NDIS Future Generations Bill 2026

Senate Community Affairs Committee Submission

Introduction

I am a parent with an autistic child who has experienced substantial functional impairment across executive functioning, emotional regulation, sensory processing, social communication, learning abilities in personal independence and daily living activities. We rely on government-funded services for our child’s development through access provided under National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). However,

Position On The Bill

The current form of this bill is opposed due its intention to improve sustainability but concerns about several changes which may increase costs rather than reducing them: The restrictions imposed upon participants’ rights to receive necessary assistance while increasing reassessment requirements and creating additional barriers for those suffering from lifelong disabilities could shift these expenses into other governmental systems instead.

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

Submission 1993

Why These Changes Represent a False Economy

The long-term economic consequences of reducing early support should not be underestimated. Children who lose access to community participation supports are at greater risk of social isolation, anxiety and disengagement from education. Children who lose access to therapy and capacity-building supports may remain dependent on family members for longer and require more intensive supports as adults. Reduced access to emotional regulation supports increases the likelihood of crisis intervention, school exclusions and mental health admissions. Many neurodevelopmental disabilitiesare invisible disabilities. Childrenmay appearcapable while still requiring substantialsupportto function safelyand effectivelyin everyday life.A childwho receives supporttoremain engaged inschooltodayis far less likely torequirlifelong income support,intensivementalhealthservices,crisis interventions,supported accommodationor high-cost disability servicesas an adult.This is why I believethe proposed changes representa false economy.Any short-termsavings achievedby restricting accesstosupports arelikely tobewhich outweighedsignificantly higher costs borne by healt hmental healtheducationhousingjustice welfareanda ged care systems inthefuture.

Review Rights and Accountability

I am concerned about proposals that reduce review rights or increase the abilityfor funding decisions tobe made without meaningful independent appeal.Participants anda families must retain confidencethat decisionsaffecting essentialsupports can bereviewed fairlytransparently.

Recommendations

• Reject provisions thateincrease barrierstosupport. • Protect participants with lifelongdisabilitiesfrom unnecessary reassessments. • Maintain independen tre viewandanappealrights . • Preserveaccess totosocial community participation suppor ts. • Ensure reforms supports long-term independence rather thanshortterm cost shifting.

Conclusion

Childrenwithlifelong disabiliti esdeservecertaintystabilityan dtheropportunity to reach their full potential. Reformstha treduce accessto su pport may create appearance of savingsintheshort term, but they risk creating a generationof Australians withe greater support needspoorer outcomesand increaseddependence on government system s.The true measureofsustainabilityis not how muchsupportcan beremovedtoday.It is whether today’s childrenare giventhe opportunitytobecome tomorrow’smost indepen dentcapableengaged adults.I do no believe this Bill,in its current formachieves that objective.Yours sincerely,