NDIA Accountability Project

Concerns regarding definition of permanence and appropriate treatment

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 3988

To whom it may concern,

I have some concerns regarding the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for

Future Generations) Bill 2026

My concerns relate to Part 8 of the bill (“Tightening meaning of permanence to reduce access where an impairment can be treated”). I believe these change to the definition of permanence will undermine the core mission of the NDIS as they will disqualify people who are genuinely permanently disabled and in need of both funding and support.

Firstly, items (89) and (91) define an impairment as non-permanent if “…any other treatment is unlikely to materially improve, reverse or alleviate the impact of the impairment or impairments”. Alleviating a symptom of an impairment may make it easier to endure but it in no way makes the impairment less permanent.

Medication and talk therapy might make it easier for a person with ADHD to manage their condition, but it does not prevent it from being a lifelong impairment. Pain medication or nerve-block therapy may provide temporary relief to a person with a permanent injury, but it does not make the disability non-permanent. I request that the words “, or alleviate” be removed from items (89) and (91).

Secondly, I am horrified by the definition of the term “appropriate treatment” in section 25A, particularly the phrase “treatment may be appropriate treatment… regardless of whether the person’s individual circumstances restrict the person from accessing the treatment.” This is completely out of touch with reality and clear discrimination against the applicants who have the greatest need for NDIS funding and support, based on their socioeconomic status and geographical location. I request that this statement (25A (2)) be removed from the proposed changes.

I implore the government to critically evaluate these proposed changes to the meaning of permanence through the lens of fairness and compassion. People-centred care is supposed to be one of the core values of the NDIS and it is people, not money, that should be considered at the heart of this bill.