NDIA Accountability Project

Potential loss of therapy services for children with disabilities

‹ PrevPage 1 of 6 · Source p. 1Next ›

SUBMISSION TO THE SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON

COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ABOUT 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: 31 May 2026

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 mother and carer of multiple children who are NDIS participants and who have disabilities.

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.

The short timeline impacts people with disabilities and their carers by reducing their ability to have their voices heard. These groups are already extremely time-poor, with limited capacity to undertake such a task, so reducing this period disproportionately impacts us, given this vulnerability.

Recommendation: Amend the consultation period for a best practice minimum of 30 days.

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 will impact my children because they may suddenly lose their many therapists, who are all critical to their lives, without any warning or any replacements in place. My children would not be afforded any transition period, any the fallout of such would be incredibly harmful to both their and my mental and physical wellbeing. They would not understand what is happening to them due to their diagnosis, and would become dramatically distressed. I would be extremely fearful for what the future held for their and my wellbeing, should this happen.

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

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. This would severely impact my children, given they are children, who are yet to go through a number of transitions in life where further assistance may be required, such as the transition to secondary school or adulthood. The progress of a typically-developing child does not apply to my children- often times the growth you would normally expect actually results in large regression, requiring even more assistance from their therapists, and myself (and I have been in burn-out for many years now with no change in sight).

  • 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. This is an appalling requirement that targets our most vulnerable members of society, requiring them to prove that inappropriate treatments for them are in fact inappropriate. The amount of time, money, stress and anxiety this requirement would place on disabled people and their families is inhumane.

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.

The Named Assessment Tool:

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.

How This Affects Participants:

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. The risks around this singular, untested tool are too great for it to be relied upon to give an accurate reading of my childrens’ lived experience of their disabilities, and of mine as their carer.

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.

Page 6

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. Losing these supports would result in less access to places that typically developing children are able to access freely, resulting in even great inequality amongst children with disability like mine, and those without.

Recommendation: Require that no reductions to community participation or capacity building supports take effect until Foundional Supports are fully operational, adequately funded and demonstrably able to meet the needs of those who will lose NDIS supports.