National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1385
Dear Committee Members,
My name is and I am an Occupational Therapist with ten years’ experience working in paediatrics, predominantly with autistic children and their families. I am writing to express my deep concern about several elements of the NDIS Future Generations Bill and the significant risks it poses to the children and families I support.
My concerns and how they relate to the Bill
- Proposed reductions to capacity building and participation supports
My primary concern relates to the Bill’s proposal to reduce:
• capacity building daily activity supports by 10%, and
• social, civic and community participation supports by 50%.
These supports are not optional extras. They are the foundation of how children build functional skills, maintain routines, develop independence, and participate meaningfully in home, school and community life. For autistic children—who often require consistent, relationship-based, long-term intervention—these cuts would be devastating.
In my practice, capacity building supports have enabled children to:
• learn self-care routines such as dressing, toileting, and feeding
• develop emotional regulation strategies
• build executive functioning skills
• participate in school and community activities with confidence
• reduce reliance on parents and carers
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1385
A 10–50% reduction would not simply “trim” budgets; it would remove the very supports that prevent crisis, regression, and long-term functional decline.
- Risk of automated or “tick-box” decision-making
The Bill’s increased allowance for automation, algorithms and standardised tools in decision-making is deeply concerning. As an OT, I see daily how complex, nuanced and context-dependent functional capacity truly is. No algorithm can capture:
• sensory processing differences
• fluctuating capacity
• the impact of co-occurring conditions
• environmental stressors
• family capacity and safety considerations
When assessments fail to reflect real-world needs, children miss out on essential supports. I have seen this happen before—when a child’s presentation on a single day or within a rigid tool did not reflect their everyday challenges. Human clinical judgement is not optional; it is essential.
- Ministerial powers to reduce or restrict whole categories of supports
The Bill expands the Minister’s ability to impose broad, system-wide funding reductions. This creates significant uncertainty for families and providers and undermines the principle of individualised, needs-based support.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1385
Therapy supports—particularly OT—are already stretched. Further reductions or restrictions would:
• increase waitlists
• reduce access to qualified clinicians
• push families into crisis
• disproportionately affect children with complex or fluctuating needs
Decisions about supports must remain transparent, clinically informed, and grounded in individual assessment—not broad rules or cost-containment measures.
- Narrowing access for children and those with complex or fluctuating needs
Although the Bill moves away from diagnosis-based access, the practical effect may be a higher eligibility threshold. This is particularly concerning for:
• children aged 0–8
• autistic children
• children with psychosocial disability
• children with fluctuating or degenerative conditions
Early intervention is not just beneficial—it is transformative. Delayed or restricted access leads to poorer long-term outcomes, increased family stress, and higher future costs to the system.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1385
I am also concerned that children may lose access before alternatives such as Foundational Supports are fully established, leaving families without any meaningful support pathway.
- Restrictions on reassessment and review
Limiting unscheduled plan reassessments to “exceptional circumstances” does not reflect the reality of paediatric disability. Children’s needs change rapidly due to:
• developmental shifts
• school transitions
• puberty
• regression during periods of stress
• changes in family circumstances
I have supported many families where timely reassessment prevented escalation, school breakdown, or significant functional decline. Flexibility is essential for safety and fairness.
What I want Parliament to do
I respectfully ask Parliament to:
• Reverse the proposed reductions to capacity building and community participation supports.
• Ensure all functional capacity assessments are conducted by appropriately qualified allied health professionals, including occupational therapists.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1385
• Prohibit fully automated eligibility or funding decisions and require human oversight for any tools or algorithms.
• Remove or significantly limit ministerial powers that allow broad, class-wide funding reductions.
• Ensure the Bill does not narrow access, particularly for children and people with complex or fluctuating needs.
• Retain practical, accessible pathways for reassessment and review.
• Support sustainable pricing and governance to maintain a qualified, clinically governed OT workforce.
• Include Occupational Therapy Australia in advisory groups to guide assessment design, pricing, and implementation.
I also express my full support for Occupational Therapy Australia’s recommendations and the No OTs, No NDIS campaign.
Thank you for considering this submission. I urge the Committee to ensure that reforms strengthen—not weaken—the supports that children and families rely on every day.