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: 28/5/26

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 a NDIS participant

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.

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 3) 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.

This increases stress, anxiety and uncertainty for myself and other participants as it would make it more difficult to understand how the NDIS functions, what changes are likely to happen to participant eligibility and funding, and therefore access to important supports. This increases instability in participants’ lives, including mine.

This will also disempower disabled people, and those supporting us, by excluding us from important decisions being made about our access to supports which hugely impact our wellbeing and quality of life.

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 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.

As a NDIS participant this will make it more difficult for me to plan for the future and make important life decisions (e.g. living independently, enrolling in tertiary education) when my continued access to my current NDIS supports is uncertain. The proposed restrictions for participant’s ability to challenge decisions will put myself and others at risk of having important supports underfunded or refused entirely due to assessment errors, including misread/misinterpreted evidence and reports, misunderstanding of participant’s disability and circumstances, and clerical errors, something myself and others have already experienced, without an opportunity to have these errors corrected and issues remedied.

This will also make it more difficult to access additional supports when needed due to changes of circumstance. This is personally very worrying for me as I rely on my mother as a carer, I am worried that as she ages and becomes less capable of

supporting me I will be left without the support I need to survive and live my life in a
fulfilling way.

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 ight to appeal. Participants who save unspent funds across plan periods for high- cost items will lose that ability entirely.

This will increase uncertainty and instability in my access to NDIS supports making it harder for me to plan ahead, create routine and consistency in my supports (something very important for me as an Autistic person), and feel confident in my future. The uncertainty I already experience with regards to my NDIS funding causes me great emotional and psychological distress as I am left unsure of what my supports will look like in the near-future, and I worry about losing access to the supports I rely on to maintain my quality of life and wellbeing. These proposed changes would greatly increase my distress as they would increase the instability and uncertainty I experience regarding my access to NDIS supports, as my support funding and therefore my access to supports would be at risk of being cut without any consideration for my personal circumstances as well as without warning and

without a right to appeal. This makes me very worried for my future and my ability to
live the life I want, it makes me feel hopeless as so much of my life will become
dependent of the decisions an instrument with no possibility to challenge the
changes it makes.

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.

Recommendation: Do not proceed with a requirement to exhaust “appropriate treatment” options – there are no safeguarding measures around participant harm 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.

How this affects participants:

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.

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.

As someone with fluctuating capacity my needs differ over time, if my supports are based on when I have my highest capacity my needs will not be met a majority of the time as that represents a very small amount of my life. This would also overall reduce my capacity long-term due to the impacts of autistic burnout for me (including skill regression, severe depression, reduced functional capacity, and fatigue).

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 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.

This will create large support gaps for me as my informal supports will be unable to fill them. My carer (my mother) is already struggling to support me with my current NDIS supports as she deals with her own disabilities, aging, and carer burnout.

Reductions to my NDIS funding will leave me without adequate support, severely negatively impacting my quality of life and wellbeing. This will also greatly impact my loved ones who do not have informal supports to fill these gaps and rely entirely on NDIS supports to survive and live their lives.

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.