Submission 1980

Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Bill 2026

I request that my name be withheld if this submission is published.

I am comfortable with my submission being made public and I stand by the views expressed in it. However, the submission contains personal information relating to my disability, health, support needs and lived experience. I do not wish for this information to be permanently searchable online in connection with my name.

My request for anonymity should not be interpreted as a lack of confidence in the views expressed. Rather, it reflects a desire to maintain privacy regarding personal health and disability-related information.

Introduction

I am an NDS participant and I am making this submission as someone whose life has been significantly improved by the Scheme.

The NDS has enabled me to participate in employment, pursue education, maintain my health and mobility, and engage in activities that are meaningful to me as an individual. These opportunities have allowed me to contribute to my community and build a more independent life.

I support efforts to ensure the long-term sustainability of the NDIS. However, I am concerned that aspects of the proposed amendments may move the Scheme away from its original principles of individualised support, choice and control. Sustainability should not come at the expense of participant rights, individual outcomes, procedural fairness, or the flexibility that allows people with disability to live full and meaningful lives. I am not convinced that the proposed amendments strike the right balance between sustainability, participant rights, individualised support, and accountability.

Based on my experience as an NDS participant, I do not support the Bill in its current form.

I believe the concerns raised by participants, disability organisations, advocates, and the broader disability community deserve further consideration before these changes proceed.

I would prefer that the Bill be substantially revised following genuine consultation and co- design with the disability community before being passed.

This submission outlines both my personal experience of the NDIS and my concerns regarding several proposed changes.

What the NDIS Has Made Possible for Me

Employment, Education and Mobility

I have a registered psychologist and work with disabled people on a range of co-designed projects and training initiatives. The only reason I was able to complete my degree was because of the NDIS.

Submission 1980

Before the NDSI, I could not afford the services I needed. I was on waiting lists simply to access waiting lists for state-based disability services. During this period, my mobility was steadily deteriorating. Although my disability is not degenerative, it felt as though I was watching my physical capacity decline year after year.

Several medical professionals told me that I would need to choose between completing my degree and maintaining my mobility. At the time, that felt like an impossible choice.

Then the NDIS happened.

For the first time, I was able to access the supports and therapies I needed. I was also able to choose supports that suited me and that I genuinely engaged with.

Today, I have completed my degree, work in a profession that I love, and have better mobility than I did in my twenties. Medical professionals regularly tell me that they cannot believe I am still walking. My response is simple: “Yeah, that’s what happens when you can access support.” The NDIs also supports my employment directly. Transport funding allows me to reliably get to work. It enables me to attend training, professional development opportunities, and workplace team-building activities. These are opportunities many people take for granted, but they are critical to maintaining employment and professional growth.

Without these supports, I would once again face choices between maintaining my mobility, participating in employment, and pursuing opportunities for advancement.

The NDIS has also enabled me to participate fully in conferences, classes, and professional events. Rather than being limited to online participation, I have been able to access support workers when travelling and engage alongside my peers in person.

One of the most important outcomes of the NDSI has been that I was not forced to choose between pursuing my education and maintaining my ability to walk. The Scheme allowed me to do both.

I now have a career that I love and a level of independence that simply would not have been possible without support.

Community Participation and Social Inclusion

The NDIS has enabled me to participate in activities that are meaningful to me as an individual.

Importantly, I have been able to choose activities that align with my interests and goals rather than being limited to generic group programs. This reflects one of the core strengths of the Scheme: recognising that disability support should be individualised.

If I never have to go bowling again with people I don’t know, it will be too soon.

Submission 1980

For example, I studied Auslan (self funded) and with the help of support workers have been able to attend Auslan-only meet-ups. These opportunities have allowed me to build skills, connect with others, and participate in communities that are important to me.

For me, social inclusion is not about being placed in an activity because it is available. It is about having the same opportunity as everyone else to pursue things that genuinely interest me.

I would not describe myself as a sporty person. During school, physical education classes were often spent in the library because nobody knew how to include me. Through the NDIS, however, I have been able to discover activities that I genuinely enjoy, including yoga and dance. Crucially, with NDIS support and support workers, I have been able to participate in classes and build friendships rather than being limited to one-on-one services.

I have also discovered a love of handcycling and recumbent cycling. Access to physiotherapy, support workers, and appropriate assistance has enabled me to safely build my strength and participate in these activities.

These experiences demonstrate that social and community participation supports are not optional extras. They are often the very supports that help people build confidence, maintain health, develop relationships, and participate meaningfully in society.

The concerns outlined below relate specifically to provisions of the Bill dealing with ministerial powers, participant planning and reassessment processes, functional capacity assessments, review rights, social and community participation supports, administrative claiming requirements, and participant compliance obligations.

My comments are based on how these proposed changes would affect me personally and how I believe they may affect future participants. The opportunities I describe earlier in this submission were made possible by a flexible and individualised scheme. I am concerned that aspects of the Bill may make it harder for future participants to achieve similar outcomes.

Concerns Regarding the Proposed Amendments

1. Ministerial Powers Require Stronger Oversight

I am concerned about the Bill’s proposed expansion of ministerial powers to determine support categories and make significant decisions through delegated legislation with limited parliamentary oversight.

Reductions in funding to support categories will have substantial impacts on participants’ lives. Decisions of this nature should be transparent, evidence-based, and subject to appropriate scrutiny.

Submission 1980

Recommendations

• Major changes to support categories should be subject to parliamentary oversight.
• Participants and disability organisations should be consulted using genuine co-design principles before significant changes are implemented.
• Decisions affecting broad categories of support should remain reviewable.

2. Individualised Supports Must Remain Central to the NDIS

The original vision of the NDIS recognised that disability affects people differently and that supports should be tailored to individual needs and goals.

I am concerned that the Bill’s proposed planning and assessment framework may place greater emphasis on standardised categories, funding caps, administrative controls and functional assessments than on individual circumstances and participant goals. My own experience demonstrates that flexible and individualised supports can lead to successful outcomes in employment, education, health, mobility, and community participation.

Two people with the same disability may require entirely different supports to achieve similar outcomes. Legislation should recognise this reality rather than attempting to fit people into increasingly narrow categories.

I am also concerned about proposals that could reduce funding for social and community participation supports. Activities that build skills, confidence, friendships, independence and community connection should not be viewed as optional extras. In many cases they are the very supports that allow people to maintain their wellbeing and continue contributing to society.

Recommendations

• Maintain individualised support principles within the legislation.
• Ensure participant goals and circumstances remain central to funding decisions.
• Avoid rigid rules that prevent consideration of individual needs.
• Ensure assessments consider participants’ real-world environments and circumstances, not simply functional capacity in isolation.
• Protect social and community participation supports.

3. Support Decisions Should Remain Reviewable

Participants should retain access to meaningful review mechanisms when decisions affect their supports, funding, or participation in the Scheme.

Review rights are an important safeguard that promote fairness, accountability, and confidence in the NDIS.

Submission 1980

I am concerned about provisions of the Bill that may result in more decisions becoming effectively non-reviewable or more difficult for participants to challenge.

Recommendations

• Preserve independent review rights.
• Ensure participants have access to clear and timely appeal processes.
• Avoid creating categories of decisions that cannot be meaningfully challenged.

4. Administrative Burden Should Not Increase

Many disabilities are permanent and lifelong.

Participants should not be required to repeatedly prove their disability or navigate unnecessary administrative requirements.

I am concerned about the Bill’s proposed administrative changes, including shorter claiming timeframes, participant compliance obligations and more frequent reassessment processes. These burdens are likely to fall most heavily on people with cognitive, psychosocial, intellectual, and executive functioning impairments.

Personally, I value the flexibility currently available within the system. I have never needed the full period available to submit claims, but knowing that flexibility exists is important when life becomes busy, when I am travelling, or when I am recovering from surgery.

I am also concerned about proposals that could result in participants losing access to the Scheme if they cannot be contacted within a specified timeframe. Many participants experience periods of illness, hospitalisation, travel, family responsibilities, or other circumstances where responding to administrative requests may not be their highest priority.

Recommendations

• Retain longer plan durations where appropriate.
• Reduce unnecessary reassessments.
• Ensure administrative requirements remain reasonable and accessible.
• Ensure participants are not removed from the Scheme solely due to temporary periods of non-response.

5. Participants Should Be Able to Obtain Binding Written Advice

One area where I believe the Scheme could be improved is participant certainty.

Many participants struggle to determine whether a support is eligible for funding. This creates anxiety and can discourage people from pursuing supports that may benefit them.

Submission 1980

Participants should be able to request written advice from the NDIA confirming whether a proposed support is funded.

Where a participant relies on that advice in good faith, they should be protected from future disputes or retrospective decisions.

I understand that some mechanisms for seeking advice already exist. However, in my own experience I have sought clarification and never received a response.

A formal written advice process would improve consistency, reduce disputes, and provide participants with greater confidence when making decisions.

Recommendations

• Create a formal written advice process.
• Allow participants to rely on written NDIA guidance.
• Use the process to improve consistency and reduce disputes.

Looking to the Future

The NDIS has changed my life.

Without it, I do not believe I would have finished my degree. I do not believe I would have the career I have today. I certainly do not think I would have the mobility that I have now.

Before the NDIS, I was told I would need to choose between my education and my mobility. Thankfully, I never had to make that choice.

Today I am a registered psychologist. I work on projects that improve the lives of disabled people. I am active in my community. I have hobbies that I love. I have friends and interests that are important to me. Most importantly, I have choices.

I also have the privilege of working with other people with disability and being a role model. Many of the people I work with have been told, directly or indirectly, that their opportunities will be limited because of their disability. I am able to show them something different.

I can show them that it is possible to have a job you love. It is possible to be active. It is possible to contribute to your community. It is possible to have goals, interests and ambitions. It is possible to build a life that you are proud of.

None of that happened because I tried harder than anyone else. It happened because I had access to the right supports at the right time.

The NDIS is often discussed in terms of costs and budgets. Those discussions are important, but they should also consider what the Scheme makes possible.

It is hard for the media to report on what is not happening.

Submission 1980

There is no headline about the hospital bed that was never needed because someone received the right supports early. There is no headline about the person who stayed employed, remained housed, maintained their mobility, or avoided a crisis because they had access to the support they needed.

I am one of those people.

I am not occupying a医院床。我不会被隔离在家。我没有失业。我不是无家可归。

相反，我在工作，为我的社区做贡献，缴纳税款，在残疾人士中担任导师，并过着没有支持就不可能实现的生活。这些结果不仅对我有利，也对更广泛的社区有益。

那些成果可能不会有头条新闻，但它们很重要。

重要的是，我的成功不应被视为我不再需要支持的证据。这表明当人们有机会获得适当的支持时会发生什么。我的残障并没有消失；NDIS只是让我在有它的情况下能够更多地参与社会。NDIS并未消除我的障碍；它已经消除了障碍。希望它可以继续这样做。

我很担心未来的参与者如果该计划偏离其致力于个性化支持、个人选择和社区参与的承诺，则无法享有同样的机会。

我希望未来几代澳大利亚人拥有与我现在拥有的相同的机会。我想让他们能够学习、工作、建立关系、追求自己的兴趣并活出他们想要的人生。

我知道政府必须考虑成本和可持续性问题。然而, sustainability should not be measured only by what is spent. It should also be measured by what is achieved.

The NDIS helped me maintain my mobility, participate in my community and support other people with disability. I worry that future participants may be asked to prove their needs more often, justify supports more frequently, and fit within increasingly rigid systems, rather than being given the flexibility that helped me succeed.

If the goal is to secure the NDIS for future generations, then those future generations should have the same opportunity to build meaningful, independent and contributing lives that I have had.

That is what the NDIS made possible for me, and I hope it continues to do so for others.

Summary of Recommendations

• Strengthen oversight of ministerial powers.
• Protect individualised support principles.
• Ensure support decisions remain reviewable.

Submission 1980

• Reduce unnecessary administrative burdens.
• Ensure assessments consider participants’ real-world circumstances.
• Avoid arbitrary caps on supports.
• Protect social and community participation supports.
• Establish a binding written advice process for participants.
• Substantively revise the Bill following genuine consultation and co-design with the disability community before it proceeds.