Submission in regards to NDIS Future Generations Bill 2026
Monday, 1 June 2026
My name is redacted and I am a disabled person who is currently on the NDIS.
I have no informal supports and limited formal supports.
My function deteriorated significantly whilst trying to access the NDIS due to the complex and
complicated application process and unfortunately since gaining access my function has continued to
deteriorate due to the difficulty navigating the scheme especially when the goalposts (rules) keep changing
seemingly without notice and the information we are given is conflicting and not clear.
Despite it being a scheme to support disabled people it is not accommodating or accessible for the very
speople it is meant to support. This Bill is the most recent example of this, a complicated document that is
full of ambiguous language which seems to give the NDIA unparalleled powers whilst simultaneously
taking away any power or sense of security that disable people have and we were given just two weeks to
try to read and understand the massive document and make a submission, this is not accommodating our
eeds and in fact it feels like an attack.
I am making this submission because I have major concerns about the Bill and the implications for
isabled people if it is passed. I am against the proposed changes as they pose significant risks to disabled
ipple such as myself. I believe restricting reviews, tightening eligibility, and reducing supports will put
isable people at risk of significant harm. I believe that the proposed changes will actually increase uture support costs and force disabled people onto other systems that not suitable, overwhelmed or are
either not even in existence yet.
There is an overwhelming amount of fear and anxiety in the disability community as a result of this
nouncement; we are feeling very vulnerable and we are feeling attacked. We feel like the bill will take
away our rights and many of us are feeling quite hopeless and afraid for the future.
I wish for my submission to be published as “name withheld”
The 50% cut to social and community participation funding from October 2026 If my social and community funding is cut I will be unable to safely access the community, not only for social activities but also for things like shopping and attending appointments and medical care. As stated I do not have any informal supports and there are no other suitable options for me due to my location and also due to my disabilities and this will put my health at risk. If my social and community funding is cut I will be unable to safely engage in worthwhile and meaningful work as I will be unable to safely access my place of employment. If this proposed cuts go ahead I will likely be unable to safely access anything outside the home because I cannot do this without support and this will significantly affect my mental and emotional wellbeing and llikely put me at significant risk of harm. This proposal of cutting 50% of social and community participation for every participant sends the messages that the government want all disabled people to be hidden from view; that we don’t deserve any quality of life or the ability to engage in our community attend appointments or take part in activates that night bring us happiness in whatever way that looks for us.
Submission 2550
Changes to Self-management and Registration
As someone who is neurodiverse and has experienced trauma and abuse in the past, it has taken me a long time to find support workers that I trust, and it was an overwhelming and exhausting process to try to find, organise, and educate these people—all of which caused worsening of my disabilities. Forcing me to use registered support workers will mean that I can no longer use my trusted support workers, and because of my concerns, it’s unlikely that I would feel safe engaging new workers; this would cause me to deteriorate and risk my mental and emotional wellbeing. This would also result in higher care needs and costs in the future.
Whilst it was difficult finding support workers whom I felt safe around gave me a sense of control over my environment being able to do things in ways that suit me removing my ability could cause significant harm.
A organisation being registered does not necessarily make them any less likely commit fraud or act inappropriately from what others have spoken about within disability groups fraudulent practices are just as common if not more so with providers. I believe addressing such issues important but punishing participants largely doing right isn’t correct way proceed.
The Minister’s New Power Cut Funding Without Appeal (s 34A), Loss Review Rights Automated Decisions Algorithms No Ability Appeal
This is absolutely terrifying change! Disabled individuals already vulnerable there massive imbalance power The NDIS processes extremely hard navigate rules vague constantly changing processes hard understand used inconsistently Right appeal decision gives opportunity fair unbiased consideration although NDIA far model litigant lawyers best circumvent wasting time losing reading documents using bullying behaviour intimidation tactics taking away leaves even powerless vulnerable significantly increased risk harm Change creates feeling instability fear for removes procedural fairness risks human rights It unsafe has potentially life-threatening implications.
The use automated decisions algorithms problematic you cannot put disabled people disabilities nice little boxes two people same disability affect differently their goals totally different automated unable recognise Already seeing this the /out lists “everyday item” excuse refusing funding Problem black white perspective doesn’t account how someone uses an item affects them For example many things help me energy limiting disability aren specifically made people however would mean they helping enable build capacity because of in/out can purchase these items result deteriorate further plan actually helps me.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 2550
The new “all appropriate treatments” test for permanence for scheme eligibility There are many parts of this bill that I don’t fully understand (as someone with cognitive impairments as well as physical and neurological impairments), however this is an aspect that really scares me (it all scares me if I am honest). The idea that someone that has no medical expertise or understanding of my situation can tell me that I should be attempting a treatment that is deemed unsafe or not appropriate by the medical professionals who know me is terrifying. I am on the DSP and as such I do not have the financial means to access a treatment that might be determined by the NDIA to be beneficial but which is costly, nor do I have the means to travel if the NDIA decides that a treatment in another city (or even country, I mean where does it end??) might help. My medical team have looked into all of the current evidence based treatments available and have made a decision as to what I should try based on their in-depth knowledge of me and my situation; having a treatment forced upon me that has been deemed unsafe would cause significant harm, or being refused access because I couldn’t access a treatment that cost thousands of dollars for example, with no guarantee it would work, is overreach and outside the scope of the kind of power the government should have.
Plan Suspensions for being “un-contactable”
This is another one that terrifies me. I am unable to make or take phone calls because of my disabilities; everywhere in my application and in all communication with the NDIA it is made very clear they are not to call me because of my disabilities, that my preferred method of communication is email however this is ignored time and again and they continually try to call me and I cannot answer the phone. I have seen post after post after post in my disability groups from people who have had so many problems with the communication practices of the NDIA: They call when there are clear notes that the participant cannot communicate via the phone, they state they have tried to call when the participant has no record of any missed calls, they send a text message to expect a call and then call 10 seconds later, 5hrs later or not at all (at a time when everyone is warning us about scam calls), and so giving them the power to then remove us from the scheme if they have been unable to contact us is a direct threat—it is saying that we have to meet their needs rather than the scheme meeting our needs.
This again is giving all the power to the government and taking away our power and increasing the risk of serious harm.
Cost Saving
The Bill is being promoted as necessary to reduce the costs of the NDIS; however, in fact, it is all about taking away the power of disabled people and giving the government more power – almost unlimited power–to use against us. It focuses on restricting and punishing participants, the people with the least power, the most vulnerable people in our society, and those for whom the NDIS was meant to support. It does not address ways I believe money could be saved within the NDIS such as poor administration of the scheme, requiring expensive reports costing thousands which are then ignored in favour of opinions by someone who isn’t a medical specialist with knowledge of me or my disabilities, nor how these affect me, or an allied health practitioner who has seen me deteriorate over time, the massive amounts spent by NDIA on top lawyers and barristers fighting vulnerable participants (who usually represent themselves); these lawyers proceed using delaying tactics, intimidation, and bullying against the participant yet something like 75% of tribunal cases eventually find in favor of the participant—the agency wastes so much money and time forcing participants down this path regarding genuine needs.
Submission 2550
The NDIS needs to be a scheme that recognises disabled people as individuals, a scheme that is designed to provide individualised supports, early intervention, choice and control, and freedom from discrimination. The NDIS needs to support the human rights of disabled people and it needs to recognise that disability support a moral obligation as well as an economic investment.
The NDIS is a lifeline and it needs to be a fair, equitable, and rights-based system that supports disabled Australians to live with dignity, independence, and the ability to fully participate in society in whatever way meets their needs.
Any changes to the legislation must strengthen, not weaken the scheme, must protect, not diminish the rights of disabled people and address systemic failures, not punish participants.
i beg the Committee to oppose the Bill and to send the NDIA back to the drawing board to create legislation with true collaboration with disabled people (not just a token disabled person willing to ignore or minimise the suffering of their fellow disabled people) ensuring it protects participants, supports carers, upholds human rights, and remains true to the founding vision of the scheme.
Thank you for considering my submission Yours sincerely