National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
I am a 31yo AFAB Woman with Level 2 Autism. I have just been accepted onto the NDIS and given my first plan after being diagnosed in 2023. I feel a huge sense of relief knowing I might finally be able to get the help I really need. I was diagnosed later in life despite showing all the typical male characteristics of Autism (biting, throwing furniture, isolating from peers, intense special interest). I was able to ‘get by’ for the most part, with extensive clinical psychology from the age of 8. But all this time, I was never given the support I really needed to learn how to maintain friendships, how to handle conflict, how to manage my sensory needs, what to do when I need to melt down. ‘Basic stuff’ really. These gaps in my skillset have become more obvious the older I get. I’ve spent most of my life teetering on the edge of mental collapse, most days unable to imagine carrying on. While I have never attempted my own life. I think about it a lot. Because the world is so abrasive, and I was never given the tools I needed to manage this. I’m only now being given different tools, and I really hope it can save me from helplessness and depression. I hope they’re not taken away before I can learn new things that might change the course of my life when it comes to my disability.
● First and foremost, Labor, you should be so ashamed. ○ When did you stop working for the people and start working for the 1%? ○ Take a long hard look in the mirror folk. This bill is the lowest of lows. ● You’re proposing changes without any consideration of the disability community ● You haven’t even completed the work required to make such changes (see below) ● You can’t hand in homework that’s only 10% complete when the changes could lead to further deaths (we’ve already seen this from NDIS cuts), and significantly impair the LIVES disabled people. ○ When did it become acceptable for the Government to do half arsed work that could kill people?
THE HOMEWORK YOU STILL NEED TO DO (THE BILL CAN’T HOW THIS AFFECTS ME AND MY DISABILITY PASS UNTIL WE KNOW THIS - STATE THE OBVIOUS):
First Nations and Equity First Nations and Equity
1. No dedicated funding has been provided for First Nations NDIS 1. I am not First Nations, but I stand with my reform impacts despite the scheme change representing the brothers and sisters who will be most impacted by greatest policy risk to First Nations people with disability since these changes due to a widening health gap AND
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
the NDIS was created. a higher number of rural/remote participants. 2. The functional capacity assessment tool has not been culturally validated for First Nations participants — the First Peoples Disability Network has called for no First Nations participant to be reassessed under a new tool until independent cultural validation by a First Nations-led research body has occurred. 3. There is no stated plan for how rural and remote participants — who already face significant access barriers — will be supported through the transition to new eligibility criteria, new planning, and Thriving Kids. 4. Psychosocial disability — which is disproportionately represented among First Nations people and those in rural and remote areas — has not been addressed in any specific way in the Bill or accompanying communications.
Human Rights and Legal Framework Human Rights and Legal Framework
1. The Bill removes references to UN Convention on the Rights of 1. Not many supports exist for women with Autism Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) principles — specifically those who were diagnosed later in life. If I lost centred on personalised support, choice, and independence — personalised choice of my providers, this could with no explanation of what replaces them as a legal safeguard remove my supports all together or how Australia’s CRPD obligations are still met. 2. The Bill amends Section 3(1)(d) of the NDIS Act to say supports 2. Without wording to protect people on the scheme, will be provided “so far as is consistent with the financial this puts everyone at risk of losing support sustainability of the scheme” — language that has never appeared in the Act before, making budget a legal test for whether an individual receives support. 3. No human rights compatibility statement or analysis has been 3. This adds to a lifetime of feeling like a burden as published by the government explaining whether and how the a disabled person. Not a very uplifting way to live Bill is consistent with the Human Rights (Parliamentary your life. Scrutiny) Act 2011. 4. The shift from a rights-based framework to a 4. Terrifying stuff to be seen as a dollar number, and sustainability-based framework has not been acknowledged or not as a person trying so hard to exist. explained in any government communication — government
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
fact sheets make no mention of it.
Eligibility: Functional Capacity Eligibility: Functional Capacity
1. The actual threshold for “substantially reduced” functional 1. Not acceptable. This needs to be defined before capacity is not defined in the Bill — how reduced is the bill is passed. As a high-masking autistic “substantially reduced” is left entirely to the Technical Advisory woman, this reads as “you will be cut” Group to determine after the legislation passes. 2. The specific assessment tool or tools to be used have not been 2. “You will be cut, and we’ll retrospectively design identified, selected, or published. the tools to accomplish that” 3. The government has not explained how the new functional 3. “You will be cut, and we’ll retrospectively change capacity definition differs in practice from the existing the definition to do so” six-domain test (communication, social interaction, learning, mobility, self-care, self-management) currently in section 24 of the NDIS Act. 4. No guidance has been provided on how episodic or fluctuating 4. I have numerous chronic incurable conditions that conditions will be assessed under the new functional capacity severely impact my autism when they flare, there test. is no wording to ensure I won’t get missed
Eligibility: Permanence Eligibility: Permanence
1. The Bill tightens the meaning of permanence to reduce access 1. This reads as “you will be cut, and we’ll define “where an impairment can be alleviated or treated” — but these words in order to do so” neither “alleviated” nor “treated” has been defined. 2. It is not clear whether a person who could theoretically access 2. I could fail on the basis that I cannot afford or treatment but cannot afford it, cannot access it in their location, access treatments. or chooses not to would fail the permanence test. 3. It is not clear whether conditions managed by medication, 3. If these therapies mean I finally improve in therapy, or assistive technology would now be deemed wellbeing, there’s no guarantee that I stay golden “alleviated” and therefore ineligible — potentially removing once they’re removed. thousands of current participants. 4. There is no guidance on how this interacts with the existing
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
(2022) provision that allows episodic or fluctuating impairments 4. See above to be treated as permanent.
Eligibility: Access from Other Systems Eligibility: Access from Other Systems
1. The Bill clarifies that access may be affected where someone is, 1. Living with disability affects my mental health or could be, eligible for supports from other service systems — significantly. The mental health care plan is but those other systems (health, mental health, housing, already not enough for me. I worry so much about education) are not adequately funded or available in many parts this. I just want to be happy. of Australia, particularly rural and remote areas and for First Nations people. No plan has been published to fix those systems before restricting NDIS access. 2. There is no definition of what “could be eligible” means in practice — whether a person must actually receive alternative support or merely be theoretically entitled to it.
Eligibility: Diagnosis Lists Eligibility: Diagnosis Lists
1. The removal of diagnosis lists as a means of entry to the NDIS 1. This reads as “we’re removing autism from the has not been accompanied by any transitional guidance for the list, and we’re also not going to tell you how we’ll many conditions that currently rely on those lists for access — assess your functional capacity until after the bill such as autism, intellectual disability, and psychosocial is passed. Oh and we’ll leave it in the hands of disability. TAG to define, and not tell you that we plan to completely ignore the advisory council we will create to tick a box ” - the audacity and lack of professionalism abounds.
2. There is no explanation of how people with conditions that are 2. As a person with Autism this is a cataclysmic difficult to quantify functionally (e.g. psychosocial disability, level of uncertainty. degenerative conditions early in their progression) will demonstrate substantially reduced functional capacity under the
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
new test.
Eligibility: Children and Thriving Kids
1. The Thriving Kids service model — what it will actually fund and provide — has not been finalised by the Commonwealth, states, or territories. 2. There is no confirmed Thriving Kids service offering for rural and remote areas. 3. There is no culturally appropriate Thriving Kids service model for First Nations children. 4. No support needs assessment tool for children under 16 has been selected. 5. It is not clear what happens to children already on the NDIS who are reassessed and redirected to Thriving Kids, including what their existing plans become. 6. Thriving Kids is not yet fully operational, but the Bill enables children to be removed from the NDIS before the replacement service exists.
Planning: Reassessment Rights Planning: Reassessment Rights
1. The time to respond to a reassessment request has been 1. I live with chronic illness as well as Level 2 extended from 21 days to 90 days — a more than fourfold Autism. I recently had a medical episode that increase — with no explanation of how participants with urgent affected my autism greatly (sensory wise). I went or deteriorating needs will be protected during that period. months without seeing any friends/family. I had no support when unable to cook and clean. I imagine I would go through this again, should I need a reassessment and it take 3 months to complete. By then I will have left this earth voluntarily. I could not stand to experience what I went through
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
again. So isolated without help. Capacity can change rapidly and significantly, and this should be treated with such delicate urgency. Lives are at stake. 2. The threshold for requesting an unscheduled reassessment — 2. I’d like you to imagine trying to make last minute that there has been a “significant and ongoing change in appointments with your 5 specialists, to confirm a functional capacity that substantially reduces ability to perform change of capacity at the final hour, when you’re daily activities” — directly contradicts the scheme’s own early unable to walk, clean yourself, feed yourself etc. intervention principles, which require action before deterioration This is a reality we all face as people with occurs, not after it has already substantially occurred. disabilities. 3. Only participants, plan nominees, or guardians will be able to 3. This is absolutely ridiculous. You should not take request unscheduled reassessments — providers, allied health the ability to trigger reviews out of the hands of professionals, and family members who observe functional health professionals who tend to be the experts in decline will no longer be able to trigger a review. the disability at hand. Why would you leave this up to people without training? The people most likely to observe day-to-day functional decline lose the ability to act on it?!!? Are you nuts? Ffs 4. The new reassessment restrictions apply to old framework 4. Guys lets be so ffr. This WILL lead to deaths and plans immediately, before the new framework planning system suicide. Be better. Do better. has been rolled out — creating a gap period where people can neither be reassessed under old rules nor access new framework planning.
Planning: Reasonable and Necessary Supports Planning: Reasonable and Necessary Supports
1. The Bill changes the requirement from supports “arising from an 1. As an autistic person, this affects me greatly. impairment” to supports “arising directly from an impairment” — but the word “directly” has not been defined, creating new scope for denial of supports for secondary conditions (e.g. anxiety arising from autism, mental health conditions arising from chronic pain) that are caused by but not immediately traceable to the eligible impairment. 2. No definition or examples have been provided to distinguish 2. Is there even a difference in the end? It is still a between a direct and indirect connection between a support requirement of support that wouldn’t exist if not
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
need and an eligible impairment. for your disability???
Planning: Ministerial Power Over Budgets Planning: Ministerial Power Over Budgets
1. The Minister can, by legislative instrument, reduce funding 1. Ok. So a minister with no skills in this area, or across an entire category of supports by a set percentage lived experience with my disability can make calls across every participant simultaneously — with no individual on what supports to cut? Abuse. Call it what it is. assessment, no consideration of specific participant circumstances, and no parliamentary vote. 2. These ministerial determinations are exempt from sunsetting 2. See above. provisions — they do not expire and do not require review or parliamentary reauthorisation. 3. The Bill explicitly states that a ministerial determination is valid 3. Abuse. even if it means a participant’s plan no longer covers the full cost of their reasonable and necessary supports — which directly contradicts the individualised planning principle that underpins the entire scheme. 4. There are no stated limits, criteria, or constraints on what 4. Abuse. percentage reduction the Minister may impose, on which support categories, or how frequently. 5. The government has not explained how unchecked, unilateral, 5. Human Rights Abuse. permanent ministerial power over the funding of 760,000 disabled Australians is consistent with the individualised planning model the Act was built on.
Planning: Auto-Renewal and Unspent Funds Planning: Auto-Renewal and Unspent Funds
1. Unspent funds will no longer roll over — removing the buffer 1. This is wildly inappropriate and dangerous given that allows participants to respond to unexpected health events, you haven’t bothered to address how episodic an equipment failures, or increased support needs without waiting fluctuating conditions will be supported/defined. I months for a formal reassessment. am still looking for the right fit when it comes to OT and Speechy, and so while I wait weeks for
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
appointments I just never get to access that therapy then? 2. If a ministerial funding cut has been applied to a support 2. Human Rights Abuse - no wonder you want to category, that cut will be embedded in every auto-renewed plan remove the UN wording indefinitely, with no human review of whether the reduced funding is adequate for the individual. 3. One-off funding items (e.g. for equipment or home 3. This doesn’t affect me, but it enrages me and modifications) that were not spent in the previous plan period breaks my heart to think of the people who might will disappear on auto-renewal. change rentals and not be able to access home mods, and then will have to wait 90 days for a review that HASN’T EVEN BEEN RE-MODELLED YET WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES. Like, this is literally dog sh** quality. How is this even allowed?
Planning: Automated Decision-Making Planning: Automated Decision-Making
1. Schedule 3 of the Bill introduces provisions supporting 1. Isn’t automation how we got here in the first automated decision-making — but the government has place? Planners charging a full fee for a 5 minute provided no detail on which decisions will be automated, what call, that’s automation. safeguards will apply, or how participants will be able to challenge automated decisions. 2. There is no published human rights or due process assessment 2. ‘Shock horror’ (sarcasm) of the automated decision-making provisions. 3. The Bill enables an algorithm to effectively form a legal “state of 3. Oh okay. Seems we learnt nothing from mind” about a participant’s support needs — with no robo-debt. requirement for human review of any particular decision.
Technical Advisory Group Technical Advisory Group
1. It is not stated whether the TAG’s advice will be binding or 1. Historically advisory councils are merely recommendatory. recommendatory - and subsequently ignored.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
2. It is not stated whether the TAG’s recommendations will be 2. THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY SHOULD BE subject to public consultation before implementation. INVOLVED IN A BINDING CAPACITY 3. The TAG will not begin work until mid-2026 and is not expected 3. The math aint mathing. to advise on the functional capacity threshold until some time thereafter — yet Parliament is being asked to pass legislation that legislates that threshold as the basis for eligibility before the advice exists.
Pricing and Market Reform Pricing and Market Reform
1. Pricing decisions are transferred entirely to the Minister with no 1. Power in the hands of someone who has no stated criteria, constraints, or independent oversight of how that understanding/experience. Yeh that should end power will be exercised. well. 2. There is no explanation of whether or how participants and 2. See 1. providers will have input into ministerial pricing decisions. 3. Consultation on differentiated pricing for unregistered providers 3. See 1. has not begun and the model has not been published. 4. The commissioned plan management panel model has not 4. See 1. been designed — selection criteria, integrity requirements, and number of providers have not been specified. 5. The new support coordination and connection function replacing 5. See 1. existing support coordination has not been designed. Its model, workforce, and funding have not been determined.
Transition and Existing Participants Transition and Existing Participants
1. It has not been explained how existing participants whose 1. No services exist that would adequately meet my conditions would not meet the new eligibility threshold will be needs. I’d be back at square 1. A lifelong history transitioned — whether they will lose access, have their plans of difficulties that will never be managed. reduced, or be moved to other services. 2. Existing participants will be reassessed under new eligibility 2. You’ve managed to agree the Minister should criteria over a three-year period, but no detail has been have unchecked powers, and not designed any of
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1041
provided on how they will be notified, what evidence they will the crucial parts that affect the DAY TO DAY OF need to provide, or what their rights will be during that DISABLED PEOPLE. And what? The minister will reassessment. have the final say in these? Genuinely evil. 3. The government has not stated what appeal rights will apply to 3. ??? functional capacity assessments — whether the Administrative Review Tribunal will remain available, whether legal aid will be accessible, or whether new review mechanisms will exist.
Consultation and Process Consultation and Process
1. The Senate has been given only approximately one month (14 1. Human Rights Abuse. May to 16 June 2026) to inquire into and report on a 113-page Bill affecting 760,000 people. 2. The community was given only until 29 May 2026 to make 2. Human Rights Abuse. submissions — less than two weeks after the Bill was tabled. 3. Consultation on the most consequential elements of the Bill 3. Human Rights Abuse. (functional capacity assessment, new framework planning, home and living supports, support coordination) has not yet begun and is not scheduled until the second half of 2026 — after the legislation is expected to pass. 4. The government has not published how it will weigh or respond 4. Human Rights Abuse. to the Senate committee inquiry findings before moving to a vote. 5. The Bill includes transitional rule-making powers allowing the 5. Human Rights Abuse. Minister to make rules within 12 months of commencement that cannot be disallowed by Parliament — further concentrating power in the executive and reducing parliamentary scrutiny of implementation detail.