Concerns regarding downstream economic impacts of NDIS Amendment Bills

‹ PrevPage 1 of 9 · Source p. 1Next ›

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

Dear Committee Members,

I am writing to express my concerns regarding the downstream economic impacts of both the

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026 and

the proposed National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future

Generations) Bill 2026. This submission will focus on costs to taxpayers.

Media coverage and political speeches on the topic of these bills, has focused on cost savings.

The claim is that these two bills will bring government expenditure under control, saving money

for all taxpayers, and preventing budget blowouts. A main part of the Securing the NDIS for

Future Generations Bill is the re-assessment of eligibility criteria and a reduction in participant

numbers. ​

Tom Keating from The Mandarin reported on the 19th May: “The scheme’s participant numbers,

which have grown from an expected 410,000 to over 760,000 Australians, will be reduced by

160,000 over four years. A new algorithmic planning tool, I-CAN, will be introduced from April 2027

to shape individual support budgets.

Participant budgets for social, civic, and community participation will be reset from October 2026. Unspent plan funds will no longer roll over. Reassessments will require “exceptional circumstances”. The ministerial statement also foreshadowed a reassessment of existing participants from 2028.”

The issue, as I see it; is that disabled people do not simply stop costing money because the

government cuts funding to the NDIS. Their support and inclusion needs do not simply go away.

Rather, they are either adequately covered by other parts of government (aka, money is simply

rearranged), or they are inadequately covered resulting in increased hospitalisations,

productivity losses, overloaded medicare systems, increased requirement for aged care

placements, increased pension applications, increased Family and Domestic Violence (FDV),

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

increased family breakdowns, increased police involvement, increased homelessness and

ultimately death; all of which cost the government more money.

I will address each point below:

Increased hospitalisations and aged care placements.

According to the Guardian; As of March 31 2024 1 thousand 125 NDIS participants were stuck

in hospital despite not needing medical care because they do not have appropriate supports or

safe accommodation to be discharged to. ABC reports that as of Nov 2023, “almost 900 people

were taking up Queensland public hospital beds while they waited for access to aged care or

disability accommodation and support. That’s more beds than in the entire Sunshine Coast

University Hospital (13% of all hospital beds in Qld). The number of so-called long-stay patients

has risen from 630 to 877 since August last year – a jump of 39 per cent.” This obviously puts

significant pressure on our hospitals as well as costing significantly more than care in the

community. “The cost of long-stay patients to the public system is around $1.7 million a day.“

If the amount of hospital blockage worsens due to cuts to NDIS participants’ access and plans,

the state governments will be required to fund an estimated $1.32 billion per year more in

hospital funding. That extra funding will have to come from either the federal government,

(which might explain the January 30th agreement for the federal government to increase

funding to the states for hospitals by $25b) or by the states increasing stamp duties further

worsening the housing crisis.

A Monash University study found the NDIS reduces Medicare expenditure by around $10.6 million and out-of-pocket mental health costs by $16.3 million annually — nearly $27 million a year in mental health savings alone across 700,000 participants.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

Reducing access by 16000 participants, automating plan decisions, and cutting Social and

Community Participation funding for those remaining on the scheme, means that a significant

percentage of PWD in Australia will not have their basic needs met. Their ability to shower,

toilet, cook, eat, go to appointments, do their banking, maintain their house. This will mean the

number of PWD requiring long term admission to hospital and aged care facilities will increase.

Productivity losses

The NDIS employed over 270,000 people directly in 2021, across more than 20 occupations, and indirectly supported tens of thousands more. Cuts to participant budgets directly reduce hours, reduce provider viability, and shrink that workforce. Those are real jobs, concentrated in communities across the country, gone from local economies, during a cost of living crisis.

For every $1 billion the NDIS is underfunded, modelling estimates a drop of around 10,200 jobs, a decline of $2.25 billion in total economic activity, and a 0.14 per cent reduction in GDP. The $37.8 billion in claimed savings, applied across four years, points to a contraction in economic activity many times larger than the federal savings projected.

270, 000+ people are at risk of unemployment as a result of this bill, for the proposed “foundational supports” that are to replace NDIS access make little or no mention of allied health funding or support worker funding. Whilst many support workers are unqualified and will be able to transfer to employment in other industries or roles without significant personal loss, our Allied Health professionals have spent 4-10 years at university training for their current roles at great cost. The Medicare and hospital systems will not be able to absorb hundreds of thousands of allied health professionals at once, nor will there be room in families budgets to pay to see allied health therapists privately, which means this bill risks the collapse of an entire industry.

Other productivity measures are at risk as well. According to the Federal Government’s own data, as of February 2024, “(PWD) Participation in work has more than doubled from 10% to 22% for (NDIS) participants aged 15 to 24.” As of April 2026 the number of NDIS participants aged 15-64 in open employment at full award wages has increased to 25% up from 20% in 2021-22.

Deloitte modelling found that closing the employment gap between people with and without disability by just one third could produce a cumulative $43 billion increase in GDP over a decade. The NDIS is one of the few mechanisms that actually moves that dial — by funding the supports that allow people with disabilities to work, study, and participate. Cutting those supports cuts the mechanism, and reverses the GDP increases. ​

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

​ Finally the February 2024 report also states that “Half of all parents and carers are now reporting paid employment, reaching the 2023-24 target of 50%. This is a relative increase of 10%.” Removing PWD from the NDIS and cutting plans for those who remain condemns carers too. As things stand, “Unpaid carers save the Australian economy an estimated $77.9 billion annually — more than the total projected cost of the NDIS for 2023-24.” This is primarily achieved by carers providing full time care, and not being in full time work. Australian carers provide 2.2 billion hours of informal care each year. Over 2.6 million Australians — close to 11 per cent of the population — are carers. Primary carers spend an average of 35.2 hours per week providing care. Twenty-eight per cent spend more than 60 hours per week. Only 22 per cent of primary carers are employed full-time, compared to 43 per cent of the general population. ​

Should this bill pass the Senate, the percentage of Carers able to work full time will shrink even further. Many who are currently working part time will no longer be able to work at all. When the government removes supports from 160,000 NDIS participants, the care does not disappear. It transfers — from support workers and allied health professionals who are employed and pay tax, generating government income - to family members, now unable to work and therefore increasing the reliance on other social supports - namely Centrelink payments, reducing employment rates, reducing productivity and reducing GDP. ​ ​

Increased Pension applications and dependence on other social services

As well as the number of carers relying on Centrelink services to survive, PWD who have

previously been able to work thanks to their NDIS supports, allied health professionals and

support workers out of a job, will also need to rely on Centrelink services to survive. ​

There is also of course a long term negative impact to cutting NDIS participation rates and plan

funding for children. The whole purpose of early intervention is the understanding that by

investing a relatively small amount in funding NDIS plans now, the government and society in

general saves money long term as those children become adults who are able to live

independently with minimal support, study at a tertiary level and be partially or fully employed.

Removing their funding and supports to replace them with the “Thriving Kids” program (which

all information so far suggests will be woefully inadequate) risks creating a generation of

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

Australian children who will never meet their potential, and are instead condemned to reliance

on Centrelink supports for survival. ​

Increased risk of FDV, family breakdown

When families are stressed, financially or practically, family violence rates and rates of family

breakdown explode. The Labor government knows this, it is part of the reason why during the

height of the Covid pandemic the rates of government pensions and other supports were

temporarily doubled.

Family violence and family breakdowns (divorce, separation and relinquishment of children)

costs money, both personally and to the government. Poverty is both a significant cause of DFV

and the reason why many victims do not leave, or return to abusive relationships.

According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare “Financial implications have been

reported by single mothers as a reason for returning to a previous violent partner following a

temporary separation. The Summers analysis of the 2016 PSS showed that of the ‘single mothers’

who had experienced previous partner violence, more than half (55%, or an estimated 92,600) had

ever temporarily separated from the violent partner. Almost one-quarter (24%) of these women

said they had returned to the violent partner because they had no money or financial support and

14% said they had nowhere else to go.

The analysis also highlighted the financial issues experienced by single mothers following

separation from a violent partner including that “34% receive a government pension or allowance

(compared to 12% of the total population)” and “50% of single mothers had government benefits

as their main source of income.”

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

Children who experience violence may have impaired social, emotional, and educational

functioning, which can be seen later in life by looking at main sources of income, their experiences

of financial stress and reduced economic security .” There are economic costs in terms of

Centrelink payments that arise as a result of children experiencing violence too, as “When

children are unable to live safely at home, they may be placed in out-of-home care.” An AIHW

analysis found that young people in the OOHC study population were 3 times as likely to receive

income support payments at ages 16–30 as the Australian population of the same age – about 3

in 5 (56%) compared with about 1 in 5 (18%), respectively. The OOHC study population were also

up to 13 times as likely to receive Crisis Payment than the Australian population of the same age.

The findings highlighted that the OOHC study population are in need of income support for longer

or are repeatedly moving in and out of income support into their late 20’s, suggesting they are at

increased risk of not being able to maintain ongoing employment. Further, despite income support

payments generally declining to age 30, a considerable proportion of the OOHC study population

were still receiving income support at age 30 – over 1 in 5 (22%) were receiving unemployment

payments, 1 in 7 (14%) were receiving parenting payments and 1 in 7 (14%) were receiving

disability support pension”

Additionally, “People with disability are more likely to experience FDSV than people without

disability in Australia and can experience greater difficulty getting support.”

“The economic cost of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation experienced by people with

disability in Australia was conservatively estimated to be at least $46 billion in 2021–22. When

considering the gaps in outcomes seen for people with disability the conservative estimate

increased to $75 billion.“

That figure from the AIHW is the estimated costs of disabled Australians experiencing FDV

when they have indivdualised NDIS supports. Should this bill pass the economic cost of FDV will

increase astronomically.

Increased homelessness

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

Homelessness Australia’s CEO Kate Colvin states that “People with poor mental health and

psychosocial disabilities often need support to sustain their housing, and a home they can

afford, but neither support, nor low cost housing is available. This is why we continue to see

people with psychosocial disability and other complex needs becoming trapped in

homelessness or in exploitative and unsafe housing conditions.”

The Productivity Commission’s Mental Health Inquiry found that among approximately 300,000

Australians with persistent, severe and complex psychosocial disabilities:

●​ More than 31,000 are experiencing or at risk of homelessness

●​ More than 2,000 remain in institutional care due to a lack of alternative

housing options

●​ More than 154,000 are not receiving the services they need, including

critical support to find and sustain housing.

Cutting people’s NDIS access or plans cannot possibly improve these figures. Rather disabled

Australians will now have to choose between therapies and rent, support workers and food.

Without their therapies, support workers and assistive technology, they will lose their ability to

earn an income. Without an income, they lose their housing. ​

It seems particularly cruel of the Labor government to claim that the proposed changes to the

NDIS are “an act of Stewardship” when they will see thousands of people at risk of

homelessness in a cost of living and housing crisis. ​

As Ms Colvin says “ People with disabilities deserve access to safe, stable housing and the

support they need to thrive”. This bill does the opposite.

Death

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

It is not hyperbolic to say that the proposed NDIS changes will cause deaths. It has already

occurred. The West Australian reported in December 2023 that “dozens of NDIS Participants

have died while locked in legal battles over funding cuts”. In September 2025, Aleisha Gibson

blamed NDIS cuts for the death of her 4-year-old daughter Koa, after her funding was changed

to the new quarterly block system and her support worker funding for nurses was cut to three

hours per week. And this year alone has seen two separate murders of Autistic children.

Within the disability community fear is high. Families speak of loved ones who died after being

denied essential supports or after being transferred into unsuitable accommodation. Friends

recount cases of people being “booted off” the scheme and then dying within months, often in

circumstances that suggest neglect or desperation. Allied health professionals and support

workers express concerns for their clients safety if their access or funding is cut. Nobody Worse

Off Coalition’s Harm Tracker shows 6,924 NDIS participants have been harmed by cuts since

Oct 2024. And participants are researching Volutary Assisted Dying or suicide plans.

Should this bill pass, the harms it will cause to the disabled community, carers, allied health

professionals and the economy are potentially catastrophic. This bill risks causing real

economic harm (alongside mental and physical harm,) both to individuals and the economy at

large.

I close with a final Quote from Tom Keating’s article in The Mandarin: ​

“Minister Butler is right that the NDIS needs to be secured. A scheme that grows to $70 billion

annually without adequate quality, equity, or outcome guarantees is not serving anyone well. But

securing the NDIS can’t mean simply reducing its cost. It must mean building the social, clinical,

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1151

educational, housing, and community infrastructure that makes citizenship possible, within or

outside the scheme.

The “future generations” the government invokes in its bill title are not only the future taxpayers who will fund the scheme. They are also Australians with disability who will depend on it.

The question is not whether the NDIS can be made financially sustainable. It is whether, in the process of making it so, the government is building the conditions for genuine social inclusion, or repeating the oldest pattern in Australian disability policy history: fiscal pressure dressed as reform, institutional logic in new administrative clothes.

The answer is not yet clear. The Senate inquiry the disability sector is calling for exists precisely to provide that clarity. It should be granted.”

Sincerley, ​