National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
Submission to the Senate Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Impact of the NDIS Amendment Bill 2026 on participants, families, and the disability workforce Date: May 26th, 2026
Introduction
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission on the National Disability Insurance \Scheme\ Amendment (Securing the NDIS For Future Generations) Bill. I write as an NDIS participant, long-term advocate, someone who has lived experience in policy changes which don’t fully consider realities around disabilities. While stating this bill aims at “securing” it’s core principles are choice & control over individualised supports and right living ordinary life many proposed amendments risk undermining them, This outlines likely real-world impacts of said bill on participants,families,paid support workers raising concerns about broad new powers granted Minister without sunset clauses or adequate safeguards.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
This directly contradicts the Treasurer’s stated intention to protect the Scheme from future governments with different values.
Trauma, fear, and psychological harm already occurring
Even before the Bill has passed, the disability community is experiencing significant distress. Participants, families, and workers are reporting:
- Fear of losing essential supports
- Anxiety about being reassessed under new “functional capacity” rules
- Distress at the idea of automatic plan renewals with no opportunity to advocate
- Fear of being pushed into mainstream systems that are already inaccessible
- Loss of trusted support workers
- Loss of choice and control
- Fear of losing continuity of care relationships
- Worsening mental health and trauma responses Many participants live with trauma, chronic illness, or mental health conditions that are worsened by instability and fear. The Bill, as drafted, amplifies trauma rather than reducing it.
Real-world impacts of each major change in the Bill
Below are grounded everyday examples of how the Bill will affect:NDIS participantsFamily and informal carersPaid support workers and providersThese examples reflect typical situations already occurring —andhow they would worsenunderthe newrules.
Stricter definitionof“functionality”Assessors must judge a person’s ability withoutsupports,equipmentor environmentaladjustments.ParticipantsApersonwithautismwhofunctionswellbecauseofroutines,nocancellingheadphonesandsupportworkersmayappear “too capable”, even thoughwithoutthesesupporstheyexperiencemeltdowns,sensoryoverloadandexecutivefunctioningdifficulties.Awheelchairuserwhoisindependentbecausetheirhomeismodifiedmaybeassessedas having “higher functional capacity”,eventhoughwithoutmodificationstheycannotsafely function.Familycarers
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
- Parents may be pressured to withdraw supports so assessors can see the “true” level of impairment —a process that can be traumatic, unsafe, and harmful.
- Carers may need to“prove”their loved one’s strugglesby allowing themto failor experience distress. Paidworkers Support workersmaybeaskedtodocumentdeclineordremovesupportsduringsessionscreatingethicaldilemmasandriskingparticipantsafety. 3.2 Supports must bedirectly linked toltheimpairment usedforaccess SupporthmustarisedirectlyfromlheimpairmelltgotthepersonintothenNDIS. Participants A person with cerebral palsy who later develops severe anxiety maybe toldpsychology is not fundedbecauseanxietyis “not directly caused”bypCP.A participantwithintellectualdisabilitywhoneeds helpwithe parentingmaybe toldparentingsupporthis “notdirectlylinked”tot heir impaire ment.FamilycarersFamilies m ayneedtopickupsupporth now reclassified as “ordinary life responsibilities”.PaidworkersProviders ma ylose fundingf orsuppo rts in “grey areas”suchas emotional regulation,social skills ,orc ommunity access .
Harder t og et unscheduled plan reviews Participants must show a significantandongoing changein functional capacity ort heircircumstances.Participants Aparticipant whose support worker quits suddenlymaystuggleformonths because this isn ot considereda“significantfunctionalchange.”Ap ersonwit hfluctuatingchronicillnessmaybedeniedareviewbecausetheir chang e i s not ““ongoin g.“Family car ers Families may be forced to fill gaps when plans no longer meet needs. Carers my burnoutbe cause theycannotgetextra hoursapproved.Paid workers
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
- Workers may see participants stuck with unsafe or inadequate supports, increasing risk and stress.
Automatic plan renewals
Plans roll over for 12 months with little or no participant input.
Participants
- A child entering puberty or transitioning to high school may be stuck with outdated supports for another year.* A participant who finally gets a good planner may never get another proper review.
Family carers*
Families lose the chance to advocate for updated supports, especially for children or degenerative conditions.
Paid workers*
Providers may be forced to continue delivering supports that no longer fit the participant’s needs.
Minister can reduce groups of supports across many plans
Entire categories of supports can be cut by a percentage. ####### Participants* If “community participation” is cut by 20%, a participant may lose weekly social outings that prevent isolation.* If therapy hours are capped, people with developmental delay may regress. ######### Family carers* Families may need to replace lost supports with unpaid labour. Carers may have to reduce work hours or quit jobs.Parents may leave the workforce -predominantly women ############# Paid workers* Support workers may lose shifts.Therapists may have to ration sessions, reducing quality of care.
New “scheme sustainability” principlesThe NDIS must consider fairness, efficiency, and direct impairment links.
Participants
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
- Supports that improve quality of life but aren’t considered “essential” may be harder to justify.
Family carers
- Carers may be expected to do more “ordinary living tasks” than what is now considered non-disability-related in relation to their role under this scheme or a similar one being implemented elsewhere within Australia’s borders as part thereof, or any other such similar schemes;
Paid Workers
- Workers who are employed on an ongoing basis at least once per week will face pressure from employers to deliver cheaper services with shorter durations; group-based supports rather than individualized ones where possible shall also become increasingly common due partly thereto.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
Providers may lose funding for supports reclassified as “mainstream”.
Pricing and plan management changes
Participants
- If maximum prices are set too low, participants may struggle to find workers willing to accept the rate.
Family carers
- Families may need to top up privately if providers charge above capped rates.
Paid workers
- Workers may face lower pay, fewer hours, or pressure to deliver more for less.
Stronger fraud and compliance powers
Participants
- Claims must be lodged within 90 days — people with executive functioning issues may miss deadlines and lose funding.
Family carers
- Carers may need to take on more administrative tasks to avoid compliance issues.
Paid workers
- Providers must keep more detailed records, increasing admin time and reducing time with participants.
- Recommendations
I urge the Committee to consider the following amendments:
- Add a sunset clause to all new Ministerial powers.
- Require parliamentary oversight for any instrument that reduces supports.
- Protect choice and control by requiring participant consent for automatic renewals.
- Strengthen continuity-of-care protections for existing worker relationships.
- Maintain access to unscheduled reviews by broadening the definition of “significant change”.
- Ensure functional capacity assessments reflect real life, including supports and environments.
- Prevent cost-shifting by requiring proof that mainstream systems are accessible and adequate before denying NDIS supports.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 1965
The NDIS was built on the principles of dignity, autonomy, and individualised support. The bill, as currently drafted, risks reversing these gains and creating widespread harm. Participants, families, and workers are already experiencing trauma, fear, and instability. Without stronger safeguards, the bill gives future governments – regardless of their values —the power to significantly cut supports with minimal oversight. I urge the committee to amend this bill to protect participants, upholding the original vision of the NDIS; ensuring it doesn’t compromise sustainable development while maintaining respect towards fundamental human rights such as those related to personal security.