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

Submission 233

I am writing to make a submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.

I am making this submission as [choose one or more]:

• -A person with lived experience of disability-
• -A carer of a person with disability-
• • A worker in the disability sector-
• • An advocate for people with disability-

I request that this submission be published in full as part of the public record of this inquiry.

I understand that once accepted by the committee, this submission is protected by parliamentary privilege.

Opening Statement

This submission examines the documented sequence of events that produced this bill and asks when people with disability will stop being political targets in this country.

The submission requests the committee examine this bill within its context, as questions about democratic accountability arise from said documentation—posing serious concerns regarding legal rights held by individuals living under disabilities; economic integrity behind governmental claims; whether a publicly funded legislative reform process was abandoned lawfully or not.

Australia ratified UN Convention on Rights Persons Disabilities (CRPD) back in year ’08. Its core principle is nothing without us. Yet eighteen years later, governments have commissioned consultancy services aimed at crafting narratives conducive towards reducing financial assistance provided toward persons disabled while abandoning public-funded roadmaps crafted specifically through their own efforts—and removing approximately one hundred sixty thousand such beneficiaries from schemes they legally qualify access to—all done so devoidly of mandate, genuine consultation nor honest public disclosure. The submission urges committees address more than just this legislation but also structural failures enabling it. Without permanent enforceable protections ensuring individuality beyond reach of expediency politics, future administrations might replicate actions taken herein.

Submission 233

How We Got Here: Chronology - From Decision Making to Implementation

Every decision documented here has been made publicly and every sequence matters.

Background (NDIS Establishment)

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (“NDIS”) began its operations with an explicit promise “to provide lifelong support once access had been granted,” which led people living with disabilities or their families into irreversible life decisions based upon this assurance from day one when they entered NDIS services.[^fn-ndis-establishment] In states like New South Wales where alternative disability service providers were eliminated entirely without any plans as to what would happen if someone left these programs after being enrolled within them; there still isn’t such planning today despite years since then having passed under successive governments’ watchful eyes[^fn-no-plan].

Governance Failure Preceding Everything

From inception, both Coalition-led [^ ef-coalition]and Labor-controlled federal administrations failed in properly governing it through deliberate neglect of key aspects including provider registration oversight that allowed for approximately 9 out-of每十 registered providers operating outside regulatory frameworks. This was widely reported yet never acted on by respective political parties leading up until now[^ ef-governance-failure]. Subsequently, the very frauds used later as justification for cuts came directly due to governance failures and lack thereof.

2023: The Growth Target Controversy

Before a comprehensive independent review could be completed, Prime Minister Albanese announced at National Cabinet an ambitious target aimed towards reducing annual growth rates down from roughly “22% per year” to“to just below half this amount,” or around eight percent annually by July ‘26’. However, no details regarding how exactly this reduction will occur safely were provided nor any plans about foundational supports needed alongside these changes.[^fn-target] The government renamed their initial proposal into something called

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 233

Key Events in 2023:

• January: While an independent review proceeds independently, another government commissioning Redbridge—a Labor-aligned political consultancy founded collaboratively testing attitudes toward the NDIS. The research reveals two findings: deep empathy towards disabled individuals and fraud narratives as effective funding cut support builders, which becomes a communication strategy despite initial skepticism about empathy’s utility; suspicion replaces trust; committee must require identifying who decided this shift when.

The sequence matters—budget targets first followed by political narrative then roadmap prescribing careful co-designed five-year transition foundational supports pre-condition abandoned subsequently. September ABC Four Corners airs ‘Careless’ major investigation exposing provider fraud watershed moment making fraud mainstream national story Redbridge completed three months away. December Independent Review Roadmap handed over Government Over Australians contributed more than personal stories nearly submissions Result recommendations specific actions explicit instruction implement whole Foundational Supports prescribed non-negotiable precondition changes participant eligibility or plan funding.

How every check was bypassed Shorten introduces Getting The NDIS Back on Track No.1 Bill What happens next precisely how human rights protections discrimination law democratic scrutiny were bypassed Before bill introduced Disability Representative Organisations shown details legislation required sign non-disclosure agreements preventing them from telling communities what coming people most affected legally gagged There public exposure draft no prior discussion Parliamentary Joint Committee Human Rights stated could not conclude whether compatible with because critical rules determining operation had yet written This is how human rights protection was bypassed Not rejected made impossible assess.

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

Submission 233 The bill passed the House of Representatives but the government did not have enough support in the Senate. It was referred to a second committee hearing.Hundreds of submissions objected.The Greens pushed back.the disability community called for the bill to be rejected.Shorten then reached a deal with the states and territories.The deal included faster timeframes for approving NDIS rulesand—critically—a move from unanimous majority decision-makingfor NDIS rule changes.Previously every statehadto agree.Underthe deal,aminorityofstatescouldbeoverruled.That is howitwas done.Every checkthat existedwaseither bypassed,delayedor made structurally impossiblet apply.The legislationthata resulted—with its broad ministerialrule-makingspowers—is thelegal foundation on which Butler has since built everything. The Dorothy Dixer — July 2nd, OnJuly to Shortenedeliverya prepared listNDI expenditureitemsinto parliamentary record via stagedDorothy Dixera question coordinatedwith Laborbackbencher give minsterplatform deliverprepared statements.Listincluded cruises,gambling,cry therapyclairvoyants,taxidermy,and cryptocurrency.He told parliament billionsNDS spending being rorted.As June cases active fraud cases estimated value $ million—in scheme annualy. Thatisnotbillionsthat08%annualspending underactivefraud investigation.list notdrawnfrom confirmed investigations—it could have beenbecauseconfirmed figure was$345million.It drawn unverified tip-offs in system examining less than .4 of claims by dollarvalue.minister toldparliament billionswerebeingrortted.confirmed figure at time wassumilion.Those two statementscannot both be true.fraud narrative—presenting millions asbillions,unver allegationspolitical instrument used to create conditions resistant crossbench senators passedlegislation granting broadministrial powers.committee must ask whether those senator would pass that legislati had the confirmed figures placed before them instead.In March one monthbeforeButler’s announcementOne Nation moved Senate specific inquiry into NDIS fraud.The government voted it down 34 against aninquirythat verifiedthe theyhadbeen publicly citing for years. Pageof14

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

Submission 233

That is not the behaviour of a government confident in its evidence base. That is the behaviour of a government that needed the narrative but could not afford the scrutiny. June 2024.The NDIs quarterly report shows scheme expenses coming in approximately$$$ million under budget.Plan inflaionis stabilising.TThe governance measures are working.These results receive no public attention equivalenttothe fraud narrativE.January 20，２０２５．Shorten leaves then DIS portfolio and takes th Vice-Chancellorshipofth Universityo fCanberra.Hisreview co-chair Lisa Pauli s already installedas Chancellor o fsame institution.Heleaves behindastabilisingscheme-andalegalarchitecturewith broad ministerial powers, anational Cabinet cost reduction agreement,andaredbridge communication strategy sitting ready to be used.May１３，２０２５。Mark Butler isswornin as Ministerfor Health,AgeingandDisability includingthenNDIS.Butler ran Albanesefirst campaign forthelabor leadership against Shorten. His uncosted climate policies ar epublicly documented ashaving damaged Shortens’ election campai gn. Hiscareer was subsequently rehabilitated entirelyunderAlbanese Heisanow handedt he NDIS-the defining legislative achievement both Julia Gillard who established it,Bill Shor tenn reviewed legislated its reform framework.He inherits a completed roadmap Passed legislation.Astabilising scheme.Afive year transitionframework.Agrowth targetalready set.Ar edbridgetcommunication strategyalready developed Broadministerialpowers alreadylegislated.All ofit. August 20 ，　２０２６ 。But ler makes his first major NDIs announcement at the National Press Club .He signals that children with autism may not need fullNDS plans and begins using ’original intent language’reframe whoscheme designed for.Disability organisations say they were consulted.State premiers saythey learned about from press conference.January-March ２０２６．The fraud narrative reaches most extreme form A fresh parliamentary inquiry into ndis fraud is convened.Labour backbenchers make coordinated media appearances warning cost blowouts autistic participants.Thiscoordinatedcampaign laying groundwork follows April，２２，２０２６。 Butler announces people will be removedfromtheNDIS over four years, averageplanswill reduced by$5 ,and participant numbers fall760 to million.Growth capped annually below inflation real terms cut everyyear.The foundational supports review prescribed as non-negotiable preconditions do exist.Noneofthiswas taken Australianpeople federal election.There was no mandate.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 233

According to The Saturday Paper, fraud and rorting accounted for just 1.05% of the projected $19 billion savings. A third of the savings came from removing children from the scheme.

May 14, 2026: The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 is introduced into parliament; its length being 113 pages long while allowing public response within fifteen days.

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

Submission 233

Lie 3: The NDIS is unsustainable

The NDIS delivers $2.25 to the Australian economy for every dollar spent—generating $52 billion in economic value in a single year. It is not a drain; it is a growth industry employing hundreds of thousands of Australians.

The primary unaddressed cost driver is Supported Independent Living—with individual plans averaging $487,300 per year.The 2023 review made specific recommendations about SIL pricing and governance.Those recommendations have not been implemented.Instead Butler has cut social and community participation supports by 50% —the funding that allows disabled Australians to leave their homesand participate in ordinary life.

Lie 4: This will save money When people with disability lose NDIS supports they do not disappear from public expenditure.They reappear in emergency departments,hospital wards,housing crisis services,and mental health systems.The NDIA spent $34.8 million fighting participantsin the AAT ina singleyear.As160,000peopleare reassessed andreducedthat figurewill increase.

The overwhelming majorityof informaldisability careis providedby womeninthecountry.Thecuts will pushwomenoutofpaidworkto provide unpaidcarethestatehas abandonedreducingtheir lifetime earnings,superannuation ,andeconomic independence.Thisishappeninginautumnwhilethisgovernmentclaimstosupportwomentheireconomic equality.

Lie 5: States willprovide alternativesupports The statesdismantledthedisabilitieserviceswhenthen DIS absorbed demand.Thereisonethingt fall back on.Quintlandhass alreadyrefusedtosign then Thriving Kids agreement .The foundational supportsthetherreviewprescribedas non-negotiable preconditionsdo no exist.`

Page of `

The Toxic Environment Nobody Is Naming

The government created this damage. It must repair it.

People Are Dying: This is On Record These are named people whose deaths documented consequences due to funding decisions:

• Noah Johnston: A young man with severe disabilities requiring continuous ventilation; he passed away after his ventilator tube came out during an unsupervised period at night when no registered nurse could attend—due lack of funding for such services from NDIS (NDI).
• Koa Gibson: Four-year-old needing constant care who had her weekly nursing assistance cut down drastically post-March ’23 changes introduced by NDIA; she succumbed a few days following her mother’s illness where urgent need for more support wasn’t met despite requests being rejected by NDA. In fiscal year 2024/’25, $60M` were allocated towards litigating against beneficiaries via AR Tribunals rather than providing necessary financial aid.

Submission

The number of younger people with disability living in aged care was over 7,000 before the NDIS. This scheme reduced it to 829 in September 2025. These changes will reverse progress made under the NDIS program, as documented consequences are attributed directly or indirectly due to funding decisions made on behalf of Noah Johnston & Koa Gibson. The Robodebt Royal Commission recommended more oversight rather than less automated decision-making. From mid-2026 onwards plans will largely be computer-generated using I-CAN (Instrument For Classification And Assessment Of Support Needs). Human involvement is dramatically being reduced; planners cannot override its decisions. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has stated publicly this deeply concerning given that the Robodebt Royal Commision’s explicit recommendations were not followed; an equivalent tool for Aged Care is already subjecting complaints to Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation. Despite opposition during election campaign, government now implements roboNDIS reforms.

Malfeasance — Who Is Responsible and At What Level?

Malfeasance means knowingly doing something wrongful while holding office position. Preliminary evidence establishes:

• Prime Minister Albanese set a National Cabinet growth target without releasing modelling on downstream costs nor providing plan for foundational supports Treasurer Chalmers incorporated that target into budget projections but did so without releasing whole-of-government cost modeling. Shorten passed legislation with broad ministerial powers explicitly warned would be misused by disability community. He delivered prepared fraud list in parliament drawn from unverified allegations presenting $345 million as billions confirmed fraud, in reality it was only $187m.

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

Submission 233

Butler inherited all of that and removed any pretence of care. He proceeded without foundational supports, without mandate, and without the safeguards the review prescribed. People have died. More will die.

The question of malfeasance does not rest with one minister. It rests with a chain of decision-makers who were told – repeatedly, specifically, and on the public record — what the consequences of their decisions would be. Who had the roadmap? Who had the Royal Commission recommendations? Who had the deaths of Noah Johnston and Koa Gibson recorded before announcing further cuts?

And who proceeded anyway.

Australia ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2008. Its foundational principle is nothing about us unless we are involved. None of this happened here: Not under Coalition; Not under Shorten; Not under Butler; The Disability Royal Commission made 222 recommendations combined with those from an NDIS Review findings resulted in over two hundred forty-eight recommendations being made last year [in] The most important structural ones—a Disability Rights Act or dedicated disability portfolio—have been ignored.

What This Committee Must Require Before This Bill Passes

These questions must appear as part of the bill’s proceedings.

1. Non-disclosure agreements - Before introducing Getting the NDIS Back On Track No. One Bill was introduced to require that Disability Representative Organisations sign non-disclosure agreements preventing them informing communities. The Parliamentary Joint Committee for Human Rights could conclude whether such legislation was compatible because it did not yet exist. The committee should ask how a piece affecting hundreds thousands Australians was introduced without exposure draft, key stakeholders gagged legally, human rights compatibility structurally impossible assess. Is same approach used now?
2. July Dorothy Dixer — A minister told parliament billions were reported. Confirmed fraud figure at time $345 million. Those statements cannot both be true. The committee requires complete evidentiary basis each item on list tabled. It also needs government explain why Senate fraud inquiry voted down March 2026 evidence does support claims then correct parliamentary record.

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

Submission 233

Key Questions:

- **The Redbridge engagement:**

The Minister should present comprehensive documentation—scope of work, total findings—and timeline related to policy engagements. Identify those responsible for adopting a fraud narrative rather than an empathy finding, along with when this occurred.

- **Abandoned roadmap:*

Which among its twenty-six recommendations does is implemented or contradicted? Has advice from the panel confirmed proceeding without foundational supports is consistent? If so, table such guidance.

- *Whole-of-government costs:* Treasury projections on how hospitals,

nursing homes, housing services Centrelink, justice systems absorb NDIS drops; current annual cost government legal representation ART matters resolved participants’ favor.

• The National Cabinet growth target*: Prime Minister Treasurer must submit evidence base setting up eight percent growth targets whole-of- government modeling downstream costs gender impact workforce participation superannuation impacts women. Publicly state if no models exist; budget set without these is fiscal negligence.

  Political history Julia Gillard built scheme. Bill Shorten reformed it. Two men dismantled it have most documented political against Shorten’s legacy committee must ask Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister did any consideration other than policy public interest inform decision abandon 2023 review framework did not take Australian people federal election democratic basis claim authority changes magnitude.

Human rights An independent assessment of bill compatibility UN CRPD Disability Discrimination Act 1992 NDIS Act commissioned before passes. Women A full gender impact assessment covering workforce participation, superannuation lifetime economic displaced care this year Women who will absorb displaced care. Robo-NDIS Full human rights impact I-CAN automated planning tool tabled implementation Government explain Robodebt Royal Commission recommendations on automated decision-making applied here. deaths minister account Noah Johnston Koa Gibson What review conducted deaths serious adverse outcomes linked NDIA funding decisions past three years why has that review publicly released? Page 12 of 14

The Question Nobody Has Been Able To Answer

Examined from every angle, the same conclusion emerges.

There is not a single _positive_ justificat ion_ fo r wh at has been done.

Not econ omic—The NDIS returns $2 .25 f o revery dollar spent an d cutting i t shifts costs ,it does n ot save them.Not fiscal—the whole-of-government cost h as never b een modelledand released.Not structural——the realcost drivers ha ven otbeen addressed Not humanitarian—peoplehave died. No tdemocratic—a there was no mandate.No legal-rights protected under domestican dinternational law are being stripped without justification. Not for women-carers will leave th e workforce anda lose superannuation. Not politically coherentfor aparty that claims to represent working people.

There_is_no arena — economic,budgetary,social,l egal,or_political—in which these decisions produce a positive outcome_for Australia. When agovernment makesdecisions harmfulbyeveryavailable measurethat contradicts ever y relevant expertthatabandonapublicly funded roadmap built byt he peopl emost affected andtha t have already contributedtotheadaths of vulnerab le Australians-the questionof what is actuallydriving those decision s_i sn ot_a distraction from the policy debate._ Itis_the_policy_debate_and_it_must_be_answered_.

The Permanent Demand

People with disability are not a budget line. They are not a political instrument. They are Australians with legal rights ––rights protectedunderdomesticlawandinternationaltreaty—andthoserightsmustbeplacedpermanentlybeyondthereachofpoliticalexpedience. ThiscommitteemustrecommendaDisabilityRightsAct.Notasafutureaspiration.Asapreconditionforthisbillproceeding. Nothingaboutuswithoutuisnotaslogan.Itisthefoundationalprincipleofiernationaldisabilityrightslaw.EighteennyearsafterAustraliaratifiedtheconventionthatcontainsit,aovernmenthasonceagaindemonstratedthathoutenforcement,thatprinciplesisworthless.Thecommitteehasanopportunitytochangethattitmusttakeit.