Opposes NDIS Bill due to impact on individuals with intellectual disability, cognitive impairment, complex trauma, and communication barriers

‹ PrevPage 1 of 3 · Source p. 1Next ›

Submission 2174

Dear Committee Members, I am writing as an Occupational Therapist and Operations Manager working within the NDIS to strongly oppose the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 in its current form. I recently attended a sector webinar where practitioners were explicitly encouraged to make submissions to this inquiry, recognising the seriousness of these reforms and the critical need for real-world clinical input. I am submitting in response to that call. The Bill Puts the Most Vulnerable at Risk In my daily clinical practice, I support individuals who in many cases cannot advocate for themselves, including people with intellectual disability, cognitive impairment, complex trauma, and significant communication barriers. These participants rely on: eclinicians to interpret and evidence their needs efamilies already under strain ea system that recognises individual complexity and responds flexibly The proposed changes fundamentally weaken these protections. Stricter access criteria, reduced flexibility, standardised virtual assessments, and more limited review pathways will disproportionately harm those least able to navigate or challenge decisions. They will:elose supports leading to functional deterioration eaunderstandably unable to appeal effectively deteriorate functionally before systems respond leading to health and other impacts ultimately increasing the cost of care A Shift Away from Individualised, Evidence-Based Care The Bill introduces a clear shift toward standardisation, cost control, and administrative efficiency, at the expense of individualised care. From an Occupational Therapy perspective, this is deeply concerning. Functional capacity: eis context-dependent, shaped by environment, supports, and lived experience ecannot be accurately captured through standardised tools alone erequires clinical reasoning and longitudinal understanding The move toward ICAN-style assessments and reduced weighting of treating clinician evidence risks producing incomplete and inaccurate representations of need, particularly for people with: ecomplex disabilities efluctuating conditions einvisible or complex presentations Cuts to Capacity Building and Participation Will Cause Harm Occupational Therapy Australia has highlighted the devastating impact of proposed funding changes, including:

Submission 2174

  • cuts to capacity building supports (including therapy)

  • major reductions to social and community participation supports [linkedin.com] These supports are not discretionary. They are what enable people to:

  • leave their homes to complete daily tasks such as banking or attending a medical appointment

  • build independence

  • participate in education and employment Cutting them will:

  • increase social isolation

  • reduce functional independence

  • undermine the core purpose of the NDIS Participation is central to health, wellbeing, and dignity, removing it is not a cost-saving measure, it is a harm multiplier. Increased Ministerial Powers and Funding Caps The Bill enables broad powers to reduce funding across participant groups and introduces limits on reassessment and tighter eligibility thresholds. [health.gov.au] This creates a system where:

  • funding may no longer reflect individual need

  • participants cannot easily seek review when circumstances change

  • decisions become less transparent and less contestable This is inconsistent with a rights-based, person-centred scheme. Shifting Burden to Families and Crisis Systems If participants lose access to supports, their needs will not disappear. They will shift to:

  • families already at breaking point

  • hospitals and mental health systems

  • housing and homelessness services This is not sustainable reform, it is simply cost-shifting with human consequences. The Core Issue: Loss of Choice, Control, and Safety The NDIS was built on:

  • choice and control

  • individualised funding

  • participant-centred outcomes This Bill erodes those principles through:

  • standardisation

  • reduced clinical input

  • restricted appeals

Submission 2174