PWDA Template: Submission to the

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Attention: Committee Secretary, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs

Submitted by email: community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au Date: 01/06/2025

I welcome the opportunity to make a submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs about the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.

I am a family member of an NDIS participant. I also live with disability (I am not an NDIS participant).

I want to outline the harm this Amendment Bill will cause if it passes Parliament. This Bill is too far-reaching to pass as it stands. I believe the Bill requires further scrutiny and amendment before it proceeds.

Parliamentary Scrutiny and Transparency

The consultation period for the Amendment Bill is two weeks, which is insufficient to allow for appropriate consultation, considering accessibility and communication needs. The Australian Government Guide to Policy Impact Analysis says consultation should occur for a minimum of 30 days where possible.

The short timeline impacts me by limiting the time I have to review the Bill and

provide clear and specific reflection and feedback.

• Amend the consultation period for a best practice minimum of 30 days.

Key decisions left to ministerial instruments, not law

The issue: The Bill allows Ministers to change who gets NDIS support (Schedule 1Parts 8 and 9) and how much funding people receive (Schedule 1 Part 4; Schedule3) by signing an instrument, without going back to Parliament. The rules that willdetermine critical eligibility thresholds (Schedule 1 Parts 1, 8 and 9) have not yetbeen written.

How this affects participants: The decisions that shape the lives of participants, whether they qualify for the NDIS and what supports they can access, could bechanged without parliamentary debate or public scrutiny. Participants, who arealready experiencing stresses related to living with disability will be placed underfurther stress by not knowing how they will be affected, not knowing how toplant ahead, and ultimately if they will be able to maintain a comfortable qualityof life.

• Require that all decisions affecting NDIS eligibility and funding levels bemade through primary legislation subject to full parliamentary scrutiny, withmandatory advance notice to affected participants before any changes take effect.

Existing participants face narrower criteria and fewer rights to challenge decisions

The issue: The Bill changes the rules for existing NDIS participants and makes itharder to challenge some decisions about supports and funding. It also restrictswhen you can request a reassessment, removes review rights for automatic planrenewals, and makes funding reductions unreviewable (Schedule 1 Parts 1 and 8).Combined with restrictions on reassessment requests (Part 2), automatic planrenewals without review rights (Part 5), and unreviewable funding reductions (Part

How this affects participants

This does not protect participants already on the NDIS, who could be reassessed under stricter rules. If someone’s funding is reduced or their plan renewed automatically, they may have limited or no ability to challenge that decision. This could make it harder for people to get extra support when their circumstances or disability change. Even participants, like my family member, who are good at advocating for themselves, will be disempowered in self-advocacy. This will place more pressure on carers and community workers to advocate on their behalf.

Recommendation:

Require a “no harm” safeguard ensuring no current participant loses access to supports unless equivalent supports are in place, with independent review rights before any exit decision and access to unscheduled reassessments preserved.

Unreviewable ministerial power to cut funding across all support categories The Minister can reduce funding for any support or group of supports by a specified percentage through an instrument that cannot be challenged (Schedule 1 Part 4). This applies across all budget categories. Unspent funds will no longer carry over at plan renewal (Schedule 1 Part 5).

How this affects participants: A participant’s community participation, capacity building or assistive technology funding could be cut without warning and without any right to appeal. Participants who save unspent funds across plan periods for high-cost items will lose that ability entirely. This means that participants’ abilities to live independently and be part of community is threatened. They may end up reliant more on carerers and family members for support and socialising. Additionally, waits on assistive technology may prevent immediate purchasing of technology, and unspent funds may be being reserved for when technology is available.

• Recommendation: Require that unspent funds carry over at plan renewal for
• participants saving for high-cost items and require independent review rights before
• any funding reduction takes effect.

Requirement to exhaust treatment options before eligibility

The issue: A person with disability will need to exhaust treatment options before they can be eligible for the Scheme (Schedule 1 Part 8). There will also be a removal of whole-of-person assessment, replaced by single eligible impairment consideration (Schedule 1 Part 3). The note that previously acknowledged environmental factors and other ineligible impairments could affect support needs will be removed (Schedule 1 Part 3).

How this affects participants: People with disability will need to prove their impairment cannot be treated before they access the NDIS. Once in the scheme, their supports will only be assessed against a single eligible impairment rather than their whole experience. A person’s individual circumstances will not be considered, including ability to pay for treatment, where they live or whether treatment is actually available to them.

My family member who is a participant of the NDIS has multiple disabilities which interact with each other. This is especially sensitive when treatment for one aspect of disability may have impact on another (pharmaceutical interventions especially). Additionally, my family member’s socioeconomic circumstances directly impacts their ability to treat their disability, leaving them with conditions that are treatable but not affordable. Environmental factors and other impairments drastically influence someone’s ability to live well while managing their condition/s.

Recommendation: Do not proceed with a requirement to exhaust “appropriate” treatment options – there are no safeguarding measures around participant harm due to side effects or complications, a participant’s financial ability to pay, or their geographic capacity to access treatments.

Unvalidated Functional Capacity Assessment Tool Risks Misidentifying Need

The Issue:

The Bill shifts assessment from whole-of-person consideration to a single eligible impairment (Schedule 1 Part 3). Read together with the eligibility thresholds in Parts 8 and 9, the tool used to conduct functional capacity assessments must be capable of sufficiently identifying whether a person meets the threshold for that single impairment.

The Named Assessment Tool:

The named assessment tool is the Instrument for Classification and Assessment of Support Needs (I-CAN). I-CAN requires validation to ensure it will sufficiently identify the needs of all people with disability, including those whose needs may be fluctuating or episodic and may not be captured through a point-in-time assessment, and to ensure it is culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.

How This Affects Participants:

If the assessment tool does not accurately capture the full extent of a person’s disability, including needs that fluctuate or vary over time, a participant may be found ineligible or have their supports undercounted, with no guarantee the result reflects their actual experience.

A person’s overall health is impacted by multiple factors which often change over time, as our bodies do. Assessment of the whole person and their situation is necessary to see how their disability exists within their context.

Recommendation:

do not proceed with I-CAN as the functional capacity assessment tool unless it has been demonstrably validated to identify the needs of all people with disability, including those with episodic or fluctuating disability, and demonstrated to be culturally appropriate for First Peoples with disability.

Supports Cut Before Replacement System Is Ready

The Issue:

From 1 October 2026, the government has announced funding for social, civic and community participation supports will be cut by 50 per cent and capacity building daily activities by 10 per cent for all participants, reductions that will be implemented through the ministerial instrument power in Schedule 1 Part 4.

Page 6

Foundational Supports system intended to fill that gap has no confirmed implementation date and is not yet operational.

How this affects participants: Supports that help participants connect with their community, build skills and maintain independence may be cut before anything exists to replace them, leaving carers and families with greater responsibilities and no additional support. These supports are often what help people stay visible, connected and safe.

One of my family members has been the primary carer for almost 20 years of my family member participating in the NDIS. This family member has experienced deterioration of their own health as the result of physical and mental stress of being a carer. It has also impacted my relationship with that family member as they have not been available to connect with me. This family member had been able to take a step back as primary carer, giving them time to enjoy retirement, have personal interests and develop relationships with friends and community. Our relationship is better too.

If NDIS support was cut, this family member would become primary carer again and I believe they would spend the rest of their life devoted to care, and eventually be permanently injured (as they are elderly) from the physical aspects of care, and further emotionally impacted by the trauma involved in care.

Recommendation: Require that no reductions to community participation or capacity building supports take effect until Foundational Supports are fully operational, adequately funded and demonstrably able to meet the needs of those who will lose NDIS supports.

Thank you for reading my submission. I wish there was more time available to outline the specifics of how the proposed changes would impact my family.