NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 – Senate Submission
Submission on the NDIS Amendment Bill by”
Franklin Bruinstroop
I am the partner of a person whose daughter has a disability and is currently receiving NDIS support, and have a strong belief in justice and equitability for all.
In my submission, I wish to acknowledge that a significant number of people have examined the bill more deeply than I, and that what I say has been helped through their work.
Access and Eligibility
Proposed change What this could mean in real My experience / what I want the Senate to
(Bill section) life know
Functional capacity A standardised assessment may Having seen and experienced reports written by
becomes a key not accurately capture fluctuating allied health professionals, I know that using an
eligibility test (s9B). A disability, masking, trauma, assessment tool one day for a few hours either
functional capacity autism, fatigue, behaviour with a person that the child doesn’t know or even
tool will be used to support needs or the cumulative worse AI, shows no understanding of disability.
determine who can impact of multiple disabilities. A We shouldn’t base somebody’s needs on a “one
become a participant child may appear capable during off"assessment if we truly want to respect and
of the scheme. a short assessment but require support people with disabilities and their families.
The assessment tool significant support to function In depth reports prepared over time through
has not yet been safely every day. experience in a variety of contexts are essential
released and it is Instead of clinical information for understanding the whole child and the whole
unclear who will from qualified allied health picture.administer it. professionals who know the participant, access decisions may rely more heavily on a standardised assessment which may involve automation.
Evidence will be Families may need to I am concerned that a participant may be required
required around the demonstrate that all reasonable to trial certain medications before accessing
‘Permanence’ of a treatment options have been certain supports? Could a family be expected to
person’s disability. attempted before accessing pursue surgery, intensive therapy or another
There will be a supports. This may disadvantage intervention they believe is unsuitable, ineffective
requirement to people where treatments are or carries unacceptable risks?exhaust ’all unavailable, unaffordable, unsafe,
appropriate ineffective, culturally In my experience of disability, where people have
treatment' before inappropriate or create significant a rare condition or diagnosis, many experts don’t
NDIS eligibility is side effects. To gain access, know what treatment will be beneficial or
confirmed. participants may have to undergo effective.‘treatment’ including surgeries, medication and therapies that Because the NDIA can no longer take into may be harmful. account a person’s environment (i.e. financial It also raises difficult questions status) this may mean that if they cannot afford a about where the line sits between specific treatment (to prove that it is not effective), an “appropriate” treatment and a they cannot access the NDIS. treatment a person does not wish to undertake.
New eligibility People already receiving the I am concerned for my partner’s daughter as well
framework from 2028 NDIS may need to demonstrate as children and young people who currently
(s9B and related they continue to meet the new receive support that they could lose access
provisions) eligibility criteria. Existing and despite no improvement in their disability or
All current future participants face functional capacity.participants will need uncertainty about whether they
to be reassessed will qualify under the new access I don’t know what assessment tools will be used
under the new model, particularly where support for this eligibility process, what evidence
functional capacity needs are developmental, participants will be required to provide and if there
eligibility framework psychosocial, fluctuating or are any appeal rights.from January 2028. difficult to measure using
Some may lose their standardised tools. There doesn’t appear to be any otheraccess in this Foundational Supports in place for those who are process. exited from the NDIS.
Functional capacity Two children with the same In my reading around this bill, it appears to seek
will be assessed with diagnosis can have vastly to assess a persons functional capacity without
reduced different support needs taking into account environmental factors such asconsideration of depending on poverty, housing, their financial circumstances, their home
environmental and transport, family supports, family environment or the assistive technology they use.
personal violence, culture, geography and Ignoring context risks underestimating need.circumstances (s9B) access to services.
Governance and Ministerial Powers
Proposed change (Bill What this could mean in My experience / what I want the Senate to
section) real life know
Minister may temporarily The Bill allows the Minister to While I have respect for the work that Ministers
modify how parts of the temporarily change how and their offices do, I believe that, particularly in
Act operate (Schedule 5 certain parts of the NDIS Act relation to people with disability, important
transitional powers) operate without having to changes should always be debated and approvedpass a new Act of Parliament by Parliament. first or uses the usual parliamentary process. From what I have seen of the legislation and interpretation of it, the Minister has significant opportunities to decide and act without Parliamentary consideration.
Minister has greater While the NDIS Review See the previous comment.influence over pricing recommended an arrangements independent organisation should set pricing (such as IHACPA) this bill transfers pricing power directly to the NDIS Minister with advice from the Agency. Self-Managers would still be able to pay above the Pricing Caps.
Different pricing caps can also be set for different providers (i.e. registered and unregistered). What conflict of interest exists when the Minister responsible for controlling (and right now reducing) NDIS expenditure is also given the power to set the prices the Scheme will pay?