To the Committee Reviewing the NDIS Bill,

My name is and I am unpaid carer, writing because the proposed NDIS Bill represents one of the most significant threats to disabled Australians and I liken it to very damaging institutional models disabled people and their carers have fought so hard against. This Bill does not simply “update” legislation; it fundamentally alters who is considered disabled, who is allowed to access support, and who is left behind. It seeks to redefine the meaning of “reasonable and necessary” and “severe and permanent disability,” narrowing eligibility in ways that will exclude thousands of people whose disabilities are real, lifelong, and profoundly impactful. These redefinitions are not administrative adjustments — they are structural changes that will remove supports, increase suffering, and push families back into crisis. They are dangerous, discriminatory, and inconsistent with Australia’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

I am one of the hundreds of thousands of unpaid carers whose labour saves the Australian Government $78 billion every year. Carers provide 24/7 supervision, behavioural support, emotional regulation, domestic labour, transport, medical coordination, crisis management, and case management — all without wages, superannuation, leave, or safety nets. Any reduction in NDIS access does not reduce the need for support; it simply shifts the burden back onto unpaid carers who are already exhausted, financially strained, and carrying responsibilities that would otherwise fall on government systems. The NDIS was created to relieve this burden, not intensify it.

One of the most alarming elements of the Bill is the introduction of a new trial assessment model, a standardised functional “triage” system that will determine eligibility and support levels. This model is deeply flawed and will disproportionately discriminate against autistic people, ADHDers, people with intellectual disabilities, psychosocial disability, neurological diversity, fluctuating or episodic disability, trauma-impacted individuals, and anyone whose disability is not visible or easily measured. Functional assessments privilege people who communicate verbally, who do not mask, who can perform tasks on command, who have stable functioning, and who can self-report accurately. They punish people whose disabilities fluctuate, who rely on carers to function, who experience sensory overload, who have executive functioning impairments, or who have been conditioned to “perform” competence to avoid stigma. A person may appear capable for thirty minutes in an assessment but be unable to sustain that functioning safely, consistently, or independently in daily life.

model is not clinically valid, not trauma-informed, and not aligned with the NDS Act.

It is discriminatory by design.

Even more concerning is the Bills allowance for automated or AI-driven assessment tools. Australia has already witnessed the catastrophic consequences of automated decision-making in social policy. Robodebt unlawfully targeted vulnerable people, caused immense harm, triggered a Royal Commission, and resulted in a successful class action against the Government. Introducing algorithmic or AI-based assessment into the NDIS risks repeating this disaster on an even larger scale. Automated systems cannot understand nuance, context, trauma, masking, sensory overload, or the difference between “can do once” and “can do safely every day.” They cannot interpret the lived experience of disability. They cannot recognise when a person is performing competence out of fear. They cannot see the invisible labour of carers. They cannot understand the complexity of neurological diversity. They can only exclude — and they will. Any attempt to automate disability assessment is not only clinically irresponsible but a profound human rights violation.

The Bill’s redefinition of eligibility, combined with the trial assessment model and potential AI-driven decision-making, will disproportionately harm people with intellectual disabilities, neurodivergent people, and those with psychosocial disability—groups already marginalised in healthcare, education, and employment. These changes violate multiple articles of the CRPD, including equality and non-discrimination, independent living, social protection, access to justice, and integrity of the person. They also risk breaching the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, including indirect discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments. Narrowing eligibility and restricting supports is not reform; it is exclusion.

The Government has already indicated that up to 160,000 people could be removed from the Scheme. Removing this many people will push families into crisis, increase unpaid care load, increase hospital admissions, increase homelessness risk, reduce workforce participation, and reduce tax revenue. The NDIS is not a cost—it is an investment. For every dollar invested, the Scheme returns more than double to the Australian economy. Cutting participants is fiscally irresponsible and socially devastating.

The Bill also expands Ministerial and Agency powers without adequate safeguards, allowing rules, eligibility, and supports to be changed without parliamentary oversight.

Any system that can change overnight without scrutiny is unsafe. The Bill further restricts plan reviews, making it harder for participants to challenge decisions or update supports when circumstances change. This erodes procedural fairness and denies people the right to contest decisions that affect their daily lives. When supports are inadequate, behaviours escalate, safety risks increase, carers burn out, and families collapse under pressure.

The real cost drivers in the NDIS are not participants — they are market failures. In NSW, The issue is not a lack of providers but price gouging, inflated travel fees, charging for non-billable time, unskilled providers charging premium rates, and a lack of quality control. The Bill does nothing to address these issues. Instead, it targets participants — the group with the least power.

Unpaid carers and disabled people have already sacrificed their health, income, and retirement savings to support their families or themselves. The NDIS was meant to relieve this burden, not return Australia to the days when families were left to fend for themselves. Every major review that led to the creation of the NDIS — including the Productivity Commission’s 2011 Inquiry, the NDIS Review 2019, and the Disability Royal Commission — found that Australians with disability were living in crisis, families were collapsing under the weight of unpaid care, services were inconsistent and unaffordable, and people were being denied basic human rights. The NDIS was created to fix that. This Bill risks undoing that progress.

The NDIS is a lifeline. Any legislative change must strengthen rights, not weaken them. Any reform must protect disabled people, support carers, uphold human rights, and remain true to the founding vision of the Scheme: a fair, equitable, rights-based system that enables disabled Australians to live with dignity, independence, and full participation in society.