National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1293
Submission to the Senate Inquiry into the NDIS Amendment Bill / NDIS (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill
I am writing this submission as an anonymous NDIS participant with multiple disabilities and chronic health conditions that significantly impact my daily functioning, mobility, energy levels, and independence.
Although I have only been on the NDIS for less than 12 months, the support I have received has already made a substantial difference to my quality of life, mental health, dignity, and independence. Prior to accessing the NDIS, I relied heavily on family members for care and support with basic daily tasks. This created strain within family relationships, caused feelings of guilt and resentment, and significantly affected my mental wellbeing.
The NDIS has allowed me to access practical supports that help me participate in everyday life more safely and independently. It has reduced my dependence on unpaid family care, improved my ability to manage my health and fatigue, and allowed me to engage more with the community.
I am deeply concerned that many of the proposed reforms in this Bill risk undermining the core principles of the NDIS, particularly choice and control, participant wellbeing, and the ability for disabled people to live dignified lives within the community.
Concerns About “All Appropriate Treatments” Requirements
One of my strongest concerns relates to the proposed approach requiring participants to demonstrate they have tried “all appropriate treatments” before accessing supports.
This approach fails to recognise the reality of disability and chronic illness. Treatments are not always financially accessible, geographically available, medically appropriate, or effective. Some treatments may involve significant side effects, long wait lists, or ongoing costs that disabled people simply cannot afford, particularly when many participants already live in poverty due to limited capacity to work and the additional costs associated with disability.
For people living with fluctuating and complex disabilities, there is often no single treatment that “fixes” the condition. Many people have already spent years attempting treatments before accessing the NDIS. Requiring participants to continually prove they have pursued every possible treatment risks delaying support, worsening health outcomes, and creating unnecessary suffering.
The NDIS should exist to support people to live functional, safe, and dignified lives, not to force people into endless medical gatekeeping processes before receiving practical assistance.
Concerns About Functional Capacity Assessments
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1293
I am also extremely concerned about the increased reliance on functional capacity assessments conducted by people who may not properly understand fluctuating disability.
My disabilities fluctuate significantly from day to day. Some days I am capable of far more than others. Assessments conducted in short appointments often fail to capture the cumulative impact of pain, fatigue, burnout, post-exertional symptom worsening, and the reality of trying to maintain functioning over time.
There is a serious risk that people with fluctuating or less visible disabilities will be inaccurately assessed as “high functioning” based on how they present during a brief appointment, despite requiring substantial support in daily life.
Assessments that fail to properly account for fluctuating disability could lead to inappropriate funding reductions, loss of support, worsening health, and increased reliance on already overwhelmed family members and health systems.
Concerns About Automated Decision-Making
I am deeply concerned about the expansion of automated decision-making within the NDIS.
Disability support decisions are complex and deeply personal. They cannot be fairly reduced to automated systems or rigid criteria without significant risk of harm. Automated systems are incapable of understanding nuance, fluctuating conditions, cumulative fatigue, or the real-world impact of disability on a person’s daily life.
I believe there is a genuine risk that these systems could become another Robodebt-style failure, where vulnerable people are harmed by incorrect decisions, inaccessible review processes, and systems that prioritise administrative efficiency over human wellbeing.
The prospect of incorrect automated decisions that are difficult or impossible to appeal is extremely distressing. Participants deserve fair, transparent, human decision-making processes with strong appeal and review rights.
Concerns About Ministerial Powers and Lack of Oversight
I am very concerned about the expansion of ministerial powers to determine what supports can or cannot be funded, particularly where these decisions may occur with limited oversight or parliamentary scrutiny.
The NDIS was created to provide disabled people with individualised support based on their actual needs and circumstances. Allowing broad powers to remove or restrict categories of support risks undermining the entire purpose of the scheme.
I am particularly concerned about social and community participation supports. These supports are not luxuries. They are essential for reducing isolation, improving mental health, maintaining
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1293
community connection, and allowing disabled people to participate in society in ways many non-disabled Australians take for granted.
Without these supports, many people risk becoming isolated in their homes, experiencing worsening mental health, and becoming increasingly dependent on unpaid carers.
The Importance of Support Workers
Support workers have made the single biggest difference in improving my quality of life.
Their assistance with meal preparation, maintaining a clean and liveable environment, attending appointments, shopping, and completing errands within the community has allowed me to better manage my energy and health.
These supports are not about luxury or convenience. They are about maintaining basic dignity, nutrition, safety, and independence.
Having support with meals has improved my nutrition and reduced the physical strain associated with food preparation. Assistance with household tasks allows me to conserve limited energy for other important aspects of life. Support to attend appointments and access the community has reduced isolation and allowed me to participate more in normal daily life.
For the first time in a long time, I have been able to do things that other people my age often take for granted, including independently attending appointments, shopping, and participating in the community.
Without these supports, I would likely experience severe deterioration in both physical and mental health. I would become increasingly isolated and dependent on family members again, placing enormous strain on both myself and those around me.
The likely consequences of reduced support would include:
● malnutrition, ● worsening pain and fatigue, ● social isolation, ● mental health decline, ● burnout, ● inability to leave the house, ● increased family conflict, ● and loss of independence.
Stress, Fear, and Reassessment Burden
Even the current NDIS system can already be extremely stressful to navigate.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1293
The ongoing public rhetoric around “fraud”, “rorting”, and reducing costs creates significant anxiety for participants who rely on these supports for basic daily functioning. Most disabled people are not living luxurious lives through the NDIS. They are simply trying to access the same opportunities, dignity, and community participation that non-disabled people often take for granted.
I have experienced significant fear around potentially losing supports that are essential to my daily life and wellbeing. Reassessments and evidence gathering processes are stressful, expensive, and time-consuming. Obtaining medical evidence often involves long wait times and significant financial costs.
The proposed reforms risk increasing this fear and instability even further.
The NDIS should not become a system where disabled people are forced to constantly justify their existence, prove their suffering repeatedly, or live in fear that essential supports may disappear at any moment.
What I Want the Committee to Understand
I ask the Committee to understand that disability supports are not abstract budget items. They directly determine whether people can eat properly, leave their homes, participate in society, maintain relationships, protect their mental health, and live with dignity.
The NDIS is not simply a cost. It also enables participation in the broader economy through employment of support workers, reduced reliance on hospitals and crisis systems, and increased community participation by disabled people and carers.
The public narrative surrounding the NDIS has increasingly portrayed participants as burdens or potential fraudsters. This rhetoric is deeply harmful and does not reflect the reality experienced by most participants.
Most disabled people are simply trying to survive and participate in society as equally as possible within the limitations imposed by disability.
Recommendations
I urge the Committee to recommend:
1. Protection of social and community participation supports as essential supports under the NDIS. 2. Strong limitations and oversight regarding ministerial powers to remove or restrict support categories. 3. Preservation of participant rights to appeal and review decisions. 4. Strict limits on the use of automated decision-making within the NDIS. 5. Recognition of fluctuating and less visible disabilities within all assessment processes.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1293
6. Requirements that functional assessments be conducted by appropriately qualified professionals with expertise in complex and fluctuating disability. 7. Recognition that financial accessibility, geographic availability, medical appropriateness, and participant safety must all be considered before expecting participants to pursue treatments. 8. Greater safeguards to ensure participants can vary plans when circumstances change. 9. Reduction of reassessment burden for participants with permanent or lifelong disabilities. 10.Continued protection of participant choice and control as the central principle of the NDIS.
The NDIS has already significantly improved my life in a relatively short period of time. It has allowed me greater independence, improved my mental health, reduced strain on my family, and helped me participate more fully in the community.
I fear these proposed reforms risk moving the scheme away from its original purpose and towards a system focused primarily on restriction, suspicion, and cost-cutting at the expense of disabled people’s wellbeing and safety.
I ask the Committee to carefully consider the real-world human consequences of these reforms and to ensure that the NDIS remains a scheme grounded in dignity, fairness, independence, and genuine support for disabled Australians.