PLEASE DON'T DISAPPOINT THE DISABLED, JULIA
Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.
Of all Gillard’s electioneering “initiatives”, the NDIS will be her most disastrous. The disabled and their carers will be devastated when they discover it’s just another Gillard fraud. It has little hope of implementation and no hope of working.
This is the blatant, vote-catching scam that makes me the most angry, and I’ll tell you why.
- Between 35 and 40 percent of all departmental budgets is usurped in administrative costs. That’s normal, but the projected NDIS will not fare anywhere near that well.
- The NDIS will be yet another new monolithic department employing an army of Labor-voting, dubiously qualified Public Servants because there is no similar department on which to draw or compare.
- The scheme itself will attract far more fraudulent claims than the ATO and Centrelink combined and that requires other monitoring departments, investigators and much litigation.
- There is no legal definition of “a disability”. Therefore, medicos and shrinks will be kept busy supporting claims of disabilities instead of treating them.
- Claimants who have been denied access to the scheme must be given recourse to an appeals process. There’s another new department with associated legal-aid costs.
- Litigation can be expected from the carers/families of unsuccessful claimants who have had accidents or died, allegedly as a result of a rejected disability.
- Who will legally discern a “temporary disability” from a “permanent disability?”
- Is downs syndrome more deserving than severe depression or a recurring drug addiction?
- Can a mental disability equate fairly to a physical disability?
- A crippling spinal injury is surely a disability but what if it marginally improves? Who monitors that? Is the claimant legally required to return benefits on an honesty basis? More legal aid!
- Who are the recipients of the benefits when the disabled are unable to administer them? Who determines that? Mmmm.
- Can disabled pensioners in private nursing homes trust their carers with various benefits? They haven’t been able to in the past.
- How is it possible to legally determine the extent of a disability? Will it be on a scale of one to ten? Does seven qualify and six not?
One thing is certain, 34,000 illegal immigrants will take a keen interest in the scheme. Sewn lips, isolation and mental anguish seem a reasonable basis for a legitimate claim, via legal aid.
Julia Gillard has cruelly gladdened the hearts of the needy, but it’s Tony Abbott who will wrestle with the reality.
As is usual with this type of scheme, the smart operators manipulate it while the truly needy miss out.
It is the carers who need support and their roles are more easily quantified and regulated than the disabled.
While you’re there sew up Julia’s lips because every time she opens her mouth someone is terribly disappointed.