National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1437
I am writing to ask for changes to the NDIS for Future Generations Bill 2026. My son and I owe our functional success to the following- NDIS funding, an expert team, listening to the experts, consistently doing the therapeutic work and some NDIS processes.We both are grateful for the NDIS.
Without the following, my son and I would not be at the same capability level as we are today.
I am asking for: ● Independent contractors and directly-employed workers are officially exempt from NDIS provider status for self managed plans; ● A transparent means of assessing function; ● A deemed decision with review rights to bypass a stall in the system when an unscheduled reassessment request is filed; ● A statutory floor protecting categories of permanent and significant disability; ● Individual review rights, traceability, and independent audit.
Here are some experiences from my son and myself. My challenges are managing my severe mobility limitations and complex, high-impact chronic pain that requires highly specialized expertise, as my condition frequently challenges conventional therapeutic approaches. In any given week I can progress from being non-ambulatory from pain (bed-bound) to walking for 10 minutes and making curry and rice for my family. My neuro-physical therapist, exercise physio, speech therapist and psychologist are key in helping me remain out of a wheelchair and helping me create a balanced routine that leaves me space to thrive, not just cope. I can both dream of professional goals and achieve those goals because of the expert team I have. This working arrangement is made possible by my self-managed funding and the current exemption which allows me to engage independent workers who are not NDIS registered providers. As well, if I had to depend on a stalled system to clear funds my pain would be so severe that I would be non-ambulatory and bedbound. If there was a statutory floor for permanent and significant disability, more time could be spent on routine check-ins to focus on what extra goals you want to achieve, rather than forcing you to constantly re-prove that you are still disabled just to keep your basic care.
My son’s situation with his therapeutic team is the same as mine as some are not NDIS registered. His OT noted on his recent session note that he “presents with skills that are beyond what would typically be expected of a person with similar challenges.” And his capability has enabled him to be employed at a young age.
At a re-assessment meeting for my son, due to his complexity, the Local Area Coordinator (LAC) struggled to accurately assess the true extent of his functional impairment, inappropriately capping his projected eligibility at a minimal amount. When I attempted to clarify his daily challenges, the LAC pressured me to accept this deficit-based figure, implying that pushing back would result in further funding reductions. Refusing to accept this, I exercised my individual review rights. The subsequent internal review granted him three times the amount the LAC claimed was possible. This experience highlights why transparency, individual review rights, and independent audits are so vital—I have seen firsthand how these structural safeguards infinitely improve the lives of vulnerable participants.
On a broader note, the NDIS currently lacks a standardized, transparent functional capacity assessment tool. Introducing one would significantly improve how the system captures our true ability to navigate and manage the real world In addition, a true functional representation needs the independent, trusted reports from a participant’s own treating specialists will still be given genuine weight, rather than letting an algorithm make the final call. Moreover, invisible functional impacts of psychosocial disabilities and neurodivergence are necessary to capture daily functioning challenges.
I hope that due consideration is given to the submissions and thank you for your time.