National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1896
James Hain MIEAust - Submission to the NDIS Amendment Bill 2026 Inquiry
Dear Members of the Senate,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission to the inquiry into the NDIS Amendment Bill 2026. Please accept this email as my formal submission for consideration.
As an NDIS participant and a working Spacecraft Systems Engineer, I am writing to share my view on how the proposed legislation will impact me, individuals, and the future of NDIS. I believe the bill should not be passed for the reasons described below.
-
Resetting or reducing Social, Civic and Community Participation funds will prevent people from contributing to society and maintaining health, resulting in future higher costs for the NDIS. I strive to maintain independence; I only use social and community participation funding for physical assistance to attend my medical appointments (around 3-6 per week) and to volunteer as an expert in my field at events such as mentoring and judging students at university robotics competitions. This also affects me professionally by reducing my ability to attend events for continuous professional development, required as an engineer. Group activities for people with a disability is NOT the solution. Blindly reducing social and community participation funds will disproportionately affect individuals with complex medical conditions that require regular healthcare and those with a desire to participate or contribute to society. This will result in higher future support needs due to participant reduction in health and reductions to society contribution, resulting in higher NDIS and societal costs.
-
Resetting and reducing Capacity Building funding will increase the cost of NDIS in the future. Therapies such as physiotherapy is required to increase day-to-day function while also preventing functional decline in many conditions such as mine. I became an NDIS participant after my condition was medically stabilised but before I needed to use any mobility aid. I have consistently been given insufficient capacity building funding, despite providing evidence, to retain my function as per the nature of my condition. Now I am considered high physical support needs, use a wheelchair and require SIL & SDA housing. Further reductions in my capacity building funding risks further decline, my ability to work and the level of independence I currently have. This bill is supposed to be securing the NDIS for the future, but it will result in higher future costs as participants are forced to reduce their function and capacity.
-
Forcing provider registration limits the skillsets available in supports and therefore the capacity of participants. I have a hobby of using complex technology such as electronics and 3D printing. These activities also improve my engineering skills professionally. I sometimes require physical assistance to complete these tasks within my home. I have found an unregistered support worker with the technical skills that allow me to successfully complete tasks. Limiting supports within closed settings to only registered providers limits the pool of unique skills that are available in support workers. This would in turn limit participants like me, the ability to develop skills and contribute to society professionally in employment and volunteering.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1896
James Hain MIEAust - Submission to the NDIS Amendment Bill 2026 Inquiry
-
New Framework Planning will not be able to consistently provide accurate funding for participants. No computer algorithm or automation can consistently understand the nuance of a participant’s disability. Working on the forefront of technology, I have experience with both conventional and AI algorithms. No current or near future computer software can reliably produce correct decisions on complex topics such as support needs with 100% certainty. There will be participants where the software is repeatedly unable to make correct decisions. This software could even produce results that over fund participants. Using well trained assessors with backgrounds in healthcare can reduce but not eliminate this. The current plans for New Framework Planning is not an evidence-based approach to fair decision making.
-
Some unspent funds should be rolled over. Often funds such as assistive technology repair is funded together with the assistive technology itself. If the repair funding or the funds for the assistive technology itself does not persist to the new plan, participants could be left with no working assistive technology and no way to repair it, increasing reliance on other supports and reducing independence and safety. If reduced independence becomes the new ‘normal’, NDIS will be forced to fund more supports in a participant’s next plan review.
-
Changing eligibility to be based purely on current function and no consideration of medical conditions will cost the NDIS more in the future. Neurodegenerative medical conditions require immediate intervention to prevent further disability. Capacity building reduces function loss, daily assistance and assistive technologies for basic tasks can ensure capacity is not lost in other areas. For example, even if an individual can complete daily morning preparation for work, the time and eƯort involved will increase likelihood that the person cannot contribute to additional activities such as volunteering. This then has a snowball eƯect where the individual physically loses the ability to complete these activities, creating a permanent function loss. This was all medically predictable based on a person’s permanent medical condition, not the function at the time of assessment. This then results in higher future support needs and an individual that has reduced ability to participate in society, resulting in higher NDIS and societal costs.
I respectfully request that the Committee consider my feedback. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
MR James Hain MIEAust
Page 2 of 2