Submission to the

Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee

Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2025

Submitted by: National Ethnic Disability Alliance (NEDA) Date: February 2026

Contact:

• About NEDA: The National Ethnic Disability Alliance (NEDA) is the national peak Disabled People’s Organisation (DPO) representing culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) people with disability, their families, and carers. NEDA is governed by, and constitutes of, people with disability and/or from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds, and works to advance equitable, culturally safe and human-rights-based disability policy and systems across Australia.

• Overview and Position: NEDA supports the intent of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2025 (the Bill) to strengthen accountability, prevent

Exploitation, Safeguarding, and Improving Measures within the National Disability Insurance Scheme

Evidence from NEDA’s consultation with CALD NDIS participants and informal carers demonstrates strong support for enhanced integrity and safeguarding measures, including fines, provider bans, and criminal sanctions in cases of serious misconduct (NEDA, 2024). Participants viewed such measures as necessary to deter unethical behaviour, improve service quality, and restore trust in the Scheme.

The direction of the Bill is consistent with the NDS Review Final Report, which emphasised the need for stronger integrity and enforcement mechanisms alongside protections for participant rights and access, particularly for people experiencing systemic disadvantage (Commonwealth of Australia, 2023).

However, NEDA is concerned that without explicit safeguards, several provisions may have unintended and disproportionate impacts on CALD people with disability, particularly those facing language barriers, limited access to advocacy, cultural misunderstanding, and mistrust of enforcement-focused systems.

Clause-specific analysis and recommendations

3.1 Integrity, monitoring and compliance powers

Relevant provisions:

• Civil and criminal penalties: ss 57, 59A, 73B, 73D, 73J, 73V, 73ZC, 73ZI
• Monitoring and investigation: ss 73ZE, 73ZF, 73ZK–73ZL

Issue: The Bill substantially expands the NDIS Commission’s integrity, monitoring, investigation and enforcement powers. CALD participants support stronger action against unsafe or unethical conduct. However, NEDA’s consultation identified concern that broad compliance powers, if not clearly constrained, may capture administrative errors or miscommunication rather than serious misconduct (NEDA, 2024).

Page 3

This risk is heightened for CALD participants and providers operating in linguistically complex environments, where compliance failures may arise from system complexity rather than intent.

Recommendation 1:

Ensure that enforcement powers under amended ss 57, 59A, 73B, 73D, 73J and related provisions are applied on a proportionate, risk-based basis, with explicit guidance distinguishing serious or systemic non-compliance from inadvertent or administrative breaches.

3.2 Information sharing and protected Commission information

Relevant provisions:

• Protected information offences and civil penalties: ss 67B—67D
• Delegation of rule-making powers: s 201A

Issue:

Participants supported information sharing with courts and regulators where absolutely necessary to ensure accountability for serious harm. However, strong concerns were raised about privacy, consent, and the handling of protected information, particularly for CALD communities with heightened fears of surveillance or cross-agency data use (NEDA, 2024).

While the Bill introduces additional civil penalties for misuse of protected Commission information, it also expands rule-making and information-sharing powers that may not be well understood by participants.

Recommendation 2:

Strengthen safeguards around ss 67B—67D and related rule-making under s 201A by requiring:

• strict necessity thresholds for disclosure,
• participant notification wherever practicable,
• and culturally accessible explanations of how protected information may be used and shared.

3.3 Banning orders and compliance with banning orders

Relevant provisions:

• Expanded banning order powers: s 73ZN
• Compliance with banning orders: s 73ZNA

Issue:

CALD participants strongly supported the removal of unsafe or unethical providers and individuals from the NDIS. However, NEDA’s consultation highlighted concern that banning orders imposed without adequate transition planning may result in sudden loss of essential supports (NEDA, 2024).

This risk is particularly acute where culturally safe or language-appropriate alternatives are limited.

Recommendation 3:

Amend the operation of ss 73ZN and 73ZNA to require that, where a banning order may disrupt participant supports, the Commission and NDIA implement participant-centred transition planning to ensure continuity of essential services.

3.4 Criminal offences and higher-tier penalties

Relevant provisions:

• Definitions of serious contravention: ss 11B, 73B
• Criminal offences for non-compliance: ss 73B, 73ZNA, 73ZI

Issue:

Participants expressed strong support for criminal penalties in cases of egregious misconduct such as fraud, abuse or exploitation, particularly where harm is repeated or severe (NEDA, 2024). This aligns with the Disability Royal Commission, which called for stronger accountability where violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation occurs (Royal Commission, 2023).

At the same time, participants emphasised the importance of proportionality and due process, noting concerns about over-criminalisation.

Recommendation 4:

Clarify that criminal offences and higher-tier penalties under ss 11B, 73B, 73ZNA and related provisions apply only to intentional, reckless or systemic conduct causing significant harm, and not to minor administrative errors or failures arising from language or system barriers.

3.5 Anti-promotion orders

Relevant provisions:

• Anti-promotion orders: ss 73ZOA–73ZOC

Issue:

NEDA supports measures to address misleading or predatory promotional conduct that undermines the integrity of the NDIS. However, participants emphasised the need for clear boundaries and procedural fairness, particularly where anti-promotion orders may affect livelihoods.

Recommendation 5:

Ensure that the exercise of powers under ss 73ZOA–73ZOC includes clear guidance, reasons-giving, and accessible avenues for review, with information provided in culturally and linguistically appropriate formats.

3.6 Participant safeguards and NDIA administrative integrity

Relevant provisions:

• Withdrawal from the Scheme: ss 29, 29A
• Claims and electronic claiming: ss 9A, 45, 45A
• Plan variation: s 47A

Issue:

NEDA supports the introduction of a 90-day cooling-off period for participant withdrawal under new s 29A and expanded communication methods. These measures provide important safeguards, particularly for participants experiencing coercion, stress, or misinformation.

Page 6

However, CALD participants may require additional support to understand these processes.

Recommendation 6: Ensure implementation of ss 29A, 9A, 45, 45A and 47A is supported by culturally safe communication, interpreter access, and outreach to ensure CALD participants can exercise their rights effectively.

Cultural Safety as a Cross-Cutting Requirement

Across all amended provisions, NEDA emphasises that integrity and safeguarding mechanisms must be culturally safe, trauma-informed and accessible. NEDA’s consultation identified ongoing barriers including racism, lack of interpreters, culturally unsafe service responses, and inaccessible complaints pathways (NEDA, 2024).

Cross-cutting Recommendation:

Insert an overarching requirement that all integrity, compliance and safeguarding functions exercised under the amended Act be delivered in culturally safe, linguistically accessible and trauma-informed ways.

Conclusion

NEDA supports the objectives of the NDIS Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2025 and the strengthening of accountability within the NDIS. CALD people with disability want robust safeguards and meaningful consequences for misconduct.

To ensure these reforms do not create new harms, the Bill must embed proportionality, privacy protections, cultural safety and participant-centred implementation. NEDA urges the Committee to adopt the recommendations outlined above to ensure integrity reforms deliver safety with equity.

NEDA welcomes the opportunity to appear before the Committee and provide further evidence if required.

Appendix A – Clause Mapping Table

Relevant section(s)	Key concern identified by NEDA	Recommended amendment
ss 57, 59A, 73B, 73D, 73J, 73V, 73ZC	Risk of disproportionate enforcement for administrative or language-related non-compliance	Apply proportionality and risk-based thresholds; Strengthen necessity thresholds, notification and safeguards
ss 67B–67D, 201A	Privacy and misuse of protected information	Notification and safeguards
ss 73ZN, 73ZNA	Disruption to participant supports following banning orders	Require participant-centred transition planning; Limit criminal penalties to intentional, reckless or systemic harm
ss 11B, 73B, 73ZNA, 73ZI	Over-criminalisation	Intentional, reckless or systemic harm
ss 73ZOA–73ZOC	Procedural fairness for anti-promotion orders	Clear guidance, reasons-giving and review pathways; Culturally safe implementation and communication
ss 29, 29A, 9A, 45, 45A, 47A	Accessibility of NDIA administrative reforms	Implementation and communication
All amended provisions	Lack of explicit cultural safety requirement	Insert overarching cultural safety obligation