National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 121 - Supplementary Submission
Supplementary Submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submitted by Pia Kyre, Port Macquarie NSW This supplements my primary submission to the inquiry. I consent to it being published in full under my name.
Purpose of this supplementary submission I make this short supplementary submission to draw the Committee’s attention to the Government’s own modelling, tabled in response to Senate Orders for the Production of Documents Nos 503–508, which became available after I lodged my primary submission. That modelling confirms — in the Government’s own figures — several of the central concerns I raised, and in my respectful view materially strengthens the case that the Bill should not proceed in its current form.
On 14 May 2026 — the same day the Bill was introduced — the Senate agreed to six Orders for the Production of Documents moved by Senator Steele-John, requiring the Government to table the modelling underpinning its claimed NDIS savings and participant-reduction figures. The Government’s consolidated response was subsequently tabled. It confirms, in the Government’s own figures, the matters set out below.
Finding 1 — The modelling confirms 346,000 fewer participants than projected by 2031 The tabled modelling sets out the following participant figures (as at 30 June each year):
As at 30 June Pre-reform total After-reform total Difference 2025 (actual) 739,414 — — 2026 783,000 783,000 0 2027 817,000 817,000 0 2028 842,000 789,000 −53,000 2029 876,000 710,000 −166,000 2030 910,000 632,000 −278,000 2031 944,000 598,000 −346,000
On the Government’s own figures, by 30 June 2031 there will be 944,000 participants under the pre-reform trajectory but only 598,000 after the reforms — a difference of 346,000 people. The widely-cited “600,000 by the end of the decade” figure is confirmed, but the divergence from the projected trajectory is substantially larger than that single figure conveys. Exits begin in 2028 and accelerate sharply through 2029, 2030 and 2031.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 121 - Supplementary Submission
The modelling contains a line item, “Entered scheme before 1 Jan 28 and assumed to be exited,” confirming that existing participants — not merely future applicants — are within the cohort to be removed.
Finding 2 — The savings come overwhelmingly from cuts to eligibility and support, not from fraud The modelling sets out the fiscal impact of each of the ten reform components (fiscal balance basis, total over the period):
Reform item Total (fiscal balance)
1 Strengthen guidance on what is −$2.9b reasonable and necessary 2 Reset of Social Community and −$13.2b Civic Participation / Daily Activities Budgets 3 Plan management and support −$1.4b co-ordination reforms 4 Tightening criteria; ending plan −$3.1b rollovers and stopping unspent funds 5 Planning (lower growth from new −$3.9b framework) 6 Objective Test of Substantially −$0.5b Reduced Functional Capacity 7 Capacity −$9.3b 8 Differentiated pricing for −$2.6b unregistered providers 9 Mandatory registration for high- −$0.2b risk providers 10 Fraud measures −$0.9b TOTAL MEASURE IMPACT −$38.1b
Two conclusions follow directly from the Government’s own figures.
First, the largest single saving — −$13.2 billion — comes from item 2, the reset of Social, Community and Civic Participation and Daily Activities budgets. The next largest, −$9.3 billion, comes from item 7, “Capacity.” Together with the reasonable-and-necessary guidance reset (item 1), the tightening of criteria (item 4), the planning growth reduction (item 5), and the new functional capacity test (item 6), the eligibility-and-support reductions account for approximately −$33.4 billion of the −$38.1 billion total — roughly 88 per cent of the savings.
Second, the fraud measures (item 10) account for −$0.9 billion — approximately 2.4 per cent of the total measure impact. This is the smallest substantive line item in the package.
This is significant because the public framing of the reform package, by the Government and through media briefings, has heavily emphasised fraud, integrity, rorts and exploitation. The Government’s own modelling demonstrates that fraud accounts for a small fraction of the savings,
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 121 - Supplementary Submission
while the overwhelming majority is drawn from reducing the eligibility of, and the support provided to, people with disability. I respectfully submit that the Committee should weigh the gap between the public framing of this Bill and what the Government’s own modelling shows it actually does.
Finding 3 — The largest single cut targets the support category most directly tied to community participation Item 2 — the largest single saving at −$13.2 billion — is the reset of Social, Community and Civic Participation budgets (together with Daily Activities budgets). These are precisely the supports that enable people with disability to leave their homes, maintain social connection, participate in their communities, and live included lives. The single largest source of savings in the entire package is drawn from the support category whose explicit purpose is community participation.
As I set out in my primary submission, this raises serious concerns under Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (living independently and being included in the community), which Australia has ratified. The tabled modelling makes the concern concrete: the Bill’s central fiscal mechanism is a reduction in exactly the supports Article 19 is intended to protect.
Finding 4 — The 12-year reduction is $184.9 billion, materially larger than the figure most often cited The tabled modelling confirms two distinct headline figures. The named budget measure produces a reduction of approximately $37.8 billion (underlying cash) / $38.1 billion (fiscal balance) over four years. The change in total NDIS participant cost estimates between the 2025-26 MYEFO and the 2026-27 Budget is approximately $24.6 billion over four years and $184.9 billion over twelve years. The $184.9 billion figure — the subject of Orders 505 and 506 — represents the full scale of the reduction against the prior projection and is materially larger than the $37.8 billion measure most often referenced in public commentary.
Conclusion The Government’s own tabled modelling confirms that the Bill will remove approximately 346,000 people from the projected scheme by 2031, that approximately 88 per cent of the savings come from reducing eligibility and support rather than from addressing fraud, and that the single largest saving is drawn from the support category most directly connected to community participation and inclusion.
I respectfully reaffirm the recommendations in my primary submission, and ask the Committee to recommend that the Bill not proceed in its current form. I further ask that the Committee’s report explicitly address the gap between the public framing of the Bill as an integrity and anti-fraud measure and what the Government’s own modelling shows it does.
Source: Department of Health, Disability and Ageing, consolidated response to Senate Orders for the Production of Documents Nos 503–508 (moved by Senator Steele-John, agreed 14 May 2026), tabled in the Senate and recorded at Tabled Documents No. 16585. Response signed by Senator the Hon Jenny McAllister, Minister for the NDIS, 26 May 2026, copied to the Treasurer.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 121 - Supplementary Submission
Note on figures: dollar amounts are drawn from the tabled modelling tables. Percentages are my own calculations from those figures. Some cells in the tabled scan are faint; where a figure was unclear I have used the clearest available reading and invite the Committee to rely on the authoritative tabled document.