Submission 2705
NDIS Submission 1 June 2026
Submission on Proposed Changes to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)
Submitted by: Ann Vouden
Date: 1 June 2026
Summary
As the mother of an adult son with a significant physical disability as well as a severe intellectual disability, I welcome the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed NDIS legislation. However, the timeframe provided for consultation has been inadequate, particularly for people with disability, families and carers who may be managing significant health issues, caring responsibilities, or barriers to participation. Due to my son’s current ill health, I have only been able to address a limited number of concerns.
While I acknowledge the need to ensure the long-term sustainability of the NDIS and support efforts to address fraud and misuse of scheme funds, I am concerned that a number of proposed changes will undermine the safety, independence and community participation of people with disability.
The NDIS was established to provide reasonable and necessary supports to enable people with significant and permanent disabilities to live ordinary lives, participate in their communities, and exercise choice and control. Any reforms should remain faithful to these objectives.
Introduction
The NDIS provides essential supports that enable people with disability to live with dignity, independence and a sense of purpose. For many participants, the scheme funds supports that allow them to attend medical and therapy appointments, participate in community life, perform exercise programs that maintain their health and personal wellbeing and avoid social isolation.
When governments discuss NDIS expenditure and reforms, it is important to remember that behind every budget figure is a person whose quality of life may be directly affected.
Key Concerns
- Requirement to Exhaust All Treatment Options Before Accessing the NDIS The proposal requiring participants to have exhausted all treatment options before becoming eligible for the NDIS raises significant concerns.
It remains unclear: -How all treatment options will be defined. -Whether treatments nominated will be evidence-based.
Submission 2705
-Whether a person’s financial capacity to access treatments will be considered. -Whether geographical barriers and service availability will be considered.
- Whether a potential applicant/ participants mental and physical capacity to attend all available treatment options after tending to their daily personal needs will be considered.
People with disability already experience lower rates of employment and lower incomes than the general population. Parents of children with disability frequently reduce their working hours, work in a lower role with a reduced level of pay or leave employment altogether to meet caring responsibilities, resulting in significant financial disadvantage.
Many Australians living in regional and rural areas face additional barriers, including: -Limited availability of specialists and allied health services. -Long travel distances. -Lack of accessible transport. -Thin service markets.
Without appropriate safeguards, this requirement risks becoming a barrier to accessing the NDIS but perhaps that is the intent of this requirement.
- Cuts to Community Participation Funding Proposed reductions to Community Participation (CP) funding are deeply concerning.
-Community participation supports help people with disability: -Build and maintain relationships. -Access social and recreational activities. -Participate in their communities. -Reduce social isolation.
Social isolation significantly increases vulnerability to abuse, neglect and exploitation. The tragic death of Ann Marie Smith in South Australia highlighted the devastating consequences that can occur when people with disability become isolated and disconnected from their communities.
Reducing community participation supports risks reversing decades of progress toward inclusion and could return people with disability to conditions resembling institutionalisation and segregation, where opportunities for meaningful participation are severely limited.
People with disability deserve more than mere survival. They deserve opportunities to live lives of purpose, connection and fulfilment. Up until a couple of months ago when my son’s Community Participation (CP) budget was cut, the NDIS had supported my son to live a life worth living, doing activities that engaged him and that he looked forward to. My son has
Submission 2705
lost vital supports as the Service Providers for reason of safety can no longer allow him to attend their service with the reduced staff ratio.
Much has been made in the media and in public discourse of the NDIS paying for people to be taken to get haircuts. When my son no longer has parents alive, I am shocked that it appears that journalists and commentators do not believe that my son, who will pay for the cut itself, is worthy of having his hair cut and I am also disappointed that the government has not stood up in public for the right of disabled people to have this basic personal care task attended to.
It is worth noting here that the NDIS commenced in our area at the time my son was finishing school. The change from providers being block funded to the funding being allocated to participants, resulted in significant improvements in the services being offered. Service Providers broadened the scope of activities offered and this transference of funding from Providers to participants, encouraged innovation in order to attract clients to their service, rather than just providing whatever services suited the Provider. It is vital that this model continue so that Participants are offered choice and have control over which Providers they can engage.
CP funding allows individuals with disability, support to engage in activities that align with their interests, build social connections and develop new skills. Some may not consider Community Participation funds to be a worthwhile use of tax payer dollars but a life without joy and hope and something to look forward to, is an impoverished life indeed. I believe that people with disability have the right to use these funds, not just for work or medical appointments, but to improve their quality of life and maintain their mental health. Many in the mainstream community struggled with the social isolation and lack of control over their lives during Covid. This is the life that people with disability are facing on a permanent basis without adequate NDIS and Community Participation funding.
- Ministerial Powers to Reduce Funding Across Support Categories The proposed power allowing the Minister to make legal instruments that reduce funding for broad categories of supports across multiple plans raises serious concerns.
Such powers could permit funding reductions without individual assessment, consideration of personal circumstances and meaningful consultation with affected participants.
The NDIS was designed around individualised support. Blanket reductions risk undermining this principle and may disproportionately affect people whose circumstances differ significantly from policy assumptions. For example, for people with major disabilities like my son who cannot drive, and cannot even go for a walk by themselves without a Support Person to stop them going onto the road and being hit by a car, or cannot go to the shops and purchase basic items because they have no understanding of money will be profoundly
Submission 2705
affected by cuts to Community participation budgets, as they will be unable to leave their home.
Individual needs should remain at the centre of funding decisions.
- Automatic Plan Renewals with Reduced Funding combined with Fewer Plan
Reassessments
Automatic plan renewals may improve administrative efficiency; however, they risk providing participants with in adequate support particularly when combined with reduced opportunities for reassessment when there are changes in their circumstances. This could pose significant risks to health and safety.
I also question, what will happen if participants are midway through organising AT and home modifications or home modifications have been approved and are underway when a plan is automatically reviewed and the funding that had been allocated for the AT or Home Modification is potentially lost. Will the home modification be able to proceed? What safeguards will be in place to prevent this happening?
Participants should retain access to timely reviews when their needs change ad maintain access to funding that has been approved.
- Increased Reliance on Mainstream Systems The proposed tightening of provisions that prevent the NDIS from funding supports considered more appropriately provided by other systems, such as health, risks creating further “cost shifting” between government departments and a barrier to disabled people being adequately supported
People with intellectual disability already experience poorer health outcomes than the general population. Research demonstrates increased morbidity and mortality among people with intellectual disability when in hospital settings. The hospital system does not adequately support participants and further cuts to NDIS funding with place further lives at risk.
If responsibility continues to be shifted between systems, participants will experience delays, service gaps and poorer outcomes.
Governments must ensure that individuals do not fall through the cracks between health, disability and social support systems.
- Automated Decision-Making and “Robodebt” Concerns The use of automated information technology systems and decision-making tools requires strong safeguards.
The lessons of the Robodebt Scheme and now My Aged Care, where assessors cannot override the decisions of the automated tool even when they feel mistakes have been
Submission 2705
made, demonstrate the significant harm that can occur when automated processes operate without adequate oversight and accountability.
Any automated systems used within the NDIS should include:
-Human review mechanisms. -Transparent decision-making. -Accessible appeals processes. -Independent oversight.
- Preserving Choice and Control Participant choice and control remain fundamental principles of the NDIS.
Choice not only benefits participants but also drives innovation and service quality as I have mentioned in point 2 above. Providers must continuously improve their services to attract and retain participants.
Overly centralised controls and blanket restrictions risk undermining the flexibility that has been central to the success of the scheme.
- Governance and Public Discourse I need to state that I believe both major political parties have failed to adequately protect the interests of people with disability in the governance of the NDIS and the prevention of fraud. Stronger action is needed to identify and prevent fraud within the NDIS.
There has also been insufficient oversight of the closure of services previously provided by local and state governments so this does need to be addressed quickly so that those removed from the scheme are receiving adequate support.
Misleading claims about the NDIS funding movie tickets, haircuts or providing income payments to participants have been allowed to circulate without correction from the government. At the same time, public discourse has increasingly portrayed people with disability as fraudsters or as recipients of unreasonable benefits. These misconceptions have contributed to negative public sentiment and has created support for cuts that may be unfair, unsafe and damaging. The government needs to address this misinformation.
The question should not be whether a person with disability is allowed to get a haircut. The question should be whether people with disability are entitled to live ordinary lives with dignity and inclusion. The answer should be yes.
Recommendations
-
Extend consultation periods for major NDIS legislative reforms to ensure meaningful participation by people with disability, families and carers.
-
Clarify and limit any requirement to exhaust treatment options, ensuring affordability, evidence base and geographic accessibility are considered.
Submission 2705
-
Maintain Community Participation funding to prevent isolation and support inclusion.
-
Remove or significantly limit powers allowing broad funding reductions without individual assessment.
-
Ensure automatic plan renewals do not result in unintended loss of supports.
-
Preserve access to plan reassessments when participant circumstances change.
-
Prevent cost shifting and service gaps between disability, health and other government systems.
-
Do not proceed with automated decision- making processes or as a minimum, establish strong safeguards and independent human oversight
-
Preserve participant choice and control as a core principle of the NDIS.
-
Continue efforts to combat fraud while protecting the rights and wellbeing of genuine participants.
Conclusion
The NDIS has transformed the lives of many Australians with significant and permanent disabilities. While reforms may be necessary to ensure the scheme’s sustainability, those reforms must not come at the expense of participant safety, dignity, inclusion and independence. The horrors uncovered during the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability must not be allowed to be repeated and the lives of people with a disability must not return to those of isolation and segregation from the community.
The original purpose of the NDIS must remain central: providing the supports people with disability need to live ordinary lives, maintain their health and well-being, participate in their communities and enjoy the same opportunities as other Australians. Any reforms should strengthen that vision rather than diminish it.