BSc (Logopaedics) CPSP Speech Pathologist
Speech Pathologist E: M:
31 May 2026
To Whom It May Concern,
RE: Opposition to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
I write as a Speech Pathologist working in private practice in the Shoalhaven region of New South Wales. For many years, I have provided assessment and therapy services to children, adolescents and adults living with autism spectrum disorder, intellectual disability, developmental language disorder, complex communication needs, neurological conditions and other lifelong disabilities.
I work with children from birth to 18, predominantly those with disability, and I specialise in working with children, young people and teens with Autism. I’ve worked in this area for the last 20 years and consider myself highly experienced. I offer a mobile service to preschools, schools and homes. I train the family by supporting the young person with Autism or other disability as well as staff at the preschool and educational setting. I provide my services in the regional area of the Shoalhaven LGA, near and around Nowra NSW.
While I recognise the importance of ensuring the long-term sustainability of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), I am deeply concerned that the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 risks achieving financial savings at the expense of participants with genuine and significant disability. The proposed reforms place considerable emphasis on reducing scheme growth, tightening eligibility criteria, and introducing new assessment and planning processes that may unintentionally exclude or disadvantage vulnerable Australians.
Of particular concern is the proposed shift toward standardised assessments of functional capacity and the increased focus on determining whether impairments can be alleviated through treatment. As a Speech Pathologist, I see firsthand that disability is rarely reflected accurately
through brief, standardised assessments alone. In fact, standardised assessments are discouraged for people with a disability as they have generally not been normed on this population and results would therefore be considered misleading, inaccurate and could lead to misdiagnosis.
Communication difficulties, executive functioning deficits, social communication impairments, sensory regulation challenges and cognitive limitations often present differently across environments and over time. These difficulties are best understood through comprehensive clinical assessment, longitudinal observation and multidisciplinary evidence. A standardised assessment framework risks oversimplifying complex presentations and failing to capture the real-world impact of disability on daily functioning.
I am also concerned that the proposed legislative changes may create additional barriers to accessing supports for children with developmental disabilities. Early intervention is one of the most evidence-based and cost-effective investments available. Restricting access to therapy services until disability becomes more severe risks poorer long-term outcomes, increased support needs in adulthood and ultimately greater costs to government and community services.
The Bill’s proposed changes to eligibility, reasonable and necessary supports, reassessment processes and the consideration of alternative service systems raise significant concerns regarding equity and consistency. Many families in regional communities such as Nowra already experience limited access to health services, specialist medical care and disability supports. Where mainstream services are unavailable, under-resourced or have lengthy waitlists, the assumption that participants can simply access support elsewhere is often unrealistic.
As a regional clinician, I am particularly concerned about the potential impact on participants with autism, intellectual disability and complex developmental conditions. These individuals often require ongoing support throughout their lives. Their disabilities do not disappear because funding is reduced, eligibility criteria change or service systems are restructured. Instead, the burden frequently shifts to families, carers, schools, health services and already stretched community organisations.
I further note concerns raised by many participants, families, clinicians and advocacy organisations regarding the limited consultation period associated with this legislation. Reforms of this magnitude should be developed in genuine partnership with people with disability, their families, carers and the professionals who support them. Meaningful consultation is essential to ensuring that legislative change does not produce unintended harm.
The NDIS was established to support Australians with permanent and significant disability to participate more fully in their communities and achieve meaningful life outcomes. While reform may be necessary to address fraud, improve accountability and strengthen sustainability, these objectives should not come at the cost of reducing access to essential supports for people with genuine disability. Measures aimed at protecting the future of the NDIS must also protect the individuals who rely upon it today.
I respectfully urge Parliament to reconsider the current form of the Bill, undertake broader consultation with the disability community and allied health sector, and ensure that any reforms remain centred on participant wellbeing, evidence-based practice and the rights of people with disability.
Yours sincerely,
Speech Pathologist
MSPA Certified Practicing Speech Pathologist
Mob: Email: