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

Submission: [2206]

Introduction.

Dear Committee Secretary,

The following submission expresses fear at harm caused by proposed amendments affecting individuals with disabilities:

• The changes aim to force vulnerable participants off support schemes without addressing costs or responsibilities towards providing necessary assistance;
• Instead of funding these programs adequately through budgetary means as intended initially; the amendment seeks removals from those lacking alternative resources;

It urges committee consideration regarding safeguarding caveats against such proposals based on advocacy group submissions which represent disabled voices. As I’m not legally trained in legislation terms-of-reference, my blanket recommendation remains ‘reject this change’. Advocacy groups recommend modifications/additional safeguards - urging committees’ attention if constructive rather than rejecting outrightly. Some recommendations are included here from People With Disability Australia.

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

Submission 2206

ableism and bullying. Her father (who is also AuDHC) works four days a week nothing our sole income.I suspended writing career PhD scholarship support home.Money tight us rely on NDIS funding continence aids OT support.We currently can’t afford adults go dentist new glasses me or get cats vaccinated.Previously used some budget pay child attend accessible social club neurodivergent children closed down recently, in anticipation Budget cuts proposed this Bill.Current plan partially covers cost continece aids has removed swimming lessons.Barely managing unfunded continence needs ourselves.We haven’t found replacement social club because no neuro-affirming club exists where live.(This unique South Australia sore missed.) Could not afford OT fees without NDIS.The report from her outlined need professional support continue thrive older.It explained that border unsustainable will increase age.outlined future in which could achieve independence with professional support warned dangers leaving parents as providers complex.These were to wellbeing harm mental health, lack access community broader structural supports well-being whole family would do anything power provide everything she remains under considerable strain due low capacity only so much one full time part carer respite.report spoke daughter’s being Human Right person disability.Husband agree completely.Given situation idea of my daughter potentially 160.000 participants removed scheme changes NDIS Act genuinely frightening. We continue everything we could for help her thrive but become poorer than already are perhaps have send school dangerous education.become even more strained at risk burnout closer merely surviving rather thriving.We terrified she wasn’t able through OT build skills

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Submission

Submission: [Redacted]

independence, including potentially accessing a support person or carer in the future. We would all be vulnerable to mental ill-health and poorer quality life.

Fear For Broader Disability Community

I want emphasise count family privileged within disability community outlined what amendments mean our hope can seen these generate tangible pain out families aware many less privileged already exist at breaking point if they lose access through proposed changes, these families individuals WILL BREAK. Worried mainly Autistic children removed from NDIS directed Thriving Kids providers which well inappropriate needs wellbeing most cases don’t actually yet callous cut off support kids with no alternative on offer. Terribly worried outsourcing previously NDIS funded supports parents carers disabled people who are financially physically emotionally majority women. Distraught reports current participants researching voluntary assisted dying options fear unsupported rather dead heard talk suicide The fear heartbreaking witness not misplaced - genuinely suffer when their supports drastically. fear for disabled experience domestic violence greater risk as cuts Please listen disabled advocates say stand cruel unfair ableist violation Human Rights.

Addressing Terms of Reference (prepared information Proposed Changes Bill provided Villamanta Disability Rights Legal Service People With Disability Australia).

Problems Proposals Recommendations 2.1 Access To NDIS Functional Capacity Currently “functional capacity” used term but defined test substantially reduced functional applied case by case. With changes the bill defines future rule making named assessment tool Instrument Classification Assessment Support Needs I-CAN requires validation ensure sufficiently identify

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

Submission 2206 the needs of all people with disability, including those whose needs may be fluctuating or episodic and may not be captured through a point-in-time assessment, and to ensure it is culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability. This amendment means there will be rules that effectively limit who can be considered for access before applying the legislative test. It is a way to make the NDIS harder to access and will filter out disabled people with reasonable and necessary support needs from the scheme. Recommendation from PWDA: Do not proceed with I-CAN as the functional capacity assessment tool unless it has been demonstrably validated to identify the needs of all people with disability, including those with episodic or fluctuating disability, and demonstrated to be culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.

Permanence – disability requirements The amendment requiring that a person has undertaken all “appropriate treatments”before being able to access the NDIS will apply regardless of a person’s circumstances.For example this test would still apply if a person were unable to afford the treatment orto get to a clinic offering the treatment.Recommendation: This amendment is designed to stop disabled people accessing theN DIS , outsourcing support to potentially inaccessible treatment options.It discriminates against low income and regional disabled people.There are no safeguarding measures around participant harm due to side effectsor complications.Please reject this change.

Early intervention requirements

The proposed change to early intervention criteriafrom“benefitthepersonbymitigatingortr alievingth eimpactof th eperson’ simpairment ”to“ benefittehep ersonbyreducing t he impact o f teh pe rson ’s impa irme n t”. Recommendation :This am end ment discrim in ates agai stpeop le w ith dege nerat ive conditions who may have treatm ent delayed untilt h et point they meet teh dis abil ityrequirements,p otentia lly reducing qual i ty oft elife. Please rej ectthis chang e .

PlanningandImp airments

Thechangeinthew ord ingoffrom34(1)(aa)s upportneeds “arising from an impairment”tot hesuppor ts needs “ arising directly fr oman impair me nt orim pa ir m ents” means thatpeople with complexorm ultiple disabilities will onlyhave one impairmen t considered.In our daughter’s case thi should mean her Autism but nother ADHC ora nthi xity profileswould beconsidered, meaningthat reasonable and necessary supports specific tote se wouldnotbecons idered.For other peopleitmightbethati theirmobilityimpairmentbut

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

Submission 2206

not their Down’s Syndrome or their Down’s Syndrome but not their d/Deafness would be considered. Recommendation: This amendment discriminates against people with complex and multiple disabilities. Please reject this change.

S3 Objects of the Act

The current object of the Act is to provide reasonable and necessary supports, including early intervention supports, for participants in the NDIS; the proposed change is for the object of the Act to “provide NDIS supports for participants in the National Disability Insurance Scheme that are reasonable and necessary, so far as is consistent with the financial sustainability of the scheme”. Recommendation: Obviously this wording allows for reasonable and necessary supports, which provide basic human rights, to be deemed financially unsustainable for the scheme and therefore no longer the object of the NDIS. Please reject this change that sacrifices the objective of the NDIS along with disabled people with support needs.

Principles relating to plans - Section 31

Currently the principles are: The preparation, variation, reassessment and replacement of a participant’s plan, together with managing funding under such planning should where reasonably practicable:(a) be individualised; b be directed by the participant;(c)where relevant consider respect role family carers other persons significant lifeparticipant c(a)where relevant recognise relationship between participants familiescarer(d)(d)a strengthen build capacity children(e)familiesandcarersupportparticipantsadultlife(f)econsider availability informal community(g)support communities respond goalsneeds(h)iunderpinned right exercise control own

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

Submission 2206

(h) advance the inclusion and participation in the community of the participant with the aim of achieving his or her individual aspirations; (ii) maximise the choice and independence of the participant; (jj) facilitate tailored and flexible responses to the individual goals and needs of the participant; k(k) provide the context for the provision of disability services to the participant where appropriate coordinate delivery. Only parts find their way back into various sections: Recommendation: Please reject these changes removing respectful strengthening, flexible inclusive supports from participants families communities.

Support determinations Powers Available to the Minister

Where Current Act works so that reasonable necessary + price guide = certain category percentage. He has stated this social but not limited categories will have applied when next plan starts. People Down’s Syndrome vision impaired Autistic Neurodivergent People spend highest budget on social and community participation My daughter lost main avenue through club closing anticipation change. PWDA Recommendation Require no reductions until Foundational Supports fully operational adequately funded demonstrably able meet those who lose NDIS support. Please also consider how future categories defined data? The section states determination must regard safety please ensure it.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment

(b) A maximum intensity or ratio. (c) Maximum price setting with differentiation between providers.

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

Submission 2206

Rollovers vs “renewal”

Currently when a plan passes the end date it is automatically extended, adding more time and funding called a “rollover” - any unused funding in the old plan remains, and nothing else changes. With the proposed changes in the Bill, the old plan would end and a new one start the next day, but unused funding would be confined to the old plan. If you reach the end of a plan and a renewal occurs, it will bring all the new features in- funding periods, support determinations maximum funding etc. A renewal is not reviewable. Support determinations won’t be written into plans So the plan may say $50,000 funding but there’s only $30{comma}000 available Please reject this change allowing a new underfunded plan with no avenue for review to refuse adequate support to people on the scheme Recommendation from PWDA: Require that unspent funds carry over at plan renewalfor participants saving for high-cost items require independent review rights beforeany funding reduction takes effect.

Suspensions The NDIA will be able to suspend a plan if they have been unable to contact a participant for 90 days Would suspensions be automated? What if the participant has actually called or emailedthe contact centre but nobody got back to them? What if the disabled person is unwell or hospital or lacks capacity executive function respond

or working their second job make up inadequate support under thesecond changes whatif ndia doesn’tmakecontact within 90days recommendationfrom pwda: no harm safeguard ensuring currentparticipant loses access supports unless equivalentsupports are inplace, independentreviewrights any exit decision andaccess unscheduled reassessments preserved.

Payments & claiming Currently claims must madewithin2 years Act silent record keeping Under proposedchanges claimsmustbe madewithin90 daysparticipantsmustkeep records ofclaimsandpayments year nominees keeprecordofclaimsand payments5years.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Submission

Submission 2206

Recommendation:

This change is clearly designed to take advantage of participant’s capacity and executive function issues, making it just too hard to access following tightening deadlines record keeping requirements. Pleaserejectthis discriminatorychange.

Plan managementwillfundamentallychangefundamental

There willbea far smaller poolplanmanagerswho musthave a signed agreement with NDIA.Plan managersnot allowedto providenotallowed any other supportsparticipantsPlan managerneedstheNDIAManagement aboutany relatedcompanies(ownedbythesamepeople).

Recommendation:Planmanagementhelpswiththe administrationsupportmanydisabledparticipatantssupport relyonaccessingNDSISmakingit harder accessto planmanagerharderfor themselvesisanotherway weed participants off schemePlease reject changemanagement this change.

AutomationThe NDIA ableautomate certain decisionsmoment focused on production paymentsWith changes like determinationsautomation obviously going through all relevant budgetsBut what information automation relying deciding apply determinationparticipant see review?

The most obvious pieceofinformation recognised disability/impairment why can’t yousee that portal/app?To avoid Robodebt disastrous fallout please rejects thesechanges.

ConclusionLet clear proposed changes cut cost NDIS expense original objective provide reasonable necessary support disabled Australiansunderstand more people than originally anticipated architectsscheme require meaning costly initial projections many unexpected Neurodivergent children daughterIt seems glaringlyobvious answer redefine definitionNeurodivergence nor adjust NDIS Act make Neurodivergent ineligible for support.

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

Submission 2206

If you build a house for two and then try for a baby and find yourself with triplets,

you don’t throw a couple of them out the window after reclassifying them as not children or going your responsibility. You build an extra room if you don’t enough money to build one more room; or stop giving subsidies to the fossil-fuel industry asking some back in gas tax form so can look at care about your children. Redefinition being rejected from scheme won’t make people stop being disabled instead will ensure they unable receive professional supports while their “natural” support systems already stretched due systemic ableism are overwhelmed Families who should receive support human right must not sacrificed Disabled people have been sacrificing this budget cuts because they perceived vulnerable easy target without capacity demand rights human beings NDIS participants may less powerful than other influential members community but still voters very well organised intrinsically worthy fundamental human right. If money can be found prop up failing fossil fuel destroying planet it can allow disabled children thrive survive A little reshuffling priorities required Sincerely, Anonymous