To who it may concern,

Destroying Australia’s Disability Insurance won’t save Australia any money. Removing our community access, autonomy and choice in supports will actually cost us significantly more. In both money and lives.

This attack on disabled Aussies won’t do anything good. It won’t even get you the benefits your corporate sponsors are promising you in return for targeting us. You’ll just be remembered as the traitors who betrayed your constitutional obligations and constituents for nothing. You’ll be forever remembered as the architects of robo- obrobbery 2.0 who knowingly killed and maimed thousands to please your megacorp overlords. Refusing to demand they pay their debts for their strip-mines and gas rorts is pure cowardice. And theft. You betray us all. And you can’t kill or forcibly institutionalise enough of us to save yourselves. Even though you’re apparently instituting AktionT4-take 2.

I honestly can’t understand how you justify this to yourselves. But you will be held accountable for this theft, cruelty and gross negligence. The coming environmental devastation and social upheavals will make that inevitable. You’re either with us in respecting our constitutional and human rights, or you are declaring yourselves a threat to all of us. Stealing our social resources and disability funding will never be forgiven. It is premeditated murder. And there will be justice.

Especially as the motivations for this theft seems to be purely about the egos and profit of a very few, very unpleasant people. We won’t go back to the old Ugly Laws and Shame Rooms. You will be forcing a revolution, and the end of our entire governmental systems.

While the Treasury modelling attributes the massive $38.1 billion in savings to specific mechanisms like funding caps, tightened access, and the elimination of rollovers, the Bill also attempts to introduce several sweeping structural, governance, and administrative changes. Ones that directly contravene your legal obligations, and our human rights.

While these changes may indirectly facilitate budget cuts, they are primarily focused on shifting power away from participants and Parliament, reducing the Agency’s accountability, and transforming how the scheme operates on a day-to-day basis. Much like the media focus on disingenuous accusations of wasted spending on short-term disabilities and services for medical needs. Neither of which have ever qualified for the NDIS scheme.

These changes include:

• Automated Decision-Making (Schedule 3, Part 2) The Bill grants express legislative authority for the NDIA to use computer programs (Automated Decision-Making, or ADM) to take administrative actions. This allows algorithms to process claims, approve plans, and even make “evaluative judgements” without human intervention.

While it is a major operational shift, it is completely separate from the direct budget cut line items. Blatant robodebt 2.0, which is clearly illegal.

• Unilateral “Henry VIII” Powers (Schedule 5) The Bill includes controversial “Transitional Rules” that grant the Minister sweeping powers to make legislative instruments that can change the effect of the NDIS Act without needing to be passed by Parliament. These powers last for up to 12 months after the Act commences, allowing the government to bypass usual parliamentary accountability to fix “unforeseen operational issues” during the rollout

• Extending the NDIA’s Deadlines (Schedule 3, Part 3 & Schedule 1, Part 2) Tucked into the “minor amendments” section, the Bill legally extends the timeframe the NDIA has to decide on a new access request from 21 days to 90 days. Similarly, if a participant requests a plan reassessment, the NDIA now has 90 days (up from 21 days) to respond. Crucially, the Bill removes “deemed refusal” protections, meaning that if the NDIA simply ignores a reassessment request for 90 days, the participant has no legal right to appeal the lack of action

Page 3

Slashing Claim Timeframes (Schedule 2, Part 5)

The Bill drastically reduces the allowable timeframe for participants and providers to submit a claim for an NDIS payment. Currently, claims can be submitted up to 2 years after a support was provided; the Bill cuts this window down to just 90 days.

Plan Suspensions for Being “Uncontactable” (Schedule 1, Part 7)

The Bill empowers the CEO to abruptly suspend a participant’s plan if the Agency has made “reasonable attempts” to contact them for information but the participant remains “uncontactable.” If the plan remains suspended for 90 days because the person cannot be reached, the CEO can completely revoke their status as an NDIS participant. Using such punitive efforts against us is weaponising our disabilities and violating legally protected rights to accessibe communications.

Expanded Police-Like Investigative Powers (Schedule 2, Parts 2 & 3)

While the budget notes mention “Fraud measures” saving $0.9 billion, the actual legislation implements aggressive criminal and regulatory expansions. It broadens the NDIA’s functions to explicitly include assisting in the prosecution of criminal activity. This is gross overreach. Furthermore, it integrates the Regulatory Powers Act 2014, granting NDIA investigators sweeping new powers including entry, search, and seizure, and the ability to force individuals to decipher encrypted computer data under the threat of severe civil and criminal penalties. Again, gross overreach and abuse.

And these are the non budget related changes. Including RoboNDIS.

Automated Decision-Making (ADM) Rollout

The Change: Schedule 3, Part 2 grants the NDIA express legislative authority to use automation and computer programs to make administrative decisions, process claims, and handle payments. This violates your obligations.

Mandatory Record-Keeping and Automatic Debts

The Change: Schedule 2, Part 4 introduces onerous new record-keeping mandates, requiring participants and providers to retain documents regarding NDIS payments for up to 7 years. If a participant fails to keep these records, they will automatically owe that money to the NDIA as a debt, and providers will face civil penalties. This is abuse via proxies.

Integration of Police-Like Regulatory Powers

The Change: The Bill integrates the Regulatory Powers Act 2014 into the NDIS framework. This significantly expands the NDIA’s compliance and enforcement capabilities, granting investigators the power to monitor, enter premises, search, and seize evidence. Again, gross overreach and abuse by proxies.

Slashing Claim Timeframes

The Change: Under Schedule 2, Part 5, the timeframe for a participant or provider to make a claim for funded NDIS supports is drastically reduced. All claims will now be legally required to be submitted within just 90 days of the service being delivered.

Plan Suspensions for Being “Uncontactable”

The Change: The legislation introduces a new mechanism allowing the CEO to suspend a participant’s plan entirely if they are deemed “uncontactable” after reasonable attempts by the Agency to reach them.

Stringent Nominee Oversight

Page 5

The Change: The Bill introduces new, stringent oversight and regulatory rules over “nominees” (family members or advocates legally appointed to make decisions on behalf of a participant), tightening control over how they operate.

7. New “Anti-Promotion” and Banning Orders

The Change: The Bill expands the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commissioner’s punitive powers by introducing “anti-promotion orders” (Section 73ZOA). This allows the Commission to legally ban individuals or entities from promoting or advertising NDIS services, expanding enforcement beyond just those who directly provide supports.

8. Unilateral “Henry VIII” Powers

The Change: As discussed previously, Schedule 5 introduces “Transitional Rules” granting the Minister sweeping powers for up to 12 months to make legislative instruments that can alter the effect of the NDIS Act without needing parliamentary approval to fix “unforeseen” issues. This breaches your legal obligations for fair and reasonable conduct.

9. Extending NDIA Deadlines & Removing “Deemed Refusals”

The Change: As noted earlier, the Bill extends the NDIA’s legal timeframe to respond to participant requests (such as a plan reassessment or access request) from 21 days up to 90 days. It also removes the “deemed refusal” protection, stripping participants of their right to appeal to the Administrative Review Tribunal if the NDIA simply ignores their request for 90 days. Arbitrarily blocking our rights and your obligations.

This is how some of those things work together in practice.

1. The Automated Debt Trap

Page 6

What They Are:

The Bill slashes the timeframe to submit a claim down to 90 days, while simultaneously introducing mandatory rules that require participants to keep receipts for 3 years, nominees for 5 years, and providers for 7 years. Alongside this, the Bill grants the NDIA the power to use Automated Decision-Making (ADM) computer programs to process claims and administrative actions.

How They Work In Conjunction:

A participant or provider must rush to submit a claim within the 90-day window, but must hold onto the administrative proof for years. Because the NDIA can now use automated algorithms to process and review these claims, the system can constantly scan historical payments. If the computer audits a past claim and requests proof, and the person cannot produce the years-old receipt, the legislation dictates that they automatically owe that money to the NDIA as a debt, with no exemptions or defences allowed.

What This Gives Rise To:

A highly efficient, automated debt-generation machine. By combining strict multi-year record-keeping with algorithms and zero legal defences, it creates the exact conditions for a “Robodebt-style” scenario where vulnerable people are hit with inescapable, automated debts for minor administrative errors.

---

The One-Sided Clock (The Double Standard On Deadlines)

What They Are:

The legislation introduces a punitive rule where the CEO can suspend, and eventually revoke, a participant’s funding if they are “uncontactable” for 90 days. Conversely, the Bill extends the NDIA’s own deadline to respond to a participant’s request for a plan reassessment from 21 days up to 90 day. Crucially, it removes the “deemed refusal” protection.

How They Work In Conjunction:

The law applies a vicious double standard to timeframes. If a disabled participant misses phone calls or letters for 90 days (perhaps due to hospitalisation or a crisis), they are severely punished by having their life-saving supports cut off. However, if the NDIA ignores a participant’s desperate request for more funding for 90 days, the removal of the “deemed refusal” rule means the participant has no legal right to appeal the NDIA’s inaction to the Administrative Review Tribunal.

Page 7

What this gives rise to: A massive power and accountability imbalance. Participants face the ultimate penalty (losing their NDIS access) for failing to communicate, while the Agency is legally shielded from any consequences for ignoring participants.

3. The Surveillance and Punishment Web

What they are: The Bill integrates the Regulatory Powers Act 2014, giving NDIA investigators police-like powers to enter premises, seize evidence, and force people to decrypt computer data. This is combined with strict new administrative rules for “nominees” (family members who manage plans), 7-year record retention mandates for providers, and new “anti-promotion” and banning orders.

How they work in conjunction: The NDIA can deploy its new investigative taskforce against a small independent provider or a family nominee. If an investigator demands a 7-year-old scheduling record and the provider cannot produce it , or if a family nominee fails to perfectly report a change in circumstance ,the NDIA can hit them with crippling civil penalties (e.g., 120 penalty units). The Commissioner can then instantly issue a banning order or an “anti-promotion order” than legally gags the provider from even advertising their services.

What this gives rise to: The transformation of the NDIS from a supportive care model into a highly surveilled, heavily penalised environment. The compounding threat of search warrants, massive fines, and immediate business bans will inevitably intimidate small businesses, independent allied health professionals, and trusted family advocates, likely driving them out of the sector entirely.

4. Unchecked Executive Alteration

What they are: The Minister is granted unilateral “Henry VIII” powers to make transitional rules that change how the Act operates for up to 12 months without needing Parliament’s approval. This sits alongside the new power for the Minister to issue “Support Determinations” that instantly slash funding for specific categories across the scheme.

How They Work In Conjunction

The Minister can unilaterally declare a percentage cut to a specific type of support. If the NDIA faces “unforeseen operational issues” in trying to implement these cuts through the new Automated Decision-Making systems, the Minister can use their Henry VIII powers to bypass Parliament and instantly alter the rules to make the system function the way they want.

What This Gives Rise To

A system where the fundamental rules of the scheme, the amount of funding participants receive, and how the computer systems process those cuts can be altered by one politician overnight, completely removing the usual democratic scrutiny and parliamentary accountability.

These changes will not hold under legal challenges. It will just strip millions more from public funds in legal fees and compensations.