Submission 2720
Zara Ariarta
Deakin Electorate
Email:
Date: 29.05.2026
To: Australian Parliament House
Labor Party of Australia
Member of Menzies, Parliament House, Canberra ACT
Dear Matthew,
Re: NDIS BILL
I am writing to express my deep concern about the new NDIS Bill and the associated reforms currently being proposed by the Federal Government. As someone who works closely with NDIS participants and their families, I see every day how essential the Scheme is for safety, wellbeing, independence, and community participation. The proposed changes risk undermining the very purpose of the NDIS and may cause significant harm to the people it was designed to support.
- Cuts to Core Supports and Social/Community Participation I am particularly concerned about the proposed reduction of Core funding for social and recreational participation, including indications that access may be cut by up to half. Many participants already struggle with insufficient Core budgets. For people with cognitive disability, autism, psychosocial disability, or limited informal supports, social and community participation is not optional — it is their only avenue for human connection, skill‑building, and emotional stability.
Reducing these supports will increase isolation, loneliness, behavioural distress, and mental‑health decline. Many participants do not have friends or family networks; their support workers are often their only consistent social contact. Removing or reducing these supports risks leaving some people with zero meaningful human connection. This is unsafe, unfair, and inconsistent with the NDIS Act’s principles of inclusion and participation.
-
Mental‑Health and Suicide‑Risk Concerns The proposed changes pose a serious mental‑health risk. Isolation is one of the strongest predictors of distress, crisis presentations, and suicidality — especially for people with cognitive disability or psychosocial disability. Reducing access to social participation and community engagement increases the likelihood of mental‑health deterioration. This is not hypothetical; it is well‑documented in disability and mental‑health research. Any reform that reduces social connection must be approached with extreme caution and strong safeguards.
-
Over‑Assessment and Evidence Being Ignored
Submission 2720
People with disability are already the most assessed, reported‑on, and scrutinised group in the country. Participants undergo functional assessments, therapy reports, medical evidence, planning meetings, reviews, audits, and constant justification of their needs. Despite this extensive evidence — often repeated year after year — the proposed reforms still allow for funding to be reduced or restricted even when functional capacity is clearly documented. This creates a system where people with disability must continually “prove” their disability, only to face the possibility of cuts regardless of the evidence provided. It is exhausting, unfair, and inconsistent with evidence‑based decision‑making.
-
Funding Flexibility and the Ability to Cut Supports There is significant concern about provisions that appear to allow funding to be reduced or reallocated at the discretion of the Agency. Participants already experience uncertainty and anxiety around planning decisions. The idea that funding could be cut “whenever necessary” creates instability and fear for people who rely on the NDIS for essential daily living supports. Predictability and security are fundamental to wellbeing, especially for people with disability.
-
Economic Impacts and Job Losses The NDIS is not only a disability support system — it is a major economic driver. It supports hundreds of thousands of workers across support work, allied health, community services, transport, and small business. During COVID‑19, the NDIS was one of the few sectors that continued operating, providing stable employment and preventing deeper economic contraction. It underpinned local economies at a time when many industries collapsed.
Independent economic modelling consistently shows that for every $1 invested in the NDIS, more than $2 is returned to the Australian economy. This means the Scheme is not a cost burden — it is an economic engine. How can reducing investment in a system with a positive economic multiplier be considered a responsible or beneficial economic decision?
Cutting participant budgets, reducing Core supports, and limiting social and recreational access will not only harm individuals — it will also result in widespread job losses, business closures, and reduced workforce participation. These cuts will contract local economies and increase pressure on health, mental‑health, and crisis services. It is difficult to understand why a system that helped stabilise the economy during COVID is now being treated as expendable.
-
Foundational Supports and System Gaps The reforms assume that foundational supports outside the NDIS will be available and adequately funded. However, many of these services do not currently exist, are not accessible, or have long waitlists. Shifting responsibility away from the NDIS without ensuring equivalent supports are in place will leave participants without essential services.
-
Need for Genuine Co‑Design and Extended Consultation People with disability, their families, and the professionals who support them must be central to designing any changes. The speed and scale of the proposed reforms do not appear to allow for
Submission 2720
meaningful co‑design or sector readiness. I respectfully request that consultation periods be extended and that lived‑experience voices be prioritised in shaping the final legislation and rules.
- Personal Experience as a Carer I have personal experience as a carer for my 24‑year‑old son, who has Autism and an intellectual disability. Since receiving NDIS funding, his world has opened up in ways that would not have been possible otherwise. With support workers twice one week and three times the following week, he has been able to build his capacity in understanding money, daily living activities, social interaction, community access, and developing confidence, purpose and independence. He now attends a specialised neurodivergent program where he can connect with like‑minded peers, and he works two half‑days per week in supported employment, travelling independently to and from his workplace. He continues to develop his skills through regular speech pathology and counselling sessions. Without these supports, he would be socially isolated, spending most of his time on screens, with limited community participation, no employment, and reduced sense of purpose, and he would experience poor self‑esteem, low confidence and deteriorating mental health.
What I am asking
I respectfully ask that you:
Raise these concerns within your party room and in Parliament Advocate for amendments that protect participant choice, control, and dignity Ensure that social and community participation supports are not reduced Protect funding stability and prevent discretionary cuts that create fear and instability Consider the economic consequences of reducing NDIS investment Ensure foundational supports are fully funded and available before shifting responsibility away from the NDIS
Support extended consultation and genuine co‑design with people with disability.
The NDIS is one of Australia’s most important social reforms. It must remain a Scheme that empowers people with disability to live ordinary, dignified, connected lives — not one that restricts them or pushes them into isolation.
Thank you for taking the time to consider this submission. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these concerns further or provide examples from frontline service delivery.
Kind regards,