ABC Capital Hill
E&OE
GLENDAY:
Mitch Fifield, do you think that calling new mums “double dippers” on Mother’s Day was necessarily the best idea ahead of the Budget?
FIFIELD:
Well, I think the important point here is that we are looking to bring greater fairness and equity to Paid Parental Leave. What we are saying is quite simply, if you have an employer-provided arrangement which is more generous than that of the Government, then that is what you get. If your employer arrangements are less generous, then the Government scheme can top you up. That is what we are aiming to do, to look for a more equitable situation.
GLENDAY:
Was the language a mistake though, in your view? Especially given that some of your ministerial colleagues, like Josh Frydenberg for example, have admitted to being double dippers?
FIFIELD:
Look, we each choose the language that we use and all of us I think learn as we go through any budget process.
GLENDAY:
So you would use that language?
FIFIELD:
Well, the important thing is to focus on the measure itself, which is about greater equity.
GLENDAY:
Given the enormous about-face in policy in this area and some of the recent statements by Labor and the Greens, do you think you have got any chance of actually getting this through the Senate though, as it currently is?
FIFIELD:
The Senate is a many splendid thing. It is full of variety and where you have got variety amongst colleagues that means there is opportunity. Scott Morrison, I think, as people have seen over recent months is someone who has a great capacity to negotiate, a great capacity to build bridges. Not just with stakeholders but also with crossbench Senators. So we will be working hard to get the measures through.
GLENDAY:
Fair dinkum, fair dinkum was the word he used. Paid Parental Leave was the Prime Minister’s signature policy not that long ago. And some of the crossbenches are essentially asking what is the Prime Minister’s signature worth? Do you think that that is going to make it harder to get this policy through?
FIFIELD:
Well I do feel for the Prime Minister, because on the one hand people were saying you should be listening. You should be listening to the electorate, you should be listening to the range of voices in the Senate. And when the Prime Minister does that, people then criticise him for listening, for taking those things on board. So we have what I think is a good and fair policy proposition, we will be working hard to get it through the Senate.
GLENDAY:
As one of the Government’s chief Senate negotiators are you going to change the way you approach this year’s Budget sell to the crossbench, given how last year went?
FIFIELD:
Well, it is a different Senate to the one that was in place when we came into office. Halfway through the middle of last year the new Senate came into being…
GLENDAY
Things didn’t go that well, so surely there is going to be a change of strategy?
FIFIELD:
It was a learning exercise for the crossbench Senators and also a learning exercise for us as a Government. I think the important thing is, with the crossbenches as with any relationships, you can’t deal with people where you want them to be. You can’t deal with people where you think they should be. You have got to deal with people where they are and work back from there. And I think when you do that you can get good outcomes.
GLENDAY:
On another topic, you are the Minister responsible for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. In the budget it does become fairly clear there is not yet enough cash allocated to cover even the Commonwealth’s contribution to this. It looks as though there is about 30 per cent to 40 per cent. How are you going to fund this enormous expenditure in the coming years?
FIFIELD:
Well it is a big programme, at full roll-out the NDIS will be a $22 billion a year scheme. About $10 billion of that comes from the States’ contribution. There is an additional $3 billion which is money that the Commonwealth would be spending on disability in the absence of the NDIS. That leaves a $9 billion requirement for the Commonwealth to make a contribution.
GLENDAY:
That’s a big hole.
FIFIELD:
It a big number, but 40 per cent of that is covered by the half a per cent increase in the Medicare levy, which means that at full roll-out there is about $5 billion a year that the Commonwealth will need to find. Now, something that I was very disappointed about when we were in Opposition was that the previous Government sought to present the half a per cent increase in the Medicare levy as though it funded the entire scheme. At best, being most generous, it covers 40 per cent of the Commonwealth additional contribution. If you combine the Commonwealth new money and old money, it only covers 30 per cent of the scheme. But if you also add in the state money, the half per cent increase in the Medicare levy only covers 20 per cent of full scheme costs.
GLENDAY:
Now you have been in Government for 18 months, how you going to fill that hole? You are going to have to make fresh cuts aren’t you?
FIFIELD:
Well the increase in the Medicare levy covers the Commonwealth’s additional contributions up until 2018-19. In 2018-19 we will need to find a bit over an extra billion dollars. From 2019-20, thereafter, it will be about $5 billion extra. So we will have to do what the previous Government didn’t do and that is find savings in other areas to fill that gap.
GLENDAY:
Do you know how you are going to do that?
FIFIELD:
That is something that we are committed to doing because the NDIS is just too important.
GLENDAY:
Mitch Fifield, thanks very much for joining us on Capital Hill.