Submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs

NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Introduction

My name is [redacted]. I am a 23-year-old Australian living with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), a progressive condition that affects my mobility and my ability to independently carry out everyday tasks, including showering and using the bathroom. I have been a participant in the National Disability Insurance Scheme since 2017. I am writing this submission because I am deeply concerned that the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 would cause serious, lasting harm to people like me — not abstractly, but in the daily reality of how I live, how I am cared for, and whether I get to have any meaningful independence at all.

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

Submission 2324

• providing “substantial” support, the burden of my care would fall entirely on their shoulders. In practice, that would mean one of them would have to permanently leave work to meet my needs ––a financial blow\thefamilycannotabsorb—anditwouldtakeaserious tollontheirmentalhealthandwellbeingtoo. -A legal presumption cannot capture \thecomplexityofreal familycircumstances.My parentslovemeandsupportmeeverywaytheycan.But loveisnotacareplan,and goodwillcannotsubstituteforthestructuredsupportsthenNDISprovides.

Section59B(4): Automated Decision-Making This provision authorises automated systems and algorithmstomake decisionsthat involve discretion,evaluative judgement ,andaforming“stateofmind”—inother words,the kindsofdecisions thatdeterminewhatisinaparticipant’s planwhat they canaccess.I find this genuinely frightening.Mycconditioniscomplexprogressive.The decisionsthatshapemyN DISplannerquireahuman beingwho counderstand context,wieighindividual circumstances,a ndrecognise th atnoalgorithmcanfullycapture what mylife requires. Automatingthesedecisionsintr oducesalayeropacityuncertaintythat is incompatiblewithkind individualised,needs-based planning the NDIS wasdesignedto deliver.If anautomatedsystemgetsmyplanwrong, whatreco urse doIhave?Who d oi appeal to ?The Billdoes notadequatelyanswerthesequestions&that silenceistroubling

The Human Cost Ifmysuppor ts werereducedorremovedas aresult ofthisBilltheconsequences wouldbeimmediateand severe . Iwouldbecomeentirelydependenton myfamilyforcare.My parents who alreadyst workfulltimecareformigrantmotherwoul dfac ean impossible situation.Oneforthem wou llikelyhavetogiv uppaidemploymenttoc are for me full time—a financialsacrifice withlong-term consequencesforthewhole family’s security andwellbeing.Beyondthefinancialimpact,Iwouldlosetheadependenceand dignity thatmy currentsupports makepossible.

Mysociallife wouldeffectivelydisappear.Mymental healthwould suffer.Iwouldgofrombeingayoun gpersonwit hdegreeofagency overmyownlifeto being whollyreliant onothersforeverything—notbecause m yconditionrequiresitbut becausethesystemchosetowithdrawthesesupportsthat made somethingbetter possible. Thatisnotatheoretical risk.That iswhat thisBil lmakes likelyforeach peoplelikeme.Recommendationto theCommittee

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

Submission 2324

I am asking the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs to reject this Bill in its current form.

The provisions outlined above —the parental presumption in s 34(1G)—(1J)and the authorisationof automated decision-makinginss 59B(4)—arenot minor technical adjustments.They strikeatthecorewhatthen DIS issupposedtobe: an individualisedneeds-baseschemethat treatdisabledAustraliansasfull human beingswith rights not as acostto bemanaged. TheBillalsoraises serious concerns about compliance with Australia’s obligations under UN Conventionon therights PersonsDisabilitiesparticularlytheright independentlivingcommunity inclusionindividualisedsupport TheNDIS wasbuilt thoseprinciples ThisBioundermines them IfCommittee ispreparedreject Bielire urge it at minimum recommend removal substantial amendment ss 34(1G)(1J ands B(4), andrequire that any transitional protections be written into primary legislation rather than left ministerial rules expire within months. Disabled Australians deserve betterthanthis We deservesceme support our independence respectsour dignity keepsits promises Iamasking Senato stand right side of thi