Submission 2796

ATTN: Committee Secretary

Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs

RE: National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment

(Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Sunday, May 31, 2026

  Thank you for the opportunity to present this parliamentary submission regarding the

proposed amendments to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS, the Scheme)

currently outlined in the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (the Act).

My interest in the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS

for Future Generations) Bill 2026 (the Bill) can be attributed to my intersections as a health

practitioner and a spouse and primary carer of a NDIS participant.

  The NDIS provides vital support to over 700,000 people living with a disability and

connects them with over 300,000 approved service providers1. In excess of one million

Australians are expected to be impacted by these proposed amendments.

     I understand and recognise that amendments to the Act are necessary to ensure scheme

longevity and continued support for our most vulnerable citizens. However, it must not fall upon

NDIS participants, their families, carers and nominees to recoup the fiscal responsibility.

     If the Bill is to pass as it currently stands, people living with a disability may be exposed

to an increased risk of harm, restrictions that diminish their capacity and control, and

exclusionary automated decision-making processes.

     1 https://dataresearch.ndis.gov.au/explore-data

Submission 2796

Respectfully, I must acknowledge the time restraints to research and digest the proposed amendments to the Act. Therefore, I have only included two of my concerns regarding the proposed changes listed below, accompanied by potential negative outcomes (including how my family will be impacted) if the Bill proceeds as is.

Schedule 1 – Access and planning measures

Part 1 – Defining functional capacity: Moving the goalpost for what is considered “substantially reduced functional capacity” disproportionately affects Australians living with complex and dynamic disabilities – such as Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and psychosocial conditions. People belonging to these groups are more likely to experience distress[2] and stigma[3] relating to their conditions, which can significantly impact their presentation of functional capacity during an assessment. I recommend further consultation with occupational therapists, physiotherapists, psychologists and medical specialists[4], as well as people living with disabilities and their advocates, prior to amending the definition of functional capacity.

My husband lives with ASD level 2 and is a NDIS participant who experiences fluctuating deficits in all six categories that the Scheme assesses for functional capacity. Environmental, social, psychological and physical factors can impact the severity of his disability – and therefore, impact the assessment of his impairment and eligibility for NDIS support. Changing the definition of functional capacity as a method to “safeguard” eligibility for NDIS supports threatens to exclude my husband and around 300,000 other Australians living with Autism[5].

[2] https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-025-00695-9 [3] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2025.101927 [4] https://www.ndis.gov.au/applying/types-assessments/functional-capacity-assessment [5] https://dataresearch.ndis.gov.au/reports-and-analyses/participant-dashboards/autism

Submission 2796

Schedule 1 – Access and planning measures

Part 7 – Plan suspension etc.: Revoking participant status without insight

regarding the person’s current wellbeing or circumstances is irresponsible governance masqueraded as fraud prevention. This amendment introduces risks to people with disabilities who rely upon the vital support of the NDIS to maintain fulfilling, safe and dignified lives. We know from previous cuts that cancellation or reduction of participant support creates uncertainty, loss of control and systematic isolation from communities6.

A person who does not live with a disability may acknowledge that 90 days is ample time to respond to contact from a government agency. However, I suggest that this is not realistic for NDIS participants, many of whom have already proven their reduced functional capacity regarding communication, self-management and social interactions.

My husband was not eligible for a plan manager on the grounds that he has informal supports perfectly capable of managing his NDIS plan - me. My concern regarding the Bill’s no-contact plan suspension is the increased carer burden and fatigue that would be introduced. The proposed amendment does not take into consideration the physical and emotional toll that informal carers experience without additional time-restricted administrative tasks. Like many Australians in a similar situation, my health and wellbeing are adversely impacted by my status as an informal carer7. The proposed risk of having my husband’s NDIS support revoked because I overlooked emails or phone calls from a private number deeply frightens me and will impose unnecessary anxiety in my daily life.

Submission 2796

Gathering information and preparing this submission was an additional task that I deemed absolutely necessary in the name of civic duty, inclusion and advocacy. I implore the committee to critically consider the concerns that I have addressed and decide against proceeding with the Bill.

It is undoubted that people living with disabilities, their families, carers and advocates will welcome consultation from the committee to draft a more inclusive amendment to the Act that is based on the principles of self-determination, independence, choice and control.

The NDIS has facilitated participation, enjoyment, safety and community for hundreds of thousands of Australians living with a disability since its establishment – work with us to ensure the Scheme can truly be secured for future generations.

Thank you for your consideration.

Kind regards,