PWDA Template: Submission to
the National Disability Insurance
Scheme Amendment (Securing
the NDS for Future Generations)
Bill 2026
Attention: Committee Secretary, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs
Submitted by email: community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au
Date: [01/06/2026
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 [carer for participants with varying degrees of disability. My son also has a diagnosis of adhd and is on medication for this. I chose not to get a dual diagnosis as the process for funding was a nightmare
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 by not being able to fully understand the impact
this will have on the people is support and how to explain these potential
changes may affect them
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.
[It is simply ridiculous for participants just to be pigeon holed and not know about
the changes until their plans are changed if they are. Some of our participants
dont have the capacity to understand why their plan would be affected
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 4), existing participants face narrower criteria with significantly fewer avenues to challenge decisions about their supports.
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.
[If i lose hours due to my participants funding being cut this is going to negatively impact my participants who will likely end up with severe mental health issues as a result. I am not qualified in mental health so means i could not support these clients]
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
The Minister can reduce funding for any support or group of supports by a
specified percentage through an instrument that cannot be challenged (Schedule
1 Part 4). This applies across all budget categories. Unspent funds will no longer
carry over at plan renewal (Schedule 1 Part 5).
How this affects participants: A participant’s community participation, capacity
building or assistive technology funding could be cut without warning and without
any right to appeal. Participants who save unspent funds across plan periods for
high-cost items will lose that ability entirely.
[Its simply not fair and i feel its not been thought out. This is simply a way to cut
cumbers at the expense of human beings lives
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
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 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.
without an effective assesment process how exactly are we treating people as
people
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
cocial, 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. The 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.
I feel this is going to have such a negative impact on so many of my participants who have literally had support their entire lives, this will 100% break them and i truly beleive that lives will be lost as a result
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.