National Disability Insurance Scheme Access Changes
Department of Health, Disability and Ageing Consultation
October 2026
Key issues
This submission
Palliative Care Australia (PCA) is the national peak advocacy body for palliative care, and represents all those who work towards high-quality palliative and end-of-life care for those who need it. Working closely with consumers, our Member Organisations and the palliative care workforce, PCA aims to improve access to and promote palliative care.
PCA welcomes the opportunity to provide advice to the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing’s consultation on National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) access changes through this submission.
Summary
The Australian Government is reshaping NDIS access. For people with life-limiting illness, the stakes are high because the requirement to demonstrate that all appropriate treatment has been undertaken could delay or prevent access, while new access assessments may miss rapid decline. This is concerning given the risk of erroneously denying NDIS access on the mistaken assumption that the palliative care system would meet disability support needs.
The scale of change has caused understandable concern among people with life-limiting illness who need disability support and are now unsure about whether they may be able to access it into the future. This submission recommends changes to the access principles and process to ensure people with life-limiting illness with disability support needs are not disproportionately disadvantaged by these reforms.
The current consultation materials provide little detail about how the Government will reduce NDIS participant numbers while still protecting the rights of people who require disability support services. Foundational Supports for people under 65 with life-limiting illness are not in place. Without reliable support outside the NDIS, an access refusal can leave people at the mercy of postcode lottery for other disability support services.
This submission provides recommendations about:
- how to determine permanence fairly, taking into account the needs of people with life-limiting illness
- how to design the NDIS access process so it meets the needs of people with life-limiting illness, including people with short life expectancies
- how the proposed guiding principles can be refined with the needs of this cohort in mind.
Determining permanence fairly
The proposed reforms include a requirement to have undertaken all “appropriate treatment” in order to be eligible for NDIS support. This raises particular concerns for people with life-limiting illness. As terminal illnesses progress, it is normal and appropriate to receive treatment that alleviates symptoms; this should not prevent anyone from accessing NDIS-funded disability supports. Instead, healthcare and disability support, where necessary, should occur simultaneously and in parallel, as envisaged by the Independent NDIS Review.
PCA welcomes Note 2 under subsection 24(5) of the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by Parliament (‘the Bill’): “A person may require ongoing treatment for some permanent impairments in order to maintain functional capacity in relation to an activity, even if the person has undertaken all appropriate treatments for the impairment.” The Explanatory Memorandum also confirms that ongoing treatment to maintain functional capacity, including for degenerative conditions, should not prevent NDIS access.1 This safeguard must be reflected in access rules, assessment tools and assessor practice.
In addition, PCA is concerned that a person’s inability to access treatment due to financial circumstances will not be taken into account when considering whether a person has undertaken all appropriate treatment.2 While PCA welcomes amendments clarifying that “appropriate treatment” can only include those treatments for which public funding is available (such as through the Medicare Benefits Schedule, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and public hospitals),3,4 it still remains unclear what out of pocket costs participants may reasonably be expected to cover in undertaking all appropriate treatment. There is a clear need to clarify this in the NDIS rules.5
NDIS Priority Access Pathway
PCA recommends that the Australian Government ensure that the NDIS Priority Access Pathway is made a permanent feature of the NDIS access process. It should also clearly explain to NDIS applicants and health professionals the circumstances where the Pathway will apply, and how people with disability can escalate their access request to the Pathway. Limited public communication about the pathway to date has created unnecessary uncertainty in the context of major NDIS access reforms.
Point-in-time assessment
PCA is also concerned about the proposed introduction of single point-in-time assessment of functional capacity. The nature of terminal illness means that for many people, functional capacity and associated support needs can change quite rapidly. Given this reality, functional capacity assessments should account for the full range of functional states over several points in time, and where possible anticipate future functional decline. To do this accurately, it will be critical for NDIS access assessors to have relevant health experience and or qualifications and be able to seek clinical
expertise and advice from treating health professionals alongside views from family and carers. Importantly, the costs for any health professional reports required by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) for a participant to access the scheme should be covered by the Australian Government.
Guiding principles
PCA welcomes the proposed principles’ focus on human rights, lived experience, evidence, and a person-centred, strengths-based approach. It is important to acknowledge the human rights concerns that many stakeholders have raised in relation to recent legislative changes. PCA recommends a specific acknowledgment of life-limiting illness and rapidly deteriorating conditions in Principle 5, “Equitable, inclusive and safe.” PCA also recommends inclusion of a new principle around low barriers to access, which at a practical level would include multiple referral pathways into the scheme.
Broader issues affecting NDIS access
There are two critical barriers that profoundly impact access to disability support for people with life-limiting illness, and which were highlighted in the Independent NDIS Review. Though they may fall outside the scope of this consultation, if not addressed these barriers will continue to impede access to appropriate support.
Clarifying system boundaries
The Australian Government has announced its intention to further clarify boundaries between the NDIS and other service systems. However, a goal to establishing harder lines between systems may be at odds with recommendations from the NDIS review, which suggested both the clarification of distinct system responsibilities and shared responsibility between service systems, where appropriate, so that people with disability are not caught between systems and funders that disagree about who is responsible for delivering care.
Filling the service gap outside the NDIS
The most pressing factor contributing to problems at the interface between the NDIS and other services systems is the lack of functional support outside the NDIS for people with life limiting illness, who are under 65. PCA estimates that each year around 5,000-10,000 Australians under 65 with a life limiting condition cannot access functional support, such as personal care and domestic assistance, outside the NDIS. Many of these people end up in hospital, not because they need to be in hospital, but because they cannot remain at home safely without this basic support.
Due to this lack of support outside the scheme, the NDIS can be seen by some as the only program through which to obtain these critical supports. Investment to fill
this gap is critical to divert NDIS applications from people who should arguably be receiving support from other services.
This group was identified by the Independent NDIS Review as requiring additional support, and should be a clear priority for a future system of Foundational Supports.
Recommendations
Determining permanence fairly
Recommendation 1
The rules for determining permanency should specify the circumstances where ongoing treatment can occur without precluding someone’s access to the NDIS. It should also specify where treatment that might be appropriate for some individuals could be considered inappropriate for those receiving palliative care. This should include, at a minimum:
- where the purpose of the treatment is to alleviate symptoms or distress associated with life-limiting disease or illness, such as palliative care to ease pain or breathlessness
- where a treatment is generally appropriate for an illness or condition, but is not clinically appropriate for an individual
- where a treatment may be considered appropriate, but is unacceptable to an individual due to side effects or quality of life impacts.
The Australian Government should consult with people with life-limiting illness, family, carers and clinical experts on the detail of the rules for determining the permanency of a person’s functional impairment.
Recommendation 2
The rules should specify what is considered a reasonable cost to consumers for appropriate treatments (for example in the form of out-of-pocket costs over and above what is covered by the Medicare Benefits Schedule or the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme).
Recommendation 3
The Australian Government should explain the process it intends to use to seek expert advice to determine what is appropriate treatment for different conditions or diagnoses, and to update its approach as new evidence emerges.
Recommendation 4
Once determined, the Australian Government should provide clear information about the evidence NDIS applicants would be required to provide to demonstrate they have exhausted appropriate treatment. As far as possible this should include the use of existing health professional reports.
Access decision-making process
Recommendation 5
The NDIA should make the Priority Access Pathway permanent, and extend it to all conditions with a typical trajectory of rapid decline.
Recommendation 6
The NDIA should provide much clearer and more accessible advice to health professionals, NDIS Hospital Liaison Officers, NDIS Partners in the Community and people with life-limiting illness, their carers and families, about the Priority Access Pathway, including:
- who is and is not eligible for the Pathway
- how to access to the Pathway, including escalation from the normal access pathway into the Priority Access Pathway
- what people seeking to access the Pathway can expect during the access process.
Recommendation 7
To arrive at accurate and consistent NDIS access assessment outcomes for people with life-limiting illness, functional capacity assessments should use multiple time points, capture multiple states of functional capacity and anticipate likely future functional capacity declines.
Recommendation 8
NDIS access assessors should have health related experience and or qualifications and the ability to consult relevant clinical expertise to assist in understanding complex health information, including anticipating where functional capacity may fluctuate or be likely to deteriorate.
NDIS access assessments should consider the views and clinical reports prepared by treating health professionals and the views of family and carers.
Recommendation 9
The Australian Government should cover the cost of any medical or clinical assessments it requires NDIS applicants to provide in order to access the NDIS.
Guiding Principles
Recommendation 10
The NDIA should publish information on how it intends to implement the principles in practice.
In Principle 5, “Equitable, inclusive and safe,” PCA recommends inclusion of the words “rapidly deteriorating” and “life-limiting” in the sentence: “… work effectively for people whose disability may be complex, fluctuating, episodic or not immediately visible.”
PCA also recommends inclusion of a new principle on low barriers to entry to the NDIS, for example through enabling multiple referral pathways and low administrative burden.
Broader issues affecting NDIS access
Recommendation 11
Governments should review and update the Applied Principles and Tables of Support to provide better guidance on how the NDIS and mainstream systems can and should provide services simultaneously and in parallel, where appropriate, consistent with the intent of the Independent NDIS Review.
Recommendation 12
Governments should invest in functional support outside the NDIS for people under 65 with a life limiting illness and disability support needs.
Determining permanence fairly
The new legislation requires prospective NDIS participants to have undertaken all ‘appropriate treatment’. Appropriate treatment must be evidence-based, regularly performed in Australia, and expected to “improve, reverse, or alleviate” the impact of an impairment.6
For people with life-limiting illness, this creates a serious risk that palliative care to alleviate symptoms such as pain or breathlessness could be treated as a reason to deny NDIS access. This would be a profoundly negative outcome which would deny necessary disability support for many thousands of Australians at the very time when they most need that support. Symptom relief does not necessarily remove the need for
disability supports nor treat an underlying condition. For example, dopaminergic therapy for Parkinson’s disease may manage symptoms without reversing or halting the underlying pathology.7
PCA welcomes Note 2 under subsection 24(5) of the Bill: “A person may require ongoing treatment for some permanent impairments in order to maintain functional capacity in relation to an activity, even if the person has undertaken all appropriate treatments for the impairment.” The Explanatory Memorandum also confirms that ongoing treatment to maintain functional capacity, including for degenerative conditions, should not prevent NDIS access.8 This safeguard must be reflected in access rules, assessment tools and assessor practice.
To this end, PCA recommends that the Australian Government consult with clinicians, service providers and consumers on the content of rules and the ways in which they will specify the circumstances in which a person is to have undertaken all appropriate treatment. The process for determining permanency should specify the circumstances where ongoing treatment can occur without precluding someone’s access to the NDIS – or conversely where treatment that might be appropriate for some individuals could be considered inappropriate for those receiving palliative care, including, at a minimum:
- where the purpose of the treatment is to alleviate symptoms or distress associated with life-limiting disease or illness, such as palliative care to ease pain or breathlessness
- where a treatment is generally appropriate for an illness or condition, but is not clinically appropriate for an individual
- where a treatment may be considered appropriate, but is unacceptable to an individual due to side effects or quality of life impacts.
At a system level, the Australian Government should also explain how it will seek clinical advice to inform which ‘appropriate treatments’ people will be required to undertake. Clinical guidance about this question will be essential to ensure safety and dignity of participants.
In addition, there remains widespread concern about the Bill’s intention that a treatment can still be considered appropriate even if a person’s financial circumstance prevent them from accessing it.9 We welcome amendments to the Bill to clarify that, to be considered appropriate treatment, there must be public funding available in respect of the treatment (for example through the Medicare Benefits Schedule, Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme or public hospitals).10,11 However, we continue to hold concerns regarding whether prospective participants will be expected to contribute what can sometimes be significant out of pocket costs to undertake specific treatments to access the NDIS. There is a need to clarify what out of pocket costs can reasonably be expected of participants in order to demonstrate they have undertaken all appropriate treatment.
Finally, there is also a need to clarify what evidence NDIS applicants will be required to provide. Requiring people with progressive illness to prove they have exhausted every appropriate treatment could impose substantial costs and delays on them, and could run counter to both the purpose of and the right to palliative care. For people with short life expectancies, delay may mean never receiving the functional support they need.
Access decision-making process
For the NDIS access process to accurately and consistently identify people with a life-limiting illness who are eligible for NDIS, it must be accessible, swift and flexible. Efforts should build on the success of the NDIS Priority Access Pathway, ensure the access process and tools are adequately tailored for people with a life-limiting illness, and make sure NDIS access assessors have the right skills, knowledge and experience to make consistent and accurate decisions about NDIS access.
Building on the success of the NDIS Priority Access Pathway
The NDIA introduced the Priority Access Pathway in 2024 for people with terminal illness and disability. It committed to an access decision within five business days and a first plan within 30 days of the person becoming a participant.12 This was a significant step forward in ensuring the NDIS access process appropriately responds to people with a life-limiting illness, which prior to that time had been a major challenge.
There is a clear need for a public commitment from the NDIA to retain the Priority Access Pathway. This is all the more pressing in the context that section 20(2)(a) of the NDIS Act now allows 90 days for an access decision from the NDIA. Life-limiting conditions do not wait for administrative processes.13
The Pathway must also be easier to use. People assisting applicants have reported uncertainty about how to request a Priority Access Pathway decision.14 The NDIA should publish clear practical guidance for applicants, families, clinicians and the palliative care sector about entry points and criteria for the Pathway.
PCA understands the Pathway has to date primarily been used for people with metastatic cancer, particularly brain cancer, childhood dementia and Motor Neurone Disease. The Pathway – or a similar process – should also be available to people with other conditions that cause documented rapid functional decline. Access to a timely decision should reflect a person’s trajectory and support needs and not be determined purely by diagnosis.
Accurately assessing functional capacity of people with life-limiting illness
Accurately assessing functional capacity of people with a life-limiting illness requires the right assessment tools, right information, and assessors with the right skills, knowledge and experience.
NDIS access assessments must reflect how life-limiting conditions affect a person over time. A single point in time assessment may miss fluctuating impairment, treatment-related changes or rapid decline, leading to an inaccurate decision about eligibility.
Assessment tools should draw on evidence from multiple time points.15,16 For fluctuating conditions, they must capture both a person’s best and worst functional states, including changes caused by energy limits or treatment.17 This should include consideration of the impact of complex symptoms such as fatigue and pain. An assessment of what a person can do on one day, particularly without examining the support they rely on, can substantially understate impairment across a fluctuating and progressive illness.18
Assessments must also anticipate likely decline in functional capacity. For someone with Motor Neurone Disease, for example, functional capacity may change significantly within weeks. As MND Australia has pointed out, progressive conditions require an assessment process to account for both current capacity and the person’s likely near-future needs.19
Assessment tools are only part of the answer. NDIS access assessors could potentially need to:
- interpret complex medical information (including understanding a possible trajectory of decline in functional capacity and whether treatment options are in fact appropriate given an individual’s circumstances and end-of-life care preferences)
- make judgement calls about when information might need to be sourced from third parties (such as carers or treating health professionals).
PCA therefore recommends that assessors making access decisions for people with life-limiting illness have health-related experience and/or qualifications and a clear process for obtaining further specialist clinical advice when needed.
PCA welcomes the commitment in the consultation paper to the access decision making process being informed by evidence and clinical expertise. A person’s treating health professionals understand both the condition and its impact on the individual thoroughly. Their views and professional opinions must be given appropriate weighting in the access process.20,21 PCA holds particular concerns that this is not occurring currently.22 Further, the Australian Government should cover the cost of any additional health reports they require of NDIS applicants.
PCA also welcomes the commitment to the access decision making process being informed by lived experience. Families and carers can also provide valuable evidence of functional capacity across daily life and over time.23
Guiding principles
In order to better account for the needs of people with a life-limiting illness, PCA recommends Principle 5 “Equitable, inclusive and safe” be updated to include words “rapidly deteriorating” and “life-limiting” in the sentence: “… work effectively for people whose disability may be complex, fluctuating, episodic or not immediately visible.”
PCA also recommends inclusion of a new principle on low barriers to entry to the NDIS for those who are eligible. Practically, this could mean ensuring there are several referral pathways, such as self-referral, NDIS Hospital Liaison Officer referral, NDIS Partner in the Community referral and health professional referral. It also speaks to low administrative burden and tailoring the pathway to meet cognitive function and fatigue, through offering several communication methods and no jargon.
System interface challenges
While outside the scope of this consultation, it is important to also understand the broader strategic context, which underpins the NDIS Access process as it relates to the provision of palliative care and disability supports. This includes the need to clarify system boundaries and reduce the flow of unnecessary NDIS applications from people with life limiting illness.
Clarifying system boundaries
The Australian Government has previously stated an intention to clarify the boundaries between service systems through its NDIS reforms, including changes to NDIS access.24 This approach of drawing harder lines between the NDIS and other service systems runs counter to the NDIS Review’s recommendation to identify shared responsibilities between systems to stop people who require supports from NDIS and other systems simultaneously from falling through the gaps.25 For people with life-limiting illness, this distinction matters as they often need palliative care and disability supports at the same time.
The Applied Principles and Tables of Support (APTOS) state that “functional supports as a part of an NDIS participant’s plan may continue to be provided at the same time as palliative care services, recognising that supports may need to be adjusted in scope or frequency as a result of the need to align with the core palliative care being delivered through sub-acute health services.”26
Despite this early attempt to clarify the interface between NDIS and palliative care, the NDIS Review found it is difficult to navigate and can lead to poor outcomes, including uncertainty about which system should meet a person’s support needs.27 More recently the NDIS supports transitional rules clarified that NDIS supports for the participant may continue to be provided at the same time as sub-acute or palliative care services.28
PCA understands that some people with life-limiting illness have been denied NDIS access on the assumption that palliative care would meet their disability support needs. In practice, those supports are unavailable through the palliative care system. It is too early to tell whether the transitional rule on NDIS Supports has resolved this issue. But the risk of further NDIS access denials on this basis is heightened by the new legislation enabling access to be denied if another service system “can reasonably meet the needs of a person, or where the service system has responsibility for meeting the needs of a person…”29
The NDIS Review called for the palliative care and NDIS interface to be treated as a priority and for clearer guidance on how the two systems work together.30 To address this recommendation, PCA recommends Australian Governments review and update the APTOS to provide better guidance on how the NDIS and mainstream systems can and should provide services simultaneously and in parallel, where appropriate, consistent with the intent of the Independent NDIS Review.
Reducing the flow of unnecessary NDIS applications from people with life-limiting illness
Finally, in order to ease pressure on the NDIS access pathway and avoid unnecessary administrative burden for people with life-limiting illness and their family and carers, PCA recommends that Australia Governments invest in functional support outside the NDIS for people with a life-limiting illness. PCA estimates that each year around 5,000-10,000 Australians with a life-limiting condition under 65 are unable to access the non-clinical care that would allow them to remain at home safely; supports like: personal care and domestic assistance are essential to their dignity and quality of life. But these people are ineligible for NDIS and too young to access aged care. They are falling through the gaps in the system. We should not wait until people’s functional capacity deteriorates to the point where they need NDIS support to provide them with basic at home assistance.
As a solution to this issue, PCA has previously proposed a pilot that would fund non-clinical care (which would complement clinical palliative care) for 1,000 people over two years at a cost of $16 million. For more information about this proposal see Palliative Care Australia’s 2026 Federal Budget Submission. This should be a key priority for investment already provisioned by Australian Governments for Foundational Supports.
References
1 Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia (2026) NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS For Future Generations Bill 2026: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, 67
2 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by both houses, 43, see the note at section 25A(2)
3 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by both houses, 42, see section 25A(1)(c) and note 1
4 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, 68
5 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by both houses, 43, see sections 25A(3)(b) and 25A(4)
6 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by both houses, 42, see section 25A(1)(b)
7 Parkinson’s Australia (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 14
8 Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia (2026) NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS For Future Generations Bill 2026: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, 67
9 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by both houses, 43, see the note at section 25A(2)
10 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, as passed by both houses, 43, see section 25A(1)(c) and note 1
11 Australian Government (2026) National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, 68
12 PCA (2024) Breakthrough for better access to palliative care for people with disability
13 Neurological Alliance Australia and members of Neurodegenerative, Palliative Care and Rare Diseases Advisory Group (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee’s Inquiry on the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 20
14 Neurodegenerative, Palliative Care and Rare Diseases Advisory Group (2025) Meeting summary, 1
15 Neurological Alliance Australia and members of the Neurodegenerative, Palliative Care and Rare Diseases Advisory Group (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee’s Inquiry on the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 6
16 Parkinson’s Australia (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 2
17 Neurological Alliance Australia and members of Neurodegenerative, Palliative Care and Rare Diseases Advisory Group (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee’s Inquiry on the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 6
18 Neurological Alliance Australia and members of Neurodegenerative, Palliative Care and Rare Diseases Advisory Group (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee’s Inquiry on the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 4-6
19 MND Australia (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Committee Inquiry into the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 3
20 Parkinson’s Australia (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 2
21 Dementia Australia (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 4
22 Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee (2025) Official Committee Hansard: Estimates: Thursday 27 February 2025, 7
23 Dementia Australia (2026) Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026, 4
24 Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia (2026) NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS For Future Generations Bill 2026: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, 212
25 NDIS Review (2023) Working together to deliver the NDIS: Independent Review into the NDIS: Final report (see Action 2.6), 76
26 Australian Governments (2015) Applied principles and tables of support to determine the responsibilities of the NDIS and other services systems, 5
27 NDIS Review (2023) Working together to deliver the NDIS: Independent Review into the NDIS: Final Report: Supporting Analysis, 137
28 The Hon Bill Shorten, then Minister for the NDIS (2024) NDIS (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1)(NDIS Supports) Transitional Rules 2024 (see Schedule 2, section 1 table item 12(r)). The NDIS supports transitional rules confirmed that “sub-acute palliative care, including in-patient and out-patient services delivered in the person’s home or clinical setting.” are not NDIS supports but clarified that “NDIS supports for the participant that may continue to be provided at the same time as sub-acute or palliative care services are not included in [sub-acute palliative care which are not NDIS supports]”.
29 The Hon Mark Butler, Minister for Disability and the NDIS (2026) NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS For Future Generations Bill 2026: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, 72
30 NDIS Review (2023) Working together to deliver the NDIS: Independent Review into the NDIS: Final Report: Supporting Analysis, 137