National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1413
Submission to the Parliamentary inquiry Committee: National Disability Insurance
Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Prepared by: Charlotte Burgess (Occupational Therapist)
Date: 27 May 2026
1. Introduction and Statement of Lived and Professional Experience
I welcome the opportunity to provide a submission regarding the proposed changes to the
National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). I am a Paediatric Occupational Therapist
operating a private sole practice in Hobart, Tasmania, and I have worked extensively within the
NDIS framework for the past four years.
In addition to my professional experience, I am an Autistic individual. I have lived experience
navigating a world where my disability was repeatedly misdiagnosed until adulthood, and I
continue to experience the challenges of lacking appropriate systemic support. This dual
perspective—as both an allied health professional and a person with a disability—gives me
unique insight into the profound impact these proposed legislative changes will have.
Every day, I work with families who are facing significant distress in response to recent NDIS
changes. They are fearful that their children will not receive the support necessary to participate
in society alongside their peers. They are fearful that they will become so burnout that their own
mental health will suffer to the point they can no longer care for their child.
While many aspects of this bill are concerning, this submission specifically addresses the
sections that I believe will have the greatest impact on the families and children I support.
2. Proposed Cuts to Social, Civic, and Community Participation
The proposed 50% reduction in funding for social, civic, and community participation places
disabled Australians at acute risk of severe social isolation. Community access is not a luxury or
a privilege; it is a fundamental human right. Participants rely on these supports for essential
daily activities, including:
● Purchasing groceries and collecting medications.
● Attending medical and therapeutic appointments.
● Maintaining connections with family, friends, and support networks.
● Attending study and work.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1413
Reducing this funding will inevitably force many disabled individuals to remain isolated at home,
segregated from public life.
Research correlates community engagement directly with health outcomes and quality of life.
Reducing funding in this area is economically counterproductive. The projected savings will
likely be offset by increased pressure on other portfolios. Social isolation is a known determinant
of poor mental health; consequently, these cuts will shift the financial burden onto an already
strained public mental health and hospital system.
These changes are also likely to have a disproportionate effect on unpaid female carers. I work
with many children whose mothers have been forced out of the workforce due to a lack of
support within the education and NDIS systems. Without appropriate foundational support in
place, these changes will further contribute to the gender wage gap and disparities in
superannuation.
Article 19(b) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities states that persons
with disabilities must have access to a range of in-home, residential, and other community
support services, including the personal assistance necessary to support living and inclusion in
the community, and to prevent isolation or segregation from the community (United Nations
- . There is a significant risk that these proposed changes will mean Australia fails to fulfill
its obligations as a signatory to this convention.
3. Reductions to Capacity Building Funding
The National Disability Insurance Agency’s (NDIA) position that therapy funding should naturally
decline over time as a participant’s capacity increases relies on a flawed, linear model of
disability. It fails to account for the diverse realities of many NDIS participants. While the
explanatory memorandum notes on page 204 that capacity building budgets are frequently not
reduced as capacity is gained, it overlooks the fact that many participants require ongoing
support to maintain their functional gains or to build capacity in different areas of life as they
grow.
Many of the children I support have severe, lifelong disabilities. Their progress toward
developmental milestones is often incremental and requires consistent, long-term therapeutic
intervention just to maintain baseline functioning.
The explanatory memorandum further states that “in most allied health disciplines there is little
research evidence to support high volumes of therapy on a long-term basis.“ While a historical
lack of investment into allied health research may limit the available literature, this statement
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1413
fails to acknowledge the momentous outcomes achieved by participants who receive consistent
therapy through key developmental milestones. I work with children with severe disabilities who
have learnt how to use the toilet, how to eat a wider range of foods, and how to play and
engage with others. These vital outcomes would not be possible without consistent, continued
therapy. While it is true that some participants require less therapy over time, this must be
determined on a case-by-case basis.
A participant’s need for support is not static; it fluctuates based on developmental stages and
environmental demands. During critical life transitions—such as the move from primary school
to high school—the sensory, social, and executive functioning demands increase exponentially.
Therapy must often be increased, rather than decreased, during these periods to prevent
functional regression and school refusal.
I strongly urge the NDIA to maintain an individualised assessment model for therapy budgets
rather than implementing broad, sweeping reductions. Currently, the system suffers from
inequity: some participants receive more funding than they can realistically utilise within a plan
period, while others are forced to ration their therapy. Budgets must remain flexible and tailored
to individual needs.
4. Eligibility Requirements: Tightening the Meaning of Permanence
While permanence has always been part of the eligibility criteria, the proposed bill seeks to
make it significantly more stringent. By tightening this definition, the bill aims to reduce access in
cases where an impairment could theoretically be treated. I am deeply concerned by this shift,
particularly the requirement that an applicant must exhaust all ‘appropriate’ treatments before
gaining access to the scheme—a mandate that raises critical ethical questions.
First, it remains unclear who will define what constitutes an appropriate treatment. There is a
significant risk that vulnerable families will feel pressured to pursue interventions like Applied
Behavior Analysis (ABA). While frequently marketed as an evidence-based standard, a growing
body of research and lived-experience testimony indicates that ABA can cause long-term
psychological trauma and negative mental health outcomes for autistic individuals. Recent
research demonstrates a correlation between ABA and mental health hospitalisation (Mtanous
et al., 2025).
Research indicates that families with at least one young child with a disability have a variety of
different experiences and circumstances but tend to have lower socioeconomic status, labour
force participation and income than other families with young children (Australian Bureau of
Statistics, 2008). This burden is compounded by a systemic lack of formal and informal
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1413
supports. Low-income families do not have the financial capital to fund endless private
treatments simply to prove NDIS eligibility. If the government insists on this prerequisite, it must
clarify how these treatments will be funded. Without robust, publicly funded foundational
supports outside the NDIS, this policy will entrench systemic disadvantage and lock the most
vulnerable people out of the scheme.
5. Disproportionate Economic Effect on Women
Finally, it is vital to acknowledge the gendered economic impact of these proposed changes.
Societal data consistently demonstrates that women shoulder the primary burden of unpaid
caregiving in Australia.
When NDIS funding for community participation and therapy is reduced, the resulting support
deficit is almost always filled by mothers and female carers. By stripping away these formal
supports, the government risks forcing women entirely out of the workforce, severely
undermining their long-term financial independence, superannuation accumulation, and
economic security.
6. Conclusion and Recommendations
To ensure the NDIS remains a sustainable, equitable, and compassionate scheme, I urge the
committee to recommend the following:
● Reject the proposed 50% cut to social, civic, and community participation funding,
recognising these supports as a health and human rights necessity.
● Retain individualized, case-by-case therapy allocations rather than implementing broad
reductions.
● Remove or clarify the “exhausted all appropriate treatments” clause to ensure it does not
mandate harmful practices, override bodily autonomy or create an insurmountable
financial barrier for low-income applicants.
● Ensure that robust foundational supports are established externally so that people with
disabilities can access necessary treatments regardless of financial hardship.
● Conduct a comprehensive Gender Impact Assessment on the bill to address the
disproportionate economic burden placed on female caregivers.
Thank you for considering the feedback of the disability community.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1413
References:
Aguirre Mtanous NG, Koenig J, Nikahd M, Effertz SE, Silinonte S, Hyer JM, Hand BN, Bishop L.
Mental health outcomes associated with applied behavior analysis in a US national sample of
privately insured autistic youth. Autism. 2026 Feb;30(2):484-494. doi:
10.1177/13623613251390604. Epub 2025 Nov 9. PMID: 41206741.
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2008,
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-persons-disabi
lities
United Nations General Assembly. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities, opened for signature 30 March 2007, 2515 UNTS 3 (entered into force 3 May 2008)
art 19(b).