Submission to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee

Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submitted by: redacted date: May 28th , year=2026 Contact details: redacted

Introduction

I write this submission as a registered counsellor who works directly with National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) participants across a range of psychosocial,intellectual, nervous system disorders,and physical disabilities. The scheme must remain viable for future generations.Reform is necessary.Fraud and exploitation within the NDIS must be addressed decisively.However,this bill appears to place burden on “sustainability” disproportionately onto disabled Australians rather than targeting systemic provider misconduct and market failures which have driven excessive costs.The people affected are not statistics,budget figures or administrative burdens.They navigate significant barriers simply surviving daily life.Many I work closely live in chronic instability,poverty,social isolation,housing insecurity,deteriorating mental health.Reducing supports without addressing underlying failure will not create sustainability.It creates harm.Public policy should build around budgets but also humanity,fairness,the recognition that disability can affect any family.

Concerns Regarding The Bill

1. Increased Restriction Of “Reasonable And Necessary” Supports The bill significantly expands power restrict what support participants access increases ministerial rule-making powers regarding considered an ndis support.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1736

This creates serious concern because it allows broad exclusions to be introduced without adequate parliamentary scrutiny and risks shifting the Scheme away from individualised support.

Participants with psychosocial disability are particularly vulnerable under these changes. Many supports essential to maintaining community participation, emotional regulation, independent living and crisis prevention may increasingly be viewed as “non-essential” despite being clinically and functionally critical. In practice, I see participants who require: • Support workers to attend community activities to prevent complete isolation, • Assistance with executive functioning and emotional regulation, • Therapies that prevent hospitalisation, • Support coordination to navigate complex systems, • Psychosocial recovery coaching to maintain housing and stability. Without these supports, participants do not simply become “less independent.” They deteriorate. Relationships break down. Mental health worsens. Hospital presentations increase. Suicide risk increases. Families collapse under unsustainable caring burdens. Research consistently demonstrates the relationship between inadequate disability supports and worsening health and social outcomes. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has repeatedly reported that people with disability experience significantly higher rates of psychological distress, social isolation, poverty and unmet healthcare needs compared with the general population. The Bill appears to frame sustainability primarily through cost containment rather than long-term human outcomes.

Harm Caused by Narrowing Access and Reassessments

The projected removal or exclusion of approximately 150,000 people from the Scheme is deeply alarming. Many participants already experience repeated reassessment processes as traumatic. Requiring disabled people to continually prove the permanence or seriousness of their disability creates substantial psychological harm. For participants with psychosocial disabilities, autism, intellectual disability and chronic neurological conditions, repeated reassessments can trigger:

• Severe anxiety,
• Emotional dysregulation,
• Self-harm risk,
• Disengagement from services,
• Traumatisation,
• Worsening functional decline.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Submission

These are not hypothetical concerns; they represent realities consistently reported by front-line clinicians.

The administrative burden itself can become disabling, as evidenced from my interactions:

• Stopped attending appointments due to overwhelming processes;
• Experienced suicidal ideation after reduced funds;
• Lost support coordination leading to housing instability;
• Unable comprehend NDIA procedures without extensive assistance. A “streamlined” or stricter system may appear efficient administratively but causes profound human damage in practice.

Practical Alternatives to Improve Sustainability Without Harming Participants

There are numerous reforms that could substantially improve NDIS sustainability without removing vulnerable people from essential supports.

Cap Assessment Costs

Functional assessments and reports should have regulated pricing caps. it is unreasonable for providers to charge:

• $2{\text{-}}1736

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1736

• maximum fee schedules,
• standardised assessment templates,
• independent auditing of assessment billing.

Stronger Provider Regulation and Registration

Mandatory registration requirements should be expanded for providers delivering high-risk or high-cost supports. There should be:

• stronger auditing powers, - random compliance reviews,- mandatory minimum qualification standards,- stronger penalties for fraudulent billing,- public reporting mechanisms for provider misconduct,- restrictions on conflicted recommendations. Participants should not bear the consequences of inadequate provider regulation.

Target Excessive Provider Profit Margins Certain sectors of the NDIS market have become highly commercialized with little transparency regarding profit extraction.The government should:

investigate excessive pricing structures,	limit unreasonable markups,	require pricing transparency,	conduct market reviews into provider inflation.

Reduce Administrative Waste Within the NDIA Participants and clinicians spend enormous amounts of time repeatedly reproducing evidence already provided.T he NDIA should:

accept permanent disability evidence long-term where appropriate,reduce unnecessary reassessments,improve continuity of planners,simplify review processes.reduce duplicated documentation requests. Administrativ e inefficiency itself generates significant Scheme costs. Invest in Early Intervention and Preventative Supports

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1736

Cutting low-level supports often creates significantly higher downstream costs. For example:

• reducing psychosocial supports can increase hospital admissions,
• cutting support coordination can result in homelessness or crisis intervention,
• reducing therapy supports can increase long-term dependence. Preventative supports are not wasteful. They are cost-saving over time.

Improve Oversight of Unregistered Providers

The rapid growth of unregistered providers has created inconsistent standards and increased opportunities for exploitation. While participant choice and flexibility are important, stronger safeguards are necessary. This could include:

• mandatory minimum compliance standards for all providers,
• improved worker screening,
• enhanced financial auditing,
• greater powers for the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission,
• mandatory reporting of suspected fraud and exploitation. Effective regulation should target exploitative business practices rather than restricting legitimate participant access.

Human Rights and Dignity

The NDIS was created following decades of advocacy by disabled Australians for recognition, autonomy and equal participation. The Bill risks shifting the Scheme toward a deficit-based model focused on minimising expenditure rather than enabling meaningful lives. Disabled people deserve more than survival. They deserve: connection, participation, dignity, safety, independence, opportunities, stability.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1736

Policy decisions must recognise the human reality behind funding categories and legislative language. When supports are removed, the consequences are not abstract:

• People become isolated,
• Carers burn out,
• Housing is lost,
• Health deteriorates,
• Crises escalate,
• People die earlier. These outcomes carry both human and economic costs. Australia is also a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which recognises the right of people with disability to live independently and participate fully in community life.Any reforms to the NDIS should be assessed not only against budget outcomes but Australia’s obligations to uphold dignity equality and human rights.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1736

The easiest option politically is to tighten participant access. The harder, but necessary, option is meaningful regulation of the industries profiting from the Scheme.

disabled Australians should not bear the cost of regulatory failure. The success of the NDIS should ultimately be measured not only by expenditure reduction, buth whether disabled people are able to live with dignity, autonomyand genuine participation in Australian society.Any oneof us could need thesesupports oneday.The question beforetheCommitteenot simply howtoreducetcosts.It isthatsociety Australia chooses tobewhenpeople becomedisabled.A society thassupportsdignity,humanitryandinclusion oronethat treatssubjectedto repeated reassessments,reduced supports,increasing barriers t oaccess anda systemthattreatsthemprimarilyasa financial liability rather than a humanbeing deservingdignityandsuppor?I urge Committee ensure that reforms strengthen integrityScheme without abandoning peoplet it was created protect.Thank you and sincere regards,A concerned counsellor working withinNDIS space.