National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 134
Dear [Recipient / Minister / Member of Parliament],
I am writing to express deep concern about the recent changes and cuts to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).
Disabled people should not be treated as collateral damage for the failures of the system. The narrative that widespread cuts are necessary to address fraud unfairly punishes those who rely on the NDIS for basic dignity, independence, and survival. The reality is that many disabled Australians are now being made to carry the burden for the actions of a minority of bad actors— particularly organised fraud and unscrupulous providers.
Rather than holding those providers and criminal networks accountable, the current approach appears to shift the consequences onto vulnerable individuals who have done nothing wrong. This is not only unjust, it is dangerous. Removing or reducing essential supports risks leaving people without adequate care, housing stability, or access to services that sustain their health and wellbeing.
There are also serious system-wide consequences being overlooked. If these cuts proceed, hospitals and mainstream health services will inevitably become overwhelmed. When people lose access to supports that keep them stable at home, they do not simply disappear—they turn to emergency departments, inpatient wards, and already stretched mental health services. This will not save money; it will shift costs into a far more expensive and reactive part of the system. Emergency rooms will become clogged, mental health services will be overburdened, and outcomes for disabled people will worsen. Supporting people to live safely at home is not only more humane—it is far more efficient.
There are more targeted and effective ways to address fraud within the NDIS. Stronger regulation, better oversight of providers, and enforcement against those exploiting the system would directly tackle the root of the problem. Broad cuts to participant plans do not.
These changes are not abstract policy adjustments—they will have real human consequences. For many, they will mean deteriorating health, increased isolation, and in the most serious cases, loss of life. It is not an exaggeration to say that these decisions could cost thousands of lives if left unchecked.
I urge you to reconsider the current approach and prioritise reforms that protect disabled Australians while holding the true sources of fraud accountable. A fair and humane system must support those who depend on it, not penalise them for failures beyond their control.
Yours sincerely,
Thomas Conlan