National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1280
Submission to the Senate Community A1airs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submitted on 28 May 2026
About the Author I am the mother and legal guardian of a profoundly disabled 24 year old man. I am also his NDIS nominee and will refer to him as M, to respect his privacy. I was the fulltime carer for M for the first 18 years of his life. Due to his two-person manual handling requirements for all transfers, complex needs and carer burn out, M moved into a purpose-built house with another young man when he reached adulthood. The two young men have now shared this house happily for 6 years with 24/7 support due to their exceptional needs.
Over the past 24 years I have met, spent time with and built relationships with many severely and profoundly disabled children who are now young adults. Many of these young people now live in SIL due to the high level of support they require to stay safe, healthy and have a reasonable quality of life, which their aging parents are no longer able to provide.
Over the last week I have read the proposed Bill and Explanatory Memorandum, attended several forums on the Bill and read summaries by multiple organisations. Due to the exceptionally short time frame given to prepare a submission and the overwhelm experienced, I have decided to focus on two aspects of the Bill only. I believe these sections will have the most detrimental ePect on the quality of life of those with profound disability who require 24/7 High Intensity Level support (identified by the NDIS) and put them at High Risk of Harm.
Schedule 1 Part 4 – Support determinations
A percentage of funding can be removed from a support category by legislative instrument. The first cuts have been announced to be phased in from 1 October 2026 as plans renew: • 50% reduction in Social, Economic & Community Participation (SECP) funding • 10% reduction in Capacity Building (CB) funding The same power can apply to any support category to any level in future.
The majority of participants who have SIL (Supported Independent Living) funding require 24/7 support. Most of them have SECP funding to support them when they are not being supported by support workers funded through SIL. For many of the most profoundly disabled SIL clients they require the same level of support whether in the community or in their own homes. Sometimes the SECP support is provided by a diPerent “Day Options” provider. However, for many of these participants, including M, this 24/7 support is provided by the same provider. This is because he requires High Level Intensity support provided by experienced, highly qualified support workers and an individual program due to his exceptional needs. There is no unallocated SIL funding to “cover the gaps” as the Minister suggested in his address to the National Press Club on 22 April 2026. A 50% decrease in SECP would create periods of time with high risk of neglect, distress and pain, unnecessary hospitalisation, restrictive practices, isolation, homelessness due to loss of placement and potentially life-threatening harm including choking, airway diPiculties and self- harm.
A decrease in SECP funding would create gaps in care for those with 24/7 support, leaving the most vulnerable participants at High Risk of Harm. 1
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1280
M’s team of support workers are required to have the following training, with all the health training renewed annually:
• Reducing restrictive practices • Bowel care and suppository administration (competency-based training) • Administration of medication via gastrostomy (competency-based training) • PEJ and PEG Feeding • Individualised health support training • Culturally responsive and accountable practice • Conduct manual tasks safely (HLTWHS005) • Safe de-escalation and crisis intervention • Cybersecurity awareness • Participation in Evacuation Drill • Sexual harassment awareness • Therapeutic care • Assist with Medication (F2F E) • Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) • Complex Bowel Care • Conflict of interest • NDIS Supporting safe and enjoyable meals • NDIS Worker Orientation Module • NDIS Supporting Effective Communication • Infection control • First Aid • Fire safety and emergency management • Child Safe Environment • Corporate orientation and understanding autism (F2F I) • Understanding trauma and trauma-informed approaches • Privacy and information management • Code of Conduct • Workplace bullying and harassment • Safe food handling • Person centred active support • Mealtime and Dysphagia Management • Manual handling • Keeping safe at work • Epilepsy • Effective Progress Notes • Duty of care, informed choice and dignity of risk • Complaints and reportable incidents • Abuse and neglect • Individualised behaviour support training • Understanding trauma and trauma-informed approaches in children and young people
$200mil Inclusive Communities Fund will not replace the need for support workers with the above credentials to support people with complex needs like M in the community and at home.
2
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1280
M requires full assistance to eat, drink, for communication support and all personal care and transfers, regardless of whether he is at home or in the community.
A 10% decrease in Capacity Building funding would mean for M a decrease in the funding that was available for a Registered Nurse to provide the mandatory training for his team of support workers, the ability for the speech pathologist to assess and update the mandatory annual Oral, Eating and Drinking Care Plan (to ensure M is fed safely due to his high risk of choking), the physiotherapist’s ability to update the mandatory Transfer Positioning Care Plan and training for the staL team in the varied transfers to keep them injury free. The recent work the occupational therapist has undertaken with the staL team has resulted in M being more compliant with his oral care would be at risk. If this teamwork results in M complying with opening his mouth for a dentist after three consecutive failed visits, this will mean one less hospital admission and general anesthetic. These are vital services, not trips to the gym. For people with complex needs like M, a reduction in support would inevitably fall back on the overburdened health system.
What does (3) In making the determination the Minister must have regards to the safety of participants look like?
There needs to be a carve out from a percentage-based reduction in community participation and capacity building supports for participants with High Intensity level supports who require continuous 2:1 or 1:1 support due to complex health risks, tracheostomy care, swallowing risks, constant assistance with transfers, behaviours of concern or other intensive needs.
Schedule 4 – New Framework Planning
(3E) A method specified in National Disability Insurance Scheme rules made for the purposes of subsection (1) must have the effect that no maximum specified for the purposes of subsection (3D) is exceeded in working out the total funding amount for flexible funding or total funding amount for a stated support or class of stated supports.
So now the entire premise of an individualised scheme is being dismantled? Everyone is being assessed by automation and assigned a class, and the funding limit of the assigned class cannot be extended? Robodebt NDIS?
There must be a human review of any automated decision making which adversely aCects a participant’s funding or eligibility before the decision takes eCect. The necessary safeguards must be in place before auto-decision making destroys lives.
Footnote In a letter to the NDIS Chairman, the Reviewing Actuary noted in his summary of the June 2025 Financial Sustainability Report: “the number of deaths for participants with higher support needs was considerably higher than expected”. He attributed higher than expected numbers of participants with SIL support leaving the scheme due to mortality. These people are statistically unlikely to reach old age, so are unlikely to need expensive care after the age of 65. So will you please have the decency to ensure these participants with complex support needs are kept from harm and their shortened lives are comfortable. The NDIS was created to move young people out of nursing homes. Now is the time to ensure young people are not forced into nursing homes.
Thank you for reading The most vulnerable NDIS participants are relying on you for their future.
3