”
When the Productivity Commission produced its extensive proposals, state government direct care management and staff saw their comfort zone and safe employment disappearing with the Productivity Commission’s proposal of a shift from state government-funded and provided services, to services provided by a wide range of organisations.
State government direct care management and staff no longer see the NDIS as a threat to their captive market comfort zone, where consumers and their families are frequently seen as a disruption to the well being of service management and staff.
It’s back to bureaucratic business as usual.
Consumers and their families have no service entitlement, and are made to feel they are bludging on government services if they dare to question any aspect of the service they receive as a ‘charity hand-out’.
The ‘Disability Services Commissioner’ – Victoria, identifies the number-one reason why consumers and their families do not complain, as being, “The fear of intimidation of their vulnerable family member and themselves”. Where consumers, vulnerable people, have no choice of service provider, intimidation can be, and often is rife.
