Submission to the Senate Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Bill 2026

Submitted by: Leeanne McAdam

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the proposed changes contained within the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Bill 2026 and the likely impact these changes will have on my daughter, our family, and many other disabled Australians whose independence depends on relatively modest but essential supports. My daughter currently lives independently in her own home and works part-time as an Inclusion Teacher Aide despite significant disability-related challenges and ongoing health conditions. Her current NDIS supports assist with cleaning, home organisation, shopping, attending medical appointments, maintaining routines, and managing the practical demands of daily life. These supports are not excessive. They are preventative and foundational. Her current NDIS funding totals $53,205.70 across two years for all supports including daily living assistance, therapy, transport, and employment-related supports. This is not excessive funding. These are modest supports that allow her to maintain employment, manage her health conditions, avoid crisis, and live independently rather than relying entirely on family.I am deeply concerned that the proposed legislative changes place this independence at significant risk.The proposed amendments appear to substantially increase the discretion of the Minister and the NDIA to redefine what supports are considered appropriate or fundable under the NDIS. This includes broader powers relating to funding decisions, reassessments, support substitution, and the narrowing of what may be considered “reasonable and necessary” supports.I am concerned the proposed changes will narrow interpretations of “reasonable and necessary” supports in ways that disproportionately impact people requiring ongoing functional assistance to maintain independence.Of particular concern are provisions that appear to:• Increase focus on

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Submission

On paper, supports such as cleaning assistance, shopping support, home organisation, appointment assistance, and support maintaining routines may appear minor or non-essential. in reality they prevent deterioration without these:

• Employment no longer sustainable;
• Medical appointments missed;
• Home environments unsafe/unmanageable ;
• Burnout/mental health decline increases;
• Physical health deteriorates worsens;
• Dependence aging family members significantly increase . The proposed legislation assumes families can absorb this care gap but is unrealistic for us due our husband’s increasing inability from age-related issues and my knee replacement preventing physical support. Despite clear evidence that informal support won’t compensate reduced funded support shifting responsibilities back onto elderly parents ignores thousands’ realities across Australia. We’re retired with own conditions limiting indefinitely absorbing disability support workers/cleaners/coordinators/carers roles. Proposed reforms also conflict NDIS Act 2013 foundational principles recognizing independence/sustainability of people with disabilities/maximizing goals while acknowledging carer needs supporting their wellbeing. These changes risk undermining UNCRPD Article 19 obligations enabling independent living inclusion community My daughter’s current supports directly assist her maintain employment manage burnout/fatigue sustain independent life The discussed in reform are not luxury supports precisely those legislative objectives occur practice.

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

Submission 1961

I am also concerned that the proposed changes create increased risk for people who may appear “high functioning” during assessments while requiring significant structured support to remain stable and avoid collapse. Many disabled people survive because of carefully balanced support systems that prevent crisis. When these lower-level supports are removed, the result is often:

• hospitalisation
• mental health deterioration
• loss of employment
• housing instability
• carer burnout
• increased long-term government expenditure through crisis responses This is not sustainable policy.It is cost-shifting.The burden is simply transferred from the NDIS onto families, emergency systems, hospitals,GPs,mental health services,and aged carerswhoarealreadystruggling.I asktheSenateto carefulyconsiderthereal-worldconsequencesoftheseproposed amendmentsandensurethenNDISremainsaschemefocusedonhumanrights,independence,participation ,andaearlyinterventionratherthanonedrivenprimarilybycostreductionandrestrictiveeligibilityinterpretationss.Removingsupportsthatkeepdisabledpeoplestable-employed-andindependentisnot sustainability .Itisthecreationoffuturecrisis.LeeanneMcAdamConcernedCarerofoPersonWithDisabilities