Submission
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: 1 June 2026
My submission expresses concerns about the National Disability Insurance Scheme
Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill, 2026, touches on issues
with timeframes for consultation, ministerial powers, assessment tools, cuts to supports
without transitional plans to fill those gaps and the safety risks associated with continuity
of care.
I am a 60-year-old sibling/carer for my 63-year-old brother, a NDIS participant. I am also
a person living with both neurological and immune system diseases, both intersecting to
make my life very difficult to manage with limited or no support outside NDIS. I am
concerned that proposed eligibility changes might disallow me the help I need as I live
with multiple disabilities that compound my functioning.
Aside from primary care plans support for medical needs and some allied health care,
the only daily living everyday support I can now access outside the NDIS is a limited to
a Community Transport service.
I am my voice and my brother’s only voice.
My brother currently has a NDIS plan that meets his needs well and provides a life he
never experienced previously. He has always struggled with a lifelong intellectual
disability of unknown aetiology since birth and finding friends and meaningful
-
relationships and hobbies were always a challenge. He was such a lonely child.
-
The social supports he has now have been life changing.
-
As he ages, his cognitive, physical mobility and mental health are now declining. His physical disabilities involving Bilateral Hip Dysplasia/deformed feet and leg length discrepancy are now more complicated by age and Arthritis, and the multiple surgeries and hospital admissions since birth. However, he has a meaningful life full of activities he loves.
-
My concern is my brother’s multiple disabilities may not be reassessed under the proposed changed in the bill, and may be misunderstood by computer algorithms based on proposed assessment tools that may not work for every participant to provide a fair outcome.
-
A right of review if the technology fails him is important and seemingly missing in the proposed bill. Government, parliament, the Ministers must be accountable to the people and subject to scrutiny if decisions adversely affect people.
-
An algorithm would never provide the right balance of wholistic, or person centred supports for my brother. One assessment tool would never cover the complexities of his disability nor calculate the level supports he needs.
-
The funded social outings and supports in place now provide him with a structured routine and meaningful inclusion. There are no shopping centre visits while workers are on the phone. He is now part of the local art society, Church, learning music and guitar, attempting a shared group program for outings and making friends. He is supported to go shopping, attend medical appointments and specialist care, visit the pharmacy or do necessary errands he needs.
-
Incontinence and psychosocial issues are now present. This adds to support needs.
-
My concern is I battled every level of the NDIA, including the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to get the right supports and housing funded for my brother to only now, feel so
-
disheartened that his supports are working so well that this could be disrupted, reduced,
-
removed and most importantly, his stability to stay living in his SDA apartment with
-
single occupancy with SIL supports and our choice of the best providers to support him,
could be compromised.
He would not cope with shared care; there are widespread implications of the Minister deciding to move single occupancy participants into shared accommodation arrangements and to suggest at the Press Club address that group style social programs to save money are a solution for people with a disability is so disempowering.
I believe the consultation period for the Amendment Bill has been insufficient to allow any proper consultation, considering accessibility, the communication needs of participants and time constraints of family.
The short timeline has directly impacted me as the providers I am engaged with have had insufficient time to organise any focused discussions.
The local member in my community has not responded to my requests to organise or invited constituents to a focus group or information sharing forum to better inform those impacted of the potential outcomes if the Bill is passed.
The draft Bill is too rushed without proper consultation.
3
4