The Point Live: Advocates push back against a NDIS that rations by budgets, not need, Liberals still in polls abyss as parliament prepares to return. As it happens

Malcolm Turnbull and Bob Carr are among those who have given evidence to the public inquiry on AUKUS today – here is what AAP reports from Turnbull’s appearance:

Australia faces the real risk of not receiving its promised nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS pact as the US confronts the “political fantasy” of handing over its prized boats when it cannot build enough.

Former Liberal prime minister and AUKUS critic Malcolm Turnbull told an independent public inquiry into the agreement on Monday it was unlikely the Virginia-class submarines would be delivered to Australia when the US navy continued to fall behind on production.

Under the $368 billion deal, a future US president must certify that the sale of the boats won’t negatively impact the American navy.

“In what political fantasy land is a president going to do that if they’re already short,” Mr Turnbull said.

“And we can’t complain because … the Americans have been utterly transparent about this.

“We won’t have been double-crossed or reneged on or anything like that.”

The crowdfunded inquiry is being overseen by former Labor minister and Midnight Oil frontman Peter Garrett.

Australia will buy three used Virginia-class submarines from the US, before the new SSN-AUKUS boats enter service from the 2040s.

The Albanese government confirmed earlier in August media reports that thousands of American military personnel will be deployed to Western Australia to support submarine rotations to HMAS Stirling.

The US has set up the framework for a military base in the state, establishing Naval Support Activity Stirling over the past few months.

While Labor insists it will not be a US base on Australian soil, the designation is how Americans refer to other overseas bases.

Mr Turnbull said the “reality is this will be a US base”.

“It’s not called a US base, but it is a US base,” he said.

“This has never been discussed in the Australian parliament. There’s never been an inquiry. These are momentous changes, and our parliament has led us now.”

AUKUS was signed between the US, Australia and the UK in 2021 under former prime minister Scott Morrison and the Biden administration.

Former Labor foreign minister Bob Carr said the opportunity to have opted out of the security pact was the election of the Albanese government in 2022 which had a “clear opening” to question the deal.

He said the US will not be in any position in the 2030s to transfer the boats as originally planned.

From Mike Bowers lens…..

Megan Spindler-Smith, Sophie Cusworth and Dr Martin Laverty

People have been given control and care over their lives and care – and therefore have the space to make decisions for themselves and also their future. And that’s opened up space for all sorts of opportunities that are not necessarily available to those trying to find what works best for them.

Like Dwayne who attended today’s speech

SBS asks is there a possibility that those on NDIS will be moving on and off the scheme because of regular reviews.

Megan Spindler-Smith says – yes because the NDIS improves lives and so it could in essence make it seem like they don’t need support because they are doing so well under the NDIS and then they fail the “functional capacity requirement” (especially if the standard is changed to cut costs) and then as a result they’ll go backwards and then need the NDIS again.

This is because some disabilities also can be progressive and why if the automation process is implemented people will be made worse off.

Nick Stewart from Disability News asks about the broader impact. Megan Spindler Smith highlights Australia Institute research that these cuts are equivalent to 52,000 jobs cuts in the care sector – and points out the loss of income tax, but also that family members will have to take up that care, and that will mean a loss of work on that score.

Sophie Cusworth adds that women will be the ones who will be asked to take up the care burden.

She also noted that it is obvious these cuts will lead to greater hospitalisation – and thus will place more strain on the health system

Megan Spindler-Smith, Acting CEO of People with Disability Australia, Sophie Cusworth, Chief Executive, Women With Disabilities Australia and Dr Martin Laverty, Chief Executive, Aruma, are addressing the National Press Club on the topic: “Reasonable or Necessary? Debating changes to the NDIS”.

It opens with a journalist suggesting that “economists believe the NDIS is not sustainable” – which is not a sentence you will ever hear in response to defence or fossil fuel spending. And yet, it is considered so normal to question where the money is coming from when it comes to any social service. The less social power the people receiving the service have – so think of the unemployed, or disabled, or any one from a majority, then the more any spending on them is questioned. Cuts to social spending is considered “sensible” while never ending spending on things neoliberals approve of is either not questioned, or pushed back on as if it is not enough.

Sophie Cusworth has made the point that the funding cuts will also impact women and others fleeing abusive relationships more, because if you are not contactable, your supports are suspended. Cusworth makes the point there has been no gender analysis of the proposed changes.

Women are also the ones who will be expected to pick up the majority of the care gap for their partners or families. “Care doesn’t go away, it shifts”.

The bill is also being pushed through before any of the foundational supports which are supposed to help make the gaps less noticeable, are established.

All the panelists think there will be more automation in deciding who gets care and how, and are unsure of whether or not human appeals will be allowed.

Matt Grudnoff

More affordable housing sounds great.

Everybody’s in favour of it. Right?

Well maybe not. Since May, when the RBA last increased interest rates and the Government announced in the budget changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing, we’ve seen house prices drop, but only by a few percent.

Well, you would think financial Armageddon had arrived, if the rhetoric we’ve seen from some is to be believed.

There have been plenty of news articles anxiously discussing last weekend’s low auction clearance rates or the latest small drop in house prices.

What this highlights is that while there may be broad consensus that housing needed to become more affordable, there are some who are less keen when housing starts to become more affordable. My colleague Greg Jericho had this interesting graph on the industries with the biggest profit margins in recent years. Once you get past the various parts of the mining industry, the next most profitable includes real estate agents.

It’s perfectly reasonable for those who make money from a hot property market to be concerned when things slow down, but just remember, housing can’t become more affordable if prices are increasing faster than incomes.

In 2011, the Australian government proposed to means-test the private health insurance (PHI) rebate – a taxpayer subsidy to encourage PHI uptake.

At the time, the private healthcare industry warned that “1.6 million people would drop their cover”. The proposal thankfully passed, and the rebate began to be means tested.

A subsequent evaluation published in the Australian Economic Record in 2021 found a modest increase in PHI uptake after means testing was introduced.

Why is this relevant?

The government is currently proposing to remove the additional PHI subsidies for people aged 65 and over, aligning the rebate with younger cohorts. This means that the rebate would be based only on income, not age.

Industry is again predicting that older Australians will relinquish their PHI in droves because of the modest rebate reduction proposed.

And new research from Melbourne University – using a decade of taxation data and separating the impact of the rebate from that of the Medicare Levy (the other main lever to encourage PHI uptake) – estimates that between 14,800 and 42,500 older Australians will drop PHI.

The government, meanwhile, expects that 44,000 people would drop their cover.

That may seem like a lot of people. But even if each was admitted to hospital in the 12 months after dropping their cover, that represents just 0.55% of the 7.7 million public hospital admissions that took place in 2024-25.

The private healthcare industry might want to tone down the doomsaying a little.

This week, as Senate returns from the winter break, it will take a vote that will change the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) in ways that will be felt by hundreds of thousands of Australians.

The government wants its NDIS reform bill passed. It says the changes are necessary to put the scheme on a sustainable footing, bring down its rapidly growing costs, tighten eligibility, improve the way people’s support needs are assessed and crack down on fraud and poor practice.

Few people would argue with the need to make sure the NDIS is sustainable. There is widespread agreement that rorting and exploitation need to be dealt with, and that a scheme this important cannot continue to grow indefinitely without reform.

But there is a very big difference between agreeing that the NDIS needs to change and agreeing with what is now being proposed.

That difference has been impossible to miss during the Senate inquiry.

Read more at The Point

Ahead of the National Press Club address on the NDIS changes – from those who will live them, rather than the political side for a change – AAP has this story on a measure already being rejected:

One of the architects of the National Disability Insurance Scheme has called for extra oversight of the program similar to that of Australia’s aged care system.

But the NDIS Minister Mark Butler, seeking to get cost-cutting reforms to the disability-support scheme passed in the next two weeks, remains unconvinced the proposal would make it easier for participants to get the help they need.

Martin Laverty, the chief executive of disability support provider Aruma who helped to set up the NDIS, said the scheme needed a national inspector general.

Mr Laverty, who will unveil the proposal at a speech to the National Press Club on Monday, said the inspector-general would have oversight of how the NDIS is run and regulated as well as its federal funding.

“This is needed because NDIS participants face extraordinary challenge in navigating their way through the NDIS,” he told ABC Radio.

“Their role is to recommend to government better coordination to address those systems failures. And I think this is a proposal that’s been long overdue in the NDIS.”

Mr Laverty said the proposal would be similar to that of an aged care inspector general, who oversees the running of the federal response to the sector.

It comes as the federal government is still seeking support to pass its reforms through the Senate.

The measures would cut more than 100,000 participants from the NDIS to rein in growth of the $56 billion program.

However, Mr Butler dismissed the calls from Mr Laverty for national oversight of the disability scheme.

“There are a lot of different committees and bodies that oversight the NDIS. So I’d have to be convinced that another one, another level of bureaucracy, would serve a real purpose,” Mr Butler told ABC Radio.

He was confident a deal could be struck to get the disability scheme reforms through parliament.

“Obviously, we’ve got further discussions to have over the course of this parliamentary sitting fortnight. But I take (the coalition) at their word that they see this as something we can work together on,” Mr Butler said.

“I’d like to see it passed this fortnight because it is critical we start the work of getting the NDIS back on track.”

A Senate inquiry into the NDIS changes it also due to hand down its findings on Friday.

The make up of the NDIS will also be examined at the National Press Club, with  Women With Disabilities Australia head Sophie Cusworth warning of significant impacts if the reforms pass.

“The government says this won’t affect participants’ health and safety. But for women with disability, that simply is not true,” Ms Cusworth will say in a speech.

“More than half have experienced physical or sexual violence since the age of 15 … for us, social and community participation is a safeguard.”

Ms Cusworth isn’t ignorant to pitfalls in the NDIS but is also mindful that while half of disabled Australians are women, just 38 per cent of the scheme’s participants are female.

“We are under-diagnosed with disability the scheme recognises, more likely to live with conditions it does not properly see,” she will say.

“When the government proposes major changes to access, eligibility, and supports, it is doing so within a system that already disadvantages women.”

Australia’s youth mental health crisis is usually discussed as a healthcare problem (psychologists, psychiatrists, headspace centres).

But an Australia Institute report released today suggests we should also look further upstream.

The mental wellbeing among young Australians has deteriorated sharply compared to older cohorts. For example, self-reported mental health scores among 15–24-year-olds, fell by 15% between 2008 and 2024. Scores reported by those aged 45 and over have remained fairly steady.

Self-reported mental health scores by age group, 2001-2024

Source: Mental health and economic conditions for younger Australians

At the same time, the economics of being young have become considerably tougher.

Since 2001, tertiary education costs have increased by 150%. Rents and out-of-pocket health costs have roughly doubled. Yet the real minimum wage has risen just 19 per cent and Youth Allowance only 10 per cent.

Selected costs and income streams, 2001-2024 (indexed to 2001)

Source: Mental health and economic conditions for younger Australians

Note: maximum Youth Allowance rate for a single person, no children, 18+ and living away from home.

Young people’s disposable incomes have grown more slowly than those of older Australians – doubling from 2004 to 2022 while that of those 55 and over grew 2.4-fold over the same period.

And young people now face the added indignity of paying more to access the mental healthcare they increasingly need. In 2024–25, their average out-of-pocket cost for a Medicare-subsidised mental health service was 34 per cent higher than for people aged 45–64.

None of this proves that high rents or HECS debts cause mental illness. Mental health is complicated, and the report is careful not to make that claim.

But financial stress, unemployment, underemployment and insecure work are all associated with poorer mental health – and we can’t expect the healthcare system to mop up all the damage created elsewhere.

Affordable housing, adequate income support, decent wages, and lower education and healthcare costs are mental health policies too.

Take-home assessments could be banned in one state in a radical overhaul of artificial intelligence in the classroom.

NSW Education Minister Prue Car on Monday ordered a review into AI in schools, aiming to protect the integrity of the state’s formal examination process. 

The review will examine AI’s impact on cognitive development and how schools can best assess students’ abilities in the modern age.

Ms Car requested the NSW Education Standards Authority consider a moratorium on unsupervised, take-home assessments in the meantime. 

She also asked the body to develop a manner for identifying inappropriate AI use common across NSW schools. 

Half of a NSW student’s final High School Certificate result is based on school-based assessment, some of which is completed outside the classroom.

Ms Car said AI had the potential to ”support” learning but should not replace thinking, creativity and diligence. 

”If students rely on AI to bypass that learning process, we risk undermining both their education and the integrity of the HSC,” she said. 

”It is better to put sensible safeguards in place while we fully understand AI’s long-term impact on student learning.”

Teachers and educators recently told an Australian study that AI currently presented more harms than benefits in assessment integrity and cognitive development.

Education consultants Learning First recommended in their May study that educators restrict student use of AI while keeping attuned to potential benefits in the future.

Ms Car had previously floated a return to pen and paper for Australian students in the face of tanking literacy and numeracy data. 

Around one in three students across all levels did not meet basic benchmarks in the latest National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests.

The NAPLAN tests were fully digitised in 2022 except for year three writing exams and for students with special needs.

Ms Car feared NAPLAN exams pushed some schools to introduce computers into the curriculum earlier than they should.

“I’m really keen to see what comes back about pen and paper because I think that it may show that that may be a good way forward,” Ms Car said.

Australia’s Human Rights Watch says while meeting with Vietnam’s president, To Lam, this week, Anthony Albanese should also raise Vietnam’s human rights record.

From HRW’s release:

While minister of Vietnam’s notorious Ministry of Public Security from 2016 to 2024, To Lam oversaw a far-reaching crackdown that decimated the country’s budding civil society. Authorities imprisoned dozens of prominent independent journalists, bloggers, and activists, including Pham Doan Trang, Pham Chi Dung, Nguyen Tuong Thuy, Nguyen Lan Thang, and Can Thi Theu. The crackdown also targeted environmentalists and lawyers, many of whom now live in exile for fear of persecution.

Since To Lam ascended to Vietnam’s highest political office as Communist Party general secretary in 2024, the country’s poor human rights record has worsened. The authorities have expanded the scope and use of draconian laws that criminalize free speech. People now risk up to seven years in prison simply for raising complaints about government policies or local officials.

Vietnamese authorities have also deepened transnational repression—committing abusive acts abroad—in Thailand and elsewhere. Since December, the courts have tried at least five independent journalists and Indigenous rights activists in exile, including Doan Bao Chau, Nguyen Van Dai, Le Trung Khoa, Dinh Yum, and Siu Di. All have been convicted and sentenced in absentia on politically motivated charges to between 7 and 17 years in prison.

In June and July, police arrested five people for their roles in publishing a book about Ho Chi Minh that provoked the authorities. The government has also issued a new decree targeting lawyers and is revising laws to further curb freedom of expression.

The annual human rights dialogue between Australia and Vietnam should not be the only forum for rights concerns, which should inform all engagements between the two countries. In March 2024, Australia and Vietnam agreed to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership to expand cooperation across defense, economics, education, energy, and digital innovation. Australia should leverage this partnership to press the Vietnamese government to release people imprisoned for exercising their rights and to end its crackdown on free expression.

It is Christmas Eve for Andrew Leigh, who loves data, and Latin and counting – Census Eve.

He’s been out and about today asking people to remember to have themselves counted tomorrow – reminding everyone that it helps set policy into the future. He wrote all about it, here.

Mike Bowers was out and about this morning as well.

Anthony Albanese always gets very excited about the Western Sydney International Airport (the Nancy-Bird Walton airport) and led the announcement that VietJet will operate from the airport from January next year.

From Jan 2027, Vietjet plans to fly twice weekly to Ho Chi Minh City, which will increase to three times a week from March. From November it plans to fly four weekly services to Thailand.

There still needs to be regulatory approvals etc, but it is the fifth airline to add the airport to their routes – with Jetstar, New Zealand, Singapore Airlines and Qantas.

Pauline Hanson and the Coalition (when it suits them) continue to use the net overseas arrivals numbers, which includes holiday makers and short term visitors, as migration numbers, almost without mainstream media pushback.

Here is the ABS on net overseas arrivals – again, this includes tourists.

In May 2026:

• Short-term visitor arrivals: 609,040 – a decrease of 0.4% on one year earlier.
• Short-term resident returns: 922,460 – a decrease of 4.9% on one year earlier.
• Total arrivals: 1,601,820 – a decrease of 3.5% on one year earlier.
• Total departures: 1,685,410 – an increase of 0.3% on one year earlier.

And here is the ABS on what statistics you should use and why. (Yes, it got so bad the ABS had to put out an article)

When discussing migration, it’s important to use the right statistics. While the ABS releases international migration and travel statistics in separate releases – in Net Overseas Migration (NOM) and Overseas Arrivals and Departures (OAD) – they are not interchangeable. They are different and serve very different purposes. 

The ABS advises that you should only use migration statistics for measuring migration. This is not a mere statistical technicality – using OAD data as a migration measure will provide an inaccurate and misleading indication of migration levels. 

The latest Net Overseas Migration data, for December quarter 2025, shows that annual net overseas migration was 300,960 people since December quarter 2024. Using net permanent and long-term (PLT) movements from OAD as a proxy for net overseas migration would overestimate migration by 60%, or an extra 179,570 people. Over time, net PLT overstates migration to a varying extent, meaning that it does not provide a reliable standalone signal for broad changes in the rate of migration.

Migration is falling. The government is about to cut it further (making it harder for asylum seekers to appeal (which is against international law) and find work, as well as make family reunion more difficult, to try and stop the far right from using migration as a grievance harvester. But given they are NOT USING FACTS TO BEGIN WITH do we think this will do anything other than further encourage them to go even harder?!

Here was Matt Thistlethwaite this morning:

Those numbers that Pauline Hanson refers to are net overseas migration numbers, which include Australian citizens who are living overseas and returning home. Is Pauline Hanson saying that Australians living overseas do not have the right to return home? The better figure is permanent migration that we’ve set at 185,000 for the last couple of years and we’ve met that figure. That figure is based a lot on what employers tell us they need in terms of skilled migration and indeed the states and territories to run their health care system, their aged care system, their education system and their construction sector. We’ve consistently met those targets that were outlined in the Budget.

Ahhh, so the numbers they are using are wrong, and we have met the figure and targets in the budget, but we are still going to be surrender monkeys and give the far right even more power over policy. Got it.

It seems that the Bush Deep podcast appearance from Anthony Albanese continues to be the interview which haunts him, with the Japanese former ambassador to Australia writing in the Australian, that comments the prime minister made about the prime minister of Japan brining two melons as a gift, were ‘insulting’ and ‘unthoughtful’. The host made the comments that the PM came in “looking like Pamela Anderson” and there was no push back from the PM. His office denies he made any crude jokes.

Now there are a few things going on here – one, Japan now has a very conservative PM and there are some disagreements on ideologies. Two, the prime minister is seeing support among women fall, and there are some people who are very willing and ready to do what they can to push that along, given the power of women voters in Australia. And three, the PM has just been a bit stupid and unthinking about all these sorts of comments, as a combination of not reading the room, not thinking about what he’s saying and also, not going in prepared with answers to these questions which these hosts are likely to ask – because they ask them every interview.

Tanya Plibersek told the Seven network this morning:

I think it was a complete misinterpretation from the former ambassador, a completely unnecessary interpretation of what the Prime Minister said, and I think people watching it for themselves can make their own minds up.

Tim Wilson was on whatever it is Sky News is calling itself these days and is still trying to pretend like there is some difference between the Liberal party and the Labor party when it comes to how decisions are made.

On the gambling reforms, he said:

I think the conversation is around how we get an open dialogue with the government around what we can constructively pass through the parliament. Of course, people have a diversity of views and frankly, we’re not a party where people take a full-frontal lobotomy by signing up to a party like the Labor Party. People have their opinions, they’re welcome, they should be free to air them in the party room and to express a way forward. Our focus, I think, should continue to be how we protect children, particularly around gambling advertising and making sure that in any negotiation we’re getting the best outcome for the Australian people. We’re not wowsers, we do believe in protecting children, particularly from harm.

Which would make more sense if the Liberal party also did not vote as a bloc.

A new report from The Australia Institute has found young Australians’ mental health has declined sharply.

The decline coincides with increased economic pressure faced young Australians, especially around housing, education, health costs and income support.

Since 2001, tertiary education fees have increased by 150%, rent and out-of-pocket medical expenses have doubled, while minimum wage rose by 19% and Youth Allowance by just 10%.

Key points:

• The proportion of young people reporting a mental health disorder rose from 26.4% in 2007 to 38.8% in 2022.
• The decline among young people is far higher than that reported by older cohorts.
• Financial stress and labour-market insecurity are linked to poorer mental health.
• Clinical services alone cannot fix preventable economic stress; Improving economic conditions is a far more efficient and effective way to protect young people’s mental health.

The report points to evidence linking financial stress with anxiety, depression and other mental health challenges, and notes that unemployment, underemployment, job insecurity and low job control are associated with poorer mental health.

 “Young Australians are not just feeling a bit worse — the data show a sustained and substantial decline in mental health,” said Luke Slawomirski, Senior Postdoctoral Research Fellow at The Australia Institute.  

“Australia’s youth mental health crisis is not occurring in an economic vacuum.

“Young people are being asked to build a life on income supports that have barely moved, while the costs of rent, study and healthcare have surged.

“A secure job, affordable rent, and enough income to live on are not separate from mental health — they are part of the conditions that protect it.

“More mental health services are needed, but they cannot compensate for policies that make young people’s lives more precarious.”

“Understanding the relationship between economic conditions and youth mental health is critical to informing future policy that supports young people’s mental health and wellbeing,” said Dr David Baker, Head of Policy at the Orygen Policy Centre.

“We need to be doing more for young people, and that includes addressing intergenerational inequality.”

Just in case you thought it might have gone away – it hasn’t.

With the Victorian election creeping up, business and employer groups are starting the push to have the legislation which would enshrine work from home as a workplace option, scrapped. (Mostly because workers are never allowed to have any nice things).

The business lobby thinks its killing productivity and contributing to the unemployment rate which ???????????????

Anyways – you know the arguments – just be prepared for it to pop up on the federal sphere as well.

As the minister in charge of air services, Catherine King wants an urgent please explain from Airservices Australia after the second near miss at Sydney airport in nearly two weeks yesterday.

A Jetstar Plane was forced to break so suddenly a flight attendant broke their wrist in a fall, after a Qatar plane almost crossed into its path on the tarmac. The Qatar plane was being towed. The tug operator and the ground controller have been stood down after yesterday’s close call while an investigation is underway, but there are reports that Airservices Australia have not been able to roster enough air traffic control staff to cover the airport in recent days, causing delays as runways are shut down.

The main takeaway from the mainstream on the Newspoll is that Labor is at a 10-year low – that it hasn’t been this unpopular (as a government) since Julia Gillard’s government. Which, yes. But also what is happening is that the Coalition is at 18%. It is also at historical lows, it’s vote continues to crater and One Nation is the beneficiary of that.

I spent the five week break talking to more politicians than anyone ever needs to and I am unhappy to report, that most of Labor’s backbenchers still believe that Albanese’s incrementalism is what is going to get them over the line. The main view is that the electorate will “see sense” once it gets closer to an actual election. Almost all of them point to this time in the last election cycle when Dutton’s Coalition was ahead and say ‘see, and then we got a historic majority’.

What they are not looking at, is what happened in the US a few years ago, where fear of the status quo, was, as Richard Denniss and Emma Shortis have said multiple times, greater than the fear of Donald Trump.

It’s not even necessarily One Nation that people want – it’s a change. Labor doesn’t seem to have grasped that. The Coalition certainly haven’t. This is unchartered waters and they are trying to apply the old way of doing things. It is not going to work. Whether or not they work that out in time is questionable.

The NDIS cuts, as we noted in an early post, are on the huge side.

Over the 4 years from 2026-27 the budget papers estimate a cut of $36.2bn.

A big reason why the government is doing these cuts is because they believe the current level of funding is “not sustainable” – as Mark Butler told the National Press Club in April “And unless we take action to make it sustainable, it simply will not be there in the future for the Australians who need it most.”

The explanatory memorandum of the legislation outlining the cuts states:

    ”financial sustainability means ensuring the Scheme can keep funding NDIS supports now and into the future without growing beyond what governments can sustainably fund.     This means funding for some NDIS supports may be less than the actual cost of providing or acquiring the support, while still being reasonable and necessary.”

But the thing is the government has decided that “sustainable” means not changing anything on the tax/revenue side of the budget. They want us to believe that the government can only cuts spending it can’t change how they tax.

Well, we know from the May budget that the government can change the tax side of things to raise more tax. 

And even better we have a ready solution at hand. 

A 25% tax on gas exports would raise $17bn a year – or $68bn over the next 4 years. 

The Budget also estimates that over the next 4 years it will provide $47bn in fuel tax credits. Of that around $22bn will go to mining companies. That is equivalent to 61% of the cuts in the NDIS  

The government has in effect chosen to protect the profits of mining and gas companies over delivering proper support to some of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable Australians.   

Mark Butler in his speech suggested that “The NDIS is a statement of our national values, it’s a measure of our national character.”

I agree. Unfortunately, what these cuts and the lack of taxing of gas companies does not say much about our national character or values… 

Having a look at the news today, here is what the mainstream have as making the news;

Guardian Australia has gone with gambling advertising – which makes sense – the Guardian stopped taking gambling advertising a while back, following the Murphy review being handed down. It’s main report is on the tiny concession Labor has been talking about for weeks – that inducements could be something it cracks down on, but it’s not budging on the actual advertising itself.

ABC has gone with the usual, plus the cabinet deadlock on migration changes. Tony Burke was meant to give a press club speech last week where he announced Labor’s changes – but pulled out at the last moment – because the cabinet debate has been ROWDY. Which you would think – because we are having this discussion after far right marches, which included literal Nazis, made it a media issue – even though migration has been falling.

The Australian has Newspoll – Labor 29 (-1), One Nation 29 (-1) and Coalition 18 (-1). The Greens are up two to 14%. Once again proving my theory that the more people hear from politicians, the less they like them.

But One Nation tied with Labor is what will be worrying the government and pushing it into even stupidier territory, where it will no doubt try and pacify One Nation, rather than fight it.

And Tim Wilson on Sunday indicated the Coalition would go after NDIS changes that targeted the fraud and corruption in providers rather than participants. Which – duh.

Oh – and Australia has a new US ambassador, with David Brat confirmed, after 18 months with no one in the post. He’s a Christian fundamentalist, who wants his version of Christianity taught in all schools from kindergarten up, and was part of the tea-party faction which began taking over the Republican party pre-Trump. Good. Times.

Later today the National Press Club is hosting a debate on the cuts to the NDIS that were in the May Budget.

The debate is between Megan Spindler-Smith of People with a Disability Australia, Sophie Cusworth from Women With Disabilities Australia, and Dr Martin Laverty not-for-profit disability organisation Aruma, one of the nation’s largest NDIS providers.

The cuts are, to be blunt, brutal.

Expenditure on the NDIS is projected to fall by 1% from 2026-27 to 2028-29 before slightly rising in 2029-30 rather than increasing by 15% as was the case in the 2025-26 budget.

But this rather understates it all. Afterall it still lets the government claim that NDIS funding is increasing:

But when we take into account the increasing size of the economy, inflation and population growth things look rather more shocking. Rather than “NDIS payments will continue to grow each year” as the Budget Papers state, NDIS is funding is set to fall 12% from 2026-27 levels to 2029-30: 

Will this have an impact? Absolutely, and the Government knows it. Health Minister, Mark Butler told the National Press Club back in April when he announced that the big cuts were coming that “I want to be honest with people; this will have a material impact on participant plans.”

We estimate the size of the cuts in 2029-30 which are $16.4bn is equivalent to around 94 million hours of paid work in the residential care and social assistance services sector – or 51,641 full-time equivalent jobs. Care work that will now need to be done by someone else – most likely family members. 

“Material impact” indeed. 

Hello and welcome back to the (almost) beginning of parliament. We missed you!

The sitting is officially back from the winter break tomorrow (Tuesday) but all the main players are here, doing their main play, so we thought we would get in early and help you get a lay of the land.

I have been taking notes over the last five weeks, and here is what has happened since the last time parliament sat:

Anthony Albanese had a small break, which coincided during Garma. Meaning he has broken his promise to attend every Garma while prime minister. That’s not something which will get a lot of attention, but it should.

Victoria changed leaders – with Ben Carroll, dubbed the AI premier by anyone who has been forced to sit through one of his press conferences or attempts to humanise himself on social media, now leading the Vic Liberals. He has promised he is not Jacinta Allan or Dan Andrews, so you can see which direction he’ll be leaning in for the coming election. One Nation drew level with the Coalition in Victorian polling, which means One Nation is in with a real shot of being in a position to help the Coalition there form government. Won’t that be great for the nation!

Albanese played ‘shag, marry, date’ on a podcast and chose Kylie Minogue. He was also asked whether he and his wife, Jodie Haydon were still ‘bonking like rabbits’. He’s taken a hit with women voters – which hadn’t really recovered from calling Grace Tame ‘difficult’ in a word association game – and while he has apologised, it seems unlikely he has learnt his lesson.

The government hasn’t moved on gambling advertising reform, and is now waiting to see if the Coalition or the Greens bend on any of the negotiations to get it through the senate. Albanese has moved from a ‘stuff ya if you don’t’ to a ‘negotiations are ongoing’ but unless the government bends here and actually does something resembling gambling reform, it is unlikely anything will pass.

The NDIS cuts bill report will be handed down this week. The government want it passed, but advocates and the disability community are increasingly screaming about what the cuts will really mean. So far, the government is not listening. Seems like the Coalition is in on this one, which means the government will get its cuts, at the expense of some of our most vulnerable.

The NSW state government wants the federal government to allow it to see carbon credits to save a piece of state park which it has already promised to save. The land is a critical koala habitat, and Labor went to the election saying they would finally save it. Now, they will only save it if they get carbon credits for it, which is a useless way of pretending that you can harvest carbon elsewhere to offset emissions, rather than actually cutting emissions. The Nationals have a disallowance motion to stop the change, and if the Greens (and presumably the Liberals) agree to it, they have the numbers to stop the regulation change, although for very different reasons.

There was also lots of pushback against China by the government these last few weeks – Albanese went to Fiji in early July to sign an agreement, which explicitly is meant to counter Chinese influence. He also met with India’s prime minister in Melbourne. Foreign affairs, at least in the Pacific, is maybe the strongest government policy at the moment.

We are still very on-board with Aukus.

So that’s the main catch up. The main game this week, from a legislation view point, will be whether the government passes the NDIS cuts, and what happens with gambling. We will be watching both.

We’ll have a slower blog today as we ease into the sitting week (from tomorrow) but there will be lots to cover off and we are hoping to hear more from you! So keep up the conversation in the comments.

Coffee number three is on. I will try to keep it to that today.

Ready?

Me either, but it’s my job. Let’s get into it.