Submission 2272

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

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed changes to the NDIS.

Before I continue, I feel I need to emphasise that I have not had enough time to read the long and complex proposed amendment document. I am familiar with writing submissions calling for treatments to be added to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, so I thought I had enough experience to skim through the document and form a response on my own. How wrong I was.

Once I saw the sheer length and complexity of the document, I stopped trying to read it and turned instead to the insights shared by people and organisations I trust. These included disability advocacy organisations, participants who shared their stories and concerns on social media, other advocates, certain politicians and submissions already uploaded to the Parliament submissions website. From these, I learned about the key areas of concern and how they might relate to me and others in the community.

About Me

I have been an NDIS participant since 2020. I originally applied (unsuccessfully) in 2018 and was so disheartened by the experience that it took me two years to have the courage to reapply.

Only one of my disabling conditions was recognised and included in my plan. However, I consider myself extremely lucky that the supports I receive also help with my other conditions. I know this is not the case for many people.

I currently work part-time from home for a patient organisation and receive a partial Disability Support Pension. I am proud that I can earn some income, help others like me and pay my taxes. My conditions are permanent, but my symptoms can vary in intensity, frequency and impact. They are currently well managed with medications and lifestyle patterns; however, sometimes, they can change for no obvious reason, or my medications may stop working for me. Two of the main symptoms, always present to varying degrees, are pain and fatigue.

The main supports I receive through the NDS are house cleaning, garden maintenance and weekly physiotherapy. If I didn’t have these supports, I could do some of my house and garden work sometimes, but only at a basic level, and I certainly could not do heavier tasks such as lawnmowing or window cleaning. If I did do the basic tasks regularly, it would increase my pain and fatigue and reduce my functional capacity. In turn, these impacts would reduce my ability to work, pay my rent, drive or participate in activities I enjoy, making me even more isolated and financially vulnerable than I am now.

I lead two arthritis support groups and participate in a large, all-abilities community choir. Through these, I have come to know many more NDIS participants, and I see both the positive and negative impacts the NDIS has on their daily lives.

My concerns with the proposed NDIS changes

I am deeply concerned that this Bill could devastate the lives of people with disability and our families. My list of concerns is by no means exhaustive. I’m sure if I had more time to delve into all the proposed

Submission 2272

amendments, I would form many more. The concerns I have included are in no particular order of importance. They are all important. I believe the proposed changes will:

• Force at least 160,000 Australians with disability off or out of the NDIS before proper, proven alternatives are in place. This is frightening for people like me, as we would be much worse off without our supports. If people are pushed out of the NDIS without real supports to go to, they will not stop needing support. They will be pushed onto families, hospitals, homelessness services, mental health services and crisis systems that are already under pressure. This will cause real harm. In our community, families are already struggling to access disability, mental health and housing supports.
• Drastically cut supports for community and social participation, despite these being central to the founding principles of the NDIS. These supports are not extras. They help people leave home, stay connected, work, study, volunteer, build relationships and live safely in the community.
• Reduce critical funding for essential support services. Most support workers and organisations are genuinely passionate about the people they care for and also oppose fraud within the system. In many cases, they are hamstrung by inadequate professional training and by already restricted funding, such as not being able to charge for travel time to individuals. Most support providers need to be SUPPORTED, not penalised.
• Give the Minister broad powers to cut funding without proper individual review. Cutting off whole groups of supports does not take individual needs into account. Also, any powers held by the Minister are dependent on the ideology and integrity of each person in the role.
• Greatly reduce participants’ right to appeal decisions at all stages of the scheme, from initial applications through to plan reviews and changes of circumstances. Our appeal rights have already been diminished in recent years. They should be much stronger and align with human rights conventions.
• Reduce access to the scheme for people with cognitive disabilities and reduced mental functional capacity. Especially those whose capacity may vary from day to day.
• Disadvantage people whose use (or lack of use) of other service systems is considered when their NDIS eligibility is assessed. NDIS eligibility was always supposed to be based on age, residency/citizenship statues and level of disability impairment and need. I am concerned that the NDIA could start considering DSP or other Centrelink benefit status when deciding whether to include a participant or not. That would work against the principle that eligibility is not determined by income. DSP assessment is flawed and outdated in any case.
• Create negative outcomes for applicants or participants whose decisions were automated. This terrifies me and reminds me of all the RoboDebt issues. I support automation for administrative efficiency, but not to assess people’s capacity and needs. Those decisions should always be the responsibility of people extensively trained in specific disabilities or disability areas, such as allied health professionals. I believe functional capacity reports from qualified health professionals who know the individual should be mandatory and made more affordable, accessible and standardised.
• Falsely penalise participants who have their funding cut after 90 days of “non-contact’. Such delays could occur for any number of reasons. It appears this amendment makes no provisions for the NDIA to thoroughly investigate the reasons behind the lack of contact and address them. For example, participants might have been in hospital, lost access to their

Submission 2272

• support workers or be in a situation where using a phone or leaving the house is impossible
• or unsafe.

The NDIS was created so people with disability and our families could live ordinary lives, with the support we need and the right to choose who supports us. That promise is now at risk.

The Bill should not proceed unless it includes stronger safeguards around appeal rights, real co-design, independent review, and protection against arbitrary funding reductions.

Please act to ensure these changes do not harm people with disability.

We must protect our NDIS to protect our lives.