Submission 2652
Submission for Inquiry: The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment
(Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
I am a disabled person with significant impairments, whose capacity has been limited for decades and slowly declining. I have watched with frustration and sadness as the government has sought to repeatedly frame the NDIS and the enemy of the Australian economy and therefore the general public, and disabled people as fraudsters, rorters, greedy, indulgent or undeserving. Yes, the NDIS need to change, but not in a way that reverses positive changes in disability care practices, or harms the people it is supposed to support.
My application to access the NDIS is currently under internal review, after submission in January. I spent most of last year preparing my application (including waiting 3 months for the compulsory - yes, compulsory- Community Connections meeting), and significant time before that learning about the NDIS. There has been a lot of talk about 160,000 people being taken off the NDIS - to decrease participant numbers from the CURRENT 760,000 to 600,000 by 2030. BUT that ignores the tens of thousands who would have been accepted in the next few years. 600,000 is only possible if 160,000 are cut AND a new participant is only accepted when another leaves the scheme. It all seems hopeless- how am I going to be accepted?
My impairments are related to conditions not on the automatic acceptance list. The requirement to provide evidence of permanence and exhausted treatments already apply. Despite lengthy reports, the NDIA contradicted my Medical team and claimed there was not evidence that all possible treatments had been undertaken. Refuting the expertise and conclusions of medical professionals seems to be common. If the automatic acceptance list is abandoned and every applicant has to prove they have exhausted all possible treatments, will the NDIA just refute all professionals’ reports? If they use the proposed 3hr self-report needs assessment tool instead, how & when are they going to get the evidence that they demand, if multiple 3rd party reports are not enough? (I, personally do not have the capacity to undertake a 3-hour interview. My LAC meetings have been limited to 30min at most).
It is generally accepted that lockdowns during the pandemic were very difficult for people, and the Government is in no rush to repeat them- not least due to the probable public backlash. For numerous reasons, Disabled people often live isolated lives, and yet the government is proposing to isolate many even further by cutting support that enables them to leave the house. Why is it acceptable to expect disabled people to live in virtual lockdown indefinitely when no one would dream of expecting the average person to do so?
My impairments and lack of adequate support mean that I can have very few visitors, and can only leave my house a few times a week, for short periods. I cannot leave my local area without assistance, and go without important appointments or other outings because I can’t
Submission 2652
get to them or participate safely. Now, with the Government’s proposed 50% cut to social and community participation, I am wondering if this would ever be able to change, even if I do manage to get onto the NDIS.
It is difficult to live in the world as a disabled person, with all the obstacles and harmful narratives society - including the current Government- create and perpetuate. I have encountered plenty of pushback before, but the process of applying to the NDIS has changed me. When you are begging for help and are rejected, what does that say? That my experience isn’t valid or true? That I am not deserving of help? That I should be grateful just to exist and do it quietly? There is a general expectation that in ‘The lucky country’, if you’re in need, there will be help. I, along with many others, know that this is a myth. Promoting health and wellbeing, including such days as ‘R U Ok’ is all very well, but what happens when the answer is No?
The Bill would reverse a number of principles and examples set by the Federal Court, and gives immense power to the Minister – with no requirement that the Minister have any expertise, training, direct or lived experience of disability, or consult those who do. The current proposed changes are about numbers on a page; they are not about:
-
people’s needs or impairments
-
the $2.25 that goes back into the economy for every $1 spent
-
promoting a healthy society
-
lessening medium to long term decline
-
supporting disabled people to live a normal life
-
investigating and holding to account providers who use fraudulent or predatory practices, or
-
regulating inflated pricing and profits Instead, many of the proposed changes will just make life harder for disabled people, their carers and families, limit their choices and take away control, by:
-
increasing the administrative burden
-
using ridged automated systems that do not allow for unique individuals
-
decreasing NDIA staff numbers
-
forcing provider registration, limiting the choices that people have about who comes into their homes and touches their bodies
-
decreasing flexibility and limiting timeframes in relation to communication from participants,
-
dictating the timing and scale of responses to changes in circumstances and needs
-
emphasising the “financial sustainability” of the scheme over the actual needs of participants, even when a support is classed as reasonable and necessary
Submission 2652
I want to be able to choose who comes into my house, and not be limited by having to use a large registered provider. I have heard too many horror stories. My disability and impairments are not standard, and will not fit neatly into ridged definitions and boxes. It is important that participants are not penalised for circumstances out of their control which prevent them from communicating with the NDIA at times- especially when the NDIA does not necessarily try very hard to make contact- Despite my preference for email being noted, and a request not to phone my mobile number, the NDIA attempted to contact me before my application was rejected- by only phoning my mobile twice, with no caller ID and without leaving a message, and then stated I was uncontactable. I had to wait 3 months for a meeting with an LAC due to a lack of contracted staff availability. Reducing NDIA staffing is not going to help the processes and systems work any better, especially with so many changes to learn about.
Impairments and needs do not just disappear. Inadequate support for disabled people and their carers just results in greater burdens on GPs, hospitals, crisis services, nursing homes, and the general economy. Disabled people are still people. They have ideas, opinions, preferences and dreams just like able bodied people. They are not a pet to be fed and sheltered & given an occasional outing. This bill undermines respect for disabled people, and their ability to choose and control how they live. I don’t have many dreams any more, and I have very low expectations of life in general. I had hoped that by accessing the NDIS, I might be able live instead of just surviving. The current Government’s approach and the changes proposed in this bill make me wonder if this is still possible.
This took me significant time and effort to write. I request that you please take my experiences and thoughts into consideration and do not support this Bill.