National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 390
Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee
To whoso it concerns,
I write to express my opposition to aspects of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026.
While I understand the importance of protecting the long-term sustainability of the NDIS and ensuring accountability within the scheme, I hold serious concerns that parts of this Bill risk shifting the focus of the NDIS away from the people it was originally designed to support.
I work within disability and community support environments and have extensive experience supporting neurodivergent individuals, families, and people requiring complex or ongoing support. From this perspective, I believe reforms framed around “sustainability†must be approached with extreme caution when they increase rigidity, reduce participant autonomy, or create additional barriers to accessing support.
My concerns include:
• Increased centralisation of decision-making powers within the NDIA, with insufficient safeguards for participant choice and control.
• The risk that tighter definitions around supports and funding decisions may disproportionately disadvantage autistic participants, people with psychosocial disability, and individuals whose support needs fluctuate over time.
• Increased administrative and evidentiary burdens on participants and families, many of whom already struggle to navigate highly complex systems.
• The potential for fraud prevention and cost-control measures to unintentionally create fear, surveillance, and mistrust around legitimate support usage.
• The cumulative impact these reforms may have on smaller providers, regional participants, and frontline workers attempting to provide responsive, person-centred care.
One of the greatest strengths of the NDIS has been its recognition that disability support is not “one size fits all.†Effective supports are often preventative, relational, and flexible. Restrictive systems may appear financially efficient in the short term while creating significantly greater long-term costs through crisis escalation, hospitalisation, carer burnout, loss of employment, and reduced community participation.
I am particularly concerned that neurodivergent participants and people with invisible disabilities may be further disadvantaged by reforms that place heavier emphasis on rigid evidence requirements or narrow interpretations of functional capacity. Many individuals already face significant barriers in proving disability impacts within systems that are not designed around neurodivergent communication styles or fluctuating capacity.
I urge the Committee to carefully consider whether this Bill adequately protects the foundational principles of the NDIS, particularly participant choice and control, dignity, accessibility, and person-centred support.
I further urge the Committee to: • strengthen independent oversight and review protections; • ensure meaningful consultation with disabled people and frontline workers before implementation of restrictive measures; • protect flexibility within participant plans; • ensure safeguards against inappropriate narrowing of supports; and • prioritise long-term participant wellbeing and inclusion alongside financial sustainability.
The sustainability of the NDIS should not come at the cost of the humanity, autonomy, and safety of the people it exists to support.
Thank you for considering this submission.
Amber Stubbings
Queensland
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
Submission 390