Page 170 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 10 February 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Radio 1RPH sees itself as one of those tier 2 information services that should receive block funding through the NDIA. The Disability Reform Council released broad parameters about who could qualify for tier 2 funding. Radio 1RPH, on my advice, thought that they would qualify, but unfortunately that has turned out not to be the case.
The ACT government, through Disability ACT, provided $38,000 in this past financial year, and Radio 1RPH also receives funding from the commonwealth through the Community Broadcasting Foundation. But that funding, as with the majority of the ACT’s disability funding, was handed over as part of the bilateral negotiations between the ACT and the commonwealth for the NDIA. Unfortunately for Radio 1RPH, the NDIA has determined that they do not qualify for tier 2 funding despite the guidance given by the Disability Reform Council. This is an unfortunate situation, because the ACT funding forms around 25 per cent of the funding base for the station. Without it, some of the scenarios that Mrs Dunne has painted in her introductory remarks about the reduction of services or reduced transmission hours are potential consequences.
I know that Radio 1RPH are making representations to the federal department of communications and have also met with the NDIA head office on this policy decision, but so far to no avail. They are also anticipating making a representation to the Minister for Social Services, Christian Porter, to explain this situation and see what can be done. In the meantime, I will be supporting the amendment that Dr Bourke has put forward today so that the government can work directly with Radio 1RPH to see what other options would be available for the ACT government to provide additional funding.
This is a difficult issue. Members have supported the transition to the NDIS and the philosophy of it. There is an empowerment for the individual, and money goes out, but clearly there are issues that are perhaps not as black and white as we all thought when we welcomed the NDIS. This is one of those examples where the implementation is proving to be difficult and problematic.
I trust that Mrs Dunne will find the amendment that Dr Bourke has presented a positive contribution to the debate. I welcome the commitment to identifying alternative funding streams and business development opportunities. I welcome Dr Bourke’s indication that he will write to the federal minister for disability—this is something we raised with his office, and direct representation can only assist—and give the Assembly an update, which, if I recall correctly, was in Mrs Dunne’s original motion.
I trust that this is a well-received amendment and I do hope that we can sort this situation out. Radio 1RPH does really add to our community—and to the broader community, as we were told earlier, with broader geographic spread than traditionally. We need to work out how it can best access additional funds given the changing system that we are facing with the introduction of the national disability insurance scheme.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video