National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 2270
Submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment
(Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
- Introduction
I am autistic and dyslexic (using digital access tools and editing support) and while I manage my
own access needs independent of the NDIS my child is also autistic and we access supports for her
through the NDIS. Comparing my own childhood experiences with hers I can clearly see the value
and importance of the NDIS. The NDIS was set up to provide reasonable and necessary support to
disabled people and while subsequent governments have strayed from this goal toward a market
driven system this bill proposes to gut the NDIS and force disabled people to fall back on systems
of support (mainly state based) that no longer exist and will not be ready before NDIS support is
withdrawn.
- Submission Process
Also the unusual shortness of the submission period is inherently discriminatory. Added to this
people with disability generally have less capacity and so require more time rather than less, making
it doubly discriminatory. This appears to be a blatant attempt to limit criticism from the disability
community.
- My position
Having read the bill closely I can see there is very little of value and much to be reworked. I oppose
the bill in its current form and call for it to be withdrawn until such time as it has been reviewed and
rewritten in consultation with the disability community, the end users of the NDIS. Nothing about
us without us.
- Issues with the Bill
3.1 Summary
My main concern is the stated goals of long term saving will not be achieved by this bill. Removing
the support from a huge swathe of people and giving that discretion to the minister will only serve
to eliminate a substantial portion of that cohort from the workforce and further isolate them from
society. The alternatives to the NDIS system are just not available yet, especially in regional areas.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 2270
It will take more time and more money and leave more people stranded without support than fixing
the current system would. This bill will lead to an increase in costs in other areas as unsupported
people will place a greater demand on other health and social services, ones that are not designed to
support them. Disability doesn’t magically disappear when you withdraw support, it impacts all
areas of life. This bill is less to do with making the NDIS more financially manageable and more to
do with short term cuts and overreach that will have a detrimental effect on disabled people.
Social and community participation is a crucial part of Australian life, access to this support has
flow on effects that are difficult to quantify but encompass capacity building, combating isolation
and basic dignity. The arbitrary 50% cut to this funding will cause a substantial amount of services
to become unviable resulting in a rise in isolation and all its associated ill effects. This is especially
concerning in regional areas where social and community options are already limited.
3.2 Ministerial Power and Lack of Appeal
The Minister’s new power to cut funding without appeal (s 34A) is especially concerning.
Removing the option to appeal will again result in disabled people being stranded without crucial
support and access. The tougher unscheduled reassessment rules and the loss of review rights make
it more crucial for disabled people to manage their plans but the system is difficult to access for
those of us with text disabilities. Removing the appeal mechanism already discriminates against
those NDIS users but the proposed changes will only intensify this discrimination.
3.3 Reassessment
Reassessment of all NDIS participants will be costly and unnecessary. The new functional capacity
test will need to be designed to look at the whole lived experience focusing on access barriers rather
than an arbitrary functional capacity. The advantage of the NDIS system is its consideration of the
whole person and their reasonable and necessary access needs. My own functional capacity
fluctuates on a daily basis and so a functional capacity test will show different results at different
times. At best this testing will result in NDIS participants getting inadequate supports and at worst
getting their reasonable and necessary support withdrawn.
3.4 Automation
Automated decisions and algorithms with no individual appeal is a very dangerous precedent to set.
Algorithmic systems need oversight as they inevitably make mistakes. And when these mistakes
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 2270
can result in a cancellation of a plan then appeal is essential. Also appeal must be made accessible
as stated above. Automation is important in systems as large as the NDIS but it must have oversight.
3.5 Permanence
One of the foundational principles of the NDIS is choice. The new “all appropriate treatments” test
for permanence for scheme eligibility removes and limits choice. Looking again to regional areas
where services are limited this test will result in more people losing access to the support they need.
- Lived Experience
We are raising our autistic teenaged child using the social model of disability. The social model
states that disability arises from factors that limit access not from the individual’s impairments. As
such we need to choose supports and programs that align with this best practice and avoid programs
that operate in a deficit model of disability such as ABA (applied behavioural analysis). My child
was a participant in an autistic lead social club that was forced to close from the withdrawal of
social and community funding last year. This program allowed her to thrive on her own terms and
the cancellation of this club was devastating. The proposed changes in the bill will result in fewer
programs that operate using the social model of disability and more programs that operate in deficit
models limiting our access and having a detrimental effect on our functional capacity and mental
health. We use a neuro-affirming occupational therapist and a neuro-affirming continence nurse and
would potentially lose access to their supports under the new bill. This uncertainty itself is stressful.
- Recommendations
I call upon the committee to oppose the bill in its current from and call for it to be withdrawn until
such time as it has been reviewed and rewritten in connotation with the disability community, the
end users of the NDIS. Nothing about us without us.