Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Attention: Committee Secretary, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs Submitted by email: community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au

Dear Senators

We welcome the opportunity to make a submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs about the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.

We are a Queensland-based not for profit. Our motto is changing lives through sport for Queensland athletes with disabilities. We were operating before the Ndis attempting to fill Disability gaps to participating in Sport and we have seen a significant change in the needs since the Ndis was introduced but with this Bill have grave concerns about the capacity of the charity sector to pick up the gaps which would be left for people with disabilities to participate in sport at all levels from social through to elite and that this would hugely impact performance the Home games in 2032. While we are not exclusively focused on creating Australian representatives, we cannot find the stars of Sport when everyone doesn’t have an opportunity to at least try the Sport and find their way into the pathways.

NDIS “reform” cuts future medal tallies for Brisbane 2032 Games, puts athletes’ lives at risk.

Future of Parasport undermined, athletes’ lives at risk and risk of Australia not performing well at our Home Games in Brisbane 2032 because of this bill.

Executive Summary

Sporting Dreams opposes the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 completely and asks the Senate not to allow this legislation to pass. If the legislation must be passed, we urge the Senate to reject the Bill or substantially amend it before passage.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

As an organisation that operated before the NDIS, Sporting Dreams has witnessed first-hand the difference the Scheme has made for Australians with disability. Prior to the NDIS, participation in sport often depended on whether a person had a wealthy family, a large support network, or access to charity. Talent, determination and effort were not enough.

Before the NDIS:

Introduction

Sporting Dreams is a disability sport organisation that has supported Australians with disability to participate in community sport, recreation and pathways to elite competition both before and throughout the life of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

Our experience spans grassroots participation, athlete development, community inclusion and the practical realities faced by people with disability and their families when attempting to access sporting opportunities.

We welcome the opportunity to provide this submission to the Senate inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.

This submission focuses on the likely impact of the proposed reforms on participation in sport and community life. While Sporting Dreams is not a legal organisation, our evidence is informed by decades of direct experience supporting people with disability to overcome barriers to participation and achieve outcomes that benefit not only individuals but also families, communities and the broader Australian economy.

Our central concern is that the Bill shifts the NDIS away from its foundational principles of individualised support, choice and control, and social and economic participation. In doing so, it risks undermining many of the gains achieved since the Scheme was introduced.

The Importance of Sport and Community Participation

Sport is often incorrectly viewed as an optional or recreational activity. For many people with disability, participation in sport is a critical pathway to health, independence, social connection, education and employment.

Research consistently demonstrates that participation in physical activity improves physical health, mental wellbeing, confidence, resilience and community engagement. For people with disability, these benefits can be even more significant because sport provides opportunities to build skills, reduce isolation and develop networks that support broader life outcomes.

Participation in sport frequently requires supports that extend beyond the sporting activity itself. Athletes may require assistance with transport, personal care, communication,

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

equipment management, orientation, behavioural support or specialised coaching arrangements. These supports are often the difference between participation and exclusion.

The NDIS has enabled many participants to access these supports for the first time. As a result, Sporting Dreams has witnessed substantial increases in participation rates, athlete retention, volunteer engagement and progression into leadership and employment roles.

Any reform that reduces access to these supports must therefore be assessed not only in terms of immediate budget impacts but also in terms of its broader social, health and economic consequences.

Concerns Regarding the Bill

Sporting Dreams is concerned that several provisions within the Bill create uncertainty regarding future eligibility, funding and participant rights.

The proposed expansion of ministerial powers to define key aspects of eligibility and support categories through legislative instruments reduces parliamentary scrutiny and creates uncertainty for participants planning their futures.

The reduction of review rights and reassessment protections may leave participants with limited avenues to challenge decisions that significantly affect their lives.

The move toward narrower impairment-based assessments risks overlooking the interaction between disability, environment and support needs. Participation outcomes are rarely -determined by impairment alone. They are influenced by a person’s circumstances, available supports and opportunities within their community.

Similarly, proposals that restrict social and community participation supports risk disproportionately affecting people whose goals involve sport, recreation, volunteering and community engagement.

These activities are not peripheral to the objectives of the NDIS. They are central to the Scheme’s purpose of supporting social and economic participation.

Participant Experiences

The experiences of Sporting Dreams participants demonstrate the practical consequences of reducing support availability.

Many athletes rely on support workers to attend training sessions, competitions and community activities. Without these supports, participation becomes impossible regardless of talent or motivation.

Participants with complex disabilities often require specialised assistance that cannot be provided by family members or volunteers. Restricting flexibility in support arrangements

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

may remove access to the very people who possess the skills necessary to facilitate safe participation.

We are also concerned that reductions in preventative and capacity-building supports may increase long-term costs. Physiotherapy, exercise physiology, skill development and community participation frequently reduce reliance on more intensive supports over time.

Investment in participation is often investment in independence. Case studies illustrating this are provided below.

Recommendations

Sporting Dreams recommends that the Senate:

• Reject the Bill all together on the grounds that it achieves the exact opposite of securing the future of the Ndis for future generations, necessitating drastic amendments drafted in consultation with the Disability sector and Disabled People if it must pass.
• Seek alternative cost saving modelling including non-legislative ones options and run comparisons prior to changing legislation.
• Ensure that any significant changes to eligibility or support categories remain subject to full parliamentary scrutiny through primary legislation.
• Preserve participant rights to review and appeal decisions affecting eligibility, funding and support access.
• Maintain access to social and community participation supports until equivalent and fully funded alternatives are operational.
• Protect flexible support arrangements that enable participation in sport, recreation and community life.
• Retain assessment approaches that consider the whole person and their functional support needs rather than relying solely on impairment categories.
• Prioritise fraud reduction, administrative efficiency and system reform before reducing participant supports.
• Co-design future reforms with people with disability, families, representative organisations and service providers.

10. Many athletes could not participate in sport because there was nobody available to help them get to training, transport equipment, provide personal care, or navigate inaccessible environments.

11. Children and adults were forced to use poorly fitting second-hand equipment, increasing pain, fatigue and injury risk.

12. Families carried the overwhelming burden of support, often sacrificing employment, education and their own wellbeing.

13. Participation in sport frequently depended on fundraising, sponsorship and luck rather than need.

14. People without strong family support were often excluded entirely.

15. Many people with disability experienced social isolation, poorer health outcomes and limited opportunities to develop the confidence, skills and relationships that sport can provide.

The NDIS changed that.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

For the first time, many Australians with disability gained access to support workers, allied health professionals, assistive technology and individualised supports that allowed them to participate in community life, education, employment and sport.

The proposed Bill risks reversing those gains.

Through a combination of ministerial powers, reduced review rights, cuts to community participation supports, restrictive assessment processes and future reductions to funding categories, this legislation threatens to move disability support away from individualised participation and back towards a system where opportunity depends on family resources, charity and circumstance.

This is not only a disability issue.

It is a participation issue.

It is an employment issue.

It is a health issue.

And it is a national sporting issue.

Australia is investing billions of dollars preparing for the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Yet this Bill risks removing the very supports that allow future Paralympians to train, compete and remain connected to sporting pathways.

In sport, no athlete reaches the podium alone.

Behind every medal is a team of coaches, support staff, family, equipment specialists and community networks.

For athletes with disability, NDIS-funded supports often form part of that team.

When those supports are removed, the athlete is not merely disadvantaged. They can be forced out of sport entirely.

CASE STUDIES

BRIAN

Brian’s story demonstrates this clearly. Brian is a young swimmer who relies on support workers to attend training, competitions and social activities. Previous NDIS changes have already reduced his opportunities to compete away from home. Further reductions to social and community participation supports will mean fewer training sessions, fewer competitions, weaker social connections and a significantly reduced chance of progressing through the pathway to elite sport.

Brian’s story is not just about swimming.

It is about childhood.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

It is about belonging.

It is about whether a young Australian with disability gets to experience the same opportunities as other children.

“Brian is 12 years old and wants to do swimming. He attends swimming lessons at the school swimming pool as part of his swimming curriculum but to really take this further Brian knows he needs to join the local swimming club. His parents are supported in the community to learn that this involves joining the local swimming club and getting classified for his Disability so with this information they start looking for access accessible sporting clubs. At this point Brian’s parents contact Sporting Dreams and let us know.

We’re able to provide information on pathways to classification. Connections were Swimming Australia pathways programs. We also sat down with Brian and his parents to figure out what kind of needs and support he would have and using knowledge of sporting clubs in the area, select which swimming pool and local club Brian would join. Brian’s swimming club become his swimming Family. A Sporting Dreams mentor works with Brian, his parents and the swimming club to identify barriers to participating. Even with the club educated and on board there will be additional support though it’s not appropriate to ask volunteers in the club to perform such as assisting Ryan with getting in and out of his swimwear, trialling putting on Brian’s AFOs (ankle foot orthosis). Brian is very concerned about having continence accidents around other kids while part of swimming so not only having access and an introduction to a continence Nurse will be important but also someone in place designated to clean wheelchair as well when this occurs.

Brian and his parents interview independent support workers with an interest in swimming, and choose Casey. Casey competed in swimming all the way through university and understand how the swimming world works. This means Casey can focus purely on Brian’s needs, not need to figure out an entire new sport and system at the same time which would’ve been the case if Brian’s parents had simply engaged the nearest Disability provider to send whoever was rostered on that day to help Brian.

Brian attends training three times a week and club nights. He competes in local competitions, makes it to the state championships and this means his first trip away.

Until Ndis bill number one, Brian was able to attend competitions away from home with Casey travelling with the other swimmers and staying in the same accommodation. This was funded through short term accommodation in the capacity building line item. If the other swimmers were staying at athletes houses, Brian and Casey needed to stay in a hotel to ensure it was wheelchair accessible however because even though Brian can walk a little and his teammates have gotten used to the using a wheelchair doesn’t mean you can’t walk at all Brian does need a safe accessible bathroom.

Brian has been devastated since these changes to legislation because now when the other children in his swimming club go away to competitions Brian can’t attend all of them because even though one of his parents works hard, the other one has to stay home to look after multiple children with a disability and there simply isn’t enough funds to cover the expenses of a Support Worker to travel, have motel accommodation and out-of-pocket expenses in addition do whatever it cost for Brian. All parents already know how expensive it

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

is for their child to participate in sport but now imagine you’ve got to pay for two people so one of them can do sport and that’s the reality.

Sporting Dreams has been stepping in to try and pay some of these gap payments for Brian up to our maximum amount per person per year ($500).

Brian is already missing out on local competitions to save his money for a big one such as the state championships. This puts a lot of pressure on Brian compared to the other children in the club because it means if he doesn’t do his qualifying times at a local event, he won’t be going to the state or national championships.

Brian’s friendships and relationship with the other children have already changed with this cost cutting measure because he’s no longer part of some of the stuff that makes up the cultural folklore and fibre of the club because Brian wasn’t there for that time when the entire bucket of M&M spilled through the car on the way to the pool at a competition. And he wasn’t there that time everybody threw the coach in the water at the end of the big competition and then realise the coach’s phone doesn’t work and nobody has quite been forgiven since.

Brian now faces is the very real reality that he might only be able to attend swimming training once a month if he is lucky with a 50% reduction in his social and community participation budget. This is because Brian also received support to participate in other activities where it’s not age-appropriate to bring your parents such as a teenage birthday gathering of Lasertag and movie night.

Brian’s parents are not able to take him to swimming training every night. They have another child with her Disability, one parent with a Disability and the other one working overtime to financially support the entire family. The Disability-related life administration takes up a lot of the additional time for both parents filling out forms and attending appointments. Like all the kids, Brian can’t carpool because of the assistance he requires with safely getting in and out of the swimming pool, maintaining his skin integrity, putting on his equipment, remembering to pack all of the things he needs, including the things he has been taught, he needs to use through the continence Nurse. The Support Worker is also in charge of purchasing these items for Brian along with Brian’s parents so that everything Brian needs to do Sport is self-contained.

If this bill passes Brian’s Support Worker Casey will only be able to support the family by making sure everything is ordered that Brian needs Disability related for his Sport and packed before Brian needs to leave if they happen to be rostered on.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Brian will no longer be fully living like a child in Australia who didn’t have a disability because of the cuts in this bill.

•   this bill comes Brian out of being a swimmer a lot alone developing the years of talent required to represent Australia at Brisbane 2032 Home games.
  

SARAH

Sarah’s story highlights the importance of flexible and individualised supports.

Sarah is a cyclist with vision impairment who participates using a tandem bicycle. Her support worker is also an experienced cyclist capable of acting as a pilot and guide. Under increasingly restrictive support arrangements, Sarah risks losing access to the highly specialised support that allows her to participate safely and competitively.

Sarah is in her 20s and lives at home with her parents, she’s had an Interest in Sports her whole life – before and after acquiring a vision impairment.

After trying many Sports, Sarah’s parents continued to work hard to earn money to provide for their family and also juggle driving her and providing her with assistance around their work. However, the Sport she turned out to enjoy was tandem cycling. A tandem cycle has two seats. One for a rider who can see at the front is called the pilot and the second seat and pedals at the back of the rider who cannot see where they are going. For obvious reasons the pilot needs to be as fast as or faster than the person riding the bike.

At school in her teenage years, Sarah’s parents were able to fill the role of pilot and there was a Fundraiser for the bicycle.

Before Sarah had Ndis funding being able to be part of her local Sporting club and social group rides such as the tour de Brisbane which she travelled to with her family from another part of Queensland were in jeopardy. This wasn’t because of Sarah’s lack of dedication to her training, but because her mother was no longer able to keep up at all and her ageing father was struggling as Sarah got fitter and stronger on the back of the bike. As he retired out of the workforce, he had to train harder and harder just to keep up but was slowing Sarah down.

With Ndis social and community participation funds Sara has been able to find a Support Worker through the network of people met in the Sport of Cycling who has an interest in Cycling and is a strong cyclist. They are older and have maturity and life skills to assist Sara but also are young and strong enough to peddle faster than her and handle the bike safely. This means that Sara is able to check part in social events and community level competitions to build her confidence gain strength and see if she would enjoy being a competitive cyclist at a higher level.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Sara has enjoyed this so much she has gone through the process of being classified to compete as a para athlete and is investigating the options available for a pathway into elite sport.

Sara doesn’t just need assistance with a pilot though. At her own home she’s quite independent because everything is laid out. She has her tipping kettle screen reading technology. Everything in the kitchen set up the way her and her occupational therapist to organise it. But going out to cafes and restaurants or travelling to Cycling events means being out of the safe familiar environment and needing someone else to be her eyes and safety so she needs a guide on and off the bike. That’s where the Support Worker really comes in as a lifesaver. And a life changer. This type of performance is an example of teamwork in Sport.

Because the Support Worker doesn’t come from a large company, Sara her parents and her Worker have been able to decide on the policies procedures and protocols for safety what works and what doesn’t. Previously she had been able to use the capacity Building short-term accommodation to pay for the Support Worker/pilot when they travel to community Cycling events to provide assistance and also for accommodation and food.

With those changes already made to the Ndis Sarah has participated in only local Cycling club events since the changes came into effect.

Having to pay Travel food and accommodations for two people especially when it’s reasonable for a Support Worker to require their own room for privacy and downtime while away working means Sarah would need to pay for two people to travel so she can compete in one event now.

This is setting her backwards in terms of learning to independently navigate away from her parent. Parents do Cycling events and this means she’s missing out on being part of the stories and adventures in her Cycling club.

A further cut in social and community participation funding will mean she won’t even be able to compete in the weekly cycle event plus go out and train for that weekly cyble club event on the weekend. She will need to prioritise her social and community participation funding to be used on essential survival activities including for example when she needs to go to Professional appointments, work appointments and medical appointments where she needs to navigate unfamiliar locations to get inside, can be presented with a clipboard of paperwork that needs to be completed and needs assistance, needs assistance with finding front doors and falls safely. Some of these things are just that with time you can become more capable at doing by yourself with a vision impairment using a cane or a guide dog. But when it’s a new situation and

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

you’re still adapting to living with the Disability having a Human to help is incredibly important.

In addition to Cycling, Sara is studying at University, working part-time and like most young people wants to move out of home so she’s not relying on her parents and is either living by herself or in a shared house with some friends with a Ndis support working to help achieve these goals.”

GEORGE

George’s story demonstrates the value of investing in capacity rather than crisis.

Following serious complications associated with spinal cord injury, NDIS-funded physiotherapy and exercise supports helped George regain strength, independence and community participation. Those supports reduce future reliance on support workers, hospital admissions and health services. Cutting such supports may produce short-term budget savings but create significantly higher long-term costs elsewhere. George’s injury was sustained a motor vehicle accident in the 1970s and highlights the danger of the proposal to remove people injured in a motor vehicle accident where they will not be covered by system such as the national injury insurance scheme Queensland or the TAC in Victoria. George, in an attempt to set himself up for his future, spent his payout on a deposit to build a wheelchair accessible home which he has lived in since his accident and on training opportunities to secure disability friendly employment. He was required to pay back every single cent spent on him by Centrelink, the health systems and previous disabilities systems believing him without substantial finances making him eligibility for the disability pension and meaning that without the NDIS George will not be able to pay for someone to get him in and out of bed as this was trailing bathing dressing and essential activities in his daily life. But George is at risk of exactly that happening to him if this bill passes without a clause.

We therefore recommend that the process of passing this bill is slowed down. Grandfather in People in a situation such as George I’ve been injured in a motor vehicle accident have no other access to funding schemes to support their needs. Look for all the people who might fall through the cracks of systems. There might not be in George’s scenario but many people are about to leave the Ndis to support the Dohnt yet exist.

“George sustained a spinal cord injury in a motor vehicle accident in the 1970s, long before the establishment of the NDIS and before the creation of modern lifetime care schemes such as the National Injury Insurance Scheme Queensland and other state-based accident compensation systems.

Following years of legal proceedings, George received a compensation settlement. However, much of that settlement was used to repay government agencies and services that had funded his care and support during the lengthy court process, including Medicare, Centrelink and state-funded disability support systems. The remaining funds were used responsibly to secure his future. George built a wheelchair-accessible home, where he continues to live today, and invested in education and training opportunities that enabled him to pursue disability-friendly employment.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Like many Australians injured decades ago, George no longer has detailed records showing how compensation funds were allocated between future care costs, loss of earnings, pain and suffering and other heads of damage. Courts were not required to retain such records indefinitely and many documents no longer exist.

For many years George lived independently, but the long-term impacts of spinal cord injury gradually took their toll. He developed significant overuse injuries from decades of wheelchair use and experienced recurrent pressure injuries that resulted in lengthy hospital stays and prolonged periods confined to bed. His physical condition deteriorated to the point where he believed his active life was over.

Before entering the NDIS, George had largely accepted that he would no longer participate in sport or structured exercise. He had transitioned to a powered wheelchair, adopted different methods of managing personal care and adjusted to a future that seemed increasingly limited by his disability. Through NDIS-funded assistive technology, George received his first properly fitted powered wheelchair. The wheelchair’s pressure-relieving features allowed him to remain out of bed for extended periods without placing his skin at risk. NDIS-funded physiotherapy helped him rebuild strength, address years of deconditioning and manage chronic overuse injuries.

For the first time in more than a decade, George was able to participate in physical activity again. Using adapted exercise equipment, resistance training and a wheelchair-accessible hand cycle, he gradually regained strength, confidence and independence. The benefits extended well beyond physical health. George’s mental health improved, his community participation increased and he regained a sense of purpose and enjoyment that had been missing for many years.

Importantly, these supports reduced his reliance on more costly interventions. Investment in physiotherapy, exercise and appropriate assistive technology helped avoid further deterioration, reduced pressure on the health system and enhanced George’s independence.

George’s experience demonstrates why the NDIS must continue to support capacity-building and participation rather than focusing solely on crisis responses.

His story also highlights a serious risk created by the proposed legislation.

George may be considered a person who once received compensation, yet he is not covered by any ongoing accident compensation scheme. The funds he received decades ago have long since been spent on legitimate disability-related needs, housing and education. Without the NDIS, George has no alternative system to fund the support workers he relies on for essential daily activities such as getting out of bed, showering, dressing and managing his personal care.”

The Bill contains several provisions of particular concern:

• Schedule 1 Parts 8 and 9 allow eligibility rules to be altered through ministerial instruments rather than primary legislation.
• Schedule 1 Part 4 permits broad funding reductions across support categories without participant review rights.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

• Schedule 1 Parts 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8 reduce review and reassessment rights for existing participants.
• Schedule 1 Part 3 replaces whole-of-person assessment with a single eligible impairment approach.
• Schedule 1 Part 8 introduces requirements to exhaust treatment options before eligibility.
• Proposed funding reductions to social and community participation supports risk undermining participation in sport, education, employment and community life before Foundational Supports have been established.

Sporting Dreams does not accept the argument that sustainability can only be achieved by reducing participant supports.

There are substantial opportunities to reduce expenditure without harming participants, including:

• Eliminating fraud and inappropriate claiming.
• Reducing duplication and administrative inefficiency within the NDIA.
• Removing unnecessary reassessments for people with permanent and stable disabilities.
• Strengthening mainstream service systems so costs are not transferred to the NDIS.
• Investing in assistive technology and capacity building that reduce long-term support costs.
• Improving workforce capability and service quality.
• Measuring participant outcomes rather than simply reducing expenditure.

In elite sport, championships are not won by cutting training hours, removing coaches and taking equipment away from athletes. They are won through targeted investment, smart decision-making and focusing resources where they deliver the greatest return.

The same principle applies to the NDIS.

This Bill risks reducing Australia’s future Paralympic medal tally, but its consequences extend far beyond sport.

The greater risk is that Australians with disability lose opportunities to participate in education, employment, family life and their communities.

Sporting Dreams therefore recommends that the Bill not proceed in its current form and that any future reform agenda be co-designed with people with disability, informed by the Disability Royal Commission, aligned with the National Disability Strategy, and focused on achieving sustainability without causing harm.

Gold medal-winning cost savings strategies that don’t hurt participants

Delivering Better Outcomes and Sustainable Savings in the NDIS

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

In elite sport, gold medals and world records are rarely achieved through blunt cost-cutting. Success comes from identifying the factors that have the greatest impact on performance and investing in them while eliminating waste, inefficiency, and duplication.

The same principle applies to the NDIS.

If we want a scheme that is financially sustainable while continuing to improve the lives of Australians with disability, we should focus on the “one percenters” – the small but significant improvements that collectively deliver better outcomes and long-term savings. Some of these 1% is in Sport and in life don’t actually have to cost more money. They rely on blue sky Thinking and collaborative teamwork which could be done between people with disabilities who utilise the services many of who are athletes and the government.

The objective should not be to spend less at any cost. The objective should be to spend smarter, invest earlier, and achieve better outcomes.

Eliminate Fraud, Waste and Exploitation

No group has a stronger interest in protecting the integrity of the NDIS than people with disability themselves. Our lives, opportunities and independence depend on the scheme operating effectively.

Like a sporting team protecting its salary cap, every dollar lost to fraud is a dollar unavailable for genuine participants. it’s an unacceptable loss for taxpayers.

Savings can be achieved through:

• Better auditing systems.
• Improved data analytics to identify abnormal claiming patterns.
• Stronger provider accountability.
• Faster investigation and enforcement processes.
• Systems that allow participants to identify and stop invoices for services or equipment that have not been delivered.

However, anti-fraud measures must remain practical and proportionate. Compliance systems should target fraud, not create barriers for legitimate participants. Excessiveureaucracy can unintentionally push people towards more expensive and less flexible providers rather than allowing them to purchase the most suitable and cost-effective supports available.

Run the NDIA as a High-Performing Service Organisation

Elite sporting organisations constantly analyse processes to remove unnecessary steps and improve performance. The NDIA should operate with the same mindset.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Current systems often involve multiple layers of decision-making, duplication of effort, and unnecessary administrative handling.

Examples include:

•  Participants receiving calls from blocked numbers that cannot be returned directly.
  

•  Reliance on call centres to relay messages that could be resolved through direct
  

communication.

• Matters moving between Local Area Coordinators, planners and delegates before a
  

decision is reached.

These inefficiencies create frustration for participants while consuming significant public resources.

Performance measures should focus on both financial efficiency and participant outcomes, recognising that customer service and cost effectiveness are not competing objectives— they are mutually reinforcing.

Simplify Administration and Reduce Red Tape

Many participants with permanent and stable disabilities repeatedly provide the same evidence year after year.

This creates costs for:

•  Participants.
  

•   Allied health professionals.
  

• NDIA staff.
  

•  External review bodies.
  

Reducing unnecessary reassessments and standardising evidence requirements would free resources to be directed towards supports rather than administration.

In sporting terms, this is the equivalent of reducing time spent on paperwork and allowing athletes and coaches to focus on performance.

Strengthen Mainstream Services

The NDIS was never intended to become the default provider of every service that other systems fail to deliver.

When health, housing, education, mental health and justice systems withdraw supports, costs are simply transferred into the NDIS.

A sustainable approach requires:

•  Clearer boundaries between systems.
  

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

• Stronger joint funding arrangements.
• Greater accountability from states and territories.
• Reinvestment in mainstream disability services.

The NDIS should be part of a coordinated team, not expected to play every position on the field.

5. Invest in Workforce Capability

A skilled workforce delivers better outcomes and reduces long-term costs.

Poorly trained staff can contribute to:

• Behavioural escalation.
• Restrictive practices.
• Injuries.
• Failed placements.
• Increased participant dependency.

Investment in training, supervision and specialist expertise creates a stronger workforce and reduces costly crises.

Just as elite athletes require skilled coaches, participants achieve better outcomes when supported by capable and experienced professionals.

6. Build Independence Rather Than Dependence

The most effective long-term savings occur when participants become more independent.

This may involve investment in:

• Assistive technology.
• Employment pathways.
• Communication supports.
• Transport independence.
• Capacity-building programs.
• Accessible housing.
• Home and vehicle modifications.

Too often decisions focus on the immediate cost of an item rather than its long-term benefit.

For example, the cost of providing a participant with appropriate equipment may be significantly less than funding support workers to perform the same task every day for years.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

The difference between a high-performing sporting program and an average one is often investment in the tools and resources that allow athletes to maximise their own capability.

The same principle applies to disability support.

7. Invest Early to Prevent More Expensive Problems Later

Every successful sporting organisation understands that prevention is cheaper than recovery.

Early intervention can prevent:

• Hospital admissions.
• Mental health crises.
• Family breakdown.
• Homelessness.
• Institutionalisation.
• Involvement with the justice system.

Relatively small investments in therapy, equipment, home modifications and family supports can avoid much larger costs in the future.

The best savings are often achieved by preventing problems from reaching crisis point.

8. Focus on Outcomes Rather Than Inputs

One of the greatest opportunities for reform is shifting attention from what is being purchased to what is being achieved.

In sport, success is measured by performance outcomes, not simply by how many hours an athlete spends training.

Similarly, the NDIS should focus on:

• Functional outcomes.
• Independence.
• Community participation.
• Employment.
• Quality of life.

Increasingly prescriptive purchasing rules can sometimes produce the opposite of their intended effect—higher costs and poorer outcomes.

There are examples where participants are prevented from purchasing a simple solution because it is not on an approved list, resulting in the need for ongoing paid supports that ultimately cost significantly more.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

A participant using appropriate equipment independently often achieves a better outcome than a participant requiring supervision indefinitely.

9. Reduce Disputes Through Better Decision-Making

A substantial amount of public money is spent on reviews, appeals and legal processes.

Many disputes arise because decisions are:

• Inconsistent.
• Poorly explained.
• Delayed.
• Difficult to understand.

Clearer legislation, greater transparency and earlier dispute resolution would reduce administrative costs while improving trust in the system.

The best sporting teams spend their time competing, not arguing with referees. The same principle applies to scheme administration.

10. Partner With People With Disability to Design Solutions

People with disability are not obstacles to sustainability—they are essential partners in achieving it.

Participants understand which supports work, which services deliver value, and where waste occurs.

When large organisations claim certain funding arrangements are unsustainable, it is important to recognise that participants increasingly have choice and control over where they spend their funding. If people are choosing alternative providers, that may indicate differences in quality, flexibility or outcomes rather than simply pricing pressures.

The voices of people with disability must remain central to any reform agenda.

Conclusion: The Gold Medal Strategy

The most sustainable savings will not come from reducing participant budgets or restricting access to supports.

Like a high-performance sporting program, success comes from focusing on the fundamentals that drive results:

• Eliminating fraud and waste.
• Streamlining administration.
• Strengthening mainstream services.
• Investing early to prevent crises.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

• Building participant independence.
• Measuring outcomes rather than transactions.
• Partnering with people with disability to design solutions.

Gold medals are not won by cutting corners.

They are won by investing in the right things, removing inefficiencies, and creating systems that allow people to perform at their best.

The same is true for the NDIS.

Disabled people and Disabled People’s Organisations across Australia stand ready to work with government to identify practical reforms that improve sustainability, reduce waste and deliver better outcomes without causing harm.

That is how we create a scheme that is both financially sustainable and worthy of the people it exists to support.

Sporting Dreams - Background

Founded in 2008 Sporting Dreams has provided support ranging from annual grants, group or one on one mentoring and regular award ceremonies with networking opportunities for disabled athletes, their coaches families and friends to create a peer support network. While we drive to empower people to participate in Sport for the many valuable contribution, Sport brings to people’s life from being part of a sporting community, increase confidence, physical well-being, a network of other people with Disability who help to Disability pride and how to do life with Disability, The incredible connections athletes make being part of the broader sporting community of non-disabled athletes and travelling in Australia around the world playing in local competitions. After this long period of time, we’ve also seen athletes go on to move from competitive level Sport to also pursuing personal and career goals such as university study graduating from university and pursuing a career becoming parents working. Our athletes have arranged from 8 to their 40s.

Prior to the Ndis we still provided pathways information for how to get involved in Sport or helping figure out what Sport might be suitable and connecting athletes. But in terms of finances or hands-on support it was largely requests for equipment to get started. We never would’ve had the financial resources to ensure people had to Support Worker. So sadly it was already predictable that if people didn’t have a built-in support network who would be dedicated to taking them to training helping them in and out of the equipment or we weren’t able to create one within the club then the person was not probably going to continue the Sport even if we bought the person the piece of equipment. That mean we did didn’t mean we don’t try. It just shows that there needs to be a different system in place before something such as removing social and community participation funding which currently now enables athletes to use their customised equipment which they might’ve got through us, the Ndis, the Paralympics Australia Grant system or other charitable donations.

Our board is made up entirely of disabled people, family members or carers for people with disabilities led by our founder and president Paralympian Marayke Jonkers who competed at

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

three Paralympic Games in swimming winning three medals and was Australia’s first female para tri athlete to medal at world championships when she won bronze in Budapest 2010.

We’re focused on grass or sport and highlight stories include everything from helping a small child ride a bicycle around the street with her siblings with modifications to a bike to helping people into a sporting pathway who have gone onto represent Australia at the Olympics (over 15). Our Australian representatives have gone on to break world records and when metals becoming role models in Intern for the next generations of sporting Dreams athletes. Beautiful circle moment when our first sporting Dreams athlete Rachael Dodds presented a Grant 20 100 athlete a blind visually impaired skier and aspiring cyclist Jordan Carroll. It immediately became obvious from these athletes’ stories that a huge support network was necessary to enable both athletes to take part and Sport. And while we usually celebrate everyone’s story small charities simply don’t have the financial and Human Resource resources to fill all of the gaps.

Our athletes and some of their families both Ndis participants and Ndis participants giving us a perspective into the difference. The Ndis is making to people’s lives. This can be either because the person is aged over 65, the person is not eligible for the Ndis on account of not being an Australian resident and the other athletes have parents or family members/carers who also Ndis

We wish to highlight just some of the harm this Amendment Bill will cause if it passes Parliament. This Bill is too far-reaching to be allowed to pass as it is currently written and it consequences would go well beyond Sport into impacting the ability for people with disabilities only participate in sport but live and be active members of society. As such we believe the Bill requires further scrutiny and amendment before it proceeds.

• A risk not only to the capacity for people to participate in sport at any level but to be able to leave the house and perform basic activities of daily living such as 10 doctor’s appointments, education and employment and, for a younger athlete, things like assistance to attend friends’ birthday parties.
• Risk of missing generations of athletes who could represent Australia because with a drastic reduction and social and community participation funding athletes will not be able to regularly attend training. When you watch the Paralympics on TV it’s not so nice inspiration that took training and hard work every single day every week for years. Unlike athletes without disabilities there is a significant additional need for support in terms of transporting assistive technology for example your everyday wheelchair plus a racing wheelchair and a hand cycle or tandem bike for Triathlon. no sporting clubs are accessible physically in terms of the amenities and not every athlete should have to be relying on other people in the boarding club for personal care task such as toileting.
• This bill instantly enables the slashing of social and community participation funding which allows people to participate in and Train at Sport so in reality what’s that taking away? It’s taking away the Support Worker who has been working with the coach and the other people in the sporting club to work out how to include the Ndis participant. It takes away the worker who provides transportation for bulky equipment. It takes away that worker who assists with toileting and other personal care. It takes away the worker who was providing prompting and building the individuals capacity for all of the steps involved from time management to which piece of equipment they need to be where they need to be and when.
• Increase risk of burnout for parents/carers and informal supports if people are lucky enough to have them. When there are widespread cuts by category like this responsibility

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

falls back to informal support. Now for the family unit to survive things such as medical appointments check priority again over Sport like it was before the Ndis and we are many people who are enthusiastic talented and desired to fit into Sport.

Consultation period

This consultation period has been so short despite attempting to book an Auslan interpreter before we even read the legislation was impossible, to even hardest and excess online form to explain the bills content to athletes who would be affected and their families.

This fact itself displays a lack of understanding of basic Disability awareness and access needs which in itself shows how the damaging nature of this bill comes about why legislation is created for disabled people without them being involved in the conversation.

Parliamentary Scrutiny and Transparency

The consultation period for the Amendment Bill is two weeks, which is insufficient to allow for appropriate consultation, considering accessibility and communication needs. The Australian Government Guide to Policy Impact Analysis says consultation should occur for a minimum of 30 days where possible. The short timeline impacts us in particular and you are senators because this submission is being prepared by disabled person who uses voice dictation. Because of the rash there is no time to schedule additional support to deal with formatting errors which this can generate. Of the board we have people who have just had surgery people who are unwell people who have caring responsibilities and disabled loved ones in crisis and we scrambling to put together a submission on time. Consultation required for the extent of drastic changes like this with athletes has not been possible. The timeframe does not permit us to hire an Ozland interpreter the information about the bill into easy reading English run multiple workshops and the different formats for peoples different access needs from in person or online over the telephone and to assist people with making that own informed decisions about how they might be impacted. This means we cannot bring you the best quality of data because there has not been the ability to work completely with athletes. Only those who have had the capacity and time to respond.

Issues: a two day extension which allowed for an extra weekend for people who are busy with work was helpful but not long enough and technical issues with the Website meant on that actual weekend the button to actually upload a submission was not working for a lot of people for most of the weekend. This was particularly challenging for people who had hired a support person to assist in preparing and submitting the thoughts, and then during the schedule time with their Support Worker could not get the submit button to work.

Recommendations

 1. Do not pass this bill- there is a road mark for making a more inclusive Australia. It looks like a national Disability strategy
 2. The Royal commission implements all our recommendations. When these are achieved, public transport barriers, sporting club barriers, attitude barriers, physical environment barriers will have been addressed and there is a better chance that we can have people with Disability access to community for example with less support required.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Issues impacting disabled people from participating in Sport and the community

are withstanding from the legislation from a variety of factors such as the implementation of operational guidelines policies, procedures, staff training within the NDIS, so many changes hitting the sector in the past few years that families advocate and support networks are burned out. The very real reality that people are trying to do the right thing but haven’t kept up.

We recommend preventing the Ndis inquiry recommendations, especially paying attention to the one which says that they needed to be implemented all together because one at a time does not work

Immediately reopen the submissions process. Amend the consultation period for a best practice minimum of 30 days.

Key decisions left to ministerial instruments, not law

The issue: The Bill allows Ministers to change who gets NDIS support (Schedule 1 Parts 8 and 9) and how much funding people receive (Schedule 1 Part 4; Schedule 3) by signing an instrument, without going back to Parliament. The rules that will determine critical eligibility thresholds (Schedule 1 Parts 1, 8 and 9) have not yet been written.

How this affects participants: The is a highly stressful process for disabled people their families and supporters. Time spent attempting to learn new systems and keep a track of constant changes like this. It’s away time and energy which could be focused on participating in sport and focusing on this kind of skills acquisition we encourage which could be anything from learning to remember to pack one’s own swimming bag or putting on one’s own football boots without help all the way through to getting enough rest in between school or work and training as a disabled people well there is a reduced amount of energy in the day and reduced time due to extra time required for Disability related tasks.

This creates a culture of fear to utilise Ndis supports in case there has been a change not wanting to anchor a fine so therefore runs the risk of not only harming people through actual denying of things but very typical attempting not to have to engage and not taking risks in an attempt to protect themselves financially and psychologically from potential future harm they’re not aware of. Not an environment conducive to something such as I was taking up or playing a Sport.

Lots of volunteers one of the things we know it is a huge administrative burden or additional strains is a reduction in volunteers for events and informal support because the individuals who would usually be able to run a raffle with sausages or help referee wheelchair basketball game or assist people in transition for a Triathlon are now the exact same one sitting at home on the computer

The decisions that shape the lives of participants, whether they qualify for the NDIS and what supports they can access, could be changed without parliamentary debate or public scrutiny. Participants may not know supports or eligibility rules have changed until their plan is affected.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Recommendation:

Require that all decisions affecting NDIS eligibility and funding levels be made through primary legislation subject to full parliamentary scrutiny, with mandatory advance notice to affected participants before any changes take effect.

Existing participants face narrower criteria and fewer rights to challenge decisions

The issue:

The Bill changes the rules for existing NDIS participants and makes it harder to challenge some decisions about supports and funding. It also restricts when you can request a reassessment, removes review rights for automatic plan renewals, and makes funding reductions unreviewable (Schedule 1 Parts 1 and 8). Combined with restrictions on reassessment requests (Part 2), automatic plan renewals without review rights (Part 5), and unreviewable funding reductions (Part 4), existing participants face narrower criteria with significantly fewer avenues to challenge decisions about their supports. We have no idea whether any of these new provisions will factor in people’s desire and benefit from participating in Sport and to what extent.

How this affects participants: This does not protect participants already on the NDIS, who could be reassessed under stricter rules. If someone’s funding is reduced or their plan renewed automatically, they may have limited or no ability to challenge that decision. This could make it harder for people to get extra support when their circumstances or disability change.

For an hour flight with a vision impairment this now means navigating layers and layers of potentially not excess information if they haven’t been funded for accessibility technology and Support Worker hours to even try to figure out what they’re entitled to utilise. Now on top of that to participate in cycling ￿ the person will have to return to the old system of trying to borrow a tandem bike from someone else somewhere in Australia which could take years using social media to connect. If there is no way to appeal a decision that does not factor in at this person is an active cyclist they stop cycling. They lose their condition. They’ll lose their pilot. The person who sits on the bike with them. That is one of the most priceless things you can find as a disabled cyclist. Under the current legislation a person could pay another cyclist to become their Support Worker and they would have the cycling skills to be the pilot riding at the front of the bike fast and be trained by someone to assist with other personal care needs to guide the disabled athlete no when cats are made across the border decisions are made that don’t take into account someone’s whole life all of the work done to build up the relationships. The Sport supports in the connections go away. This is particularly compounded if something such as mandatory registration of support workers comes in and the cyclist with a vision impairment now has to hire from a registered provider. What are the chances that there is a registered provider who happens to have an elite level cyclist who can cycle faster than the participant to be part of the local cycling club. Exactly the same scenario if someone wants to take part in park run and is quite a fast runner you can no longer pay and Train up somebody who has the skill of running to be a support worker you instant acquire people with pieces of paper and disability or age care support but who don’t fit in the world of cycling or running and make the person feel even more out of place.

Recommendation:

Require a “no harm” safeguard ensuring no current participant loses access to supports unless equivalent supports are in place, with independent review rights before any exit decision and access to unscheduled reassessments preserved. Unreviewable ministerial power to cut funding across all support categories

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

The Minister can reduce funding for any support or group of supports by a specified percentage through an instrument that cannot be challenged (Schedule 1 Part 4). This applies across all budget categories. Unspent funds will no longer carry over at plan renewal (Schedule 1 Part 5).

How this affects participants: A participant’s community participation, capacity building or assistive technology funding could be cut without warning and without any right to appeal. Participants who save unspent funds across plan periods for high-cost items will lose that ability entirely.

People who lived before the Ndis or her face going back to an not terrified about re-enter the world of Home and community care in Queensland having seen it in place for age care or lived under it and know about all of the impact has on trying to fit in a life that includes work study and sport as well as family. Realistically to participate in those kind of systems the way they currently exist in a remaining form within Queensland you would have to drop out of paid employment/study and anything that requires regular commitments and make it a full-time commitment to fit around your supports. That would be fitting around waiting all day for someone to turn up. I might not be able to help. Wedding months for a piece of equipment to be approved. As opposed to know where you can choose your own Support Worker and make sure they have the skills to do what you need the time it needs to be done so that you can get to work and study or the person can help you get to work and study with your social and community participation budget.

• Recommendation: Require that unspent funds carry over at plan renewal for participants saving for high-cost items and require independent review rights before any funding reduction takes effect.

Requirement to exhaust treatment options before eligibility

The issue: A person with disability will need to exhaust treatment options before they can be eligible for the Scheme (Schedule 1 Part 8). There will also be a removal of whole-of-person assessment, replaced by single eligible impairment consideration (Schedule 1 Part 3). The note that previously acknowledged environmental factors and other ineligible impairments could affect support needs will be removed (Schedule 1 Part 3).

How this affects participants: Forcing someone to undergo frequent medical procedures impact capacity to take at all and set someone backwards in terms of their social connections and then network without guarantee any of these treatments will achieve anything productive other than Ndis criteria.

People with disabilities deserve a right to bodily autonomy. If you talk to groups of athletes with disabilities, you’re only find athletes who have undergone additional procedures to attempt to gain more independence or others who can do more than a typical profile of someone with their Disability should. That is simply because no two people with the same Disability are the same. People with Red disabilities won’t have a prescribed treatment option so it’s terrifying.

Participating in Sport most particularly para sport has been reported by many athletes as having been more beneficial in increasing capacity to participate in certain daily life tasks from driving to eating independently wheelchair skills rather than medical interventions. That is because if you grow up seeing all the people with different disabilities doing things driving cars having jobs being included you begin to start seaways. You can do that yourself.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

Many sporting trajectories have been interrupted significantly through surgeries, medication trials, and while some groups of children are sporting clubs try to be supportive for many others that means dropping behind and getting left out. This is something that is already part of managing Life with Disability and inclusive Sport when the person with the Disability, they’re treating Team and parents if they are under the age of 18 decide that treatment is in the person’s best interest.

That decision being made by a government without oversight and put people in a traumatic situation of for example missing out and qualifying for a Paralympics because now suddenly it is necessary to undergo some kind of medical treatment in order to receive the funding to survive through the Ndis, whereas otherwise the date for this might have been postponed by several months to miss a major competition for example.

With this very short timeframe that is absolutely no way to see whether the new automated and more restrictive processes would take into account people needing to do things such as time medical procedures around sporting calendars which even athletes who don’t have disabilities do in order to remain part of the sporting community and to be competitive.

People with disability will need to prove their impairment cannot be treated before they access the NDIS. Once in the scheme, their supports will only be assessed against a single eligible impairment rather than their whole experience. A person’s individual circumstances will not be considered, including ability to pay for treatment, where they live or whether treatment is actually available to them.

Many athletes we work with our region and remote areas of Queensland. The kind of town where there is a butcher a baker a general store. The local athletics club is run by some parents of a kid who is good at explore a decade to go when they’re still volunteering. There is nobody with the capacity to take the child regularly to a capital city to access the experts.

There is an allied health professional. So if propose recommended Therapy to gain or maintain access my involve physiotherapy psychology access to occupational therapy and a series of medical procedures, these are in insurmountable barriers. From the financial cost of travel to childcare or paying travel expenses to bring the rest of the family for a single parent or somebody who needs to be in charge of childcare because the second parent is working.

Needing someone to provide after-care and follow up in terms of the treatment recovery for procedures or maintenance at home if there is something such as physiotherapy with exercise exercises the person can’t do alone.

This is the type of things someone would usually use their Ndis supports towards but his current form we do not yet see how this plays out for someone who doesn’t have the support to implement the required treatments and therapies in their community before they can even access the Ndis. If people have already accessed the Ndis and they’re required to do this to maintain their access, what does that mean then? A constant treadmill of using their only funding to continue to meet access requirements instead of progressing towards using their supports to living a meaningful life?

Athletes like other people have disabilities can have a unique or rare Disability. They can have a combination of different disabilities. Their disabilities and their life circumstances converge you mean it’s very difficult to figure out what treatment might actually work. This is very relevant in the world of Paralympics Sport because classification to decide who fairly compete against who is based on what someone’s physical functional capacity is. Even in the world of Sport, it’s acknowledged no two people are exactly the same because of their Disability. This is how you end up seeing people with the same Disability in different

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

classifications. But less known in fact about classification is that you can’t actually classify all disabilities and all of those various impacts so it has to go off the one that most severely impacts the persons capacity to swim or run or ride a bicycle.

One place you’ll see a combination of this is when someone has a physical disability but also something such as autism and potentially because these go together a lot of the time mental health challenges ranging from depression to conditions. Additional supports are needed for physical disabilities such as the right equipment and physical support, but if you’re also dealing with severe anxiety and PTSD and don’t have the right supports for those unlikely the person is going to participate in Sport successfully. That would be an extremely sad day for Ndis participants. Because research shows that Sport is actual very beneficial in managing depression.

Recommendation:

Do not proceed with a requirement to exhaust “appropriate treatment” options – there are no safeguarding measures around participant harm due to side effects or complications, a participant’s financial ability to pay, or their geographic capacity to access treatments.

Unvalidated functional capacity assessment tool risks misidentifying need

The issue:

The Bill shifts assessment from whole-of-person consideration to a single eligible impairment (Schedule 1 Part 3). Read together with the eligibility thresholds in Parts 8 and 9, the tool used to conduct functional capacity assessments must be capable of sufficiently identifying whether a person meets the threshold for that single impairment.

The named assessment tool is the Instrument for Classification and Assessment of Support Needs (I-CAN). I-CAN requires validation to ensure it will sufficiently identify the needs of all people with disability, including those whose needs may be fluctuating or episodic and may not be captured through a point-in-time assessment, and to ensure it is culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.

How this affects participants: If the assessment tool does not accurately capture the full extent of a person’s disability, including needs that fluctuate or vary over time, a participant may be found ineligible or have their supports undercounted, with no guarantee the result reflects their actual experience.

Working with athletes are disabilities it becomes obvious very very quickly where this kind of thing can go wrong. A young child who isn’t aware of how the Disability impacts on their life will say yes I can feed myself but the reality of if you take that child away on a sporting trip may look a lot like that. They can feed themselves if the food is fully prepared and put down in front of them and they are prompted to do every single step of the shopping the preparation and reminded it’s time to eat. So that particular person is not going to find themselves in difficulty if they attended a training camp with a group of athletes rented an apartment to stay in together in order to compete in a competition out of town. Because if the coach only wonders about feeding themselves or showering or dressing and athlete doesn’t have the insight to say yes or understand that this is going to be more difficult in an unfamiliar environment. The outcome is not the same. The outcome changes whether an athlete can get themselves up packed dressed and ready for training when they are at home depending if they’re out of competition because they’re home is completely set up to be accessible for them and they know what to expect. Additional support from a support worker might be needed in a different environment. People’s capacity fluctuates on different days in a sporting environment. We are aware of this and part of being a good support network for an

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

athlete is to observe these patterns and work with the athlete to create plans so that supports work seamlessly. Administering eye Can assessments with the people are not even Allied health professionals Little line having experience with the persons everyday life leaves open a lot of potential for not asking the key follow-up questions someone who is either around The person a lot or very familiar with that. Disability would know they need to ask to gain all The information to flush out of the picture of what someone can do. And that is on the day you’re asking the questions. It might not be the day before where the person didn’t get out of bed at all because it was a flareup of pain cause reduce function and that kind of flareup is a weekly event for the person.

At the moment, Allied health professionals who know the person or at least a trained in what type of questions to ask provide these reports enabling people to receive sufficient Ndis funding.

Recommendation:

Continue to use Allied health professional assessments. If the concern is genuinely that it’s not affordable for people and there is therefore a postcode lottery based on what support you get because some people can afford reports then create a Medicare line item enabling people to do the assessments required by the Ndis. Alternatively, the Ndis could fund assessments required by the Ndis to meet access.

Funding could be freed up to do this by not requiring constant reassessment for people with stable disabilities whose needs don’t change. You will find for example a large number of persons who are lower M amputee and do not want to go through all the hoops of doing a regular plan assessment because they know what they need.

Money can be saved or not reassessing people who don’t need things and providing funding for those who need reassessment immediately before it reaches a crisis point whether there’s a deterioration.

Do not proceed with I-CAN as the functional capacity assessment tool unless it has been demonstrably validated to identify the needs of all people with disability, including those with episodic or fluctuating disability, and demonstrated to be culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.

Supports cut before replacement system is ready

The issue: From 1 October 2026, the government has announced funding for social, civic and community participation supports will be cut by 50 per cent and capacity building daily activities by 10 per cent for all participants, reductions that will be implemented through the ministerial instrument power in Schedule 1 Part 4. The Foundational Supports system intended to fill that gap has no confirmed implementation date and is not yet operational.

How this affects participants: Supports that help participants connect with their community, build skills and maintain independence may be cut before anything

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

exists to replace them, leaving carers and families with greater responsibilities and no additional support. These supports are often what help people stay visible, connected and safe.

Social and community participation is another word for playing Sport. It happens outside the house. Unless you want to try and see a generation of people who could only participate in their sport by using a stationary bike in the lounge room running on a treadmill or doing weights in the garage missing out on building a social network future employment contacts social skills. In the many other benefits we see from Sport. This will have a severe impact. We’ve reduced funding in this area. People are going to have to prioritise things like hospital and doctors appointments and the bar essentials to exist meaning Sport will be one of the things pushed to the side.

That is a sad state of affairs when you look at the state and federal budgets simultaneously pouring money into developing Stars of the future for the 2032 Home games. Because there are amazing programs now available for athletes that we might be able to be accessed because you need a support worker to help you go to the common Transport days. And then if you are connected to a Sport, you need the Support Worker to assist you to do the Sport and the next step on that pathway would be get your own equipment and begin training regularly with a club and starting to compete. When all of those things require support you are literally removing paralympic athletes of the future.

Something unique just bought for people with disabilities is that Sport literally becomes the way we learn how to do life. Unlike non-disabled people we don’t always have someone around us to learn from. So when you see a group of people with disabilities playing basketball or travelling in the world for sport there’s not just sport happening. In that car park even before everybody’s got inside the door parents of a young child and the child are seeing and talking to grown-ups about how to drive that car with hand controls realising that there is a future potential for the child to have an okay life because the person who just parked next to them is also disabled. And that person who parked next to them has a job that enabled them to buy their car and drive themselves there and the person in the car next to them is there with their partner and children and family Dog.

Sporting Dreams started out as a charity to enable people to participate in sport and very quickly found out that the real difference we were making was to our families and communities as Sport being the vehicle for learning how to do life and be the best version of oneself possible with a whole bunch of peer support and networking.

It’s a long out tradition around the world that experienced disabled athletes put time and effort into giving back to you, and helping develop them the same way someone

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

assisted when they were themselves. So that in itself it’s not costing money to the Ndis.

Not providing the opportunity for people with disabilities to be able to partake in sport and have these informal. PS Support moments costing so much more in future care and support needs, loss of employment opportunities income, lost future taxes paid by the disabled person in their family because creating a culture of low expectation when you can’t see potential. And people have disabilities are some of the most innovative at figuring out what could be great to try to help a person achieve a skill. That also a really great support network for Disability related times when they become tough. That alleviate some strain on mental health services in their community. Of course professional help is required but having a solid foundation of friends knowledgeable people has been proven around the world to make a difference and it’s not just about elite sport. It’s about everyday life. Many athletes from the 2008 cohort until the Ndis was invented have now grown from children into adult adults and studied at university gone onto work get married have children and it’s a network of friends and people they met from their sporting careers that teach them how to be a parent or a professional with the Disability and that next Life phase.

Recommendation: Require that no reductions to community participation or capacity building supports take effect.

Conclusion

The Ndis has been life changing just like Sport is for people around Australia. Enables Australia Australian should become the best version of themselves and then live full potential with support that looks like equipment Adelaide health professionals support workers. Being able to identify the correct support for the occasion is the game changer when the Ndis came in. Before the Ndis people were trapped in multiple inflexible systems that didn’t completely meet their needs and how to try and fit in around it. A result is many people didn’t participate in sport.

If this bill is brought in now without due investment in the national disability strategy the Ndis review and well commission recommendations and a long lead time for developing a community that is much more inclusive. A lot of people are going to be thrown off the Ndis or have their funding reduced. When you cut funds, you’re not just cutting a budget line item. You’re cutting the future headline used Storey for 2032 and beyond of Australian sport. You’re cutting out the opportunity for someone to be that teenager who broke through and beat the household name sprinter to

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

take the gold medal. You’re cutting away the chance to find the future Madi di Rozario or Dylan Alcott.

This bill returns to a charity model for Disability where participating in Sport means massive fundraising for organisation such as ours in an already tough economic climate.

This bill means people with disability will have a better chance of competing in Sports And doing well not if they’re naturally talented but if they are from a wealthy family or a big family who has the ability to help Dr somebody around and provide the help they need.

This bill is throwing people into a world that didn’t exist before the Ndis before foundational supports have been created.

As an organisation which existed before the Ndis sporting Dreams knows that the reason why people did survive in the chaotic previous environment and managed to do sport with having a family or being independently wealthy enough to fund needs themselves or being fortunate enough to find a community of sponsorship and donations.

Many charities who worked with athletes on everyday life so that we could come in and do the Sport no longer exist. Our charity has seen a massive decrease in donations. Many more had to return to a fee for service model and this type of long-term lifelong relationship relationships with consistent people that bring great outcomes no longer exists.

Disabled people can only become disabled athletes when their essential needs are being met for an everyday existence having support that understand the person their family their unique living environment and their needs. A support network paid all through the Ndis enter organisation such as those which did exist prior to the Ndis to provide advice on navigating systems hands-on assistance lending of equipment.

Introducing this bill is reducing disabled people to the total sum of the Disability at the cost of meeting their basic survival rather than looking at it as an investment in the persons thriving potential in the future.

The Ndis was introduced to put disabled people in the driving seat of their own lives. Whether that was participating in Sport, or fostering an interest in the arts or science, and those people found community in the events they chose. In the sporting world the Ndis has been a complete game and life changer.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

We know that more than every dollar put out into the community through the Ndis returns over two dollars into the economy. And that is to Mum and Dad small businesses who build sporting equipment because they saw a need and realised there was not going to be a market for it with people having the choice to spend their funding buying equipment from a provider they know personally who attends local sporting events watches them compete and conscript their everyday wheelchair and their sporting wheelchair.

That is a huge difference to the previous system where equipment was provided from a list of sellers in Queensland under something called the medical aid subsidy scheme. There was one designated maintenance company under that system and very long wait times. Athletes around Australia with a variety of different state-based systems struggled to cover funding. They had to become very resilient and good at fundraising and rely on Goodwill from community and charities.

There’s a significant gender impact on females who provide a larger amount of unpaid domestic and labour.

It is heartbreaking to be on the board of this charity and receive more requests for help every year than we can possibly give out and decide who’s not getting the funding.

We’ve tried as a nation already before the Ndis what it was like when different state governments ran different games so you didn’t have equal opportunity across the country or each area in the country and it didn’t work well.

There has been massive, massive reforms and changes consistently for two years. Disabled people have shown we are resilient overcome and learn new systems and try to survive. But this Bill and the lack of appeal rights and individualisation says it’s about saving the Ndis for the future and cutting costs. But it’s costing far more than can be managed and measured on a budget bottom line the intangible benefits such as self-confidence having a social network and participation.

Literally though when you take away Sport out of someone’s life and they no longer are physically strong, they’re less independent and need more support work. Take away the social connection sense of belonging and purpose now it’s feeding into the health network. Take away the frequent strengthening exercise exercises that somebody does with their health professional that allows them to participate in everyday life and Sports safely and now you’re presenting with a health crisis in the emergency department.

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission

In Sport, we talk about developing whole people and systems and ecosystems around the person to get the best out of them. This bill is about the opposite it’s shifting the entire dynamic of the Ndis from focusing on. How do we support a disabled person to be the best version of themselves to literally having legislation that talks about saving money and the sustainability of this scheme.

We have athletes who lived before the Ndis and already and I are too well that that means the cost is not going away and the Disability doesn’t go away the cow responsibility and the cost simply move to somewhere else whether it’s health housing age care.

This Bill is starting to create class system in Australia where you can have what you need if you are disabled and wealthy. If you are disabled and have access to the Ndis that would remain you might be able to have the very details of an existence provided that the new version of the Ndis actually met the persons needs because they don’t have appeal rights

If you’re a disabled person who doesn’t even qualify for the Ndis now or back relying on small organisations like us money from elderly people in the community buying money buying a sausage sizzle or corporate donations that are constantly drying up between a cost of living crisis and a general belief in the community that the Ndis helps disabled people now. See you’re talking about a lot of people not only not taking part in Sport but not taking part in life.

Not having a reason to live. It’s not an exaggeration to say that in online PSA support groups right now that is talk about accessing voluntary assisted dying and suicide if people lose the Support.

The Ndis didn’t roll out to parts of Queensland fully until 2019 so that hasn’t even been an entire decade. We recommend the bill be scrapped and a focus for sustaining the Ndis for future generations looks at addressing ways to cut costs and save money in the NDIS that do not create harm to participants. Due to the short timeframe, I cannot provide an extensive list of these but would welcome the opportunity to address Parliament on some suggestions.

Yours Sincerely,

Marayke Jonkers PLY Sporting Dreams President

Submission 1735 - Supplementary Submission