Attention: Committee Secretary, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs

30/05/2026

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.

My name is I am s single mum with no informal supports and I am caring for 5 people on the Ndis currently in my family.

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 me because I am a single mother caring for one adult child and four younger children with severe disabilities. Families with significant caring responsibilities need adequate time to understand proposed changes, seek advice, and prepare meaningful submissions. Two weeks does not provide enough time for carers already managing complex daily support needs.

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:

As a sole carer for five children with severe disabilities, I need certainty about the supports my family relies upon. Allowing eligibility rules and funding levels to change without parliamentary scrutiny creates uncertainty and anxiety for families like mine who depend on consistent supports to meet daily care needs.

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.

How this affects participants:

Several members of my family rely on NDIS supports. If funding is reduced, plans are automatically renewed, or reassessments occur under stricter criteria, I may have limited ability to challenge decisions that directly affect my children’s wellbeing and safety. Families caring for multiple participants need strong review rights to ensure supports reflect changing needs.

Recommendation: Require a “no harm” safeguard ensuring no current participant loses

access to supports unless equivalent supports are in place, with independent review rights before any exit decision and access to unscheduled reassessments preserved.

##UNREVIEWABLE MINISTERIAL POWER TO CUT FUNDING ACROSS ALL SUPPORT CATEGORIES

How this affects participants:

My children rely on a range of supports to participate in their communities, build skills, and maintain independence. Funding cuts imposed across categories could significantly increase my caring responsibilities and reduce opportunities for my children to develop essential life skills, without any ability for us to appeal those decisions.

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

How this affects participants:

I am deeply concerned about requirements to exhaust treatment options before eligibility can be established. Families already face significant financial, emotional, and practical burdens when accessing therapies and medical services. Not all treatments are accessible, affordable, or appropriate, and disability support should not depend on proving that every possible treatment option has been attempted first.

Not Only This But The Options Once Available All Ceased Years Ago When The States Handed The Care Of Participants Over To The Ndis Meaning There Are Now No Services To Go Back To And The Ones That Are Around Have Years Long Wait Lists

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

How this affects participants:

This is one of my greatest concerns. Standardised functional capacity assessments cannot fully capture the complexity of caring for multiple children with severe disabilities, particularly where support needs vary across different environments and circumstances. Assessments focused only on intrinsic ability risk overlooking the reality that people function because of supports, equipment, modifications, and assistance from carers. My family’s circumstances demonstrate why individual context must remain part of NDIS decision-making.

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

How this affects participants:

Cuts to community participation and capacity-building supports would have a significant impact on my family. These supports help my children develop independence, participate in society, and reduce social isolation. If these supports are reduced before replacement systems are available, the burden will fall directly on families and carers who are already stretched beyond capacity.

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

CONCLUSION

The NDIS was established to provide individualised support based on a person’s needs and circumstances. I am concerned that this Bill moves away from that principle by relying on standardised assessments, limiting review rights, and allowing major

• decisions about eligibility and funding to be made without proper parliamentary scrutiny.

As a single mother caring for one adult child and four younger children with severe disabilities, with no informal support network to rely upon, I know firsthand that disability support cannot be reduced to assessment scores or broad categories. Individual circumstances matter. The proposed changes risk excluding people whose needs are complex and increasing pressure on families already providing significant unpaid care.

I urge the Committee to recommend substantial amendments to this Bill before it proceeds.

Yours sincerely