National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1066
To the Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs,
RE: Submission regarding NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
I am writing as the parent and primary carer of an adult son with severe autism and intellectual disability. I am deeply concerned that proposed cuts—driven by political complaints about “high spending” on social and community supports—demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the needs of people with complex disabilities.
-
Rebutting the “Too Much Support” Narrative Recent government statements suggest the NDIS is paying “too much” for social and community supports. This view is deeply flawed. For my son, these supports are not “social extras”—they are his clinical treatment. High demand in this category actually indicates critical need, not waste. Without this engagement, he cannot regulate his body or his emotions.
-
The Reality of Severe Disability vs. Isolation No two autistic people are the same. For my son, hyperactivity and behavioural problems mean he requires constant engagement to remain safe.
• The “Stuck at Home” Cycle: When he is bored and frustrated, he creates his own unproductive obsessions. He systematically searches through all the bins, repeatedly emptying and sorting through the dirty waste. Furthermore, he vandalizes our furniture and loudly yells and swears while scattering rubbish outside, creating a major disturbance for the neighbours.
• Safety Risk: If left alone, his self-harm intensifies from biting his hand and peeling his skin and gums to repeatedly hitting his chest. Most distressingly, he becomes highly volatile and aggressive toward his family and the public.
• The Solution: Sufficient community funding keeps him engaged and calm. This is the only tool that prevents these obsessive and destructive behaviours from escalating into a crisis.
- False Economy and Value for Money Cutting community participation is a “false economy.” My son’s current support is preventative; it allows him to remain at home with his family.
• The Transition Risk: As aging parents, we acknowledge that he will eventually require a residential group home, as we are no longer able to sustain 24/7 care. Nevertheless, adequate funding would allow us to postpone this transition.
• The Cost Gap: The current cost of community engagement represents far better Value for Money compared to the alternative. A crisis-led admission to a 24/7 group home for a participant with my son’s level of complexity can cost between $350,000 and $1,000,000 per year.
• The Outcome: “If his NDIS access is reduced now, his aggression will escalate beyond my capacity to manage. Furthermore, he will lose the ability to participate safely in group environments, ultimately forcing the NDIS to fund reactive, high-cost interventions that are significantly more expensive.”
2
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1066
- The “Underspending” Trap and Market Failure The plan to cut funding for plans that are “under-utilised” punishes families for market failure.
• Waitlist Crisis: My son has been on occupational therapy waitlists for months because a competent clinician with the expertise to manage severe autism and complex behaviours is nearly impossible to find.
• Workforce Issues: Disability Support Workers capable of managing his aggression are often unavailable. Furthermore, the sector suffers from high staff turnover; workers often do not stay in the job long enough to build the trust and routine my son requires.
• Continuity of Care: This lack of continuity means funds often go unspent while we are forced to recruit and train new staff. Cutting funding because of these service gaps ensures that when we do find a reliable worker, we will no longer have the budget to hire them.
- The Myth of Unlimited “Informal Support” The government’s reliance on “informal support” from families is unrealistic. As ageing parents, our capacity is decreasing. Family members have their own lives and cannot provide 24/7 care forever for a person with complex needs. When the NDIS assumes family will “pick up the slack” for cut services, they are ensuring the total collapse of the family unit.
Conclusion I urge the Senate to stop viewing “Social and Community Participation” as a luxury. It is a critical investment that keeps families together and prevents participants from being forced into the most expensive tier of 24/7 institutional care.
Beyond social participation, the government must protect the entire ecosystem of support— including therapy, behavioural intervention, and appropriate core funding—that allows a person with severe autism to maintain safety and stability. I am deeply concerned by the move toward annualised “budget amounts” and increased scrutiny on previous spending. Using a single lump sum that doesn’t account for the daily volatility of severe autism creates a dangerous “cliff” for families. Furthermore, punishing participants with funding reductions for funds unspent due to market failures is unjust and ignores the Value for Money inherent in keeping a participant stable.
Cutting any one of these pillars does not “save” money; it simply destabilises a vulnerable person until they fall into a permanent, high-cost crisis. True sustainability for the NDIS must come from providing adequate, stable support that prevents the need for institutionalisation and protects my son’s quality of life, not by reducing the very services that keep people safe.
Sincerely,
3