Submission 436
Submission - National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for future
Generations) Bill 2026
Submitted by: on behalf of - NDIS Participant Date: 25/05/2026
I write to outline my concerns with regard to the Bill noted above. I write as the parent of an adult with Angelman Syndrome, Angelman Syndrome equals a severe intellectual impairment, physical impairment, sensory impairment, behavioural difficulties and non verbal. Individuals with AS require 24/7 support as they have little to no concept of safety. Parenting Lucy has been the equivalent of parenting a 2 year old for her entire life - changing continence aids, preparing all meals, 24/7 supervision, epilepsy, translating for her as she is non verbal, all personal care.
In addition, I have been a Support Coordinator for the past 6 years, and prior to this, supported the introduction of the scheme through my work with not for profit organisations, including educating Participants and their families on the scheme.
Whilst I strongly support changes to the NDIS to reduce fraud, increase workplace sustainability, however I do not support the following changes to the scheme.
Please revisit Part 2 - Objects and principles of the NDIS Act which is in stark contrast to the suggested amendments.
Social and Community Participation and Capacity Building - proposed cuts across the board of 50% from 1st October
My daughter will never hold a job. With a severe intellectual impairment, non-verbal and her physical impairments it will not be an option for her. Rather, she accesses programs through her community access funding to be able to leave the house each day and engage in something meaningful. These programs pick her up at 9am and bring her back at 3pm - mimicking a school or work environment for her. During the day she goes to a not for profit disability sailing program, (no cost to NDIS) exercises with her support workers with walks, trampolining, goes to a disability dance program (no cost to NDIS), visits with friends, makes new friends, goes to picnics in the park. Since leaving school last year and engaging in this program of community access, her physical strength has improved and we are no longer concerned she will become immobile which is very common with Angelman Syndrome adults.
What does she do without this support? The government explanation of the Bill advises group based activities may be funded - but she is a 1:1 support and cannot be funded 1:2 or 1:3.
Furthermore, I will need to reduce my hours or leave my job. Finding a job when you support an individual with a disability is difficult enough, but without 30 hours of social and community participation to allow Lucy to go I will need to further reduce my hours. Reducing my wage, tax paid, superannuation saved for retirement and increasing my need to rely on the government for a pension.
I urge you to rethink this very dangerous cut to plans.
Additionally, have you considered how this will affect individuals who have a severe impairment who live in supported independent living. The SIL provider is paid for their in home support for a certain amount of hours per day - and they are then supported by a community access organisation. What happens if this funding is cut - they are left at home unsupported. Or alternatively they would need to be hospitalised due to safety reason, further increasing burden on the public system.
This change is a knee jerk reaction to right wing media outlet who have little understanding of disability for those who are unable to look after themselves.
Submission 436
These reductions are not reviewable decisions under the Act.
Capping Supports - Minister can decide caps on supports i.e. hours, ratios
By capping supports on a broad basis, rather than funding people based on their current function impairment - there will be major catastrophic injury to individuals and deaths. They simply will be left without the funds to provide them with the 24/7 supports they provide.
Do not assume that all people with a disability have someone to step in and provide them with informal care if they are underfunded.
In my role as a Support Coordinator I provided support to a number of people with very complex needs who received 24/7 supports on a 1:1 or 2:1 basis, due to severe impairments and behaviours - and they did not have family members to step in and provide care if their funding were to be cut.
Those that are under the administration of the Adult Guardian, with no family, will be left unsupported and in a very dangerous position.
Providers will be unable to afford to continue to support them if there was a capping to the funding - by way of hours, ratios or amounts.
During my time as a Support Coordinator I have seen endless mistakes made by the NDIA. I have had multiple interactions with Planners where I have had to refer them to their own website, facilitate complaints due to Planners making decisions which were in contrast to their own Guidelines and Act, facilitated numerous s100 reviews and ART applications.
Staff are under trained and lack a true understanding of disability.
This lack of understanding is found right through to management and the executive, and in fact the Minister. By way of example, the Minister told the public through his speeches that “Plan Managers are requesting plan changes”. This is impossible, without the consent of the Participant by written instrument to the NDIA. It is not possible under the current structure for Plan Managers to make these decisions, and then request this.
SUGGESTED WAY TO REDUCE FUNDING
The below suggestions do not require any change to the Act, but a change to the Pricing Guide.
Tiered funding for Individual Support Workers.
At the moment all support workers, whether they are with a company who are paying for expenses, or an individual support worker all receive the amount of $70.23/hour (weekday standard card).
By reducing this amount for sole trader to a reasonable rate, this would not only reduce the budget, but also encourage support workers back under company frameworks. This would assist with the very real problem of a lack of trained support workers who are available in supported independent living houses, programs, etc. It would also increase the amount of training as these registered providers would need to meet the NDIS Commissions requirements.
Caps on Non-Face to Face charges for Centre Based Care
This is not capped, and can sometimes be excessively charged. In my role as a Support Coordinator I would argue against excessive charges, but without a cap in the NDIS Pricing Guide, this was difficult to do.
Caps to Transport Amounts per kilometre
Submission 436
This is currently no cap to the per kilometre rate charged by providers in the Pricing Guide. Capping this would go some way towards savings.