Submission 2550
Monday, 1 June 2026
Submission in regards to NDIS Future Generations Bill 2026
My name is 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 people 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 needs 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 disabled people if it is passed. I am against the proposed changes as they pose significant risks to disabled people such as myself. I believe restricting reviews, tightening eligibility, and reducing supports will put disabled people at risk of significant harm. I believe that the proposed changes will actually increase future 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 announcement, 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 any 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 likely put me at significant risk of harm This proposal of cutting 50% of social and community participation for every participant sends the message 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 might 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 is unlikely that I would feel safe to engage new workers, this would cause me to deteriorate and it would also risk my mental and emotional wellbeing. This would result in higher care needs and costs in the future Whilst it was a difficult process to find support workers I felt safe around it has given me a sense of control over my environment to be able to do this and removing my ability to set things up in a way that suits me would cause me significant harm I also feel that an organisation being registered does not mean they are any less likely to commit fraud or do the wrong thing, from what people have spoken about in my disability support groups fraud and harmful practices in regards to disabled people is just as common if not more so with registered providers. I do believe that this needs to be addressed but punishing participants who are by and large doing the right thing is not the way to do it
The Minister’s new power to cut funding without appeal (s 34A), the loss of review rights as well as automated decisions and algorithms with no ability to appeal This is an absolutely terrifying change! Disabled people are already extremely vulnerable and there is already an massive imbalance of power. The NDIS and their processes are already extremely hard to navigate, the rules are vague and constantly changing, processes are hard to understand and are being used inconsistently. The right to appeal a decision gives us the opportunity to have fair and unbiased consideration (although from what I hear the NDIA is far from a model litigant and the lawyers do their best to circumvent this by wasting time, losing or not reading documents and using bullying behaviour and intimidation tactics) and taking that away leaves us even more powerless and vulnerable and at significantly increased risk of harm. A change like this creates a feeling of instability and fear for participants and removes all procedural fairness and risks our human rights. This change is unsafe and has significant risks which are potentially life threatening The use of automated decisions and algorithms is problematic at best, you cannot put disabled people and disabilities into nice little boxes, two people could have the same disability but it could affect them in different ways and their needs and goals could be totally different and automated decisions and algorithms are unable to recognise this. Already we are seeing this with the in/out lists and the use of “everyday item” as an excuse for refusing funding. The problem with this black and white perspective is that it does not take into account how someone uses an item or how their disability might affect them. For example there are many things that could help me as someone with an energy limiting disability that are not specifically made for people with disabilities (and many things that are now considered “mainstream” actually started off as disability items) however the way in which I would use them would mean that they would help me to stay safe and enable me to build capacity however because of the in/out lists I can’t purchase these items and so as a result I deteriorate further because I cannot use my plan in a way that actually helps me
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 time 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 it 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 people who are the most vulnerable in our society and people for which the NDIS was meant to support. It does not address the ways in which I believe money could be saved in the NDIS such as poor administration of the scheme, requiring expensive reports costing thousands that are then not read or ignored in favour of the opinions of someone who is not a medical specialist with no knowledge of me or my disabilities and how they affect me or an allied health practitioner who has seen me deteriorate over time, the massive amounts that the NDIA spend on top lawyers and barristers to fight vulnerable participants who usually have to represent themselves, these lawyers the proceed to use delaying tactics, intimidation and bulling against the participant and yet something like 75% of the tribunal cases are eventually found in favour of the participant, the agency wastes so much money and time forcing participants down this path for things that are 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