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

Submission 1957

Dear Committee members,

It took me two years and three applications to be granted access to the scheme , even though I was always eligible, because my condition didn’t have an automatic diagnosis access. It took significant functional assessment evidence and documentation of over ten years of treatment to gain access, so it seems unreasonable burden expected prove permanently disabled with significant function impacts all over again needs reassessment. My degenerative condition enabled capacity building funding prolonged last three years cuts social contact.

Automating decisions risks amplifying such harms across system there must requirement assess without reference person’s environment personal circumstances proposals decided people contact experience disability shape form writers legislation disconnected reality feel consistent government dialogue media discourse around “cracking down,” cost blowouts,” sustainability“ over servicing created inaccurate manipulative narrative ploy brainwash society villainise participants.

Legislation not grant minister new powers cut participant funding expand use automated decision-making elements section current remain in NDIS Act their current form proposed legislation attempt redefine disability through fiscal administrative framework built standardized scoring threshold systems actuarial logic operational governability leading displacement reasonable that diagnose protect from reclassification reforms should undertake appropriate before impairments considered permanent creates hidden exclusion mechanism whereby treatment may still considered Ndis available unaffordable geographically inaccessible.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment

Submission: [NDIS Amendement](Securing NDIS Future Generations Bill) waitlisted, unsuitable. What if law leads implication any disabled person currently under scheme could be removed trial ‘treatment’ than market reality it would only assist person manage symptoms reduce eliminate disability. There must no human interaction intervention after needs assessment leaving another needs as recourse participant. Whilst adversarial legalistic brinkmanship brutality ART deplorable personal experience fairer than proposed legislation. The amendments social civic community participation will have significant impacts my already underfunded plan certainly seems intention government transition group based services confirm intolerable unhelpful address needs get out community wheelchair appointments therapy drive locations unable myself addition fact looking hobby interest chosen registered provider participate unknown people dissimilar disability. It’s incorrect reform goes back original intention of scheme these proposals won’t do purpose disability support with rights prevent harm crisis increase participation allow disabled live in dignity cuts exclusion expulsion achieve aggressive target vulnerable rather effectively addressing structural waste criminal systems Government wastage consultancy firms private providers bureaucracy government contracts. I considerable allostatic load emotional damage from pervasive invalidation ndis disrespectful non transparent procedural experiences being a participant AAT experience wait approval for wheelchair over 12 months still not approved minimal years on the scheme. Proposed legislation further extraordinarily detrimental cannot understand humanity government lack genuine responsibility respect persons extent living dystopian unreal world just want wake up seeking attention authentic realisation voluntary assistive death pathway investigate participants because surviving &

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

Submission 1957

needs not being met by NDIS plans rather than living a fair life, is just too difficult with the proposed harmful legislation.

You will read other submissions which critically examine the proposed reductions and implications and they will provide reasoned arguments in addition to alternatives that still deliver genuine sustainability which should be read with diligence;howevermy submission istryingtodrawuponmyauthenticlivedexperienceinsimplanguage, fromapersoninmidlifecatapultedintoahighlevelofphysicaldisability.

Nevertheless,Iraisemyserioussubmissionsandrequestforasenateenquiryanhalttolistenedtotoaddressed.