A Labor-run NDIS committee wants to slug taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars sending politicians to Europe to learn about disability services abroad at the same time the government is trying to curb the scheme’s cost.

The Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is planning to nominate for a parliamentary trip to the UK and Sweden sending five members for up to ten days in December, according to a proposal seen by News Corp. If approved the cost of business class flights alone would total an estimated $70,000, based on the average Qantas fare from Sydney to London, then Stockholm and returning to Australia that month.

The committee, which is chaired by Labor MP Libby Coker, has five government members, three from the Coalition and two from the crossbench. No individuals have been confirmed to travel if the trip nomination was successful, but a spokesman for Opposition leader Sussan Ley said the plan showed Labor’s priorities were “all wrong”. “While NDIS costs spiral and services face cuts without a plan or consultation, their committee wants to spend taxpayer money flying overseas,” he said. “Australians with disabilities deserve better.”

The proposal for the Europe trip described the “objectives” as helping members to “gain insight into the delivery of disability services” in the two countries, with specific consideration given to regulation of providers, the role of independent regulatory bodies and “parliamentary oversight” of services.

The parliamentary committee has proposed learning from the UK system, where 69,000 people with disability directly employ more than 130,000 personal assistants, on how to regulate the NDIS without burying service providers in red tape. While from Sweden the plan to was to look at how the different levels of government shared responsibility for improving accessibility. It comes as Labor has pledged rein in the cost of the scheme, expected to reach $52.3 billion this financial year and grow to about $105bn within a decade without further reforms.

Health, Aged Care and NDIS Minister Mark Butler last month signalled Labor wanted to go further than its target of limiting growth to 8 per cent, down to under 5 per cent. “After we achieve our current (spending growth) target, a further wave of reform will be needed to get growth down to a more sustainable position,” he said. Mr Butler also announced plans to move children with mild autism and development delays onto an entirely different system.

Different Australian parliamentary delegations travel internationally each year, with a bipartisan cohort last making the trip to the UK and Sweden in 2023 to discuss issues including defence co-operation, trade and investment. Ms Coker told parliament the NDIS was “life-changing” for many Australians, but acknowledged it was “not without its flaws”.

“We also know the scheme relies on social licence and families, providers, advocates and the disability sector working together to get the best outcomes for people with disability,” she said. The Albanese Government was contacted for comment.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/ndis-commitees-proposed-study-tr...

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2025 at 7:44am:


Or video conferencing...

The NDIS was a groundbreaking and much needed capability that the Rudd/Gillard Labor Government introduced in being in 2013.    Since it’s inception, it has been overseen in the main by successive Coalition governments and has been allowed to deteriorate into one, big, giant rort - if you can believe many of the people employed to deliver services.    It does not seem at all to represent the brave scheme Gillard intended it to be.     Just like Abbott’s failed Job Search, Work for the Dole Schemes, and other failed schemes,  the money road appears to have gone directly to the overarching networks that control the disbursement of whatever scraps that are left once they take their cut.   

I don’t necessarily believe an overseas junket will solve the problem - and it will be a mixture both party members (Barnaby Joyce included no doubt) but if it gets the scheme back doing what it SHOULD be doing - after over a decade of LNP failure, it will be worth it

lee wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2025 at 2:57pm:


...while you of course agree with Senator Malcolm Roberts who is insisting in the Senate right now "there is no such thing as government money, only taxpayer money"

Hence you hypocritically condemn the government  for taking SOME autistic people off the NDIS, ie mildly, not severely autistic people off the NDIS, to better reflect the NDIS' purpose which is to assist the severely disabled with their special needs in their own environment (to reduce public expenditure on the NDIS).

..........

Richard Murphy has an interesting take on the "taxpayer money" assertion, though he is apparently confused over the role of taxes:

Richard Murphy is an advocate and public supporter of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), a school of economic thought that posits that governments issuing their own currency can create money to fund spending and don't need to tax or borrow to do so, rather than being constrained by debt in the same way a household is. Murphy, an Emeritus Professor of Accounting Practice, is known for his focus on tax and economic justice campaigns and has provided insights into how MMT can offer a more intuitive explanation of how modern fiat currencies work.

So far so good...

BUT:

Richard Murphy, one of the founders of the UK’s 'Tax Justice Network' and author of 'The Joy of Tax', explains that “taxpayers’ money” is the money left in our pockets after we have paid taxes that are legally due. Money payable through taxes is the government’s property. Taxpayers don’t "own" their taxes.

He finds traditional economic theories inadequate in explaining how modern fiat currencies function.

He emphasizes that taxation is the primary tool for controlling inflation and managing the economy, as it cancels out the money created by the government.

..whereas MMT academics posit a mandated full employment policy and a ZIRP  (zero interest rate set by central banks) to control inflation, with additional tools such as price controls when required during a pandemic or war). 

Unfortunately, the "peoples' party" - your sarcastic term - is as wedded to the 'taxpayer money' mythology as you.

lee wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2025 at 5:03pm:


https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/autism-spectrum-disorders#:~:te...

The abilities and needs of autistic people vary and can evolve over time. While some people with autism can live independently, others have severe disabilities and require life-long care and support.15 Nov 2023


Quote:


Yes, in part (regarding MMT), though he has also argued that 'tax is a joy'....

Quote:


No;  my 'mantra' is the currency-issuing government should be authorized to play  a role in resource allocation via intelligent central planning -  as opposed to allocation via the 'invisible hand' market driven by individual self-interest, without being forced to tax or borrow from the private sector (including you and me).

Note: the UK doesn't "print its own money", rather  money in the UK  is issued by private banks.

If the UK govt DID 'print its own money- ie the govt's own money (while avoiding inflation) it wouldn't be saddled by a "humongous debt".

Quote:


I addressed that very issue today in the MMT thread (apart from Net Zero):

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/1215#1219

(#1219)

Fears UK is heading for 'economic oblivion' as government borrowing costs soar to 27-YEAR high

....as asserted by mainstream economists who think c-i governments are constrained by access to 'taxpayer money' - a delusion slavishly followed by you. 

lee wrote on Sep 4^th, 2025 at 3:22pm:


Crippled brain Lee asking silly questions again: the WHO asserts that severe   autism requires life long support; or he is fraudulently hiding behind the word "necessarily"...

Quote:


Those discussions were about who OWNS the BofE, and does the Central bank "print money", which I already addressed; the GOVERNMENT is not authorized to create public sector money, which ought to be the case if we want collective wellbeing alongside private wealth accumulation via competition between individuals in 'invisible hand' markets. 

As to how money is created:

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-...

Money creation in the modern economy
By Michael McLeay, Amar Radia and Ryland Thomas of the Bank’s Monetary Analysis Directorate.(1)

This article explains how the majority of money in the modern economy is created by commercial banks making loans. Money creation in practice differs from some popular misconceptions — banks do not act simply as intermediaries, lending out deposits that savers place with them, and nor do they ‘multiply up’ central bank money to create new loans and deposits.

The amount of money created in the economy ultimately depends on the monetary policy of the central bank. In normal times, this is carried out by setting interest rates. The central bank can also affect the amount of money directly through purchasing assets or ‘quantitative easing’.

Re that last paragraph: hence the objections of MMT economists to the "independent" central bank overuling elected officials' policies which were voted on by the electorate before an election - a point strongly exercising Trump at present...


Quote:


Net zero isn't travelling well, because

1. c-i governments are forced to 'balance the budget' while keeping taxes low (to get elected); and pollies keep saying renewables are the 'cheapest form of energy' (which they are, AFTER the infrastructure is built), but don't explain that the transition to renewables will be expensive as the new infrastructure (storage, transmission) is built.   

2. On that point. mainstream economists recommend carbon taxes to incentivize private sector investment in renewables - taxes which the public don't want; and pollies are frightened to outline the costs in monetary terms, because the monetary costs are huge. (probably c. one $trillion in Oz alone).

That's why Labor won't tell us how much the transition will cost; but if the c-i govt  had access to its own currency for free, it could inform the electorate of the REAL cost, namely the "opportunity cost" in RESOURCE utilization/allocation.

Meaning 'taxpayers money' is NOT the issue. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 5^th, 2025 at 12:33pm:



If you actually look at the research - severe autism MAY require long term support. Support doesn't necessarily mean full-time carers. The WHO, along with the rest of the UN  agencies, have no research capabilities, that means they take what they want from research and ignore all else, just like the UNFCC.

"What are the long-term support needs and care options for adults with severe autism?
...
They usually need comprehensive, personalized care plans that address their physical health, behavioral challenges, and social interactions."

https://www.attentiveautismcare.com/blog/what-happens-to-severely-autistic-adult...

Note the use of the word "usually".

thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 5^th, 2025 at 12:33pm:


No. You insisted it was the "private banks" that printed the money.

thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2025 at 10:27pm:


thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 5^th, 2025 at 12:33pm:


No one ever said they did. thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 5^th, 2025 at 12:33pm:


Except of course the UK is bracing the people for a tax rise.

You also don't go into the 20-25 year completre rebuild of renewables.

thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 5^th, 2025 at 12:33pm:



You mean real costs like increased mining for copper etc? On renewable power alone?

Leroy wrote on Sep 5^th, 2025 at 12:45pm:


Ok ...lee is hypocriticlly critisizing the govt. (..."the people's party") for wanting to 'save' money; while you are claiming you can't question why the money is being spent.

Yes you can; and indeed the quantum of resources required for the operation of the NDIS needs to be accounted for, whether you have empathy for the disabled or not.

Now, if the (self-interested) taxpayer  is 'on the hook' to fund government (as per convention), the nation - and the disabled - have a problem re funding 'empathy'...