National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 2756
Submission on the NDIS Amendment Bill
My name is Patrick Shaw, I am a carer for my chronically ill partner, and the nominee on my Mother’s NDIS plan. Since my mother was diagnosed with fronto-temporal lobe dementia, I have watched her deteriorate without support. Then, in the short time my mother has been on her plan, I have seen her quality of life skyrocket. I am aware that, in all likelihood, my mother’s plan will not change much, but I cannot help but think of the 160,000 other people who rely on NDIS support to get by, who will be left with no avenue if this bill goes through.
I have two concerns with this bill. Firstly, the changes proposed in the bill are wholly unfair and punishing to disabled people, with no care or concern given to their individual needs and abilities. Even beyond the removal of formal diagnoses in favour of the atrocious doctrine of ‘functional capacity’, the tightening of the administrative timelines, standardisation and automation of decision-making, and the decreased flexibility in plan reviews completely deny disabled people who wish to get support through the NDIS any semblance of autonomy or compassion. Secondly, the sweeping powers given to the minister to change funding for support categories on a whim. Without mentioning the lack of parliamentary oversight, which is an incredibly worrying trend, someone who is more than likely neither a medical professional nor a disabled person making a choice that affects the lives of thousands of disabled Australians just trying to get by is truly an abhorrent misuse of ministerial power.
These changes may affect my partner and mother because:
● The new definition of permanent condition would discount my partners Chronic fatigue syndrome, as it would many chronic conditions. ● The communication timeline requirements would adversely affect my mother due to her dementia. I am lucky that her care team and my grandmother are very capable, but this is not the case for everyone. ● The increase in automation continues the punishing trend within the NDIS, making it increasingly difficult for people to access the supports they need.
From my own experience working with people who were on the NDIS, the current system is already punishingly inflexible, difficult to get onto, and lacking in medical nuance or compassion. These changes would make it much worse for the select few who are allowed to stay, and could be catastrophic for those who are kicked off the scheme with little to no replacement support.
I want the committee to understand that the NDIS is not a pool of money grasped at by greedy disabled people for unnecessary things like wheelchairs and accessible
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 2756
showers. It is a life raft for so many people, and when taken away, it means they will drown. This government wants to reinstate the NDIS’s social license, even though it was the one that manufactured its lack thereof. If they truly wanted to reinstate the NDIS’s social licence, they would expand the supports, make it easier to access, and, rather than privatising every aspect of healthcare, fund it properly and give it all the staff it requires to do its job.
Finally, I do not support this bill in any way, not only for the underhanded, manufactured way its ‘necessity’ was generated, but also because it continues a consistent theme for successive governments of using essential and important supports for the less fortunate of our society as a piggy bank to be smashed and emptied when needed, while fossil fuel, gambling and big tech subsidies continue and we continue to have billionaires dictating policy.