Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation

Committee

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment

(Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submitted by redacted May 28th, 2026

This submission addresses specific provisions of the Bill and explains how those provisions are likely to affect me as a person who uses the NDIS program due to having severe or long-term health issues.

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

Submission 2011

Executive Summary

I support a safe, sustainable and high-integrity NDIS. I support action on fraud, abuse , poor provider conduct an administrative settings hat do no serve participants well.I al so accept th at long-term sustainability matters.My concern i s t hat this B ill goes beyond strengthening integrityand improving administration.As drafted several provisions risk reducing destabili singor rec lassifying suppor ts tha are essentialtothe dail y functioning safety employment parenting fami ly life ancivic participation of people with significant permanent disability.For partic ipants like me disabilitysuppo rtisnot simply about attending social activities.It isthe practical assistancetha makesit physically possibleget towork set up function safely through day access food facilities participate in family lif e be presentformy children volunteer coach sport contributeto committees continue playing active roleincommunity My key concer n is thatthB illdoes not sufficiently protect distinction between ordinary activity annddisability relatedsupp ortrequired to undertakeactivity safel ywith dignity Thatdistinction especially important where supports may characterised associal civic or community participa tionsupports even though practice theyareessentialtosafedailyfunctioning equalparticipation This submission focuses six areasconcern proposed Ministerial power reduce funding groupsofsupport automatic renewal plans tighter limits participant requested reassessments narrowing link betweensupports and impairment new powersset maximumfunding intensity workerparticipant ratios automation administrative action

About Me WhyThis Bill MattersMe I am NDIS participantpermanent significan physicaldisable live quadriplegia rely on disabilitiesupp ortstolivesafe independently Those supp orts enable far more than generic comm unityaccess Theyenableme t a funct ionasworker parentfamily membervolunteer committee mem bercommu ni ty leader citizen Work fulltime executive role also volun teeron communities advisorygroupscoach son soccer team attend school eventsand fami ly commitments whereverpossible In my case support oftennot the activit itself Itisphysical assistance makesactiv ity possible safe sustainable For reason B ill abstract policy issue way defines reduces renewslimits categorises suppor ts could directly affect ability workparent contributecommunity maintain safe dignified daily routine

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

Submission 2011

Proposed Section 34A — Ministerial Power to Reduce Funding for Groups of Supports

One of my strongest concerns relates to proposed section 34A, which would allow the Minister, by legislative instrument, to reduce funding for a specified group of supports by a set percentage for old framework plans. My concern is not only that reductions may occur but they also might happen at an individual level within groups instead of based on their actual function performed during daily life activities among those supported individuals with disabilities; broad category-based cuts risk flattening important distinctions between discretionary versus necessary-to-safe-daily-functioning supports; such reduction could have real-world effects such as reducing someone’s ability work parent volunteer and participate civic life even though these are fundamentally disability-related assistance services, in view this bill shouldn’t permit large-scale cutbacks across all types unless there’s much stronger safeguards ensuring essential disability related assistance excluded requirement merely having regard participant safety insufficient protection where mechanism itself so bluntly applied.

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

Submission 2011

Proposed Section 48A — Tighter Limits on Participant-Requested Reassessments

The Bill also narrows the circumstances in which a participant can obtain an unscheduled reassessment of their plan on request, while extending the relevant decision timeframe. On paper, this may appear to promote order and reduce unnecessary reassessment activity. In practice, have too high a threshold and risk setting slow pathway for participants with high ongoing needs. For people significant physical disability changes arrangements immediate consequences change arrangement capacity informal support continuity trusted workers materially affect safety independence function day-to-day. in my own circumstances issue inconvenience directly affects whether I get through access meals facilities participate parenting family life maintain routine structure makes everyday live workable.The should preserve greater flexibility where real-world changes materially affecting safety daily functioning housing sustainability existing support arrangements.

Direct Impairment Nexus Day-to-Day Living Costs Risk Mischaracterising Essential Support A further concern is tightening connection between funded supports impairment combined stronger principles.I understand policy intent behind these provisions.NDIS not become scheme funds ordinary living expenses or more appropriately delivered by another system.However does sufficiently protect distinction between ordinary cost necessary undertake that safely That critical Cost lunch ordinary cost life Disability-related required quadriplegia physically accessing manage positioning eat drink continue day Ordinary attending work meeting school event soccer training session community committee part ordinary life But disability-related required there enter environment set up remain safe access facilities function through return home Not ordinary practical inclusion into real If distinction made clearly enough effect Bill characterise essential assistance optional participation spending ordinary day-to-day living would profound impact on whose ability to work parent volunteer contribute depends those.

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

Submission 2011

Proposed Subsection 33(2EA) — Maximum Funding, Intensity and Worker-to-Participant Ratios

The Bill would also allow determinations to specify, for a support or class of supports, a maximum amount of funding, a maximum intensity of provision, or a maximum ratio of worker to participant. This may appear administratively efficient, but for participants with complex physical disability it creates real risk. Support intensity is not a luxury. It is often the difference between safe and unsafe, feasible and unfeasible, sustainable and unsustainable. A one-size-fits-all approach to caps on intensity or worker ratios may work badly for people whose needs are highly physical, highly individualized and safety-critical. It risks prioritising administrative neatness over actual participant need. If Parliament proceeds with this power, there should be much stronger safeguards to ensure that any maximums remain subordinate to participant safety, dignity and individual circumstances.

Schedule 3, Part 2 – Automation of Administrative Action

I am also concerned by the Bill’s automation provisions, which would allow administrative action to be taken by the operation of a computer program, including action involving evaluative judgement. Complex disability support decisions are often highly contextual. They turn on how a person actually lives, what is safe, what is sustainable, what support is genuinely duplicative, and what support is genuinely essential. These are not always matters that can be reduced cleanly to automated logic. Where decisions affect plan budgets, support classification, reassessment rights or the practical ability of a person with disability to live safely and contribute to society, meaningful human scrutiny matters. The Bill should be amended so that high-impact decisions affecting participant supports cannot be automated in a way that diminishes transparency, accountability or genuine individual assessment.

Recommendations

1. Amend proposed section 34A so that broad Ministerial reductions to groups of supports cannot apply to supports that are essential to a participant’s safe daily functioning, employment, parenting, family life or civic and community contribution.
2. Amend proposed section 50A to provide participants with a meaningful right to seek review or reconsideration before an automatic renewal takes effect where support adequacy, classification or safety is disputed.
3. Amend proposed section 48A to ensure participant-requested reassessments remain available where a change in support arrangements, work arrangements, housing, family capacity or informal supports materially affects safety, sustainability or daily functioning.
4. Clarify in the Act, Rules or Explanatory Materials that disability-related assistance required to undertake work, family, civic and community activities is not to be treated as an ordinary day-to-day living cost merely because it occurs in an ordinary life setting.
5. Amend proposed subsection 33(2EA) so that any maximum funding, intensity or worker-to-participant ratio settings are expressly subject to participant safety, dignity and individualized need.

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

Submission 2011

Section 6: Recommendation on Automation Use

Limit the use of automation for high-impact administrative decisions related to:

• Support Classification,
• Plan Budgets. Reassessments; or similar matters requiring careful consideration due to their impact.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Bill

Appendix A - Illustrative Personal Examples

The following examples show how apparently broad support categories can, in practice, contain essential disability-related assistance:

• Work attendance and meetings: Transport support, physical access, workstation setup, positioning, access to meals and facilities, pack-up and safe departure.
• School events and family commitments: Physical assistance to attend, enter venues, position safely access amenities and remain present as an active parent.
• Coaching children’s sport: Support for traveling, accessing ground areas while remaining physically safe during volunteering activities related to sports training sessions or similar tasks.
• Committee and advisory participation: Assistance with entering locations where committees meet supporting setting up equipment needed at these gatherings maintaining one’s ability to perform well in public service positions within communities.