I am writing as the parent of a young person with disability to express my strong opposition to the proposed changes to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and specifically the broader “National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026” approach being advanced by the Australian Labor Government.
I am deeply concerned that these amendments consistently overlook the realities faced by disabled children, young people, and their families right now.
My child already faces significant barriers in accessing healthcare, education, therapies, transport, social inclusion, and community participation. Families like mine are exhausted from constantly fighting for basic support, dignity, and stability. Any legislation focused on “future generations” must not become an excuse to deprioritise the urgent and immediate needs of disabled people.
The NDIS was created to uphold the rights of people with disability and provide genuine choice and control over the supports they need to live safely, independently, and with dignity. These proposed changes move away from that human rights-based approach and back toward a restrictive welfare model where disabled people lose autonomy and security over their lives.
I am deeply concerned that the reforms introduce greater bureaucracy, restrictions, and government control without delivering meaningful improvements for participants and families. Creating additional administrative powers while reducing participant protections is unacceptable and unAustralian.
For many people with disability, supports funded through the NDIS are not optional luxuries — they are essential for survival, communication, daily care, mental health, education, emotional regulation, community access, safety, and participation in society. Cutting participants from the scheme, reducing plans, or limiting access to supports puts disabled people and their families at serious risk of crisis, burnout, isolation, trauma, and harm.
During COVID lockdowns, many Australians experienced the impact of isolation, reduced services, and loss of support. People with disability often experience these challenges every day. Instead of strengthening support systems, these amendments will take even more away from vulnerable individuals and their families who are already under enormous pressure.
I am particularly concerned that disabled young people are too often discussed in abstract policy language rather than genuinely listened to. Governments frequently speak about “future wellbeing” while simultaneously reducing supports, restricting access to services, and failing to adequately fund inclusive education, therapies, housing, respite, and mental health care. Disabled children and young people cannot wait for long-term political ambitions while their current quality of life deteriorates.
Concerns Regarding Specific Sections
Section 34A
I oppose any one particular Minister holding all the power to reduce participant plans without properly consulting the participant and carefully considering extensive reports, assessments, and professional recommendations.
Supports are critical for daily life, wellbeing, development, safety, communication, education, and future goals. Funding decisions must always be based on individual evidence and personal
circumstances — not broad government decisions made without proper fairness, transparency, or independent review.
No individual Minister should hold excessive power over supports that disabled people rely on to live safely and independently.
Section 33(2)(e)(a)
I strongly oppose placing limits or caps on supports.
Every person with disability has different needs. Some individuals require relatively low levels of support, while others need ongoing therapies, behavioural supports, specialist care, psychosocial supports, communication assistance, or high levels of daily care.
Funding must remain flexible, individualised, and responsive to actual needs. The Government should also clearly explain how limitations or funding decisions are determined and ensure transparency in those processes.
Section 34(1AA) – Whole Person Approach
the Bill unfairly denies and rejects the “whole person.”
Disability impacts multiple areas of life simultaneously. For example, a young person with autism may also experience anxiety, sensory processing challenges, emotional regulation difficulties, communication barriers, and social isolation. These issues are interconnected and cannot be separated into narrow categories.
Supports must reflect the full reality of a person’s lived experience rather than forcing people into rigid systems that fail to reflect real life.
Section 50A
I strongly oppose the proposal to take back unspent funds.
Participants may be unable to use all allocated supports due to worker shortages, illness, hospital admissions, school demands, mental health challenges, family stress, or periods of crisis.
Flexibility is essential. Many families have to stressfully and carefully manage supports throughout the year to prepare for school holidays, difficult periods, transitions, increased community participation, or changing support needs. Participants should not be punished for responsibly managing funding in ways that best meet their individual circumstances.
Section 48A
I oppose any changes that make it harder for participants to request reviews when circumstances change.
Life changes rapidly, particularly for young people transitioning through school, therapy, social development, work preparation, and increasing independence. Participants, carers and everyday Australians must retain the right to request reviews and challenge decisions when supports are reduced, denied, or removed.
Sections 40A and 31A
I strongly oppose participant plans being suspended simply because someone cannot be contacted.
People with disability may experience communication difficulties, trauma, cognitive impairments, mental health crises, hospitalisation, family breakdowns, executive functioning challenges, or other circumstances that make responding to administrative requests difficult.
Loss of contact should never automatically result in the loss of essential supports.
I am also concerned about penalties affecting people with intellectual disability, autism, acquired brain injury (ABI), traumatic brain injury (TBI), or psychosocial disability who may struggle with paperwork, communication, organisation, or navigating complex systems and understanding political and legal speak
Section 9B
I strongly oppose the so-called “naked person” approach to eligibility.
Disabilities are lifelong conditions. Supports are not luxuries — they are essential tools that allow people to attend school, work, medical appointments, maintain relationships, communicate, regulate emotions, participate in the community, and live safely.
Assessments must consider the real-world supports people require to achieve dignity, inclusion, safety, equality, and participation.
Schedule 5 – Transitional Rules
I oppose giving Ministers broad powers to alter rules depending on the government of the day.
People with disability need stability, certainty, and confidence about their future supports. Decisions affecting disabled people’s lives should not shift according to changing political priorities without strong safeguards, oversight, and genuine consultation.
There must be stronger limits on these powers and independent protections for participants’ rights.
Consultation and Government Responsibility
People with disability — including young people — must be properly listened to when decisions are made about the NDIS and disability policy.
The Government must also work more effectively with states and territories so participants and families are not left confused about which system is responsible for essential supports outside the NDIS.
Disabled people deserve dignity, inclusion, fairness, safety, stability, and a genuine voice in decisions that directly affect their lives.
The NDIS should help people with disability feel supported, secure, independent, and included in their communities — not create greater fear, barriers, uncertainty, and stress.
A society that truly cares about future generations must value disabled people in the present. My child’s future depends not on political slogans or cost-cutting measures, but on meaningful support, human rights protections, and genuine inclusion now.
For these reasons, I urge our Australian Parliament to reject the “ National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026” and ensure that the rights, dignity, safety, and wellbeing of people with disability remain protected.