National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 2295
Attn. Legislative AƯairs Committee
Re: National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
I make this submission in strong opposition to the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.
I write to you as a voter, parent and as primary carer for my wife who is a long-term self-managed NDIS participant.
While I support the long-term sustainability of the NDIS and recognise the need for eƯective reform, I do not support reform achieved by weakening participant protections, reducing individualisation, limiting review rights, or expanding executive power at the expense of disabled people.
The nature of the changes are both far-reaching and complex and as a “package” extremely detrimental to both current and future participants. My major concerns from our family’s perspective are:
Section 31 - this should be re-instated in full to recognise and preserve individual rights and needs. A clear mechanism for exemption or appeal must also be included. Section 34A and section 33(2EA) - at minimum requires consultation with the disability community—and publication of an impact statement before any reduction is made. AƯected participants must retain full merits review rights. Section 25a – should be amended so that “permanence” can be established with appropriate evidence and without recourse to pointless treatments. The amendments to unscheduled reassessment thresholds and timeframes should be scrapped. The Transitional Rule making powers under Schedule 5 (essentially a Henry VIII clause) should be heavily curtailed and subject to independent scrutiny. The broad ministerial powers and reduced parliamentary oversight embedded within the Bill need to be wound back or amended to include guardrails, transparency, and retention of parliamentary oversight
Experience
The NDIS has been a fantastic resource for our family. My wife has a degenerative disease – Multiple Sclerosis - with both physical and cognitive impacts that over the years has meant increasing support needs as her disability has worsened.
The NDIS has enabled her to remain a contributing member of our family and the community and maintain a degree of independence and dignity in her life that would otherwise not be possible.
Yes, there have been issues with the timeliness and appropriateness of supports – the random nature of the lesions appearance means impacts are highly individual and cannot be lumped into a “bucket” labelled Multiple Sclerosis - but the existing safeguards and appeal processes have ensured these matters could be resolved and my wife continues to get the supports she needs.
1
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 2295
The way this Bill is framed my wife now has a genuine fear she will be removed from the scheme altogether while I have zero confidence that she will continue to receive the necessary supports she needs as her condition deteriorates.
In either scenario there will be a serious knock-on eƯect to our family, forcing me to look at early retirement to fill any gaps and very likely putting us under extreme financial stress as a result. It will also place a bigger burden on other government services (if they even still exist) as my wife’s decline will inevitably accelerate. How does that “help” anyone?
The Real Problems
If the Government’s concern is the quality of support workers or poor provider practices, then those issues should be addressed directly through stronger regulation, compliance, workforce standards, and enforcement — not by reducing the budgets of participants who rely on these supports to live independently and participate in their communities.
Participants are being asked to carry the burden of budget repair, while the larger systemic issues within the NDIS, NDIA and broader marketplace remain inadequately addressed. This is particularly disappointing coming from a Labor Government, given the Party’s longstanding commitment to fairness, inclusion, equity, and protecting vulnerable Australians.
A sustainable NDIS must be built on fairness, accountability, and genuine partnership with people with disability.
Government Approach
I am also appalled at the despicable and cynical demonisation of an already vulnerable community that has been engaged in by this government in promoting this Bill, essentially casting disabled people as little more than “dole bludgers” in the minds of the general public. I have heard numerous first- hand stories lately of disabled people being openly abused in public places and are now fearful about leaving their homes. I believe this is a direct result of irresponsible government commentary to the media.
The way this Bill is being rushed through with incredibly short times for submissions from the public is also incredibly cynical and does not adhere to common practices. A Bill of this financial magnitude and impact should have a complementary period of time for submissions, this should also take into account the special needs of the community group impacted who are already hampered by their disabilities and will take longer than “normal” people to mobilise.
Conclusion
The Bill in its current form would undermine core features of the NDIS, including individualised support, meaningful review rights, participant safeguards and accountability. It exposes both current and future participants to significant risk while shifting costs onto families, carers and other systems.
I urge the Committee to recommend that the Bill not be passed unless it is substantially amended to restore participant protections, preserve genuine individualisation, and ensure reform is developed transparently and in genuine partnership with disabled people.
2