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

Submission 2025

Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee

Inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submitted by: , on 27th May 2026

Submission in Opposition to the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

I write this submission with deep concern, and with hope that those tasked with scrutinising this Bill will take the time to understand what it will mean. Not in policy terms, but in lived reality, for young adults like my son. My 19 year old son lives with STXBP1 (a rare neurological condition) and Autism Spectrum Disorder in regional South Australia. He requires 24/7 support. Our family has spent years building a stable, structured support system that is finally enabling him to live and develop skills most people take for granted. The proposed Bill risks dismantling everything we have worked so hard to put in place, not because his needs have changed, but because financial targets are being placed ahead of the individual needs of people with permanent, significant disability.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 proposes a range of changes that, taken together, pose a serious threat to my son’s wellbeing, safety, and developmental trajectory.

The proposed 50% reduction to community participation funding would be catastrophic for my son. He cannot recognise danger, does not understand road safety, and is vulnerable to exploitation by strangers. His weekly activities, work experience, exercise sessions, horse riding, are not extras. They are the foundation of his NDIS goals. Cutting this funding in half does not only mean he participates less. It means he stays home, becomes isolated, and loses years of progress.

Our family self-manages our son’s plan and directly employs his support staff. His therapy team identifies staff consistency as a clinical necessity, not a preference. He learns through predictable repetition, and his behaviour deteriorates when his routine or team changes. This model delivers better outcomes at lower cost, which is exactly what the Bill claims to be pursuing. We are concerned that changes to unregistered provider pricing and self-management arrangements will make this model harder or impossible to sustain, forcing him into arrangements that have already been assessed as unsuitable for his needs.

Beyond the funding cuts, the Bill’s new budget method allows funding to be capped by “types or groups of supports” and amends the NDIS Act so that financial sustainability becomes a legal test for whether a support is funded. This fundamentally undermines the principle that supports must be reasonable and necessary for the individual. My son’s Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales results place him below the 1st percentile for his age group, with skills assessed at the level of a child under four. Blanket caps based on averages will not reflect his reality. A system where an algorithm, rather than a person who has read his reports, determines his plan puts him at serious risk.

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

Submission 2025

Our family has always managed our son’s funding responsibly, negotiating reduced rates, stretching every dollar, and following the evidence-based model his therapy team recommends. He is exactly the person the NDIS was designed for: someone with permanent, significant disability making slow but genuine progress with the right support in place. His five goals, self-care independence, safe community access, communication, employment skills, and an active life, are achievable only if his support remains consistent and adequately funded. As currently written, this Bill does not protect his future. We respectfully but firmly urge the Committee to recommend meaningful amendments that protect people with the most complex and permanent disabilities, rather than trading their needs away for a budget figure.

I am suggesting that the Committee:

• Reject the proposed 50% cut to social and community participation funding, or at minimum, require individual assessment before any cuts are applied to participants with high and complex support needs
• Ensure any capacity building reductions are evidence-based and assessed at the individual level, not applied as a blanket percentage
• Prohibit the use of cohort-based funding caps where individual assessed need clearly exceeds the cohort average
• Protect and support self-managed and directly-employed support arrangements, which deliver superior outcomes at lower cost
• Guarantee that any new eligibility or assessment tools are validated for people with intellectual disability, and that no participant currently receiving supports will lose access without a full individual review
• Extend the consultation period so that families and people with disability can participate meaningfully

My son has a right to live a safe, meaningful, and developing life. The NDIS made that possible. The proposed changes in this Bill risk taking it away, not through malice, but through blunt financial instruments applied without sufficient regard for individual need.

South Australia