Dear Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee,

I am writing to express my serious concerns about the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. As a disabled person with multiple disabled family members, I believe this Bill could have a detrimental impact on the lives of people with disability and undermine the original intent of the NDIS.

Multiple people who are close to me rely on the NDIS, including multiple family members and friends. In particular, one friend who was unable to continue working due to his emerging Parkinson’s would have been unable to support his family of four without NDIS funding.

I am particularly worried about the following aspects of the Bill:

• The shift from ‘reasonable and necessary supports’ to ‘reasonable and necessary budgets’. I fear this change could lead to arbitrary limits on the supports people can access, rather than focusing on what each individual actually needs to live an ordinary life.

• The tighter definition of what supports the NDIS will fund. I am concerned this definition is too narrow and could exclude vital supports that people with disability rely on to participate in the community and pursue their goals.

• The increased powers for the NDIA to require people to undergo assessments or provide information, with the threat of plans being suspended or revoked for non-compliance. This fails to recognise the many barriers people with disability can

face in engaging with bureaucratic processes, especially if they are

 experiencing a crisis or have complex needs.

4. The provisions that allow the NDIA to prevent a person from

 self-managing their funding if they have made mistakes in the

  past. This seems to go against the principle of choice and control

  that is central to the NDIS.

The NDIS funding model in its current state is already overly restrictive for disabled people. I recall one particularly egregious incident involving a friend with cerebral palsy; she was unable to receive funding for preventative maintenance on her electric wheelchair, leading to it breaking down and stranding her in the middle of the road. She could only obtain funding after the fact. I cannot imagine how much more vulnerable she would be if her funding was restricted to a hard budget limit. The needs of individuals with disabilities cannot be accurately estimated with a budget. The idea of further restricting funding for disabled individuals to save money is laughable, given the amount of questionably-used money flowing through the corporate structures funded by the NDIS. If overspending is truly a concern, why not start with these?

Overall, I am deeply worried that this Bill represents a shift away from the original vision of the NDIS - to give people with disability choice and control over the supports they need to live an ordinary life. It seems more focused on cutting costs than on improving outcomes for people with disability.

Without the voices of the people with the most at stake, this Bill is liable to do great harm to a great number of vulnerable people. If the NDIS’s purpose is truly to give choices to people with disabilities, why not give

Page 3

them the most vital choice: to participate in the design of laws that affect

them specifically?

I strongly urge the Committee to recommend significant changes to this

Bill. At a minimum, there must be thorough consultation with people with

disability and our representative organisations to ensure any reforms

generally meet the needs of the people the NDIS is intended to support.

The NDIS is too important to get wrong. We must take the time to get

this right, with people with disability at the centre of the process.

Thank you for considering my submission. I would be happy to provide

further information to the Committee if required.

Yours sincerely,