Submission on the NDIS Amendment Bill

Name: redacted

I am a:

• ☒ Disabled person
• ☐ Family member / supporter
• ☐ Clinician
• ☐ Other

1. My connection to this issue I am an NDIS participant living with complex neurological and autonomic health conditions that significantly impact my mobility, daily functioning, fatigue levels, and ability to participate independently in the community. I can no longer drive and rely heavily on disability supports, allied health therapies, psychology supports, and support workers to maintain my independence and quality of life.

   I understand firsthand how critical stable disability supports are in preventing crisis, hospitalisation, social isolation, and carer burnout.

2. My overall view of this Bill I have serious concerns about the direction of the recent NDIS changes and the broader culture surrounding current reforms.

   While I understand the importance of accountability and sustainability within the NDIS, I believe the current approach is becoming increasingly restrictive, administrative, and punitive toward disabled people.

   The overwhelming majority of decisions affecting disabled people are being made by people who do not have lived experience, or medical understanding of disability and often appear extremely disconnected from the realities of daily life with complex illness and functional impairment.

   My own recent experience as a victim of a plan change with no warning or consultation has already been one of immediate and significant harm. Essential supports were abruptly restricted or removed, directly affecting my physical safety, independence, mental health, and emotional wellbeing.

   The processes being used are not genuinely consultative in nature. Participants are frequently presented with decisions that have already effectively been made, while being expected to navigate extremely complex legislation, rules, and review pathways during periods of distress and instability.

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

Submission 2576

My main concerns

• Communication and accessibility
• Administrative burden
• Loss or reduction of supports
• Community participation
• Eligibility or assessment changes
• Other: Procedural fairness and participant wellbeing

Communication and accessibility

Communication from the NDIA has often been confusing, inconsistent, and highly distressing.

Major decisions affecting my supports were communicated abruptly during a phone call with little warning and without meaningful consultation. Written correspondence explaining the process arrived well over a week later, leaving very limited practical opportunity to gather evidence or appropriately respond within the stated timeframes.

As a disabled person already dealing with complex health issues, fatigue, cognitive overload, and emotional distress, these processes are extremely difficult to navigate.

Administrative burden

The level of administrative burden placed on disabled people, families, clinicians, and therapists is becoming overwhelming.

Participants are expected to constantly provide updated evidence, reports, quotes, functional assessments, and justification for supports that may already have been approved and functioning effectively for years.

At the same time, therapists and clinicians are spending enormous amounts of time writing reports, letters, assessments, and administrative documentation instead of being able to provide actual therapy and support to participants.

Many participants feel that these reports are repeatedly requested but not meaningfully considered.

The process itself becomes disabling.

Loss or reduction of supports

My longstanding supports, including psychology, allied health therapies, and support worker assistance, were significantly reduced or restricted despite those supports directly assisting me to remain stable, independent, and engaged in the community.

I was advised there was “insufficient current evidence” to continue some supports, despite those same reports and evidence previously being accepted as sufficient to

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

Submission 2576

approve those supports in the first place.

The sudden reduction of supports creates immediate harm and instability. It increases distress, reduces functioning, and ultimately risks placing more pressure on already overstretched public health systems, hospitals, carers, and crisis services.

Community participation

There appears to be an increasingly narrow interpretation of what disabled people are “allowed” to access support for.

Supports that help people participate in ordinary life, maintain relationships, engage with their community, or prevent deterioration are increasingly treated as unnecessary or discretionary.

For many disabled people, these supports are what prevent complete isolation.

As someone who already spends much of my time at home due to disability and inability to drive, reducing these supports has a profound impact on both mental health and independence.

Eligibility or assessment changes

I am deeply concerned by reforms that appear to increase discretionary decision-making while reducing transparency and procedural fairness.

Participants often feel they are being reassessed, restricted, or penalised without genuine consultation or meaningful opportunity to respond before decisions are implemented.

Many participants are left feeling powerless against decisions that immediately affect their supports, safety, functioning, and independence, with little to no avenue of appeal. This is setting a dangerous precedent for all participants.

Procedural fairness and participant wellbeing

One of my greatest concerns is the emotional and psychological harm caused by the way these processes are carried out.

Disabled people are already living with chronic illness, trauma, financial stress, uncertainty, and exhaustion. Abrupt changes to essential supports can be devastating.

The current system increasingly feels focused on compliance, surveillance, restriction, and cost reduction rather than participant wellbeing, stability, independence, and long-term outcomes.

At the same time, publicly identified large-scale fraud within the NDIS has overwhelmingly involved larger registered providers and organisations, yet many of the

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

Submission 2576

restrictive measures being implemented are falling most heavily on individual participants and their everyday supports.

The erosion of participant choice and control is one of the most damaging aspects of the current reforms.

What this looks like in real life

• cancelled therapies and appointments
• increased reliance on family and informal supports
• worsening mental health and emotional distress
• reduced independence and community participation
• fear around using supports incorrectly
• constant anxiety about funding reviews and reassessments
• therapists spending increasing amounts of time writing reports instead of providing care

Instead of feeling supported by the NDIS, many participants now feel frightened of the system itself.

What I want the committee to understand

Disabled people are not budget lines or administrative problems to solve.

Most participants are simply trying to live stable, meaningful lives while managing significant health conditions and disability-related barriers.

Supports that allow disabled people to participate in ordinary life are not luxuries. They are often preventative supports that reduce crisis presentations, hospital admissions, carer burnout, and long-term system costs.

The current direction of reform is creating widespread fear, instability, distrust, and emotional harm throughout the disability community.

The NDIS was intended to increase independence, dignity, participation, and choice and control. Many participants now feel those principles are being steadily eroded.

My position on this Bill

I ask the committee to remember that behind every policy change, funding restriction, reassessment, or administrative decision is a real human being trying to survive, function, and participate in ordinary life.

Any reforms must prioritise:

• procedural fairness
• transparency
• accessible communication
• genuine consultation
• participant safety and wellbeing

• and protection of essential supports that allow disabled people to live ordinary lives
• safely and with dignity and choice and control over who provides their care needs.

Disabled people should not have to live in fear of losing essential supports, being subjected to distressing and non-consultative processes, or being treated as risks to manage rather than citizens deserving dignity, stability, and support.

The current direction of reform is causing significant fear, instability, and emotional harm across the disability community. Many participants already live with complex health conditions, trauma, exhaustion, financial stress, and social isolation. Systems intended to support disabled people should not leave them feeling frightened, powerless, or unsafe.

The NDIS was created to improve independence, inclusion, choice, control, and quality of life. Those principles must remain at the centre of any reform.

I urge the committee to listen carefully to the lived experiences of disabled people and to to ensure that future reforms strengthen, rather than erode the human rights of NDIS participants.

Disability could happen to anyone at any time.

We deserve to live.