Submission 1330

25/05/2026

Committee Secretary Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs PO Box 6100, Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600

Submission regarding the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

deep concerns regarding the proposed NDIS Amendment Bill 2026.

As a participant who relies heavily on this scheme for care, basic human rights, quality of life, autonomy, and community presence, I am deeply alarmed by the severe impacts these changes will have on my life and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Australians with disabilities. Without the NDIS I would not be able to leave the home or participate in the community. I have not always been “disabled”. I was an active participant in the community and worked as an Registered Nurse serving the public and private sectors for 20yrs, until 3 years ago my life changed. Thanks to the NDIS I have been endeavouring to increase my funcional capacity with the support of a wonderful team I have finally found. Last review of my plan I had my capacity building reduced significantly, even though I had evidence from specialists stating the improvement from the support and therapies was keeping me functioning and improving my safety by strengthing my muscles and improving balance to prevent serious falls, and enable safe mobility. Further cuts of community access and therapy assistance, will prevent myself and others from maintaining our peak, thereby potentially keeping the participant house bound and unable to connect with nature, community, hobbies and employment etc. These are basic needs which are taken for

Submission 1330

guaranteed by the able boddied, to the disabled these needs are becoming a luxury.

The current political approach to “fixing” the NDIS reduces human beings to budget

lines and algorithmic calculations. This creates a landscape of fear, isolation, and

regression for participants who have fought for decades to achieve equal citizenship. I

urge the Senate to reject or certainly heavily amend this Bill based on the following

critical impacts:

1. The Erosion of True “Choice and Control”

The foundational pillar of the NDIS was to give people with disabilities the autonomy

to govern their own lives, and help them to continue to do activities they once did. This Bill actively dismantles that right. By replacing individual, trusted allied health assessments with standardized, algorithmic “support needs assessments” conducted by state-appointed assessors, the NDIA is shifting toward a rigid, institutionalized model.

Participants are unique individuals with complex realities; we cannot be effectively or safely supported by a rigid mathematical formula.

2. Devastating Cuts to Social and Community Access

The proposed average reduction of 50 per cent to social and community participation funding is devastating. Labeling under-spent funds in this category as “ghost funding” completely misinterprets the reality of living with a disability. Under-spending is rarely a sign of lack of need; it is usually caused by workforce shortages, systemic barriers, or illness. Slashing this category isolates participants, increases long-term dependence on core physical care, and cuts off the pathways to employment and community connection that the NDIS was explicitly designed to foster.

3. The Stripping of Freedom from Self-Managed Participants

Self-management was designed to offer the highest tier of flexibility and responsibility. The implementation of real-time digital claim blocks, restrictive multi- month funding caps, and the power of the NDIA to lock flexible funds into rigid, immovable categories destroys the purpose of self-management. It forces participants into a state of constant anxiety, wondering if a necessary, real-time adjustments to

Submission 1330

their daily care will trigger an automated system rejection or an administrative penalty.

4. Bureaucratic Roadblocks and Severe Power Imbalances

The new rules dictating that a participant can only request an unscheduled plan review under extraordinarily narrow, permanent changes of circumstance—coupled with a 90-day waiting window—traps participants in unsafe or inadequate plans.

Removing the ability for support coordinators and plan managers to assist in requesting these reviews creates an unfair bureaucratic hurdle for the most vulnerable members of our community.

Conclusion

The NDIS is not a welfare luxury; it is an essential economic and social investment that upholds Australia’s commitment to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This Bill treats the scheme purely as a fiscal liability to be managed through algorithmic restriction, rather than a human rights framework designed to empower. I call on the Senate Committee to listen to the lived experiences of participants over economic models, reject these sweeping cuts, and ensure that the human dignity of choice, control, and community access is fiercely protected.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Regards