NDIA Accountability Project

The Case Against Proposed NDIS Changes: Protecting Participants, Carers, and the Integrity of the Scheme

‹ PrevPage 1 of 4 · Source p. 1Next ›

Submission to the NDIS Parliamentary Committee

Submission Title: The Case Against Proposed NDIS Changes: Protecting Participants, Carers,

and the Integrity of the Scheme

Submitted by: – Carer

and

Business owner ,

Date: 31/05/2026

1. Introduction

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission to the Parliamentary Committee reviewing proposed changes to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). I am writing to express deep concern about the direction of the proposed reforms and the significant harm they are likely to cause to participants, their families, and their Carers.

The NDIS was created to provide choice, control, and dignity to Australians with disability. The proposed changes risk undermining these foundational principles and may result in reduced access, increased administrative burden, and poorer outcomes for the very people the scheme was designed to support.

My submission highlights three key areas of concern:

  • The risk of reduced access to essential supports
  • The negative impact on carers and families
  • The destabilising effect on the disability workforce and service quality

Risk Assessment

2. Risk of Reduced Access to Essential Supports

Many of the proposed changes appear to prioritise cost-containment over participant wellbeing. This shift threatens to limit access to supports that are currently enabling people with disability to live safely, independently, and with dignity.

  • Reduced support flexibility — Narrowing categories or tightening eligibility criteria will disproportionately affect participants with complex or fluctuating needs.

  • Increased administrative barriers — More assessments, more evidence requirements, and more gatekeeping will delay access to essential supports and increase stress for participants and carers.

  • Loss of person-centred planning — Standardised or restricted plans risk ignoring individual needs, goals, and lived experience.

These changes may save money in the short term but will create long-term costs through crisis interventions, hospitalisations, and increased reliance on state-based systems.

3. Harm to Carers and Families

Carers already carry a significant emotional, physical, and financial load. The proposed changes threaten to increase this burden dramatically.

  • Greater unpaid care expectations — If supports are reduced or removed, families will be forced to fill the gaps, often at the expense of their own health, employment, and wellbeing.

  • Increased stress and burnout — Constant reassessments, uncertainty, and reduced support availability will heighten anxiety and burnout among carers who are often already burnt out.

  • Reduced stability for participants — When carers are overwhelmed, participants experience instability, regression in skills, unhappy homes and increased risk of harm.

The NDIS was designed to reduce the burden on informal carers—not shift more responsibility back onto them.

4. Destabilising the Disability Workforce and Service Quality

The proposed changes will also have significant consequences for the disability workforce, which directly affects participant outcomes.

-eWorkforce uncertainty — Sudden or unclear reforms create instability, leading to worker attrition and difficulty attracting skilled staff.

  • Reduced service quality — When funding is restricted or unpredictable, providers struggle to maintain consistent, high-quality supports.

  • Loss of specialised roles — Roles such as mentors, developmental support workers, and behavioural specialists may be de-funded or de-prioritised, despite their proven value in building independence.

A weakened workforce means poorer outcomes for participants and greater long-term costs to the system.

  • Avoid reforms that increase administrative burden or reduce participant autonomy

  • Preserve and strengthen the disability workforce through stability and clear role definitions

  • Prioritise lived experience and co-design in all future policy decisions

  • Give the fraud Committee more powers to crack down on fraudulent behaviour from Providers and Participants alike

7. Conclusion

The NDIS has transformed lives, strengthened communities, and provided dignity and opportunity to hundreds of thousands of Australians with disability. The proposed changes risk undoing this progress and causing significant harm to participants, carers, and the broader community.

I urge the Committee to reconsider the proposed reforms and protect the integrity, accessibility, and person-centred foundations of the NDIS.

Thank you for considering this submission. I welcome the opportunity to provide further detail or contribute to future consultations.

Sincerely,