National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission: Anonymous Queensland Request: Please publish this submission without identifying details.
Introduction
I am a parent in Queensland of two NDIS participants. Both plans are Plan Managed. My family transitioned to the NDIS following the disbanding of Disability Services Queensland. One of my children has a diagnosed life-long incurable condition with high complex support needs.I make this submission outline real-world impacts proposed changes bill have families mine.
The reality care system burden
NDIS supplements care it does not replace role families Even improved plan continue providing unpaid every day.AŌer years advocacy negotiations appropriate support husband required stress leave work due pressure.OVER time obtained countless reports functional capacity assessments supporting documentation point where lost count ongoing requirement emotionally exhausting unnecessary expense on NDIS funding.The impact employment substantial.Husband took lower-paid position allow him home support caring responsibilities.Most recent review period lasted months.During lived prolonged uncertainty.
Reducing funding community participation
Proposed ability reduce funding groups supports including social and community participation deeply concerning.Community participation essential safety wellbeing quality Support workers currently:
- Enable safe parƟcipațion communität
- Reduce risk absconding
- Support engagement meaningful acțiivities
- Allow participatiın famili events,with safe exit options when overwhelmed
- Provide some independence from parentsSupport also allow me maintain full-time employment reducing level burnout within our family.Without these supports child would become isolated fully dependent exhausted parents.This reverse progress significantly increase risks.
Changes to “reasonable necessary”
supports“Reasonable necesary has always been a requirement in the NDIS.Any narrowing scope reduces access essențial supports.Families already require provide extensive evidence need Further tightening may increase administrative burden costs without improving outcomes.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1654
Greater expectations on families
Reducing supports does not reduce need — it shifts responsibility onto families. If supports were reduced:
- One parent would likely need to leave the workforce
- Financial stress would increase
- Mental health would deteriorate significantly This is not a saving to the system. It simply transfers cost and impact to families already under extreme pressure.
Functional capacity assessments
Our family has experienced numerous functional capacity assessments over many years. Each time, we are required to revisit and document the most distressing aspects of our lives. This process is exhausting and often duplicative, particularly where disability is lifelong and well established. An increased reliance on assessments risks increasing administrative burden without adding meaningful understanding.
Automated decision-making
The introduction of automated decision-making is extremely concerning. Disability support decisions require human judgement. They involve nuanced understanding of behaviour, safety risks, daily patterns and environmental factors. Automated systems cannot accurately capture these realities. Decisions that affect safety, independence and wellbeing must involve human oversight.
Plan reassessments and instability
Frequent reviews and extended decision-making timelines create instability for families. If plans were sufficient and appropriate, repeated reassessments would be less necessary. Instead, families are caught in cycles of uncertainty, advocacy and delay. Continuity and stability should be prioritised, particularly for those with complex needs.
Compliance and administrative burden
While preventing fraud is important, increased compliance requirements risk placing additional strain on unpaid carers. Families should not be expected to take on complex administrative responsibilities under the threat of penalties. This adds unnecessary stress to already demanding caregiving roles. ####### Real-life consequences The risks associated with insufficient support are real. In one incident, my child left our home when a door was inadvertently left open and walked approximately 2 kilometres, including across a busy motorway. Police were involved after a concerned motorist reported a pedestrian in distress. Fortunately, they were found alive, though with injuries. This highlights the level of supervision required, above and beyond what would typically be expected. Even now, with improved supports, our family continues to provide substantial supervision. Support workers reduce but do not eliminate this risk.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1654
What needs to be understood
The life of a parent caring for a child with ongoing, complex needs does not follow the expected path. There is no transition to independence. There is ongoing care, constant vigilance, and long-term responsibility. A key concern is the future – when families are no longer able to provide care. At that point, individuals rely entirely on the system. If that system prioritises cost over care, the consequences will catastrophic.
Practical cost-saving alternatives
There are ways to improve sustainability without reducing essential supports:
- Stop repeated assessments for lifelong disabilities: Once a condition is clearly permanent, families should not be required repeatedly prove it.
- Ensure human oversight in decision-making: This reduces errors, inappropriate decisions and costly disputes.
- Increase scrutiny of provider pricing and profit margins: Greater accountability around costs needed services products consumables.
- Strengthen Quality Safeguards Commission It more effective addressing exploitation fraud where actually occurs. Vulnerable people rely systems sustain lives generate excessive profits.