Submission 3055 — Name Withheld — NDIS Future Generations Bill

‹ PrevPage 1 of 6 · Source p. 1Next ›

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: 7.07.2026

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 an NDIS provider.

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.

1

The short timeline impacts me by putting a stop to the services I provide to people

with disabilities living in the Northern Rivers region of NSW.

Recommendation: 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 1

Parts 8 and 9) and how much funding people receive (Schedule 1 Part 4; Schedule

  1. by signing an instrument, without going back to Parliament. The rules that will determine critical eligibility thresholds (Schedule 1 Parts 1, 8 and 9) have not yet

been 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 be

changed without parliamentary debate or public scrutiny. Participants may not know

supports or eligibility rules have changed until their plan is affected.

I provide support to 12 clients each week who gain confidence, develop life and work

skills, increase their social connection and community participation to name just a

few of the essential benefits which help these people who live with extremely

challenging and complex health conditions.

Recommendation: Require that all decisions affecting NDIS eligibility and funding

levels be made through primary legislation subject to full parliamentary scrutiny, with

mandatory 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 it

harder to challenge some decisions about supports and funding. It also restricts

when you can request a reassessment, removes review rights for automatic plan

2

renewals, and makes funding reductions unreviewable (Schedule 1 Parts 1 and 8).

Combined with restrictions on reassessment requests (Part 2), automatic plan

renewals without review rights (Part 5), and unreviewable funding reductions (Part

4), existing participants face narrower criteria with significantly fewer avenues to

challenge decisions about their supports.

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.

My business employs three staff members who all rely on this income. While not a

huge income, it supports their cost of living. It is an essential source of income and

cannot be replaced.

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.

3

Community participation is entirely inaccessible for people with disabilities without

the funding which provides support workers. My typical clients are self-harmers,

depressed and isolated. Without proper funded supports their mental health

deteriorates and they become suicidal.

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.

Living with complex medical conditions in a regional area is costly. Services and

transport are limited and many people on NDIS have multiple diagnosed conditions

requiring specialist care. If one condition is left untreated, other conditions are

negatively affected.

Recommendation: Do not proceed with a requirement to exhaust “appropriate

treatment” options – there are no safeguarding measures around participant harm

4

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 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.

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

5

implemented through the ministerial instrument power in Schedule 1 Part 4. The

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.

The families and carers of my clients struggle every day to manage their own mental

health and safety. Developing social connection, independence and community

participation for my clients allows their family members to manage their own fatigue.

Simply put, the less support provided for the disabled person the higher risk for the

their families and carers. With those people being pushed harder, the client is then at

high risk of harm and domestic violence. Peoples lives are being put at risk.

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.

6